Su-34 and F-15E. Meeting is inevitable

194

... Iraq was destroyed by the war under the wing, everywhere the consequences of the recent NATO bombing were visible aviation: the desert surface was dotted with countless funnels, wreckage of cars and cars on the broken roads tanks. Once blooming oases of towns now turned into dusty ruins, a terrible haze from burning oil wells covered the horizon.

In the winter of 1991, tactical strike aircraft once again proved its high combat capabilities: using precision-guided munitions, fighter-bombers for 30 days of continuous bombardment completely paralyzed the country. Multi-purpose machines F-16, F-15E, F-111 and F / A-18 caused much more damage than the thick-bellied B-52 and the notorious stealth.

Among foreign multipurpose impact machines, the F-15E "Strike Eagle" is becoming increasingly important - having successfully debuted in Operation "Desert Storm", "Strike Needles" committed crimes in the land of Yugoslavia, in order to return to the Persian Gulf (2003). This time F-15E became the main force of aviation: thanks to a solid combat load and perfect aiming equipment, F-15E could find and destroy the most difficult targets.

The idea of ​​creating a universal strike aircraft was relevant not only abroad. Back in the middle of 80-ies in the OKB im. BY. Sukhoi began work on creating a new shock machine of the 4 generation based on the Su-27 fighter. The project under the code T-10B was subsequently implemented as a Su-34 front bomber. In connection with the well-known political and economic changes that occurred in our Fatherland, mass production of the Su-34 began only a few years ago, at present new bombers are gradually replacing the previous-generation Su-24 aircraft at the combat position. Let's hope that in the near future, the Su-34 will become the main aircraft of the front-line bomber aviation of the Russian Air Force, and their export modifications will be widely recognized in the world market.

Two completely different machines - Su-34 and F-15E are focused on performing the same tasks. Which car was perfect? And in general, is it correct to compare the Su-34 with the F-15E? We will try to answer these questions.

Pedigree heroes

Kick from the flank
Multipurpose highly maneuverable fighter with unrivaled flight performance. Su-27 raised aerobatics to a new level, opened previously unattainable flight modes in aviation. Domestic and foreign experts recognize that the best aerodynamic configuration realized to date on the aircraft. Thanks to the integral layout and the static instability incorporated into the design, the Su-27 fighter gained superiority in close-combat maneuvering over any airborne enemy.

Killer genes A proven killer who scored 104 confirmed air victories. The first plane in the world of the fourth generation, which for ten years, before the advent of the Su-27, was the undisputed ruler of the heavens - anyone who dared to challenge the F-15, at the same moment replenished the list of trophies "Needle".

Su-34

Supersonic armored cruiser designed for insane low-altitude raids on enemy positions. A powerful fighter-powered attack machine specializes in the destruction of heavily protected targets, night and day, in the densest fog and furious thunderstorms, under conditions of powerful radio-electronic interference and echelonized air defense.
Su-34 combines the experience of the combat use of shock machines in local conflicts. First time in stories aviation, cockpit front bomber made in the form of durable armored capsules. The crew and the most important units of the aircraft are covered with titanium armor up to 17 mm in thickness.

Entry to the cab through the front landing gear niche


Despite the doubts of some experts in the feasibility of such protection on a modern aircraft (the DShK machine gun bullet pierces 20 mm armor steel from a distance of 500 m, 23-mm automatic anti-aircraft shells tear such pieces of armor at a distance of a kilometer, but about the striking factors of anti-aircraft missile combat units even worth mentioning) - despite all these doubts, armor protection reliably protects the aircraft from a stray bullet from a rifle weapons, which increases the survival rate of the machine in low-altitude flights over enemy territory.

A unique feature of the Su-34 was the presence of a second radar to review the rear hemisphere - the system will warn the crew in time about the threat, and, if necessary, respond with a volley of guided missiles to an enemy fighter’s attempt to hit the “dry” in the back.

Strong turbulent eddies and sudden gusts of wind near the ground will not prevent the crew from completing the combat mission - sensitive electronics Su-34 will determine the increase in loads and the aircraft will receive forward horizontal tail, the system automatically damps harmful aerodynamic phenomena.

The Su-34 brand has become a double cabin in which the pilot and the navigator do not “breathe in the back of the head” to each other, but sit “shoulder to shoulder” - this solution improves the ergonomics of workplaces and simplifies the interaction between crew members. The “dry” cabin is equipped with everything necessary for long-distance raids - there is a bathroom and a mini-kitchen with a microwave on board, there is enough space for rest in the cabin - one of the crew members can take a nap right on the floor between the seats.

Smart electronics independently leads the plane to the target, the pilots satisfy their hunger, and comfortably settled in a warm spacious cabin in comfortable ejection seats K-36DM ... Idyll! Despite the stinging remarks about the need for such comforts aboard a front-line bomber, whose combat sortie lasts from an 2-3 force for an hour - what's wrong with the designers being able to provide such unprecedented measures for the convenience of the crew? If, on the contrary, the pilots were sitting in a narrow cramped cockpit, conversations would begin that engineers do not pay attention to ergonomics at all.



And what about weapons? What will please the Russian “probable enemy” front-line bomber? Eight tons of combat load on 12 external suspension nodes, built-in 30 caliber aircraft gun. A wide range of weapons: free-fall bombs and blocks of unguided missiles, a range of precision weapons based on adjustable bombs and air-to-surface missiles of various types and sizes.
In addition to strike weapons, the aircraft can carry electronic warfare containers, outboard fuel tanks, small cargo containers and aircraft weapons for air combat, which are generally similar to the Su-27 fighter — for example, the RNV-AE medium-range missiles.

Despite the short life span, the Su-34 had already had a chance to take part in a real combat conflict. During the “Three Eight” war, the Su-34 of the Russian Air Force was used to conduct electronic warfare over Georgian positions. During one of the combat missions, he destroyed the X-31P key radar 36D6-M near the village of Shavshvebi, using the radar missile, thereby paralyzing the Georgian air defense system.

F-15E "Strike Eagle"

"Strike Eagle" - largely ambiguous machine, often referred to as a multi-purpose fighter. Alas, this is a fallacy: in fact, the F-15E is a powerful strike aircraft designed to destroy ground targets. If you call a spade a spade, then the F-15E is a front-line (tactical) bomber - choose a name to your liking. I have enough good reasons for this:

1. The claim that the F-15E are assigned to the fighter units of the US Air Force proves absolutely nothing. For example, in the fighter units, along with the F-15E, there are anti-tank attack aircraft A-10 "Thunderbolt". Paradox? Or senseless secrecy?

2. Tactical bomber (I repeat: bomber!) F-15E is able to use the widest spectrum of air-to-air ammunition in the world, including:
- guided and unguided bombs weighing up to 5000 pounds (2270 kg),
- JDAM ammunition line (GPS-based kit that turns any free-fall bomb into a precision weapon),
- three types of CBU cluster munitions
- AGM-65 Mavrik guided missiles, heavy AGM-130 and AGM-158,
- Harpoon anti-ship missiles,
- HARM anti-radar missiles,
- Tactical nuclear weapons - B61 bombs with eight types of combat units of different power, for the destruction of highly protected targets. Just in case.

3. The crew of two people, the ability to fly at a very low altitude in the following terrain mode, a radar station optimized for detecting ground targets, 10 400 kg of suspended elements (bombs, fuel tanks, sighting and navigation systems) need to look at these positions aircraft.

4. Finally, the experience of using the F-15E leaves no doubt - in front of us is a bomber bashfully disguised as a fighter. A terrible bloody trail stretches for “Strike Eagle” through the mountains of Afghanistan and the oil-rich Mesopotamia, through Palestine, the Balkans and Libya ... Only in winter 1991 of the year in Iraq, then 24 “experimental” F-15E made 2142 combat sorties! What work did the Strike Needles do in Iraq? We were engaged in the search and destruction of important ground targets: the Scud missile positions, command posts, convoys, anti-aircraft missile systems that had accidentally escaped after a deafening strike by Tomahawks.

The power of the “Strike Needle” in its hanging containers, first of all, of the LANTIRN sighting and navigation system (Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night), which amplifies the light of stars 25 thousands of times. In technical terms, the system consists of two electronic units - navigation AN / AAQ-13 and sighting AN / AAQ-14, the data from which are projected on the indicator of the windshield of the cab. The weight of each container within 200 kg, the navigation contains a thermal imager and a radar for tracking the terrain, the target - an additional high-resolution thermal imager, a laser range finder and target tracking sensors. All this allows the Strike Needle to make high-speed throws at an ultra-low altitude (30-70 m depending on the terrain), to detect and destroy point targets at any time of day and in all weather conditions.
Su-34 and F-15E. Meeting is inevitable

Indicator on the windshield of an F-16 fighter equipped with a LANTIRN container

LANTIRN is an indispensable attribute of most US Air Force aircraft operating in local conflicts - in addition to the F-15E, this kit is equipped with the latest F-16 modifications. But the Strike Needle also has some unique features, for example, the APG-70 radar with high resolution when detecting ground objects: at a distance of 300 km, the resolution is 38 m (this is enough to notice the bend of the riverbed or the contrast building in the zone urban development), from the 30 km distance, the resolution of the “Strike Eagle” radar improves to 2,5 m - any point target becomes visible. Another feature of the APG-70 was the ability to map the underlying terrain, while the “picture” retains sufficient quality even when maneuvering with multiple overloads.
The 20 years have passed and the APG-70 with a slit antenna array has finally become obsolete - the old radar is being replaced with the advanced APG-82. “Strike Needles” are the only tactical bombers in the world equipped with an active phased-array radar.

Representatives of the United States Air Force emphasize that the F-15E was created specifically for action in the face of strong enemy air defenses, and if the situation worsens, it can independently stand up for itself in air combat - changes in the aircraft’s specialization have little affected its destructive qualities. “Strike Eagle” is still able to carry and use short-range medium-range air-to-air missiles, including AIM-120 (a favorite F-15 fighter, usually at international exercises, representatives of foreign air forces ask not to use this weapon - otherwise, the air battle ends, and not having time to start).

The fighter’s flight characteristics have also been preserved to achieve air superiority - the Strike Eagle climb rate reaches 250 m / s, and the maximum speed without suspensions exceeds 2,5 sound speed (2650 km / h). Of course, this has little to do with the implementation of his “main work” - at extremely low altitude, hung with clusters of Strike Eagle bombs, like the Su-34, flies at transonic speeds.



