Military Review

Su-34 bombers will "teach" to conduct air combat

157
Su-34 bombers will "teach" to conduct air combat

The Ministry of Defense has decided to expand the standard training program for pilots of the Su-34 multifunctional fighter-bomber. As reported "News" With reference to sources in the Ministry of Defense, the crews of bombers will be taught how to conduct air combat at high altitudes and supersonic speeds.


The front-line bomber Su-34, the newspaper writes, was previously used exclusively as a strike aircraft to destroy ground and sea targets, as well as to cover other bombers with electronic warfare. Occasionally, aircraft crews conducted exercises using melee rockets. In addition, the Ministry of Defense reported on the equipping of Su-34 air-to-air missiles that were performing missions in Syria.

Now a decision has been made to expand the training program for Su-34 pilots with training in air combat. The first exercises of this kind have already been held in the Central Military District. As the press service of the Central Military District reported the day before, the Su-34s took part in a training session on actions in the lower layers of the stratosphere. At an altitude of 15 km at supersonic speed, aircraft crews worked out the detection of the enemy and its destruction. At the same time, the aircraft operated independently, without guidance from ground-based air defense.

In the military department, the Su-34 is classified as a fighter-bomber. In addition to a wide range of conventional and guided ammunition, the Su-34 is equipped with aviation cannon and can carry up to six short- or medium-range air-to-air missiles, but on the modernized version of the Su-34M, which will begin to enter the troops already in 2021, the arsenal of missile weapons has been significantly expanded.

Despite the fact that the Su-34 is a front-line bomber with an increased range, it has the capabilities of a fighter. There is nothing particularly difficult about this. Starting with the Su-17 aircraft, we have been practicing shooting at air targets. Fighter-bombers will not carry out air defense functions, but while performing combat missions they will be able to defend themselves

- commented on this news ex-commander of the 4th Air Force and Air Defense Army Lieutenant General Valery Gorbenko.

157 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 14 October 2020 12: 23
    -9
    And at the same time it is necessary to "teach" the Su-30 to operate on the ground ...
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 14 October 2020 12: 32
      16
      Quote: svp67
      And at the same time it is necessary to "teach" the Su-30 to operate on the ground ...

      The crew of the Su-30 includes a navigator, working on the ground is his "bread", they teach from an early age, they themselves can teach anyone.
      1. svp67
        svp67 14 October 2020 12: 52
        0
        Quote: bober1982
        The crew of the Su-30 includes a navigator, working on the ground is his "bread", they teach from an early age, they themselves can teach anyone.

        You might think that the navigators of the Su-34 are not taught the use of weapons against air targets in the same educational institutions from the same early age.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 14 October 2020 14: 16
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          You might think that the navigators of the Su-34 are not taught the use of weapons against air targets in the same educational institutions from the same early age.

          Of course, no one teaches and, they never taught, this was just not enough.
          Future navigators of the Su-34 are taught bombing using the OPB-15 optical sight.
          A good sight, at one time was on the Tu-22 and Yak-28
          Conclusion - to become a well-trained navigator of the Su-34, Su-30, Tu-22M3, Tu-160, Su-24, you must first learn how to bomb from the OPB-15.
          1. ancient
            ancient 14 October 2020 15: 06
            +1
            Quote: bober1982
            A good sight, at one time was on the Tu-22 and Yak-28

            On the Yak-28, as far as I saw ... wink was OPB-116. wink
            1. bober1982
              bober1982 14 October 2020 15: 10
              0
              Yes, everything is correct, I forgot, FBA cadets were also taught from OPB-15, as well as long-range cadets.
        2. ancient
          ancient 14 October 2020 15: 05
          +4
          Quote: svp67
          that the navigators of the Su-34 are not taught the use of weapons against air targets in the same educational institutions from the same young age

          No, they do not teach ... they can only (in a certain way or I suppose) only familiarize with the possibility of using the R-60 (73) at the Faculty of the FBA .. but this must be clarified with the real navigators.
          And so, as far as I remember, the navigators for the air defense were trained by Stavropol. wink
          1. svp67
            svp67 14 October 2020 20: 51
            +1
            Quote: ancient
            And so, as far as I remember, the navigators for the air defense were trained by Stavropol

            Guidance navigators, as far as I remember, and navigators on the MiG-31, but for "drying" I think they are not really trained there
            1. ancient
              ancient 14 October 2020 21: 25
              +2
              Quote: svp67
              and navigators on the MiG-31

              On the Yak-28P, Tu-128 ... now the MiG-31.
              I don’t know about the Su-30 ... after it was put into service, it was suggested that people with “deep navigational training” (that is, “real” jokers) be put into the rear cockpit .. but how it all ended ... I don’t know.
              All navigators of the 1st and 2nd service can fly in the GLITS in the rear cockpit soldier
    2. Insurgent
      Insurgent 14 October 2020 12: 36
      +6
      Su-34 bombers will "teach" to conduct air combat

      In the military department, the Su-34 is classified as a fighter-bomber.


      So to teach something - fighter to conduct air combat, if it was originally created as a fighter-bomber and is also classified?

      The front-line bomber Su-34, the newspaper writes, was previously used exclusively as a strike aircraft to destroy ground and sea targets, as well as to cover other bombers with electronic warfare. Occasionally, aircraft crews conducted exercises using melee rockets.


      So it's probably more correct to talk about improving the qualifications of pilots, who, according to the new expanded training program, are also focused on air combat, except for the main shock functions?
      1. Vladimir Mashkov
        Vladimir Mashkov 14 October 2020 13: 00
        -1
        They just seem to expand their combat use with appropriate crew training. Before that, it seems, they were trained and used only as bombers.
      2. VO3A
        VO3A 14 October 2020 13: 37
        +1
        We have no other bombers, so the "Su-24 dinosaur" flies its own and that's it ?! 4 hundreds of new planes all over the country ?! And who will bomb! Another article is a dummy of an unwise author who wants to look fashionable, but does not understand what he is! Or the opus of a stupid general or a theoretician who gave birth to another mouse !!!
        1. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 14 October 2020 14: 14
          +1
          Quote: VO3A
          We have no other bombers, so the "Su-24 dinosaur" flies its own and that's it ?!

          Tu-22M3, Tu-95, Tu-160, no? Not bombers? Strategists, yes - but they can cook for any and tactical goals, which has already been demonstrated in Syria.
          1. VO3A
            VO3A 14 October 2020 14: 27
            0
            And we won't be left without pants? They can, but this is nothing more than political PR for dummies !!! Well, maybe for training! Su-34 and Su-24M are used in Syria for other purposes, there are no targets for them and it is very expensive. IBA, as a class killed in our country! We don't have a light fighter-bomber! There are no replacements for the Su-17M4 and Mig-27, but these planes have been irrevocably destroyed. The Tu-22M3 is a dying non-resource aircraft and will last no more than 10 years. Even for a useless modernization, 30 serviceable ones cannot be found ... Tu-95 can reach the PAK YES ... Tu-160 is a political symbol ... And 5 new ones will not be made, they are no longer needed, and it's expensive ... One airplane, one hope for the Su-34 bomber aircraft. And there are very few of them, and here in ... fighters ??? ... Yes, and PAK YES had to be made on its base ... Yes, he can carry all the missiles between engines now! .. A very heavy PAK YES is being designed! What for ?
            1. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 14 October 2020 22: 17
              +1
              Okay, I understand you. But for example, take the trouble to list all the bombers in service in the United States. You might be surprised at this attempt.
          2. ancient
            ancient 14 October 2020 15: 10
            +3
            Quote: Kuroneko
            which has already been demonstrated in Syria.

            What they demonstrated ..... bring a dozen or so 250, while burning 50 tons of kerosene wassat ... good demo ...
            Quote: Kuroneko
            Tu-95, Tu-160, no? Not bombers?

            This is when the current MS and Tu-160M ​​suddenly became ... "bombers" wassat belay ?
        2. nobody75
          nobody75 15 October 2020 21: 09
          0
          And who will bomb!

          UAVs. Loitering ammunition.
          Sincerely
      3. Doliva63
        Doliva63 14 October 2020 20: 18
        +1
        Quote: Insurgent
        Su-34 bombers will "teach" to conduct air combat

        In the military department, the Su-34 is classified as a fighter-bomber.


        So to teach something - fighter to conduct air combat, if it was originally created as a fighter-bomber and is also classified?

        The front-line bomber Su-34, the newspaper writes, was previously used exclusively as a strike aircraft to destroy ground and sea targets, as well as to cover other bombers with electronic warfare. Occasionally, aircraft crews conducted exercises using melee rockets.


        So it's probably more correct to talk about improving the qualifications of pilots, who, according to the new expanded training program, are also focused on air combat, except for the main shock functions?

        There ex-general Su-17 mentioned. So on them at least 20% of the tasks - it was interception and air combat. It was many years ago. Do we remember the rocked past? laughing
    3. Odysseus
      Odysseus 14 October 2020 13: 21
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      And at the same time it is necessary to "teach" the Su-30 to operate on the ground ...

      In general, he can. A normal aiming container is needed. There is progress here, but slow smile
      1. svp67
        svp67 14 October 2020 13: 28
        0
        Quote: Odyssey
        In general, he can.

        Yes I know
        Quote: Odyssey
        There is progress here, but slow

        But in vain ... a function that is very necessary now
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 14 October 2020 13: 58
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          But in vain ... a function that is very necessary now

          At first they hoped for foreigners, then they began to do it, but there are many problems with electronics. Well, theft, overpricing, in general, everything is as usual.
          But the actual container is already there. The issue is with mass production, reliability, replacement of imported components.
    4. max702
      max702 15 October 2020 13: 27
      0
      To increase the fighter properties of the SU-34, first it is necessary to install an engine from the SU-35S at least, and with an eye on the "product30". To the question, what for is another type of aircraft if the SU-35S (especially in twin) can do all the same? here the answer may be in the availability of production capacities, and maybe in other not voiced "internal" reasons, here even the question arises, can the SU-30 be discontinued? Maybe, as a result of operation, it turned out that the SU-34 is very good in terms of the sum of different indicators and is the leader in the line of SU .. Otherwise, yes, we rivet two types of SU-35S (+ spark) and Su-57 and beauty! But apparently there are reasons not to do this ...
  2. Doctor
    Doctor 14 October 2020 12: 25
    -11 qualifying.
    Make a twin Su-35S. And you don't need to teach. Su-34 to sell to Indians.
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 14 October 2020 12: 41
      +1
      Quote: Arzt
      Make a twin Su-35S. And you don't need to teach.

      Is it okay that the Su-34 is a specialized fighter-bomber created according to an original design that is very different from the "progenitor" of the Su-27?
      You are proposing an "ersatz-alteration" - an under-bomber and an under-fighter ...
      1. Doctor
        Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 00
        -6
        Is it okay that the Su-34 is a specialized fighter-bomber created according to an original design that is very different from the "progenitor" of the Su-27?
        You are proposing an "ersatz-alteration" - an under-bomber and an under-fighter ...

        This has been studied in detail since the Second World War. And by the end of the war they figured it out.
        It's simple.
        There is a Junkers Ju-87 "Stuck", which carries 1x500 + 4x50 or 1x1000.
        And there is Fock Fw 190, which carries 1 × 500 kg

        It would seem that everything is clear A specialized bomber with a load of 2 times more.
        But.
        He needs to be covered. Therefore, a group with a cover will go to take off, which means that the fuel consumption is 2 times higher. At the same time, it is not a fact that they will cover it.

        And in the Su-35 and Su-34, the ratio of bomb load is even worse, the difference is 8 and 000 (this is according to official data wink )
        Therefore, to bring these 12, you need to send 000 planes. Add to this the constructive difference that complicates the operation and training of the pilot and everything becomes clear.

        Why is the F-16 selling so well?
        Because this "fighter" - a fighter under the wing has so many:

        Combat load: (at +5,5 g)
        under the fuselage: 1 kg
        internal: 2 × 2 kg
        central: 2 × 1 kg
        external: 2 × 318 kg
        at the ends: 2 × 193 kg
        additional points for hanging equipment on the sides of the air intake: 2 × 408 kg
        Guided Missiles:
        air-to-air missiles: AIM-7, 6xAIM-9, 6xAIM-120, AIM-132, Python 3, Python 4, Derby, Sky Flash, Magic 2
        air-to-surface missiles: 6xAGM-65A / B / D / G, AGM-45, 2xAGM-84, 4xAGM-88, AGM-154 JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM, Penguin Mk.3
        Bombs:
        adjustable: 4xGBU-10, 6xGBU-12, GBU-15, GBU-22, GBU-24, GBU-27, 4xGBU-31 JDAM
        adjustable cassette (with WCMD): CBU-103, CBU-104, CBU-105,
        free fall: Mark 82, 8xMark 83, Mark 84


        I bought one plane and no Su-34 is needed. wink
        1. Insurgent
          Insurgent 14 October 2020 13: 04
          -2
          Quote: Arzt
          I bought one plane and no Su-34 is needed.

          Are you sure that the "alteration" of the Su-35 will be able to fully replace the outgoing Su-24? Considering that the Su-34 easily overlaps the range of the Su-24 when it comes close to the "mini strategist" Tu-22M3?
          1. Doctor
            Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 10
            +2
            Are you sure that the "alteration" of the Su-35 will be able to fully replace the outgoing Su-24? Considering that the Su-34 easily overlaps the range of the Su-24 when it comes close to the "mini strategist" Tu-22M3?

            Not sure. Nothing.
            You have to count. And start with the tactics and strategy of using the Air Force.

            And not to make an airplane, simply because we can make one, and not try to repeat (not very successfully) the decommissioned Raptor for the future.

            On the other hand, while we create a wunderfaflu, there is a risk of being left without the Air Force at all.
            But I'm not sure that for the transitional period you need to have 3 aircraft based on one glider.
            1. Insurgent
              Insurgent 14 October 2020 13: 12
              -1
              Quote: Arzt
              Not sure. Nothing.

              Do you suggest ...

              Quote: Arzt
              Make a twin Su-35S. And you don't need to teach. Su-34 to sell to Indians.
              1. Doctor
                Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 18
                -1
                Do you suggest ...

                Quote: Arzt
                Make a twin Su-35S. And you don't need to teach. Su-34 to sell to Indians.

                What can the Su-34 do that the Su-35 cannot? (And Su-30).
                Is the bomb load a quarter higher? Is the combat radius 150 km more? Like a toilet?