The high combat characteristics and versatility of the Strike Eagle have earned it a certain popularity on the international arms market. In addition to the US Air Force, the expensive and complicated "Strike Eagle" limitedly exploits Israel (25 machines, modification F-15I "Thunder"), corrupted by oil and its own greatness Saudi Arabia (84 machines, modification F-15S) and the city-state of Singapore (24 machine modification F-15SG) - by the way, this tiny country has a truly huge air force - more than 100 most modern combat aircraft, while the area of ​​Singapore is 4 times smaller than the area of ​​Moscow! Another F-15E operator is South Korea - in 2002, despite the participation of such “luminaries” as the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Su-35, the tender for the supply of 40 combat aircraft was won by the Strike Eagle (Korean modification F-15K).

At the front F-15E, under the engine nacelles, containers with an aiming-navigation system are clearly visible.

It is clearly seen that only the richest US allies order the "top" modification of a tactical bomber, the small European countries of NATO prefer to buy relatively cheap F-16. NATO aviation often has to act in local conflicts, where there is no powerful air defense, and enemy aircraft are destroyed on airfields. When using overhead containers with aim-navigation equipment, the difference between F-15E and F-16 Block 60 in such conditions is not critical, and F-16 is half the price. Although some talk about saving is appropriate, if only a set of containers LANTIRN worth 5 million dollars!

Results of the correspondence fight

The Russian front bomber was created as a result of a global rethinking of the Su-27 fighter. Despite the apparent external similarity, any element of the design Su-34 is a completely new detail. The armored cabin, chassis, onboard electronics ... literally everything has changed. The front horizontal tail appeared, but the ventral ridges and adjustable air intakes of the engines disappeared. When creating a promising Su-34 bomber, the results of recent local conflicts were taken into account, as a result, a powerful and balanced strike aircraft appeared.

The American F-15E is a successful impromptu based on the serial fighter, more precisely its two-seater training modification F-15D. On the plane, only the key elements - its avionics and weapons - were changed. “Strike Eagle” impresses with its high technologies: radar with AFAR, all-view active jamming station, conformal fuel tanks (made in the form of streamlined overlays on the side surfaces of the aircraft).

Each car is strong in its own way. The only convincing advantage of the Strike-Needle is its vast combat experience. But, despite all the long arguments, the truth is quite obvious - being in the place of the pilot, each of us would prefer the Su-34 armored cabin.
194 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lavrik
    +17
    14 November 2012 08: 59
    Good comparative analysis of two cars. Maybe not complete enough. It's nice that in some ways we are on par with the Americans.
    1. -21
      14 November 2012 09: 35
      SU-30M2 is cheaper, and the capabilities are approximately the same as those of 34, however
      1. VAF
        VAF
        +20
        14 November 2012 13: 08
        Quote: Civil
        and the possibilities are approximately the same as in 34, however


        Very wrong opinion, very much!
        1. +2
          14 November 2012 13: 28
          VAF,


          I ask you to argue about the SU-30SM
          1. +3
            14 November 2012 13: 32
            Quote: Civil

            vaf


            I ask you to argue about the SU-30SM

            Sergey has repeatedly laid out these arguments in other articles, you can read it if you wish in topics about airplanes hi
          2. VAF
            VAF
            +6
            14 November 2012 13: 42
            Quote: Civil
            I ask you to argue about the SU-30SM


            Already several dozen times this topic has been "exaggerated" and everything has been explained ... how much can you talk about the same thing?

            And even before the Su-30SM we need to ... survive, just in case!
            1. 0
              14 November 2012 14: 03
              VAF,

              damn it right away))) it’s just that everyone is moving from specialization to versatility ... it’s clear that it is necessary to change the su-24 ... but why so many types
              1. VAF
                VAF
                +6
                14 November 2012 14: 25
                Quote: Civil
                oh damn flew right away


                Why immediately ... "swooped down"? After all, we are just talking .. while wink

                And the movement towards universality is not always a panacea, unfortunately request

                Moreover, your "attempt" to replace the Su-24 with the Su-30SM is still very, very far from reality ...
                1. +1
                  14 November 2012 19: 32
                  By the way, for some reason, in the picture you have this very F-15 ...
                  1. VAF
                    VAF
                    +4
                    14 November 2012 21: 20
                    Quote: crazyrom
                    By the way, for some reason, in the picture you have this very F-15 ...


                    If you are to me, then I have in the picture the F-14th Tomcat soldier + wink

                    Well, if not a question for me, then .... humbly ask you to excuse me hi

                    1. +6
                      15 November 2012 16: 03
                      Well, it’s small, I didn’t distinguish, and the picture is known and asked from memory. But anyway, why is it American? We have so many nice and beautiful planes ... For example, I set myself on the wallpaper:

                      (http://www.bestfon.info/images/joomgallery/originals/aviacion_4/aviacion_116_20

                      120720_1580663806.jpg)

                      64 "looks awesome on TV!
      2. +8
        14 November 2012 19: 33
        Another F-15E operator is South Korea - in the 2002 year, despite the participation of such “luminaries” as Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Su-35, the strike needle still won the tender for the supply of 40 combat aircraft (Korean version F-15K).

        Do not tell my slippers! South Korea is present on the world map solely by the will of the United States. So what other plane could win the tender? hi
    2. VAF
      VAF
      +11
      14 November 2012 13: 08
      Quote: Lavrik
      Good comparative analysis of two cars


      The analysis, it seems, is nothing, but the planes ... are completely different ...... one is the purest freighter bomber, and the second is a tactical fighter, so at least comparing them ... is not correct!

      Such a comparison of the f-15 must be carried out with the Su-30 MKI, MKM and so on.
      1. +8
        14 November 2012 14: 02
        Quote: vaf
        Such a comparison of the f-15 must be carried out with the Su-30 MKI, MKM and so on.

        If we make such a comparison, the result will be depressing

        Su-30
        First flight 1990 year
        Max. speed at altitude 2M
        Rate of climb 230 m / s
        Weight of suspension elements - 8000 kg
        Slit radar "Bars" - maximum resolution when detecting ground targets 10-20 meters.
        No hanging containers with sighting and navigation equipment like LANTIRN

        F-15E
        First flight 1986 year
        Max. speed at altitude 2,5M
        Rate of climb 250 m / s
        Weight of suspension elements 10400 kg
        Old APG-70 radar: resolution 38 meters / 300 km and 2,5 meters / 30 km + mapping mode. The new APG-82 radar with AFAR obviously has even higher performance.

        Why make a known losing comparison? The Su-34 at least have really strong points - booking, PGO, comfortable cabin
        1. VAF
          VAF
          +18
          14 November 2012 14: 45
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          If we make such a comparison, the result will be depressing

          Su-30


          Well, firstly, you compare the first su-30s. which are essentially ordinary Su-27UBP and Su-27PU (depending on the manufacturer). and even more so then they were all still with the Sword. not with Leopard.

          I agree that Bars was not very good then, but since 2002 of the year Mk1,2 went and now 3 and although it is not AFAR as on the Igla, I dare to assure you that it is not inferior to Amerov’s ....... all the teachings (though without us ) This is confirmed.

          Speed ​​characteristics here do not play a role, since they are all for empty cars and you have them for today's Su-30s .. underestimated.

          The 10400 Needle is with PTB

          And if you find, then look at Bars Mk 3 (there Russian-Ukrainian-Indian-Israeli-French mincemeat, but everything is completed and integrated with us) you will find out a lot of new and interesting things for yourself and maybe then change your mind.

          On the Su-30SM the same PGO wink +! drinks

          From my own experience I’ll say ..... the receiver for MANPADS and MANPADS when approaching at an altitude of 100 meters and at speeds above 900 km / h ... stupidly does not have time, but if at 300-400 meters and at speeds of 650-800 yes. ..there are they ... kings!
          1. 0
            14 November 2012 15: 10
            Quote: vaf
            The 10400 Needle is with PTB

            I wrote so - a lot of suspended elements: PTB, LANTIRN, bombs - more than 10 tons in total
            Quote: vaf
            I agree that Bars was not very good then, but since 2002 of the year Mk1,2 went and now 3 and although it is not AFAR as on the Igla, I dare to assure you that it is not inferior to Amerov’s ....... all the teachings (though without us ) This is confirmed.

            How do you feel about LANTIRN?
            Quote: vaf
            From my own experience I’ll say ..... the receiver for MANPADS and MANPADS when approaching at an altitude of 100 meters and at speeds above 900 km / h ... stupidly does not have time, but if at 300-400 meters and at speeds of 650-800 yes. ..there are they ... kings!

            In Afghanistan, 84% of aviation losses were from barrel artillery and DShK

            Nevertheless, to get the Su-30 and F-15E unpromising. Su-30 is no better, and in some positions worse than the Amer car. Su-34 is another conversation, there are already serious advantages.
            1. VAF
              VAF
              +9
              14 November 2012 15: 24
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              In Afghanistan, 84% of aviation losses were from barrel artillery and DShK


              You know i'm in the know wink But if you look in the archives about the flights of scouts, and they constantly went to such modes, as I wrote, then there are no losses shot down from the MZA and MANPADS! For other reasons, there are, but precisely for these not.

              And all the other losses are already during the attack in the gorges and at the exit, well, during takeoffs and approaches ... request


              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              How do you feel about LANTIRN?


              Very positive, +! But now Hephaestus is doing the same on the Su-24 wink and the Bars Mk-3 is no worse ..., I don’t know what our Lightning will replace with SM-kahs.

              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Nevertheless, the Su-30 and F-15E are unpromising.


              Here I remain with my opinion soldier
              Regards, +! drinks
              1. +2
                14 November 2012 15: 38
                Quote: vaf
                in the archives about reconnaissance flights, and they constantly went to such modes,

                Is 100 m altitude suitable for reconnaissance?
                Quote: vaf
                And all the other losses are already during the attack in the gorges and at the exit, well, during takeoffs and approaches ..

                Those. All the same, the titanium shell for percussion machines will not be superfluous? wink
                Quote: vaf
                But now Hephaestus is doing the same on the Su-24

                Please tell us about Hephaestus. EMNIP is the name of the production association?
                Quote: vaf
                Regards, +!

                Mutually, Sergey
                1. VAF
                  VAF
                  +10
                  14 November 2012 16: 04
                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Is 100 m altitude suitable for reconnaissance?