                Is it all worth it to bother with a separate plane? Not sure.
                It's easier to keep one (even single) front-line fighter-bomber and create an improved Tu 22.
                Well, Tu-160 leave the heels for show-off. tongue

                And to invest in UAV R&D, it is already clear what they will be fighting in the air in 30 years.
                1. Insurgent
                  Insurgent 14 October 2020 13: 24
                  -1
                  Quote: Arzt
                  It's easier to keep one (even single) front-line fighter-bomber and create an improved Tu 22.
                  Well, Tu-160 leave the heels for show-off.

                  What is there ... Cut everything nafig, like on Okraine, what's small? ...



                  1. Doctor
                    Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 25
                    +1
                    What is there ... Cut everything nafig, like on Okraine, what's small? ...

                    In no case!
                    Only a planned replacement. Anything that can fly should still fly.

                    First we build a new house, then we demolish the old one. good
                    1. Maximilian37
                      Maximilian37 15 October 2020 00: 47
                      -1
                      Recent events show that there is no need to demolish the old, but to remake it into a UAV. Then you can launch it to detect (breakthrough) air defense. the Azerbaijanis have already utilized almost all of the corn workers belay

                      This is not how I wrote about Azerbaijanis, the site itself corrects)
                  2. iouris
                    iouris 14 October 2020 19: 41
                    -1
                    This is not in Ukraine. This is in the USSR. The Russian Federation has reduced the means of attack at the request of the United States. For this, "Bush's legs" were sold. If carrier aircraft are left in Ukraine, so will nuclear weapons. The nuclear weapons were withdrawn, then the carriers should leave.
                2. VO3A
                  VO3A 14 October 2020 15: 29
                  -2
                  Su-35 carries nuclear weapons? Do they have special suspension training? Are they assigned a special unit?
                  1. Doctor
                    Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 34
                    +2
                    Su-35 carries nuclear weapons? Do they have special suspension training? Are they assigned a special unit?

                    What is the problem to do all this? Or do you need to sculpt a new plane? wink
                  2. Doliva63
                    Doliva63 14 October 2020 20: 25
                    +1
                    Quote: VO3A
                    Su-35 carries nuclear weapons? Do they have special suspension training? Are they assigned a special unit?

                    If not, then I really won't be surprised. All this was in the Soviet IBA. But it is clear to us that everything Soviet is alien. laughing
            2. VO3A
              VO3A 14 October 2020 15: 24
              -3
              Don't count anything! Su-34 front-line bomber to destroy important targets in the front line of nuclear weapons! This is its main function - the function of the carrier of nuclear weapons, the rest are auxiliary ... It is not necessary to dump planes with different tasks in a heap, even if they have one parent ... And you think why the navigator is sitting in the Su-34, as well as in the Su-24M ?! And no fairy tales about an attack aircraft or a fighter ...
              1. Doctor
                Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 33
                +1
                Why do you think the navigator is sitting in the Su-34, as well as in the Su-24M ?! And no fairy tales about an attack aircraft or a fighter ...

                So put him in a twin Su-35, why build a new plane?
                Look at the Hornet.
                1. VO3A
                  VO3A 14 October 2020 15: 35
                  -1
                  A naive person, a single-seat combat aircraft and a spark is different aircraft. Do you have anything to do with aviation?
                  1. Doctor
                    Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 37
                    -2
                    A naive person, a combat aircraft and a spark are different aircraft. Do you have anything to do with aviation?

                    McDonnell Douglas F / A-18 Hornet not a combat aircraft?
                    Su-34 is also twin, parallel.

                    Think about where the idea of ​​training Su-34 pilots in air combat came from in our Defense Ministry?
                    Double fuel consumption. On the shock and cover. And the difference in load is good if a quarter ...
                    1. VO3A
                      VO3A 14 October 2020 15: 38
                      +1
                      They tell you, listen and remember! Stop talking nonsense with a corporal fuse ... and get off the sofa ...
                      1. Doctor
                        Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 55
                        0
                        They tell you, listen and remember! Stop talking nonsense with a corporal fuse ... and get off the sofa ...

                        Okay. Teach bombers further in air combat.
                        Those on Tu-22, Tu 95 and Tu-160 too ... wink
                    2. Alexander Seklitsky
                      Alexander Seklitsky 14 October 2020 17: 21
                      0
                      Quote: Arzt
                      McDonnell Douglas F / A-18 Hornet not a combat aircraft?

                      F 15 strike needles are not going to be written off, but it is an analogue of 34 ki
                  2. Doliva63
                    Doliva63 14 October 2020 20: 28
                    0
                    Quote: VO3A
                    A naive person, a single-seat combat aircraft and a spark is different aircraft. Do you have anything to do with aviation?

                    Are they so different that Sparka cannot complete combat missions? laughing
        2. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 14 October 2020 13: 27
          +1
          Quote: Arzt
          It would seem that everything is clear A specialized bomber with a load of 2 times more.
          But.
          He needs to be covered. Therefore, a group with a cover will go to take off, which means that the fuel consumption is 2 times higher. At the same time, it is not a fact that they will cover it.


          Fokkers with bombs also had to cover
          1. Doctor
            Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 34
            +2
            Fokkers with bombs also had to cover

            Until they unload. And then air superiority was obtained.
            And with the Su-34 it would not work, he would have escaped alive.

            Reread VRudel's memoirs. Even he understands that all these Stucks were terrible only because at the beginning of the war they knocked out our fighter aircraft. Until the 42nd, they calmly chose targets, like in a shooting range, even without a cover.

            And since 1943, when the Lavki appeared in the air, Ulrich began sprint races from our territory, after being shot down. laughing
            1. garri-lin
              garri-lin 14 October 2020 13: 52
              -1
              Are you talking about agile combat or what? If the Su 34 are covered by interceptor fighters, then there will also be air superiority after the bomb load is dropped.
              1. Doctor
                Doctor 14 October 2020 14: 01
                -1
                Are you talking about agile combat or what? If the Su 34 are covered by interceptor fighters, then there will also be air superiority after the bomb load is dropped.

                And what about the Su-34, then enter into an air battle? Is he a good fighter?
                Which fighter is better than the Su-34, freed from 10 and leaving only V-V or Su000S missiles, dropping 35 and also leaving 6000 V-V?
                1. garri-lin
                  garri-lin 14 October 2020 16: 36
                  -1
                  What is modern air combat like? Long distance exchange of blows. The VV rockets suspended from the Su 34 are essentially additional combat equipment for cover fighters. Nobody will spin aerobatics around their own tail. Fired rockets, U-turn and walk away.
                  1. Doctor
                    Doctor 14 October 2020 16: 40
                    0
                    What is modern air combat like? Long distance exchange of blows. The VV rockets suspended from the Su 34 are essentially additional combat equipment for cover fighters. Nobody will spin aerobatics around their own tail. Fired rockets, U-turn and walk away.