                  Possible below wink It depends on which view you perform, it happened and photographed objects that were in excess, i.e. in "inverted flight" wink , a lot of interesting things ... it was ... now they don't fly like that. because .... practically no one, and no longer teach ..... "military science in a real way"! +! soldier

                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Those. All the same, the titanium shell for percussion machines will not be superfluous?


                  Undoubtedly, somewhere there is a photo of a pilot from Afghanistan, from the Mi-24's, so there the techies invented their armor plates, for the crew .. like the armor of medieval knights ...
                  so any booking is very good ... any!


                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Please tell us about Hephaestus. EMNIP is the name of the production association?


                  Hephaestus and T, the SVP-22,24 complex — all functions like those of Lantirn, plus space and the same three-dimensional on ILS, all systems on laser gyroscopes, etc. etc.
                  1. PLO
                    +2
                    14 November 2012 17: 07
                    Greetings, Sergey.
                    Do I understand correctly that, unlike the Lantirn svp-22, the su-24/34 is built-in rather than suspended?

                    and you didn’t have photos of Su-24 (Hephaestus) cabins?
                    1. VAF
                      VAF
                      +11
                      14 November 2012 18: 25
                      Quote: olp
                      that unlike the Lantirn svp-22, the su-24/34 is built-in rather than suspended?


                      Absolutely central, +! Only SVP-24, and not the 22nd, and on the 34th it is slightly different, closer to Lancer.
                      Therefore, the Su-34 can go as much as necessary to criminally small, but on the F-15th for a long time ... this is very problematic.


                      Quote: olp
                      and you didn’t have photos of Su-24 (Hephaestus) cabins?



                      Only for you ... +! wink



                      To the heap ... Su-24MR ....



                      And this is the M2 Hussar ...

                      1. PLO
                        +2
                        14 November 2012 19: 19
                        super pictures
                        thank you
                  2. +5
                    14 November 2012 17: 24
                    Quote: vaf
                    It depends on which view you perform, it happened and photographed objects that were in excess, i.e. in "inverted flight"

                    Yes))) I remember this incident - the fortress was photographed on a mountain ledge - against the sky. The highest class of piloting.
                    Quote: vaf
                    with Mi-24's, so there the techies invented their armor, for the crew .. like the armor of medieval knights ...

                    In mymyma, this was done even at the KB level, but things did not go well. It is impossible to work in them.
                    Quote: vaf
                    Hephaestus and T, the SVP-22,24 complex — all functions like those of Lantirn, plus space and the same three-dimensional on ILS, all systems on laser gyroscopes, etc. etc.

                    In, everything was clearly reported)))
      2. postman
        +2
        14 November 2012 17: 28
        Quote: vaf
        The analysis seems to be nothing,

        HiSergey, comments please:

        Quote: Author Oleg Kaptsov
        A unique feature of the Su-34 was the presence of a second radar for viewing the rear hemisphere - the system will warn the crew about the threat in time, and, if necessary, will respond with a volley of guided missiles on an attempt by an enemy fighter to hit “dry” in the back.

        Probably behind the times, the launch into the rear hemisphere ("against the course") or with a turn has already been implemented?

        fuel reserve / time to "turn" / control center?
        1. VAF
          VAF
          +9
          14 November 2012 18: 31
          Quote: Postman
          Probably behind the times, the launch into the rear hemisphere ("against the course") or with a turn has already been implemented?


          Hello Basil, +! They thickened the beam and lengthened a bit, the TP container was made to slide down and moved forward, they placed the AFU-shku and rear-view radars .... with the possibility of launching RVV-AE missiles.
          U-start, with the rest of the data ...... sorry bully

          1. Alex 241
            +2
            14 November 2012 18: 40
            Seryozha, I honestly do not understand the implementation of launching into the full sphere, attacked in the ZPS, will be hit earlier.
            1. VAF
              VAF
              +5
              14 November 2012 18: 58
              Quote: Alex 241
              Seryozha, I honestly do not understand the implementation of launching into the full sphere, attacked in the ZPS, will be hit earlier.


              Sanya absolutely agrees, but ... they know better. or maybe it will be suitable for the distance of firing MD missiles or with a gun? The pancake theory is understandable, but .... most likely they took the method from Long aircraft that had Kryptons, Contours, etc. that is, a rear-view radar, and guns, well, here they stuck a station. but the cannon was considered ... unnecessary laughing (joke).
              And so, in principle, fuck it is not needed. SPO-150 will report on the operation of the locator and long ago you were captured at the AU much sooner than you find a target in the ZPS and, all the more, a separate crew member has been allocated to control armaments and review the entire ZPS, but what about here? After all, in the front and back ... you will not tear drinks

              All for an hour and a half I decrease, the dog is already furious that we are not walking!
          2. postman
            +2
            15 November 2012 00: 57
            Quote: vaf
            RVV-AE.

            Got it, like Python 4 or something?
            Turns 180 deg in 3 s, 80 kN thrust for 3 s, 0.7 kN for a further 80 s, dual canards, two narrow ailerons 45 deg offset behind the second set of canards, rear fins leading edge root extensions to mid fuselage for strengthening. Stabilised two color 60 deg off boresight seeker.
            4 seconds and 50% of the fuel reserve are losing?
            ============
            Where do you "vrazhina" take pictures?
            Probably they can’t drive you out of airfields? No.
            Like an Aviation Partner
      3. -2
        15 November 2012 02: 48
        Paphos is still too much
        1. Alex 241
          +1
          15 November 2012 02: 53
          ???????????????????????????????????
    3. Diesel
      +5
      14 November 2012 15: 03
      I don’t know how much pedivics can be trusted, but at a cost
      F15SA - $ 137 million per unit
      Su34 - $ 33 million per unit

      Can be attributed to the advantages of su34)
      1. VAF
        VAF
        +6
        14 November 2012 15: 07
        Quote: Diesel
        F15SA - $ 137 million per unit
        Su34 - $ 33 million per unit


        Bullshit of the purest water!

        if the super-duper goes through the catalog of 37 million su-30s .... far beyond the 80s, then you can imagine how much the Su-34th costs!

        Good. Cheaper does not happen, +! drinks
        1. Diesel
          +5
          14 November 2012 15: 28
          I did not believe right away, well, su34 is still cheaper?) Although no one has official data anyway, we will wait until they start offering it for export)

          He broke through the data, he was worth 33 million in 2006, when he was not even accepted into service) drinks
          1. +7
            14 November 2012 15: 33
            Quote: Diesel
            I didn’t believe right away, well, is su34 cheaper anyway?

            Unless you pay workers a salary.

            As Sergey noted correctly, good is never cheap. Especially when it comes to SUCH aircraft
            1. Diesel
              +2
              14 November 2012 15: 53
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Unless you pay workers a salary.


              What is the meaning of your post ?? Do you have data on the cost of su34? share ...
              1. 0
                14 November 2012 22: 31
                Quote: Diesel
                Do you have data on the cost of su34? share ...

                Judging by the Indian contracts for Su-35, the cost of one 35 is approx. 102 million $. Comparing with 34 is not correct of course, but a priori the price of Su-34 cannot be 3 times lower than Su-35 IMHO ...
                1. +2
                  15 November 2012 22: 09
                  Stop confusing export prices with prices for a domestic customer.
            2. Dimon Lviv
              +2
              14 November 2012 16: 03
              Last but not least, due to the salary of the Su-34, do you agree that the American workers who assemble the Su-34 have it, unfortunately, higher than the Russian? Further, it can be assumed that many Russian components are cheaper than their American counterparts.
              1. +3
                14 November 2012 17: 19
                Quote: Dimon Lviv
                Su-34 precisely due to the salary, do you agree that the American workers collecting Su-34, unfortunately, have it higher than the Russians? Further, it can be assumed that many Russian components are cheaper than their American counterparts.


                The salaries of Russian aircraft manufacturers are several times less than their American counterparts. But despite this, the final product has equal value - the reason is an unprecedented level of corruption and kickbacks, reaching half the cost of the product.
        2. +1
          15 November 2012 22: 08
          This is the contract price from 2008. 32 Su-34s for 33,6 and billion re. The price of the Su-30 for 80-90 lyam green is export, at least one and a half times more than for our MO.
  2. +20
    14 November 2012 09: 17
    The penultimate photo - with us this was only possible in the Soviet Union ..
    Americans easily on a strip of about 60 F-15 taxied.
    And we now have so many flying boards for the whole country can’t be typed .. It's a shame.
    1. +10
      14 November 2012 09: 36
      Yes. We would like to take an example from them on a complete set and quantity of new equipment.
    2. VAF
      VAF
      +9
      14 November 2012 13: 12
      Quote: sanyabasik
      The penultimate photo - with us this was only possible in the Soviet Union ..


      Only +++++! drinks

  3. +11
    14 November 2012 09: 36
    oh, I thought only the mountains were cooler than us, and the Americans have good birds, and by the amount they directly crush us, we’ll shoot machine guns at their unprotected pilots if they don’t beat us with a rocket before
    1. Lucky
      +8
      14 November 2012 12: 09
      They all will not reach us, if they reach, then they will not return back))
      1. +6
        14 November 2012 22: 34
        Quote: Lucky
        They all will not reach us,

        Straight along Gogol, - "Not every bird will fly to the middle of the Dnieper"
        1. Konrad
          0
          15 November 2012 17: 52
          Quote: Nick
          "Not every bird will fly to the middle of the Dnieper"

          And I also heard: "Not every Moscow can swim to the middle of the Dnieper, especially if you swim along!" laughing
          1. +2
            18 November 2012 13: 29
            Quote: Konrad
            And I also heard: "Not every Moscow can swim to the middle of the Dnieper, especially if you swim along!"

            PLEASE AND THE HOLE NOT EVERYONE ... laughing laughing laughing
      2. Konrad
        +3
        15 November 2012 17: 50
        Quote: Lucky

        They all will not reach us, and if they do, then they will not return back)

        Of course! They consider them fools. Once the Germans were considered fools ...
  4. +3
    14 November 2012 09: 58
    Su-34 in my opinion is better than the F-15. One Su-34 disabled the entire Georgian air defense. including beech. unless the F-15 can boast that one machine was able to destroy the entire air defense of the country)
    1. Splin
      +9
      14 November 2012 10: 23
      "All" air defense of Georgia. Given that Georgia had a huge air defense system, it was not difficult. The only question is with downed planes. Not from a slingshot they were snarled at.
      1. Nymp
        +6
        15 November 2012 23: 16
        Quote: Splin
        The only question is with downed planes. Not from a slingshot, they mocked at them.
        Bullseye question
        Splin, Yes, bros from Ukraine have tried! And mind you there (in Ukraine) no one answered for this !!! It is hard to imagine that any other country would have shot down the aircraft of the American Air Force with such impunity. That would be tantamount to declaring war! And "bros" can, and gas is cheaper for them for such freaks !!!
    2. Nik_One
      +2
      14 November 2012 11: 07
      Abaldet !!!! One Su-34 defeated the whole of Georgia !!!
      Where have you read such tales
    3. VAF
      VAF
      +10
      14 November 2012 13: 45
      Quote: King
      One Su-34 disabled the entire Georgian air defense.


      But nothing that this blow was dealt only on August 11? wink
      And by this time what losses did we not already know?

      Quote: King
      including beech


      Who is it that told you such nonsense or where did they read it? lol
  5. +12
    14 November 2012 10: 02
    And yet Eagle, despite his powerful weapons - filed for work on the ground heavy fighter. Anyway. Two points of suspension occupy an aiming system, which reduces ammunition.
    34 is still a more specialized bomber. So I remain in my opinion - Su-27 vs F-15E. It makes no sense to compare the F-15E vs Su-34 - too different planes.
    1. +21
      14 November 2012 10: 54
      Quote: Wedmak
      So I remain in my opinion - Su-27 vs F-15E


    2. Nik_One
      +5
      14 November 2012 11: 08
      It would be more correct to compare the F-15E with the Su-30
      1. -4
        14 November 2012 13: 01
        Quote: Nik_One
        It would be more correct to compare the F-15E with the Su-30

        Then nothing good will come of it
        1. Stealth
          0
          14 November 2012 14: 54
          And if you compare with the Su-30 MKI?
          1. 0
            14 November 2012 15: 29
            Quote: Stealth
            And if you compare with the Su-30 MKI?

            It is also hopeless. It has no distinct advantages over the Strike Eagle, but it may have disadvantages, primarily related to electronics and the range of air-to-surface weapons. All the same, the Su-30MKI is more a fighter than a bomber.

            The experience of combat use plays a lot - in the 25 years of wars, amers polished their system to a shine
            1. Stealth
              +2
              14 November 2012 16: 29
              I think that it is not possible to "polish" the systems to shine when fighting with countries such as Iraq or Georgia, for the reason that a weak enemy "forgives" even gross mistakes. Only a serious conflict can give a serious impetus to the development of an air force application system.
              The Su-30MKI is indeed a larger fighter, but the F-15E is also classified as a fighter.
              It’s just that the Russian Air Force creates a clear division of responsibilities:
              The Su-35 is an IFI, and the Su-34 is a front-line bomber (FB), while the Su-30SM is intended primarily for the Navy, where it is probably too expensive to have many different types of vehicles. The Americans have their own system with their own classification. Comparing the capabilities of systems, in my opinion, will be more accurate than comparing individual machines.
              1. -2
                15 November 2012 22: 37
                But aren't Su-30SM going to squadrons instead of UB-eshes?
    3. Konrad
      0
      15 November 2012 17: 56
      Quote: Wedmak
      heavy fighter filed for work on the ground

      Yes, no matter how he was "filed", but his job in combat conditions, he did and not bad!
    4. -2
      15 November 2012 22: 34
      Well yes, compare fighter and fighter-bomber.
  6. PLO
    +10
    14 November 2012 10: 09
    Su-34 is the most beautiful aircraft of the brand Su good
    1. 0
      14 November 2012 10: 33
      [quote = olp] the most beautiful aircraft of the brand Su
      This wine or car is distinguished by brand. Aircraft are called by TYPE.
    2. +3
      14 November 2012 10: 36
      Quote: olp
      the most beautiful aircraft of the brand Su


      This wine or cars are distinguished by brand, and aircraft - by TYPE.
    3. +1
      14 November 2012 13: 00
      Quote: olp
      Su-34 is the most beautiful aircraft of the brand Su

      Bombers have always been distinguished by the nobility of the lines.
  7. +2
    14 November 2012 10: 10
    Comparing the Su-34 and the F-15E is somewhat wrong, since these are different aircraft in different "weight categories". It is more expedient to compare the Su-34 with the F-111, and the F-15E with the Su-30.
    1. Splin
      +1
      14 November 2012 10: 27
      F-15E is a fighter-bomber, which as a class has disappeared in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Kazakhs are great in this regard! Saved the MiG-27. Now these countries have realized that such a class is needed. He is being reborn. But this is clearly not the Su-34.
      1. +8
        14 November 2012 10: 47
        I would say differently. As a class, a fighter-bomber really disappears or has already disappeared. A new class has appeared - a multifunctional aviation complex.
        1. Splin
          0
          14 November 2012 10: 52
          The Su-27UB converted to this function is currently undergoing primary tests.
      2. +2
        14 November 2012 10: 49
        Well, we, too, did not save the MiG-27th from a good life ... soldier
  8. +6
    14 November 2012 10: 14
    well, the presence of an "armored cabin" from a stray bullet does not make the plane especially better, because in modern conflicts, modern air defense systems are used - whether they are barreled or missiles, and the Bedouins or Georgia can be handled with machines of a stray standard - only, as always, they worked "by chance" ..... in this regard, Su is a later car, although it was developed a long time ago, I think it should be more adapted to the specifics of a bomber ... I personally like the car, it's a pity, only that it has been logically already 20 years ago was to be put into service (
    1. +2
      14 November 2012 10: 21
      At first, Georgia was already "processed" with old-style machines, as a result of senseless loss of Rooks, and even somewhere it was written about Tu-22M3, Until the Su-34 arrived and in one piece "cut out" the Georgian air defense.
      1. +2
        14 November 2012 10: 51
        Not certainly in that way. Firstly, there was not Tu-22M3, but in my opinion Tu-22M. Secondly, at that time there was only one Su-xnumx. Which worked with electronic warfare, as well as nailed the main radar.
        1. VAF
          VAF
          0
          14 November 2012 13: 54
          Quote: Wedmak
          Firstly, there was not Tu-22M3, but in my opinion Tu-22M.


          No, you're wrong here ... first of all, we don't have Tu-22M now (it was still during the tests and they were called .. "zeroes", Tu-22M0 and further numbers) and still they were all prototypes of 2 , and shot down in the chest M3 from 52 guards tbap, Shaikovka.


          Quote: Wedmak
          Secondly, at that time there was only one Su-34


          Two worked No. 01 and No. 47 .... one with a SAP-14 station and Harbin complex



          And the second with X-31P missiles




          Quote: Wedmak
          Which worked with electronic warfare, as well as nailed the main radar.


          At the expense of the main it .. nonsense!
      2. Nik_One
        +4
        14 November 2012 11: 10
        Funny ... one Su-34 defeated all of Georgia smile
        1. +4
          14 November 2012 11: 13
          Well, he was actually not alone there .... if that. There were Rooks, still there was a scout, there were still tanks, artillery and ground forces, the Navy.
      3. +8
        14 November 2012 12: 04
        yes, but sorry - how many similar radars did Georgia have, and where was the intelligence !? that it was impossible to suppress! ???? or does it work for them in a completely different way than ours !? or is a new generation radar hitherto unprecedented !? or Georgians unreasonably and unexpectedly used radar! ????? just the stupidity and stupidity of the operation, sorry - but somehow, like a bathhouse where a bunch of vodka with the girls ruklubleduli operation .... they would still pulled Tu-95 there ..... again, all hopefully hoped
        1. VAF
          VAF
          +4
          14 November 2012 14: 08
          Quote: Dart Weyder
          just stupidity and stupidity of the operation, sorry - but somehow, somehow, from the bathhouse where a bunch of vodka with the girls ruklubledali operation.


          I absolutely agree with you, +! soldier

          And in confirmation of your thoughts ... excerpt from ..... well .. one document bully

          "..... As if on purpose, after the end of active hostilities to establish peace, on August 14, 2008, the Georgian armed forces decided to demonstrate to Russia the full power of its air defense, which was involved in the hostilities.

          By means of electronic reconnaissance aircraft and helicopters of electronic warfare of the Russian Air Force, the work was discovered of a large number of radar RTV Georgian Armed Forces of various frequency ranges - P-18, P-37, 36D6, ASR-12, active use (inclusion and continuous operation on air) of the Buk- M1 ”,“ Osa-AKM ”, S-125, MANPADS of the“ Arrow ”,“ Needle ”and“ Stinger ”type, and also recorded the work of the ROC air defense systems S-200 and“ Circle ”. Thus, it was confirmed that the air defense group of Georgia is functioning and ready to conduct hostilities.
      4. +2
        14 November 2012 13: 28
        Why "... it was written somewhere ...". Quite a specific board from Shaikovka. There was a command (Smerdyakov) to raise a few more boards, but the pilots refused to fly, without cover, for slaughter. There were serious showdowns.
  9. +7
    14 November 2012 10: 23
    The author can call the F-15E at least a strategic bomber, at least an attack aircraft - this is his personal business. But according to the classification adopted in the USA, this aircraft is a tactical fighter! I already wrote about this once.
    B (bomber) - bombers (e.g. B-1, B-52)
    FB - Fighter Bomber (FB-111)
    A - attack aircraft (A-10, A-4)
    F / A - fighter / attack aircraft (F / A-18)
    S - anti-submarine aircraft (S-3A, -В)
    P - BPA aircraft (P-7)
    E - EW aircraft
    R - Scout
    etc.
    Moreover, there are air wings and squadrons of air defense fighters and air wings and squadrons of TIA (tactical fighter aircraft). They can be armed with the same type of aircraft, but of various modifications. If the article is about the American machine, then you must adhere to the classification adopted in the country of manufacture and (or) the country that has this machine in service.
    1. Splin
      +2
      14 November 2012 10: 43
      FB-111 is an average strategic bomber with a range of more than 7 thousand kilometers.
      1. +2
        14 November 2012 11: 02
        Quote: Splin
        FB-111 is an average strategic bomber with a range of more than 7 thousand kilometers.