                    So that's great. Then we leave only the Su-34. He can handle it. laughing

                    By the way, the Ministry of Defense also thinks so, here is the original article:

                    https://iz.ru/1072861/anton-lavrov-roman-kretcul/su-34-meniaet-professiiu-ekipazhi-bombardirovshchikov-nauchat-sbivat-samolety

                    And the conclusions in short:

                    “Despite the fact that the Su-34 is a front-line bomber with an increased range, it has the capabilities of a fighter,” Lieutenant General Valery Gorbenko, former commander of the 4th Air Force and Air Defense Army, told Izvestia. - There is nothing particularly difficult in this.
                    ....
                    In theory, bombers should accompany fighters. In practice, the forces are not always sufficient to cover them. The Su-34 can carry out a combat mission autonomously, independently defending itself against enemy aircraft. And if necessary, he can use weapons against bombers, concluded Valery Gorbenko.
                    1. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 14 October 2020 16: 51
                      -1
                      And the enemy will attack at what moment? On the way to where the task is done? At the time of the task? When leaving? Can the Su 34 clear the sky before bombing? Can a Su 35 with a bomb load do it? Each tool is good for its business.
                      1. Doctor
                        Doctor 14 October 2020 17: 04
                        0
                        And the enemy will attack at what moment? On the way to where the task is done? At the time of the task? When leaving? Can the Su 34 clear the sky before bombing? Can a Su 35 with a bomb load do it? Each tool is good for its business.

                        Yes, you can. Classic concept.

                        For our conditions:
                        Bomber with a combat radius of 3 km and a bomb load of 000
                        And "a clean fighter capable of escorting him."
                  2. Alexander Seklitsky
                    Alexander Seklitsky 14 October 2020 17: 24
                    0
                    Quote: garri-lin
                    ... No one will spin aerobatics around their own tail

                    in fact, he can do it quite well too. I saw a training fight between 34 and 27 in the video. 34 ka in the tail was quite easy to go
                    1. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 14 October 2020 18: 13
                      -1
                      It's just worthless. Well, the maximum is to leave the rocket with an intensive maneuver.
                  3. KKND
                    KKND 14 October 2020 18: 09
                    +3
                    Quote: garri-lin
                    Fired rockets, U-turn and walk away.

                    Rave. You do not understand at all how explosive rockets work and how air combat takes place. Google what is the method of direct proportional navigation and what is an established maneuver, then you will argue without delirium.
                    1. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 14 October 2020 18: 30
                      -1
                      The Su 34 is armed with short and medium-range explosive missiles. Infrared and active heads. Do you think that he will not be able to turn around and start running away immediately after launching the missiles?
                      1. KKND
                        KKND 14 October 2020 18: 36
                        0
                        when the battle has reached short-range missiles, it is too late to dodge and run away, but about the middle one it may work, but not always. Such tactics require machines with an exorbitant ratio to thrust-to-weight ratio and he is far from being an F-16. If to start far away is almost useless and at 20 kilometers it is already dangerous for yourself.
                      2. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 14 October 2020 19: 03
                        -1
                        Useless why?
                      3. KKND
                        KKND 14 October 2020 19: 16
                        +3
                        Because the enemy on a maneuvering aircraft will exhaust the missile with a maneuver and it will not reach.
                      4. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 14 October 2020 20: 04
                        -1
                        Well, then we can say that the goal has been achieved. While the enemy fighter is running away from the missile, the Su 34 will move away from the battlefield as fast as possible.
                      5. KKND
                        KKND 14 October 2020 20: 22
                        +4
                        Well, in theory, this will slow down the enemy, but if the enemy's speed is higher as a result, then they will try to catch up and launch into the rear hemisphere. Then, if you let the R-77 kilometers 50 kilometers along the F-15C into a meeting, then he will not have to spin much like a barrel or a snake, he can hardly lose speed as a result. There are indeed configurations of bombs with medium-range missiles on fighters, but in the event of an explosive combat, pilots immediately get rid of the bombs and the mission is thwarted, even if the enemy is lucky to shoot down or run away. And the Su-34 will still be sadder with this. You just need to attach escort fighters to bombers and can give 2 short-range missiles with IR for extreme self-defense and not try to play on a tactical bomber in the BB. The solution is from some sort of despair IMHO.
                      6. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 14 October 2020 21: 09
                        +1
                        So I said that initially. Several explosive missiles in the Su 34 ammunition will add firepower to the group, but the main defense load will fall on the Su 35.
                      7. KKND
                        KKND 14 October 2020 21: 47
                        +3
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        That's what I said initially

                        Indeed, I have not read the entire thread. hi
  • VO3A
    VO3A 14 October 2020 15: 48
    -1
    And you read badly, he argued that his trained pilots were not afraid of aircraft until the very end of the war, and they suffered the main losses from anti-aircraft artillery ...
    1. Doctor
      Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 52
      0
      And you read badly, he argued that his trained pilots were not afraid of aircraft until the very end of the war, and they suffered the main losses from anti-aircraft artillery ...

      Well I read it. And more than once. The fact that he was not afraid there is possible.
      But I also read ours, for whom since 1943 "Stuck" has been a gourmet to fill the bill.
      Efficiency. That's why fighter-bombers appeared.
      1. VO3A
        VO3A 14 October 2020 15: 56
        -1
        to fill the score.

        And again, fantasies ... Shooting down the "Stuka" was very honorable and not many pilots succeeded!
        1. Doctor
          Doctor 14 October 2020 16: 22
          0
          And again, fantasies ... Shooting down the "Stuka" was very honorable and not many pilots succeeded!

          Maybe at the beginning of the war. But it was very honorable to shoot down someone there.

          And so, according to the memoirs of our aces, the gradation is something like this:
          Fw 189 "Rama", fighters, Henk -111, Ju-88, Ju-87, transport and biplanes.
          Reactive is of course out of competition.

          There is a book by Zemfirova, Luftwaffe Assault Aviation. There, the transition to exterminators-bombers is described as follows:

          Kupffer was faced with the task of reforming the attack aircraft so that it could more efficiently and quickly provide direct support to troops on the battlefield and at the same time that it could defend herself... It was clear that for this another aircraft is required instead of the outdated Ju-87... The choice fell on the single-seat FW-190, which could carry the same bomb load, but at the same time had much better speed and maneuverability.
          On October 5, 1943, Kupfer issued secret order Nr. 11125/43, according to which all squadrons of dive bombers were to be transformed into squadrons of direct support of troops and retrofitting with FW-190 aircraft... Two days later, he signed an order on the formation of groups of night attack aircraft.
  • ancient
    ancient 14 October 2020 15: 14
    +3
    Quote: Insurgent
    fighter bomber

    If by and large, then a fighter-bomber is no longer a fighter, but not yet a bomber9 in my time they said so)wink
    1. Doctor
      Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 27
      0
      If by and large, then a fighter-bomber is no longer a fighter, but not yet a bomber9 in my time they said so)

      It's like that. But you have to count.
      It is clear when the difference in bomb load is a factor.
      For example, U-88 carried 3, and Fock 000. There is a clear specialization.
      And the Su-34 and Su-35 are practically the same aircraft in terms of load. But, as a fighter, the Su-34 is generally toothless.

      It's like teaching IL-2 pilots to air combat.

      I generally suspect that this idea came about after calculating the fuel consumption in Syria. Su-35 on the cover have been devoured immeasurably, and the Turks have shot down one and are sitting quietly.

      It got to our "strtegs", what they understood in the Second World War. Or they saw what the F-18 can do on the ground. wink
      1. ancient
        ancient 14 October 2020 22: 36
        +2
        Quote: Arzt
        And the Su-34 and Su-35 are practically the same aircraft in terms of load.

        Yeah ... it's like about the Tu-22M3 ... so it can also load 24 tons ... maybe ... just where it will fly with this load ... (i.e. at what distance).
        And the Su-34 takes 8 tons of b.c. and goes to the full tactical radius, and your Su-35s ... if it hangs 8 tons, it will fly away ... completely ... "not far" ... but what would fly away ... you need to leave fuel ( up to Gvzl.mah) only 7,5 tons, taking into account the unproduced residue well and b.c. there will be only ... 4 tons wink
        Quote: Arzt
        But, as a fighter, the Su-34 is generally toothless.