        I agree, they were at one time in the combat composition of the US Air Force SAC (Strategic Aviation Command). But they were created on the basis of the F-111 tactical fighter, and were classified accordingly. In general, they have a lot of absurdities (from our point of view), it is not for nothing that Zadornov likes to "walk" over them with a pen ...
    2. 0
      14 November 2012 11: 50
      Well, every rule has exceptions. There are our planes in the NATO designation, too, by type, it seems like all fighters are divided into f (fighter), bombers into b (bomber), helicopters into h (helicopter).
      Mig-29 - fulcrum
      su-27 - flanker
      tu-16 - beager
      tu-95 - bear
      but for some reason the SU-25 attack aircraft is frogfoot, although it is not a fighter, it is far from a fighter ...
  10. +2
    14 November 2012 10: 34
    Quote: Colonel

    The author can call the F-15E at least a strategic bomber, at least an attack aircraft - this is his personal business. But according to the classification adopted in the USA, this aircraft is a tactical fighter! I already wrote about this once.

    Something is also written on the fence, and there is a construction site
    If the aircraft is designed for bombing and is engaged in bombing, then he is not a fighter, you do not call him
    And you must admit, a fighter - a carrier of nuclear weapons - it sounds somehow strange or something
    1. Splin
      +1
      14 November 2012 10: 42
      MiG-27 and Su-17 could carry tactical nuclear weapons.
    2. +1
      14 November 2012 10: 53
      Now nuclear weapons can carry almost any aircraft. Up to the Yak-130. The size of nuclear bombs allows this. The only question is the suspension and power of a particular munition.
    3. +7
      14 November 2012 10: 56
      Quote: nae76
      Something is also written on the fence, and there is a construction site

      You see, young man, on duty for more than 25 years I "supervised" the US Air Force and Navy and NATO and therefore I know what I write and think when I speak. If you want to discuss in a "fence" style, then you can operate with appropriate expressions, definitions, etc. But I'm used to speaking in a professional language, the language of documents, officially accepted classifications and terminology.
      1. xan
        0
        14 November 2012 14: 22
        what's the difference as they call him, the main thing is what he does
  11. +7
    14 November 2012 10: 45
    Quote: Splin
    MiG-27 and Su-17 could carry tactical nuclear weapons.

    My uncle flew a MiG-27, and said that the car was completely sharpened for work on the surface, it was sooo problematic to shoot down someone on this "fighter"

    Nowadays, in general, everyone has forgotten how to call a spade a spade, we don’t have wars, only counter-terrorist and peacekeeping operations and blah blah blah, but the people hawl ....

    Remember Kozma Prutkov "Look at the root"
    1. Splin
      +5
      14 November 2012 10: 48
      Quote: nae76
      the "fighter" was sooo problematic


      Therefore, in Ukraine they are testing new equipment on the Su-17.
    2. +5
      14 November 2012 12: 00
      please do not confuse Mig-27

      he was imprisoned for a strike aircraft, the lack of radar fairing speaks for itself with the Mig-23 in the version of the interceptor, where there is one (radar)
      1. VAF
        VAF
        +2
        14 November 2012 12: 59
        Quote: Dart Weyder
        for themselves with the Mig-23 as an interceptor,


        Well, the Mig-23s were used to the full extent across the river, although the M-ki was not very successful, but the ML and MLD were really nothing, though the scope was used as a simple collimator, and all the data (range and angle) was set manually, but this it’s still better than on the BIS-based principle (demolition and two hoods)!

        And from the dive the bombs went down ... as needed wink




        Dart weyder,
        Quote: Dart Weyder
        he was imprisoned for a strike aircraft, the absence of radar fairing speaks for itself



        That's right. Therefore, he had instead of the radar -Fon, Maple and Kayra
        1. +5
          14 November 2012 13: 27
          but again, not created for this, they turned out to be worse (when attacking the MiG-17), because they had high speeds, which later replaced them with the Su-25, which had lower speed and better security, but was better suited for the roles of the attack aircraft (which he was) and the Su-22 — which had a better aiming and navigation system and could use a larger assortment of guided and unguided weapons, and accordingly a larger payload, simply wanted to save, but the 23rd one was too unsuitable for the role of a bomber or attack aircraft request
          1. VAF
            VAF
            +1
            14 November 2012 14: 13
            Quote: Dart Weyder
            did not fit the 23rd for the role of a bomber or attack aircraft


            Here I absolutely agree, but ... as they say ... "on bezrybe and .... horseradish carrots", that's why they used the MiG-23, and 27K, M and D only started at the very end in 1988, but still ... in the mountains there was no better than Scallop ...
            But, by the way, things were much better with the reservation for the 27s than the Su-17s, and the same with take-off at full load wink + drinks
  12. +6
    14 November 2012 10: 50
    It happens in their sandbox belay
    1. Splin
      +13
      14 November 2012 10: 54
      Actually, it’s buried by Hussein - MIG-25
    2. +3
      15 November 2012 21: 48
      Tank weight holds
  13. +1
    14 November 2012 11: 11
    Quote: Colonel
    But I'm used to speaking the language of documents, officially accepted classifications and terminology.


    And I used to call a spade a spade, if the plane is bombing, then it is a bomber or attack aircraft, if it is fighting enemy planes, it is a fighter, and I see no reason to do otherwise, although I am, yes, not a professional military man, but just try to "be friends" with common sense.

    As for the accepted classifications of military equipment, they were often deliberately introduced distortions for one reason or another, you yourself probably know the examples
    1. 0
      14 November 2012 11: 15
      Alas, what you said was fair a couple of decades ago. Now almost all new aircraft are multifunctional.
      1. +2
        14 November 2012 11: 32
        Quote: Wedmak
        Now almost all new aircraft are multifunctional.

        In aviation, it is customary to say multi-purpose.
    2. Splin
      0
      14 November 2012 11: 20
      Quote: nae76
      But I’m used to call a spade a spade if a plane is bombing then it’s a bomber or attack aircraft, if it fights with enemy’s planes - a fighter,


      And if the Libyan Su-22 bombed the enemy’s positions, and then launched rockets on the Rafals?
  14. 0
    14 November 2012 11: 37
    Quote: Wedmak
    Now almost all new aircraft are multifunctional.

    Multifunctional platform, yes. But depending on the mounted equipment and armament, the aircraft acquires specialization, and the equipment may be partially removable and partially not, and therefore it will not always be possible to completely convert bombs into a fighter in the field, although they are more than 80% identical. Yes, and such a task is not posed, yet it is simply done to optimize costs and manufacturability, it is clear that it is easier and cheaper to produce 2-3 base platforms than 5-6.

    Quote: Splin
    And if the Libyan Su-22 bombed the enemy’s positions, and then launched rockets on the Rafals?


    But I do not deny the existence of fighter-bombers, the problem is that most often such machines are a little flawed, both as fighters and as bombers

    It is better to make purely fighter and tactical bomber variants on the basis of one platform and send some enemy planes to shoot down and others to attack, the Americans actually did seem
    1. Splin
      +2
      14 November 2012 11: 51
      You can not compare the 24-Volga with the modern Merce C-class. But it’s really possible to patch it to the modern level. , and with IB. The American F-11 has been in service for over 30 years. And still standing in Australia. The fact is that IB is not flawed, but more perfect. Drop guided bombs, and may the upgraded MiG-29. But few are capable of acting as a front-line bomber near the ground and as a fighter of air supremacy. Another aerodynamics.
  15. Nik_One
    +9
    14 November 2012 11: 44
    "Su-34 and F-15E. Meeting is inevitable"

    And why, and most importantly, why should they meet?
    It's like writing Voivode and Minuteman, Mace and Trident 2, meeting is inevitable. Only there is no point in meeting them ..
    1. Splin
      +1
      14 November 2012 11: 57
      He put a plus sign, although if the Su-34 goes for export, then such a meeting is real without a mace.
      1. Nik_One
        +3
        14 November 2012 12: 12
        Yes, even if it will be exported, there is no sense in meeting them wink
        Are they going to conduct air combat or will they hold a competition on the accuracy of bombing? smile
  16. +2
    14 November 2012 12: 01
    Quote: Splin
    The fact is that IB is not flawed, but more perfect.


    I will not argue, sorry, not a specialist, my opinion was formed in conversations with my uncle, and he believed that the MiG-27K, for example, was not a very good fighter, but like a tactical bomber, it’s very good, and I am inclined to believe him, because he’s on this flew a car, that's actually something like this.
    1. Splin
      +2
      14 November 2012 12: 10
      Because it was originally developed as a tactical fighter MiG-23. and then remade under a bomber jacket. oversimplified. Although the MiG-23 as a fighter was also not a fountain. As for the MiG-27. I saw in the 90s how he "opened" a target tank with a gun.
      1. VAF
        VAF
        +5
        14 November 2012 12: 41
        Quote: Splin
        I saw in the 90s how he "opened" a target tank with a gun.


        And after this "shooting" I did not see ... how much he was paid in TEC. lol
      2. +4
        14 November 2012 12: 52
        the 23rd, in addition to all its shortcomings (and they can be found in every aircraft), had its own advantages, and our overseas "colleagues", the "aggressor" squadron, recognized this when they used 23s similar to the Soviet Air Force to intercept F- 111 (during the training of the pilots of the 111th), using guidance from ground-based radars, at low altitudes the aircraft developed tremendous speed, and it was difficult to detect it - so with certain skills and tactics - a formidable machine, like any weapon in experienced hands
        1. VAF
          VAF
          +4
          14 November 2012 14: 16
          Quote: Dart Weyder
          formidable car, like any weapon in experienced hands


          I agree the same, but right there across the river. when the Tu-22M3 went home to Mary and dispersed the M-1.7, then on the MLD, with all the suspensions .... well, with difficulty 1,4, so they asked the bombers .. although I would slow down a bit, + wink
          1. +2
            14 November 2012 14: 23
            yes - we know, we know !!!! drinks
    2. VAF
      VAF
      0
      14 November 2012 12: 40
      Quote: nae76
      and as a tactical bomber, it’s very good


      Only desirable over a plain or water surface, but in the foothills. and especially in the mountains ... problems .... you can ask your uncle wink
      1. +2
        14 November 2012 14: 01
        Hello hello! Question to you, like a pro. What kind of car we have is equal to or superior to F15, or there are none. Particularly interesting regarding electronic filling. Thanks in advance.
        You as always +++++++ good hi
        1. VAF
          VAF
          +5
          14 November 2012 14: 59
          Quote: SrgSoap
          What kind of car do we have equal or superior to F15 or those that are not available


          Hello, +! drinks

          1. If we specifically compare with us, then the Su-35S at least 6 of them are already in testing and are being launched into production.

          2. If at all, then the Su-30MKI and MKM are easy, and even more so with the Mars-3 Bars ... the stuffing is no worse (I wrote a little bit at the top wink )

          3. I hope that with the "departure" of the Taburetkinskaya flock, the Su-30SM will be delivered no worse

          4. Well, I don’t even speak about flight and maneuvering characteristics .... ours is better in all respects.

          although f-xnumx is a very good plane, very good

          not without reason all the media, except the western ones, are silent. once again, the Israelis conducted a brilliant air operation on f-15s. good
          October 24, i.e. less than a month ago .... "erased" the military-industrial complex in the suburbs of Khartoum ..and all the air defense of Sudan (by the way, ours is not the first freshness, but ...) 8 F-15s, 2 tankers, one Falcon and almost 4000 km round trip ... the target is destroyed, there are no casualties ... recourse
          1. +4
            14 November 2012 15: 17
            Thank you very much!!! drinks

            I laid it out, I don’t even need to specify, everything is clear. good
            You had a higher photo 23, very similar to a pterodactyl)))), in my opinion did you say or am I mistaken?

            And about the "Taburetkinskaya flock" I heard "Urfin Deuce with blockheads"
            1. VAF
              VAF
              +6
              14 November 2012 15: 45
              Quote: SrgSoap
              in my opinion did you speak or am I mistaken?


              You are not mistaken, +! drinks This is what I told Vito in the summer about the 23rd favorite creation of Kutakhov.
              Well, when the first aircraft ... "got on the wing", then for the "collapse" of the main landing gear and mechanization on the 16gr wing, in this configuration, they immediately named it ... pterodactyl .... similar to ... laughing



              1. +2
                14 November 2012 16: 38
                Handsome plane! Thanks for the photo!
          2. +1
            14 November 2012 15: 20
            Quote: vaf
            although f-xnumx is a very good plane, very


            By the way, he is a follower of the traditions of F-111. Is this car familiar? wink
            1. VAF
              VAF
              +2
              14 November 2012 15: 55
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Is this car familiar?


              Well, the question, at least, is not correct! wink

              Then I will answer in the same form .......... but what do you have such. that is, was recourse

              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              By the way, he is the continuation of the traditions of the F-111


              so any fighter-bomber can be brought under the successor of traditions lol
              1. +2
                14 November 2012 17: 28
                Quote: vaf
                Is this car familiar?
                Well, the question, at least, is not correct!

                Hmm ... remember a couple of days ago you talked a lot and in detail about the F-111
                Quote: vaf
                so any fighter-bomber can be brought under the successor of traditions

                EMNIP Strike Eagle was created as a promising replacement for 111
                1. VAF
                  VAF
                  0
                  14 November 2012 18: 34
                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Hmm ... remember a couple of days ago you talked a lot and in detail about the F-111



                  Well, so am I about the same thing! + wink And you ask me such a question request or I just didn’t understand ... humor recourse
  17. +4
    14 November 2012 12: 29
    As a small digression, in general, the opinion of the pilots themselves about airplanes is a rather mixed thing, my grandfather moved to the Pe-2 from a collective farm tractor, where he flew away for 3 years, then again to the combine (though he had 1 son left for aviation again the one that finished flying on the 27th). So grandfather said that most of the warriors especially did not like pawn techniques, the plane was difficult to control and the fear of God in operation and maintenance. Moreover, in the literature, for example, he has almost only praise. Recently, when the recollections of fought pilots began to be printed more often, I was surprised by the very warm reviews of pilots about donkeys, although as a child I read in all books that they were very much Messers and all that, but the pilots themselves loved them ....

    It’s me that it’s difficult for the pilots to guess which plane will be more pleasant and the performance characteristics here do not play a big role
  18. +3
    14 November 2012 12: 32
    Meetings of the Su-34 and F-15 are certainly best avoided.
  19. +1
    14 November 2012 12: 46
    Quote: Trevis
    you can ask uncle

    Unfortunately, for 3 years this requires a medium, there are very few men left of the post-war generation, they broke it into perestroika and afterwards God forbid anyone
  20. Oles
    +2
    14 November 2012 12: 47
    I don't understand why the author calls the F-15 a "bloody killer" .. and what about ours ??? "doves of peace" .. peacekeepers .. or whatever ....
    1. +4
      14 November 2012 12: 50
      Probably because he carried democracy under his wings. And our just bombs and missiles.
      1. +4
        14 November 2012 13: 05
        Quote: Wedmak
        Probably because he carried democracy under his wings. And our just bombs and missiles.


        Probably because 27 and 34 have practically no combat experience. Purely air show aircraft.
        1. Oles
          0
          14 November 2012 13: 28
          I agree...
          1. +1
            15 November 2012 00: 47
            Oles are you happy?
  21. +5
    14 November 2012 13: 28
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    Purely air show aircraft.

    Are the raptors apparently also purely smart?

    Oh no, they’re fighting in transformers
    1. +3
      14 November 2012 13: 37
      Quote: nae76
      Are the raptors apparently also purely smart?

      I would say experimental.
  22. +4
    14 November 2012 13: 30
    It is strange that no one paid attention to the Singapore Air Force.

    This country is 4 times smaller than Moscow in size, the population of the super megapolis is 5 million people. Despite the fact that Singapore is located on 60 tiny islands, 10 airbases are located here! This city-state in Southeast Asia has a solid air force, comparable only to the air forces of large countries like Russia or India.

    - 24 universal attack aircraft F-15SG "Strike Eagle"
    - 74 F-16 fighter of the latest Block50 / 52 modifications
    - 50 combat training F-5
    - 9 KC-130 and KC-135 tanker aircraft
    - 8 airborne early warning aircraft
    - about a hundred UAVs
    - as well as dozens of transport, training and special aircraft and helicopters

    Due to the limited size of the "super-island", part of the aircraft is based on the contract abroad - at the airfields of the USA, Australia, etc.
    1. +1
      14 November 2012 16: 58
      And in what, excuse me, place, 24 F15 and 74 F16 are comparable with hundreds of Su-27 and MiG-29 and a small number of Su-34 and Su-35?
      1. Tirpitz
        0
        14 November 2012 17: 47
        Quote: patsantre
        And in what, excuse me, place, 24 F15 and 74 F16 are comparable with hundreds of Su-27 and MiG-29 and a small amount of Su-34 and Su-35

        Singapore Air Force latest modifications. how many are these 29 and 27 in the Russian air force?
      2. +3
        14 November 2012 18: 09
        Quote: patsantre
        And in what, excuse me, place, are the 24 F15 and 74 F16 comparable to hundreds of Su-27 and MiG-29

        Figures of deliveries of new machines to the Air Force over the past 12 years:
        Su-34 - 15 aircraft (including 6 at Baltimore airport, Voronezh)
        MiG-29 - 28 aircraft (returned from Algeria)
        Su-35 - 2 experienced and 4 serial
        Su-30M2 - three aircraft
        Also, about 100 Su-27 family aircraft underwent modernization and overhaul.
        That's probably all the fighters of the Russian Air Force, capable of flying into the air

        Against the backdrop of this mess 24 F-15 and 74 F-16 Singapore Air Force look significant force

        Russian Air Force 11 AWACS aircraft - Singapore Air Force 8
        Russian Air Force 20 Refueling - Singapore Air Force 9
        Russian Air Force - how many drones? Singapore Air Force has more than one hundred different classes
        1. PLO
          +8
          14 November 2012 18: 18
          That's probably all the Russian Air Force fighters that can fly in the air

          the situation is certainly not a fountain, but do not exaggerate so
          You forgot about the MiG-31, the Su-24, which also underwent a major overhaul and modernization (no matter what), there are also a lot of non-modernized flying Su-27 and MiG-29

          in general, a direct comparison of the air force of singapore and the russian federation is incorrect, in absolute comparison the air force of the russian federation is still much stronger, but regarding the capabilities of states, the air force of singapore is a formidable force
          1. +2
            14 November 2012 18: 35
            Quote: olp
            in absolute comparison, the Russian air force is still much stronger, but regarding the capabilities of the states, the Singapore air force looks formidable

            Totally agree
          2. +1
            14 November 2012 22: 01
            Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. The article was more about absolute comparison.
        2. -1
          14 November 2012 22: 02
          More than a hundred different classes? What did you use, dear?
          1. 11Goor11
            +2
            19 November 2012 15: 09
            Probably meant:
            "More than one hundred (pieces of UAVs), of various classes. "
  23. +1
    14 November 2012 13: 36
    And all the same, our SU-34 is good!
  24. +1
    14 November 2012 13: 40
    Quote: Shkodnik65
    It is strange that no one paid attention to the Singapore Air Force

    They can’t divide the islands there in the ocean, the likelihood that it will reach war is not frail, and besides all the Chinese, and in Singapore most Chinese love when they have a large and strong army
    1. +1
      14 November 2012 14: 10
      Quote: nae76
      They will not divide islands there in the ocean

      Not quite right. Around Singapore, rogue people from Malaysia and Indonesia are asleep and see how to attach and plunder a free city.
      But China has nothing to do with it.
  25. 0
    14 November 2012 14: 13
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    Due to the limited size of the "super-island", part of the aircraft is based on the contract abroad - at the airfields of the USA, Australia, etc.


    Damn, we would also have something in the United States on the PPD to drive the Iskander a little for example

    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    But China has nothing to do with it.


    When it comes to the territory inhabited by most Chinese, mainland China cannot have anything by definition

    And besides, this "free city" is, in fact, a colonial territory that was simply taken away from these "rogue", I would also sleep in their place and see how to return back what was stolen
    1. +1
      14 November 2012 14: 18
      Quote: nae76
      When it comes to the territory inhabited by most Chinese, mainland China cannot have anything by definition


      Only at the level of distant prospects and economic ties

      Currently, Singapore is too tough for China. And Singaporeans (where there is a mixed population of Chinese, Malays, Filipinos, Indians and Europeans) China is generally a damn thing.

      Quote: nae76
      Due to the limited size of the "super-island", part of the aircraft is based on the contract abroad - at the airfields of the USA, Australia, etc.
      Damn, we would also drive something in the USA on the PPD to drive the Iskander

      But Russia does not have a protection agreement with the USA
  26. +6
    14 November 2012 15: 34
    The multi-purpose machines F-16, F-15E, F-111 and F / A-18 caused many times more damage than the thick-bellied V-52 and the infamous "stealth".