        An aircraft that has a very good radar and the ability to use the entire range of missiles "in-in" called toothless ...? belay
        1. Hexenmeister
          Hexenmeister 15 October 2020 09: 06
          -1
          has a very good radar and the ability to use
          It remains only to understand the characteristics of its radar for the "air-to-air" mode, the possibility of combining them with modes on the surface, and most likely it will turn out that he is a fighter only on paper, if compared with "normal" fighters.
    2. VO3A
      VO3A 14 October 2020 16: 02
      0
      You understand that high-altitude or programmed bombing modes without target visibility are not implemented on a fighter ... And it is expensive to drive a bomber to destroy a position, a stationary target, a small column ...
      1. ancient
        ancient 14 October 2020 22: 44
        +2
        Quote: VO3A
        You understand that high-altitude or programmed bombing modes without target visibility are not implemented on the fighter.

        Easy and unconstrained ... called "navigation bombing" from the A-720 to the Su-17M3 wink but on M4 with PrNK-54 ... so generally ... no problem wink
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 14 October 2020 23: 34
          -1
          What am I talking about? About the IBA plane! What's easy and casual ?! Su-17M3, M4 has never been a fighter!
          1. ancient
            ancient 15 October 2020 10: 49
            +1
            Quote: VO3A
            Su-17M3, M4 has never been a fighter!

            There is nothing to object here recourse
  • Odysseus
    Odysseus 14 October 2020 13: 25
    +2
    Quote: Arzt
    Make a twin Su-35S. And you don't need to teach. Su-34 to sell to Indians.

    The point of the Su-35 is maneuverability and an excellent airborne locator. It is impossible to convert it into a modern bomber.
    You can make a bad drummer out of him, but it is completely incomprehensible why.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 14 October 2020 13: 44
      +3
      Personally, I would still modify the Su-35 to the UB version, and organize their production on Irkut with a gradual decrease in their production in Komsomolsk and the build-up of the Su-57 + finally, the container should finally go into production. Su-34M would go to the Navy. Not less than 120 pieces need ...

      So far, the Su-30SM are being brought to the level of the Su-35 with a plan for delivering them to the Air Force and the Navy. The supply of Su-35 and Su-34 continues.
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 14 October 2020 14: 14
        +1
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        Personally, I would still modify the Su-35 to the UB version, and organize their production on the Irkut with a gradual decrease in their production in Komsomolsk and the build-up of the Su-57 + finally, the container should finally go into production. Su-34M would go to the Navy. Not less than 120 pieces required.

        I like to criticize, but in this case I agree with the Air Force (VKS).
        Su-35 with Irbis is not cheap. Su-30M2 will be suitable for twin cars, but on Irkut, you will have to change equipment for them, which is also money and time. I agree about the Su-57, but that's the ideal. So far, they simply cannot do this. The Su-34 is being purchased to maintain the pants (the first sides after Syria will soon be written off) and to replace the Su-24MR, which has already flown all the time.
        Su-30SM with a container and a new engine as the main platform.
        Of course, this is a variety. But this is still an inevitable evil. But the Air Force's MiG-35s are being crammed only for export reasons.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 14 October 2020 14: 21
          0
          About the MiG-35. Yes, I don't see much sense. It is quite expensive, the price is comparable to the Su-30SM, while it will be less effective than the same Su-30SM
          1. Odysseus
            Odysseus 14 October 2020 14: 30
            +1
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            About the MiG-35. Yes, I don't see much sense. It is quite expensive, the price is comparable to the Su-30SM, while it will be less effective than the same Su-30SM

            I must admit that since the 80s I was a fan of the MiG-29 program. Although many did not like her even then.
            But, alas, the reality is that they were hopelessly late with the upgrade of the MiG-29. The MiG-29M was a very useful vehicle for our Air Force in the 90s, but not now. The time has gone.
            I would gradually transfer all their powers and capabilities to attack drones. But here you need to know how technically feasible it is. And ours are counting on export ...
      2. VO3A
        VO3A 14 October 2020 16: 24
        -1
        There are no Su-34 deliveries, they only promised, as with the SU-35 too ... Well, at least there is such an idea. With the Su-34M it is generally not clear, there is a new engine to plug in, but it does not need a controlled thrust vector ... It is necessary to calculate that it is cheaper ... Put the 41st, or modify and remove the variable vector ... I think 34M not the last modernization ... But there are very few of them, and 300 are even few, and taking into account the decommissioning of the old Su-24M kerosene fighter and 500 are not enough ...
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 15 October 2020 00: 07
          0
          Quote: VO3A
          But there are very few of them, and 300 are even few, and taking into account the decommissioning of the old Su-24M kerosene fighter and 500 are not enough ...

          I agree, but everything here comes down to production and financial capabilities.
    2. Doctor
      Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 44
      -1
      The point of the Su-35 is maneuverability and an excellent airborne locator. It is impossible to convert it into a modern bomber.
      You can make a bad drummer out of him, but it is completely incomprehensible why.


      What kind of agility? Hang in the Cobra to make it easier for the enemy to hit?
      Stealth. The old truth, whoever saw before, knocked him down.

      The Americans invested in stealth technology because they meticulously studied the factors of victory in aerial combat.
      And they realized a simple thing - the stealth F-22, will release the AIM-120C-7 from 100 km along the Su-30SM and, remaining unnoticed, will return to base.
      And the pilot of the Su-30, making maneuverable tricks, does not even understand where it came from.
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 14 October 2020 14: 04
        +4
        Quote: Arzt
        What kind of agility? Hang in the Cobra to make it easier for the enemy to hit?
        Stealth. The old truth, whoever saw before, knocked him down.

        You move on to another topic. I just described the properties of the Su-35. Because of them, converting him into a drummer does not make sense.
        1) His locator is sharpened through the air. Installing a new one is very expensive and not so easy.
        2) The RCS of the entire Su-27 family is large. The Su-35 will not fit a promising bomber jacket. For current tasks there is a Su-34, which is better on the ground.
        3) It also takes less than the Su-34.
        1. Doctor
          Doctor 14 October 2020 15: 15
          -1
          Installing a new one is very expensive and not so easy.

          Is it not expensive and easy to produce another plane? wink

          The EPR of the entire Su-27 family is large. The Su-35 will not fit a promising bomber jacket. For current tasks there is a Su-34, which is better on the ground.

          It doesn't matter. They are both not stealth, they still glow like Christmas trees.

          3) It also takes less than the Su-34.

          I wrote above.
          Cover.
          It was realized in the Second World War that it is cheaper to drive 10 aircraft with a lower load to the front than 7 with more and 5 hawks.

          This is how fighter-bombers appeared.
      2. KKND
        KKND 14 October 2020 18: 15
        +4
        Quote: Arzt
        And they realized a simple thing - the stealth F-22, will release the AIM-120C-7 from 100 km along the Su-30SM and, remaining unnoticed, will return to base.

        God, what nonsense. Open source software for what? And from 100 km, such an aircraft as the SU-30SM by Amraam can be shot down only if the pilot does not look at the PDF from the principle.
        You do not understand at all what it is about, but the whole branch was reported.
  • svp67
    svp67 14 October 2020 13: 28
    0
    Quote: Arzt
    Make a twin Su-35S.