    And would they have been able to cause such damage if the French from Thomson had not been kidnapped with the Iraqi radar system, the scandalous F-117s did not ask for 900 kg of guided bombs at the air defense command centers, and several dozen completely forgotten tomahawks did not strike at the radar and command air defense centers and communication centers.
    But it’s still nice that there is only one machine on the list from an aircraft carrier))))))
    (DShK machine gun bullet penetrates 20 mm of armored steel from a distance of 500 m
    16 mm of armor produced during the Second World War is not cemented, after which these data roam according to all directories, and at a right angle by the way.
    I have a suspicion that the titanium will be stronger, and the ballistic breakdown is not bad.

    And just fragments of anti-aircraft missiles, as well as ready-to-use striking elements, will have less lethal force than a dshk bullet, especially if the detonation is more than 5 meters. Reservation must be maintained.
    1. +3
      14 November 2012 15: 44
      Quote: Kars
      And would they be able to inflict such damage if the French from Thomson had not been kidnapped with the Iraqi radar system

      this is a clear myth
      Quote: Kars
      16 mm of armor produced during the Second World War is not cemented, after which these data roam according to all directories, and at a right angle by the way.

      I'm not saying that the DShK will break through, it's purely for the comparison scale
      But the CPV which 14,5 mm - will strike for sure. ZU-23 at a greater distance
      And the thickness of 17 mm is far from everywhere - EMNIP tanks are covered by 8 mm armor
      But it’s still nice that there is only one machine on the list from an aircraft carrier))))))
      Part of the F-18 KMP flew from airfields.

      I know who I remembered - your authority is Oleg Teslenko, who proves that the 20 mm projectile could not harm the MiG-15))))))
      1. +3
        14 November 2012 15: 53
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        this is a clear myth

        And for me the most is that the paddlers have never liked.
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        But the CPV, which is 14 mm, will strike for sure

        It depends on what angle and distance it is. And probably all the same 17
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        ZU-23 at a greater distance

        Do not particularly re-rebalance BZT
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        And the thickness of 17 mm is far from everywhere

        Naturally, this is not a tank, but the rest do not
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Oleg Teslenko, who argues that the 20 mm shell could not cause harm to the MiG-15

        In this regard, you can personally contact the author, I subscribe only to what suits me.
        1. +1
          14 November 2012 17: 37
          Quote: Kars
          And for me the most is that the paddlers have never liked.

          you understand, when using equipment with bookmarks, such things would sooner or later be opened by local craftsmen. One "bookmark" - and crowns for the French defense complex, for many years not to be washed. Guardians, for whom the export of arms is an important sector of the economy, will never do this.
          Secondly, it is not clear what is meant by "bookmark" - no one can explain what kind of crap it is and how it works
          Quote: Kars
          Naturally, this is not a tank, but the rest do not

          The question is, were the costs worth the result?
          1. +2
            14 November 2012 17: 44
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            such things would sooner or later be revealed by local craftsmen

            Iraqi chtoli?
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            and cronts to the French defense complex,

            Handing over the codf to the Yankees, they are not ashamed. Moreover, we are not talking about the whole French military-industrial complex, but about private Thompson.
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            no one can explain what kind of crap this is and how it works

            There is always some kind of shutdown code, service lozenges - this is more related to electronics. If even Google collects information without the demand of subscribers --- damn it, I need to ask a search for goods, as then advertising links go up. In more complex systems, this even more likely.
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            The question is, were the costs worth the result?

            It’s worth it, this confirms the experience of everyone, even after refusing the reservation in the fleet, the local booking is still returning, although there are Ajis and the rest do not care.
            1. 0
              14 November 2012 18: 28
              Quote: Kars
              Iraqi chtoli?

              Well, who worked with them there? Clever men are everywhere; there are more scumbags in Iraqi society. because you have a negative impression
              Quote: Kars
              Moreover, we are not talking about the entire French military-industrial complex, but about the private owner Thompson.

              What exactly supplied Iraq Thompson?
              Quote: Kars
              There is always some kind of shutdown code, service lozenges - this is more related to electronics. If even Google collects information without the demand of subscribers --- damn it, I need to ask a search for goods, as then advertising links go up. In more complex systems, this even more likely.

              You see, here you are directly connected to the Internet via a protocol through a complex modem and an even more complex station. Those. in order to deal with hackers and all such things, you need to be at least connected to the network.

              Moreover, you have Google this year, and the desert storm was 20 years ago, when computers were completely different (I first saw computers more or less like a modern PC somewhere near the end of the 90's, I first saw a cell phone in St. Petersburg in 1998)
              1. +1
                14 November 2012 18: 57
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                Well, who worked with them there?

                Arrived, the Thompsons themselves will look for their own bookmarks.
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                What exactly supplied Iraq Thompson?

                Communication systems, commutation, etc. with chief installation and staff training.
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                and the desert storm was 20 years ago when computers were completely different

                That gives an even wider maneuver for various frauds.
                1. +1
                  14 November 2012 19: 11
                  Quote: Kars
                  Arrived, the Thompsons themselves will look for their own bookmarks

                  You want to say that on-site systems were served by paddlers, not the Iraqi military?
                  Quote: Kars
                  That gives an even wider maneuver for various frauds.

                  Hardly. The simpler the system. the harder it is to hide something. Do not solder the additional block
                  1. +1
                    14 November 2012 19: 25
                    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                    You want to say that on-site systems were served by paddlers, not the Iraqi military?

                    Do you think the Iraqi military knew something more than what they got to do during the adjustment? And as soon as they left the Iraqi specialists with screwdrivers rushed to reconfigure and test everything.

                    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                    Do not solder the additional block
                    Why? After you write different numbers on it and put a seal on it, the removal of it with a cathode deprives the guarantee and it's in the hat.

                    And to believe not to believe it is your business, but there are many references to the crashes and freezes of Iraqi air defense and communications computers. Google gives links to overgrown .. Iraq air defense systems fail in 1991, and I don’t see anything unbelievable. As well as French exosets in Falklands .
                    1. +1
                      14 November 2012 22: 27
                      Quote: Kars
                      Do you think the Iraqi military knew something more than what they got to do during the adjustment? And as soon as they left the Iraqi specialists with screwdrivers rushed to reconfigure and test everything.

                      Craftsmen are everywhere. And technology always requires attention
                      Quote: Kars
                      Why? After you write different numbers on it and put a seal on it, the removal of it with a cathode deprives the guarantee and it's in the hat.

                      Sewn with white thread. But not a single material evidence was presented.
                      Quote: Kars
                      but there are many references to the crashes and freezes of Iraqi air defense and communications computers.

                      Not surprisingly, there were concentrated all the forces of NATO EW. And on the first night, stealth, tomahawks and Apaches knocked out all the key posts
                      Quote: Kars
                      the battle of Iraq’s air defense systems in 1991, and I don’t see anything unbelievable. As well as the explosions of the French exosets in the Falklands.

                      You're contradicting yourself. Pure chance.
                      Quote: Kars
                      Google gives links to overgrown

                      The tale is well replicated
                      1. +1
                        15 November 2012 13: 58
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        The tale is well replicated

                        Great for American press releases on the first storm.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        the battle of Iraq’s air defense systems in 1991, and I don’t see anything unbelievable. As well as the explosions of the French exosets in the Falklands.

                        You're contradicting yourself. Pure chance.

                        specifically what am I contradicting? Iraq’s air defense did not work, the Exocet detonators did not work.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Not surprisingly, there were concentrated all the forces of NATO EW. And on the first night, stealth, tomahawks and Apaches knocked out all the key posts

                        Something then in Yugoslavia they couldn’t repeat it to such an extent, and the presence of air defense in 2003 shows that the physical damage to the air defense system itself was insignificant, otherwise it would not have been stopped under the embargo. Although, according to American fairy tales, the level of air defense as well as armored vehicles should have been negative.
                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Sewn with white thread. But not a single material evidence was presented.

                        Naturally, your version that it is necessary to add some kind of special blocks is not viable, although feasible, you can get out of communication and complex electronic devices without additional blocks, given that the systems themselves will fail and break.

                        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                        Craftsmen are everywhere. And technology always requires attention

                        Craftsmen))))) Of course there are, we see how Iraqi craftsmen were able to upgrade Scud
            2. +1
              15 November 2012 03: 14
              By any. Because if there really were something, you would have found the one who opened it.
      2. +1
        14 November 2012 19: 41
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        But it’s still nice that there is only one machine on the list from an aircraft carrier))))))
        Part F-18 KMP flew from airfields

        it makes me even more happy.
  27. +1
    14 November 2012 17: 09
    VAF
    by the way in runets they get shaw 34-ka can carry x101 / 102
    1. VAF
      VAF
      -1
      14 November 2012 18: 36
      Quote: leon-iv
      by the way in runets they get shaw 34-ka can carry x101 / 102


      Breshet, like gray geldings, while on them even ....... Brahmos cannot lol
      1. +1
        14 November 2012 21: 27
        until they even ....... Brahmos cannot
        Yeah, religion probably forbids)))) Ali Indians)))
        But the most important word is bye
        1. VAF
          VAF
          0
          14 November 2012 22: 30
          Quote: leon-iv
          But the most important word is bye


          I will not write in total bully , but this is a purely constructive-centering problem, they promised to finalize ..... in principle, they promised the same new engines with the APU .. there are some APUs, but the motors are still the same +! recourse
  28. The comment was deleted.
    1. VAF
      VAF
      0
      14 November 2012 18: 43
      Quote from rudolf
      But the pilots are not positioned along the center line of the aircraft and when the same "barrel" is executed, the overload will be much higher than in the aircraft of the classic tandem pilot placement


      if you correctly execute a classic barrel, or rather .. a soda, then you are not even "tied to a chair" you will not fall down to the floor.

      About the review, a little yes, that's why they always fly in the right bearing, if we are in formation, well, if you have to become on the left, then you keep a greater distance, well, the interval is a bit.