    And what does the Su-30 not like?
    1. Doctor
      Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 36
      0
      And what does the Su-30 not like?

      Why is he needed at all? Let's put a toilet in there and call it Su-32. There will be another plane.

      Su-30SM should be left for export only.
      1. svp67
        svp67 14 October 2020 13: 38
        +1
        Quote: Arzt
        Why is he needed at all?

        Why do we need Su-34 and Su-35? For me, the Su-30 is more necessary than the Su-34
        1. Doctor
          Doctor 14 October 2020 13: 47
          -1
          Why do we need Su-34 and Su-35? For me, the Su-30 is more necessary than the Su-34

          Maybe. There is probably no fundamental difference. At least this is not a leap to the next level.
          AL-41F1S, AFAR and the same balls only in profile.
  • Lionnvrsk
    Lionnvrsk 14 October 2020 12: 29
    0
    Su-34 bombers "teach"

    Again the subjunctive mood! They will teach .... they will deliver .... they will make .... they will introduce .... they will provide, etc. It's time to speak about the results, and not about future successes.
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 14 October 2020 12: 36
      +1
      Quote: LIONnvrsk
      It's time to speak about the results

      How can we talk about the results if, in fact, they just made a decision about training.
      1. Lionnvrsk
        Lionnvrsk 14 October 2020 13: 13
        +2
        Quote: bober1982
        How can we talk about the results if, in fact, they just made a decision

        You are about a particular case, and I am about the system. Look at publications about new equipment and weapons over the past year and you will see for yourself that basically everything is in the subjunctive mood, i.e. about beautiful plans for the future. I mean it! hi
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 14 October 2020 13: 32
          +2
          That is, we don't do anything from the word at all? New ships and submarines are not being delivered to the fleet. 5 nuclear submarines were not received either. BBC Received Over 400 New IFIs? etc.
          It's about the last 10 years if that ...
          1. Lionnvrsk
            Lionnvrsk 14 October 2020 13: 36
            +1
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            That is, we don't do anything from the word at all?

            Do not juggle. You perfectly understood what I wrote about.
    2. maktub
      maktub 14 October 2020 12: 47
      +2
      This is exactly what infuriates "ALL" media not only Russian
      May, may, may
    3. Piramidon
      Piramidon 14 October 2020 13: 54
      +1
      Quote: LIONnvrsk
      Su-34 bombers "teach"

      Again the subjunctive mood! They will teach .... they will deliver .... they will make .... they will introduce .... they will provide, etc. It's time to speak about the results, and not about future successes.

      The Su-34 is already able to do this. Crews need to be taught.
  • Observer2014
    Observer2014 14 October 2020 12: 32
    -4
    in the Ministry of Defense, the crews of bombers will be taught to conduct air combat at high altitudes and supersonic speeds.
    Lipetsk "top gun" and a flag in his hands. During a massive attack on the country, the knowledge and skills of the aircraft crews whose cars may not be superfluous.
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 14 October 2020 12: 39
      +1
      Quote: Observer2014
      During a massive attack on a country, exterminating knowledge and skills

      These skills and abilities will be superfluous.
      1. Observer2014
        Observer2014 14 October 2020 12: 46
        -2
        Quote: bober1982
        Quote: Observer2014
        During a massive attack on a country, exterminating knowledge and skills

        These skills and abilities will be superfluous.

        Well, it is understandable that to stuff a little more into one head than a lot is problematic. But after all, bright heads are sitting on the top. Optimization and all that. And why are those pilots not Russians? Or only civilian optimization concerns? Nifiga similar. and fighters. From the head of the flash drive in the morning at breakfast he will get that he is a bomber. Insert that a fighter. And forward. Especially the Su 34 is a fighter bomber if that. Funny. I don't think so.
        Let them hone their extermination skills. God forbid it will come in handy. I typed in the comment above why.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 14 October 2020 12: 49
          -1
          Quote: Observer2014
          Let them hone their fighter skills.

          What's wrong here, a competent and timely decision.
          With a massive attack, it is unlikely to help, I meant it.
          1. Observer2014
            Observer2014 14 October 2020 12: 50
            -2
            Quote: bober1982
            Quote: Observer2014
            Let them hone their fighter skills.

            What's wrong here, a competent and timely decision.
            With a massive attack, it is unlikely to help, I meant it.

            Nothing at all, only pluses!
  • Alien From
    Alien From 14 October 2020 12: 41
    +1
    The plane is beautiful in itself.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 14 October 2020 12: 51
    0
    What's the point? It's extra. expenses that will not greatly help the Su-34 in fulfilling its main task of oppressing everyone who crawls on the ground.
    1. Piramidon
      Piramidon 14 October 2020 13: 58
      0
      Quote: EvilLion
      What's the point? It's extra. costs

      Additional crew training is not such a big expense.
      a decision was made to expand the training program for Su-34 pilots with training in air combat
  • Odysseus
    Odysseus 14 October 2020 13: 17
    +4
    Damn, well, you can't fire up the office like that. For more than 20 years they have been promoting the fact that the Su-34 can conduct an air battle. But now, "we suppose to teach" smile
    In fact, the Su-27IB is the real name of this aircraft, it was really conceived as a replacement for the Su-17 and MiG-27 with possible functionality for air combat. Fortunately, the original platform allowed. But in practice they are used only as a bomber. Which is probably right. We have a catastrophic shortage of strike aircraft. Of course, there are not enough fighters either, but not enough to sharpen the Su-34 for work by air.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 October 2020 13: 45
    -1
    The Su-34 will not be able to conduct a maneuverable battle, but long-range, with appropriate equipment, is quite.
    1. ancient
      ancient 14 October 2020 15: 25
      +2
      Quote: Pavel57
      Su-34 will not be able to maneuver combat

      How can it not? .. Maximum operational overload nу 7 (as on the progenitor of the Su-27UB) ... what's the problem. Calmly turns all the figures of simple and complex aerobatics ... wink
      1. Pavel57
        Pavel57 14 October 2020 15: 55
        -1
        Quote: ancient
        Maximum operational overload nу 7


        7g by today's standards of maneuverable air combat is very small.

        F-15 - design overload is 9 units with 50% fuel reserve.
        1. KKND
          KKND 14 October 2020 19: 27
          0
          Quote: Pavel57
          7g by today's standards of maneuverable air combat is very small.

          This is normal. Pilots over 7 g are usually at war. They need a special switch to enable 7 + g and more to go. Only in extreme cases, and the car after repair should be sent most likely, especially in the case of long-term 9g +. Much still depends on the suspensions.
          The question is that the Su-34 has troubles with thrust-to-weight ratio and moment of inertia.
          1. ancient
            ancient 14 October 2020 21: 47
            0
            Quote: KKND
            They need a special switch to enable 7 + g and more to go.

            On the Su-27, it is called OPR (limiter mode).
            It is switched on on the ground, after starting the motors, with the usual ON / OFF switch.
            Disabling in flight does not affect the piloting technique, only more attention should be paid to the UUAP wink
        2. ancient
          ancient 14 October 2020 21: 59
          +1
          Quote: Pavel57
          7g by today's standards of maneuverable air combat is very small.

          This is very good ... since the time of maintaining the maximum overload is determined by the time of onset of visual disturbance, which is on average 120 s for: ny = 6; 60 s, for ny = 7; 30 s for ny = 8 and 15 s for ny = 9.
          When maneuvering for more than the specified time, it is necessary to reduce the overload to 2-3 units to restore the body's ability to resist the effects of large overloads.

          Quote: Pavel57
          F-15 - design overload is 9 units with 50% fuel reserve.

          Wake up surprised, but you give these values ​​for speeds M <0,85 wink and they, for your information and according to the Airplane Flight Manual, are the same for the Su-27 and for the F-15 and for the F-16A.
          But for speeds M> 0.85 for these aircraft, the value of nу is 27 for 7,5, and for 15 and 16A it is 7,33, but at the same time, G floor for 27 is 3 tons more than for 15 and ... exactly 2 times more than 16A. wassat
      2. KKND
        KKND 14 October 2020 18: 17
        0
        Quote: ancient
        How can it not?

        What are you talking about? what a maneuverable battle? the empty weight of the car is only 22,5 tons? belay
        1. Pavel57
          Pavel57 14 October 2020 18: 35
          -1
          The titanium capsule is a controversial decision, but it makes the Su-34 stand out in the Su-27 family.
        2. ancient
          ancient 14 October 2020 22: 23
          +1
          Quote: KKND
          What are you talking about? what a maneuverable battle? the empty weight of the car is only 22,5 tons?

          And what ...... or for you maneuverable air combat is just .. "eye to eye" ... but at medium and long distances ... no hello? belay
          1. KKND
            KKND 14 October 2020 23: 57
            -2
            And what do you squeeze out of the Su-34 at long and even more medium distances? Oh, how hard it will be to get away from missiles, only the calculation that they will not be allowed on it.
            1. ancient
              ancient 15 October 2020 10: 51
              0
              Quote: KKND
              Oh, how hard it will be to get away from missiles, only the calculation that they will not be allowed on it.

              Wake up surprised, but performing PIM, PZM and PFR have always been .. "heavy2 maneuvers for ... ANY airplanes and helicopters wink
  • iouris
    iouris 14 October 2020 14: 16
    +1
    What nonsense? The budget of the pilot's service time spent on the skills of combat use does not exceed a few percent in relative units. The bomber must be able to evade, make defensive maneuvers, and not "conduct aerial combat." The pilot and crew members must constantly practice skills related to the main and most difficult types of combat use as intended. The landfill must be equipped and equipped with the latest technology; the flight to the landfill must not take more than 10 minutes. Then, women have not yet learned how to give birth to "multidisciplinary" pilots, and even more so the flight training system does not prepare them. Prepare, do not prepare, and if the entire system is not capable of ensuring air supremacy, then the bombers will be shot down by the enemy with a high probability.
    1. ancient
      ancient 14 October 2020 15: 27
      +1
      Quote: iouris
      The bomber must be able to dodge, perform defensive maneuvers,

      Maximum operational overloads on Tu-22s .. (of all modifications) and Tu-160 ... you know? wassat
      Leaning here ..... crying
      1. iouris
        iouris 14 October 2020 15: 58
        -1
        Read the title ... I spoke on the topic.
        1. ancient
          ancient 14 October 2020 22: 46
          0
          Quote: iouris
          Read the title ... I spoke on the topic.

          I see ... you are for the Su-34 ... as I understand it, exclusively according to your generalized criterion, that you are for all bombers wink
  • Cyril G ...
    Cyril G ... 14 October 2020 14: 24
    +1
    Quote: Arzt
    stealth F-22, will release AIM-120C-7 from 100 km along the Su-30SM and will return to base undetected.


    To do this, he must turn on the radar, and LPI works at distances comparable to the radar.
  • Olechca
    Olechca 14 October 2020 14: 34
    0
    Is it like chasing two birds with one stone?
  • Bez 310
    Bez 310 14 October 2020 16: 39
    -1
    Explain to me who is more literate what the Su-30cm is,
    why it was created, and what are such special tasks,
    inaccessible to his other brothers (Su-35, Su-34), he
    decides?
    1. Alexander Seklitsky
      Alexander Seklitsky 14 October 2020 18: 31
      +3
      Su 34 is a response to the f15E purely strike fighter, the Su 30 is a further development of the Su 27. A more powerful radar is installed there (for those times). and heavier, so the Su 30 has a front horizontal tail and a double landing gear in front. The cockpit is two-seater. The Su 30 is a multipurpose aircraft, unlike the Su 27. In the future, with the development of radio electronics, they returned to the aerodynamic scheme of the Su 27. Installed the IRBIS HEADLIGHT, a single cockpit. We installed more powerful engines with OVT. The Su 35 was obtained. Again, a cleaner fighter. for work on air targets
      1. Hexenmeister
        Hexenmeister 14 October 2020 21: 24
        +2
        ... Su 30 is a further development of su 27
        All the same, not so. The Su-30SM is a Russified version of the Su-30MKI, which was a continuation of the T-10M line, hence its PGO and UVT, the Indians themselves positioned it as an analogue of the F-15E. Our MO had nothing to do with its creation, but then suddenly he wanted to have the same machine at home, so they installed everything ours on the MKI, where it was alien, and where they could improve in relation to the Indians. The Su-35S has a different look at the reworking of the Su-27 design, it was created later by the MKI, hence the more modern equipment. The SUV of the 35S is also multifunctional, there are also modes of operation for ground targets.
        1. Alexander Seklitsky
          Alexander Seklitsky 15 October 2020 07: 06
          +1
          Quote: Hexenmeister
          Su-30SM is a Russified version of the Su-30MKI,

          So MKI was not drawn from the air. It was developed at the Sukhoi Design Bureau much earlier and was based on the development of the ship version.
          1. Hexenmeister
            Hexenmeister 15 October 2020 08: 57
            0
            MKI is a continuation of the T-10M line, the shipboard had nothing to do with it.
            1. Alexander Seklitsky
              Alexander Seklitsky 15 October 2020 10: 40
              +1
              Series MKI MKM MK etc., this is the modernization of the Su 30 aircraft for foreign customers. And the Su 30 was created on the basis of the Su 27 UB. Ship versions also went from him.
              1. Hexenmeister
                Hexenmeister 15 October 2020 12: 47
                0
                But why on MKM and MK engines, radar, wing from the Su-27 and without PGO, and on MKI there is PGO, and UHT, and a reinforced wing, and another radar and this whole set was first available on the T-10M ???
    2. KKND
      KKND 14 October 2020 18: 32
      +3
      Quote: Bez 310
      Su-30cm

      Are you sure you have something to do with aviation? The Su-30cm can certainly be compared to the Su-35, it is about the same as the Su-27 modifications. But the Su-34 is far from the Su-30cm and Su-35. You look at the masses, the fact that they look alike doesn't mean anything. The large mass, large dimensions and the resulting large moment of inertia do not allow the Su-34 to conduct an air battle on an equal footing. But a larger radius and a large bomb load.
      1. Bez 310
        Bez 310 14 October 2020 19: 34
        0
        Quote: KKND
        Are you sure you have something to do with aviation?

        And should?
        Quote: KKND
        The Su-30cm can certainly be compared to the Su-35, it is about the same as the modification of the Su-27.

        Why do we need these modifications?
        Can't keep the Su-35 and Su-34?
        1. KKND
          KKND 14 October 2020 19: 43
          +2
          Quote: Bez 310
          Why do we need these modifications?
          Can't keep the Su-35 and Su-34?

          So there are years between these machines. In the sense between the Su-27 Su 30cm and Su-35.
          Do you propose to write off the Su-30cm? Are we full of fighters? Or have the Su-30cm exhausted its resource?
          Quote: Bez 310
          And should?

          So you were on some kind of naval aircraft like?
          1. Bez 310
            Bez 310 14 October 2020 20: 29
            +1
            Quote: KKND
            flew like?

            Like...
            1. KKND
              KKND 14 October 2020 20: 34
              +5
              Quote: Bez 310
              Like...

              I misunderstood your question a little. It really seems strange to have 2 machines of the Su-30cm and Su-35 at the same time. Problems with unification, maintenance ... But what can I say, we have such a tradition as Ka-52, Mi-28. T-72, T-80, T-64B. It's better not to stutter about ships.
              I myself do not know why we love such hemorrhoids so much.
              1. Bez 310
                Bez 310 14 October 2020 20: 45
                +1
                Quote: KKND
                I myself do not know why we love such hemorrhoids so much.

                So I am surprised.
        2. Odysseus
          Odysseus 15 October 2020 00: 13
          +1
          Quote: Bez 310
          Why do we need these modifications?
          Can't keep the Su-35 and Su-34?

          In theory it is possible, in practice it is not. We will have to produce a lot of Su-35s, but it is expensive and will not be able to make so much Komsomolsk now, in Irkutsk it is necessary to re-equip it for it. And then, as an export Su-30, it is much more successful than the Su-35. And this is now a priority.
        3. Alexander Seklitsky
          Alexander Seklitsky 15 October 2020 10: 43
          +1
          Quote: Bez 310
          Can't keep the Su-35 and Su-34?

          The Su 30 has great export potential. For an aircraft to sell well, it must be in service with the country of manufacture
          1. Bez 310
            Bez 310 15 October 2020 10: 50
            0
            Quote: Alexander Seklitsky
            For an aircraft to sell well, it must be in service with the country of manufacture.

            Clear.
      2. ancient
        ancient 14 October 2020 22: 55
        +1
        Quote: KKND
        The large mass, large dimensions and the resulting large moment of inertia do not allow the Su-34 to conduct an air battle on an equal footing. But a larger radius and a large bomb load.

        Here I agree on the energy limitations, and the same on the strength, the Su-34 loses significantly.
        1. Alexander Seklitsky
          Alexander Seklitsky 15 October 2020 10: 44
          -1
          Quote: ancient
          Here I agree on the energy limitations, and the same on the strength, the Su-34 loses significantly.

          The glider of the same 27th, how can it lose to a similar glider of another version, and even significantly wassat
          1. ancient
            ancient 15 October 2020 10: 48
            -1
            Quote: Alexander Seklitsky
            how it can lose to a similar glider of another version and even significantly

            The glider and, in particular, the wing have been structurally revised ... the threshold of maximum permissible overloads is as close as possible to the maximum permissible wassat
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 October 2020 18: 37
    -2
    Quote: Observer2014
    Nothing at all, only pluses!

    The plane was successful, but it cannot follow the terrain.
    1. ancient
      ancient 14 October 2020 22: 58
      +1
      Quote: Pavel57
      only can not follow the terrain

      Who told you that? belay
      1. Pavel57
        Pavel57 14 October 2020 23: 27
        -2
        Quote: ancient
        air combat is only .. "eye to eye" ... but at medium and long distances ...

        Medium and long distances do not apply to maneuvering combat.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 October 2020 19: 55
    -2
    Quote: KKND
    Pilots over 7 g are usually at war.
    it is lower than that of the MiG-21 and MiG-23.
    1. KKND
      KKND 14 October 2020 20: 30
      0
      It is clear that below. I just noticed that 7g is usually enough for most missions. Bombers do a small g because it makes no sense, only the design will be overweight. And so of course everyone would like to have constructions on a constant basis at 9g +.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 October 2020 22: 22
    -1
    Quote: Bez 310
    Explain to me who is more literate what the Su-30cm is,
    why it was created, and what are such special tasks,
    inaccessible to his other brothers (Su-35, Su-34), he
    decides?

    Three factories are engaged in the production of aircraft of the Su-27 family. Each plant received its own specialization.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 October 2020 23: 07
    -1
    Quote: ancient
    Who told you that?

    Employees of KB named after Sukhoi.
    1. ancient
      ancient 15 October 2020 11: 37
      -1
      Quote: Pavel57
      Employees of KB named after Sukhoi.

      wassat wassat wassat those who say they know the lift formula and .. ask permission .. drink your beer "? lol
      The Su-24 has a separate RPO "Relief" (MVK-24), and the Su-34 has a Sh141-E radio-electronic complex, which includes a forward-looking radar B004, which provides automatic flight with terrain bending in any , D / N, due to the fact that an additional HEADLIGHT is built into the main mirror B004
      The Americans on the F-15 followed the path of the suspension of a separate NPK LANTIRN-AN / AAQ-13, to perform flights in an automatic machine with rounding the terrain on PMV ... we, unfortunately, are already following the "paved" path .... therefore "adversary "maybe at a wound 30 meters, and over the hills - 70 and ... two regime bypass obstacles, well, ours ... only by vertical maneuver and at heights ........ (let's not talk about sad things) crying
      So ... your .. "Sukhoi Design Bureau staff" ... ardent greetings wassat
      1. Pavel57
        Pavel57 15 October 2020 13: 26
        -1
        There are many words, but practice shows that following the relief is not.
        1. ancient
          ancient 15 October 2020 15: 08
          -1
          Quote: Pavel57
          There are many words, but practice shows that following the relief is not.

          Maybe .. "following" and no ... maybe all the same .. "bending around the redief mnstnosti? This time ... well, and according to your" expressions "you probably oetali last time .. never? wassat
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 October 2020 23: 19
    0
    Quote: ancient
    Wake up surprised, but you give these values ​​for speeds M <0,85 and they, for your information, and according to the Airplane Flight Manual are the same for the Su-27 and for the F-15 and for the F-16A.

    Really surprised. How then, in training battles, the Su-27 and Su-30 regularly made the F-15?
    1. ancient
      ancient 15 October 2020 10: 58
      -1
      Quote: Pavel57
      How then, in training battles, the Su-27 and Su-30 regularly made the F-15?

      Kharchevsky and Karabasov at Langley airbase (Virginia), where the 1st tactical fighter aircraft of the US Air Force is based, during their visits to the Su-27UB ... "trained" against the F-15D and F-15C /
      The adversaries were in deep ... lol .
      I will not cite numerous teachings with the participation of Indians and Malaysians ....... "many": 0 in .. "our" benefit wassat
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 15 October 2020 11: 17
    -1
    Quote: Alexander Seklitsky
    no Su 30 has a great export potential.

    Yes, in Algeria the Su-34 crossed the road.
    1. ancient
      ancient 15 October 2020 15: 11
      -1
      Quote: Pavel57
      Yes, in Algeria the Su-34 crossed the road.

      In Algeria, they took the Su-30MKA due to the fact that it was necessary to urgently have fighters, and the MiG-29SMT, which we supplied under the contract ... turned out to be ... "not the first freshness" bully
      So you are not just about flying and airplanes ... but about aviation in general? ... Well, do you read the media at most? wassat
      1. Pavel57
        Pavel57 15 October 2020 15: 54
        -1
        The discussion with the "experts" tired me out.