      And no matter where you sit .. on the right or in the back on the aerobatics, if you don't "steer" yourself, then ... for the bag ... you don't feel comfortable
  29. Alex 241
    +7
    14 November 2012 17: 52
    To effectively manage the Su-34 combat aviation complex, its crew consists of two people - a pilot and an operator. They sit in the cab with the necessary comfortable working conditions side-by-side to each other. The double crew cabin, in which the pilot is located on the left, the navigator operator on the right, is made in the form of a welded titanium armor capsule. Even during the design, it was determined that the strike aircraft should have great combat survivability. Then, at the insistence of the general designer M.P.Simonov, the cockpit of the Su-34 was made in the form of an armored capsule of armor titanium up to 17 mm thick, protecting the crew from bullets, small-caliber shells, and fragments of rockets. Here, the experience of using the Su-25 attack aircraft in Afghanistan and design developments on the design of the armored protection of this aircraft were taken into account and used.
    In particular, the Su-34 has the largest mass of reservation - a total of almost one and a half tons (1480 kg) - which dramatically increases the survivability of the machine and the security of the crew. The corresponding Su-34 complex consists of an armored cab, armored protection and a consumable consumable compartment, an engine fire extinguishing system. Duplication, redundancy and shielding of major systems are also provided. In addition, the cabin is equipped with K-36DM ejection seats, ejection of them is possible in all modes (including taxiing).
    The dimensions of the cabin made it possible to place a seating area behind the seats with a first-aid kit, ration, thermoses with drinking water and a sewage device - a dry closet. In this area, crew members, in turn, can stand upright and rest, without losing control of the situation on board, if necessary. The cabin is equipped with air conditioning, a cooking cabinet with a thermos and a microwave. For the first time on a front-line bomber, you can lift it through the lower hatch and climb into the cabin through the door. Up to a flight altitude of 10 km, crew work is provided without oxygen masks.
    The Su-34 front-line bomber has a unique avionics equipment (REO), which includes a rear-view radar that not only allows you to detect air targets "behind the tail", but also attack them with air-to-air missiles without wasting time for additional maneuvering.

    .................................................. ...................
    1. +3
      14 November 2012 18: 21
      Quote: Alex 241
      In particular, Su-34 has the largest booking mass - a total of almost one and a half tons (1480 kg) - which dramatically increases the survivability of the machine

      Quote: Alex 241
      The dimensions of the cabin made it possible to place a seating area behind the seats with a first-aid kit, ration, thermoses with drinking water and a sewage device - a dry closet. In this area, crew members, in turn, can stand upright and rest, without losing control of the situation on board, if necessary. The cabin is equipped with air conditioning, a cooking cabinet with a thermos and a microwave. For the first time on a front-line bomber, you can lift through the lower hatch and rise

      Guys, you'd better create a universal aiming and navigation suspension container so that Russian aircraft can use precision weapons - otherwise the F-16 can bomb ground targets with a wide range of ammunition, but the MiG-29, despite all the shouts of "hurray", cannot.
      Without modern electronics, all stoves, galleys and outhouses are meaningless bells and whistles. Especially on a front-line bomber, the duration of which does not exceed 2-3 hours
      1. Alex 241
        +4
        14 November 2012 18: 30
        WEAPONS Su 34 includes a built-in gun GS-301 (30 mm, 1800 rounds per minute) with an ammunition load of 180 shells.

        At 12 nodes of the external suspension (under the fuselage, engine nacelles and wing consoles), up to 8000 kg of various weapons can be placed. The complex of high-precision shock circle provides destruction of ground (surface) targets at ranges up to 250 km. It includes tactical cruise missiles.

        Kh-59M with television command guidance (up to three missile launchers), air-to-surface missiles of the Kh-29, Kh-25M and S-25L types (up to six units), anti-ship missiles of four types with a range of 250,180, 70 and 31 km, anti-radar high-speed missiles of the Kh-1500 type (up to six), up to three corrected aerial bombs with a caliber of 500 kg or up to six with a caliber of 70 kg, torpedoes (up to four units). A container with XNUMX hydroacoustic buoys can be suspended under the fuselage.

        "Nonintelligent" weapons for engaging ground targets are similar to the armament of the Su-27 aircraft and include up to six blocks with S-8 (120 missiles) or S-13 (30 NAR) missiles, as well as up to six S-25 missiles, up to seven small containers cargo KMGU, up to 16 FAB-500, up to 22 FAB-250 or up to 34 FAB-100.

        The air-to-air missile armament is generally similar to the armament of other aircraft of the Su-27 family. It includes up to eight medium-range missiles with active radar homing RVV-AE, up to six medium-range missiles of the R-27 type or UR short-range with the R-73 TGS. At the end of the wing, two containers with an electronic warfare system can be placed. Three PTBs of 3000 liters each are suspended under the wing and fuselage.
  30. +2
    14 November 2012 19: 04
    "and it is not even worth mentioning the damaging factors of the combat units of anti-aircraft missiles"
    Very worth mentioning! Missiles are not omnipotent, there is a distance of undermining, and anti-aircraft and anti-aircraft missiles are a card case.
    On the picture:
    09.06.82 - during an air battle over Lebanon, Captain Ronen Shapira shot an MiG-15 on an F-21 plane, but was himself hit by a R-60 rocket in the right engine nozzle. The affected engine failed immediately, but the left, although it was damaged, continued to work. In addition, the plane caught fire. During the 20-minute flight, the pilot was able to reach F-15 to Israel and landed in Ramat David. On the ground, it turned out that a hole with an area of ​​1 square meter was formed in the nozzle of the right engine, while the vertical and horizontal stabilizer had about 400 fragmentation holes. The aircraft was repaired and returned to service after 2 months.
  31. Alex 241
    +2
    14 November 2012 19: 22
    The plane shot down over Benghazi.
  32. The comment was deleted.
    1. VAF
      VAF
      +1
      14 November 2012 21: 36
      Quote from rudolf
      But how do you personally feel about such a crew placement?


      I prefer a parallel line-up of pilots rather than a tandem one, even in the case of the "dumbest" failure of the SPU, I can communicate with the operator or navigator who is nearby, and if in tandem, then how? Is it stupid to trust a comrade in arms and silently "twist2 on the shooters and directors?"

      Well .. it’s easier to smoke when near and ... in general .....!

      But seriously, due to the increase in the size of the pilot's cabin in terms of width in the bow space, you can place more equipment and more powerful!
    2. Alex 241
      +1
      15 November 2012 01: 07
      Here is the tandem layout ........... laughingImage copyright belongs to Zhenya (pimpled)
  33. Alex 241
    +2
    14 November 2012 19: 26
    Sorry, I’ll insert my five cents: interaction, and crew communication with such an arrangement is better than a tandem arrangement.
    1. VAF
      VAF
      0
      14 November 2012 21: 39
      Quote: Alex 241
      crew communication in such an arrangement is better than tandem arrangement.


      Sanya, absolutely central, +! With the successful implementation of the BZ on the way back, you can with a calm soul and drinks , well .. wink
      1. Alex 241
        -1
        14 November 2012 22: 35
        Moreover, if there is always something to cast good drinks
        1. +1
          14 November 2012 22: 37
          Or maybe a snack separately? Hey.
          1. Alex 241
            +1
            14 November 2012 22: 41
            Hi Sanya, this is how it goes. laughing
  34. +6
    14 November 2012 19: 31
    Remember the joke: What is the main thing in a tank?

    Actually a useful thing. No kidding.
    1. VAF
      VAF
      +2
      14 November 2012 21: 46
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      Actually a useful thing. No kidding


      This thing is convenient, no doubt, but here in our chairs were mounted, and to you only a corrugated hose with a cone, as when refueling laughing and you have to do everything while sitting, while loosening the leg loops of the system, while the oxygen device leaves, then sitting .. get your "pride" and try to do it ...
      It seems that you have been connected to the central system of the water utility and "your" ... will never end ..... well, and then you take out everything yourself, in short ... you endured it until landing, and until you pick it up. then he opened the lantern and ... on the back compartment, then on the plane and ... on the ground ...
      Well, on different machines, different ways .. "emergency run out"! wink
      1. +2
        15 November 2012 14: 22
        Americans seem to use adult diapers
  35. Alex 241
    +2
    14 November 2012 19: 33
    The main thing in the tank is the wheels laughing about the usefulness of this device, even argue without a clue.
  36. The comment was deleted.
    1. Alex 241
      0
      14 November 2012 19: 53
      http://ammokor.ucoz.ru/index/su_34_protiv_f_22/0-166 вот ссылка ознакомтесь.
    2. VAF
      VAF
      +2
      14 November 2012 21: 51
      Quote from rudolf
      Others believe that this is the most necessary and necessary technique to date.


      I think the same, since 1982, when I first visited the model, although it was a naval version of the 32FN, but "fell in love" for life.

      We do not have a better front-line bomber soldier

      Not for nothing that his Voronezh guys call Turuk Makto

  37. +2
    14 November 2012 20: 28
    Alex 241 sad little article (
    1. Alex 241
      +1
      14 November 2012 22: 36
      I agree that there is, that is.
  38. Karmin
    +2
    14 November 2012 21: 43
    The striking elements of air defense missiles and V-V missiles by their striking properties are far from the KVPT bullet, the armor of the Su-34 cockpit is guaranteed to hold these elements
    1. +2
      14 November 2012 22: 30
      Quote: karmin
      The striking elements of air defense missiles and V-V missiles by their striking properties are far from a KVPT bullet

      The mass of damaging elements - up to tens of grams
      Speed ​​- kilometer per second
      Distance - point blank, several meters
    2. Alex 241
      +1
      14 November 2012 22: 40
      Nevertheless, I would not like to be stuffed with a fragmentation or rod warhead, especially since the PIM missiles are tuned to detonate under the cetnroplane, and then sitting in an armored cockpit we can say: Mom, I can fly.
      1. Alex 241
        +1
        14 November 2012 22: 55
        R-73E, R-73EL: air-to-air missiles
        The world's first air-to-air missiles with combined aerodynamic control; short-range missiles and close maneuverable air combat. They surpass all known missiles of similar purpose in tactical characteristics.
        Provide effective conducting close maneuverable combat at any time of the day, from any direction, against the background of the earth, with the active opposition of the enemy. When launched in an air battle, they do not impose restrictions on the overload, altitude and flight speed of the fighter, giving the pilot complete freedom of maneuver when choosing a tactical device.
        Key Features:
        starting weight, kg - 105
        length, m - 2,9
        diameter, m —0,17
        wingspan, m —0,51
        wheel span, m - 0,38
        target designation angles - ± 45 °
        deviation angles of the GOS coordinator - ± 75 °
        the height of the targets hit, km - 0,02-20
        overload of hit targets, g - up to 12
        launch range:
        maximum in the front hemisphere, km - 30
        minimum in the rear hemisphere, km - 0,3
        guidance system - all-aspect passive infrared homing
        warhead - rod
        warhead weight, kg - 8
        explosive device:
        R-73EL - laser non-contact target sensor
        R-73E - non-contact radar target sensor
        propulsion system - single-mode solid propellant rocket engine
        1. Alex 241
          +1
          14 November 2012 22: 57
          the first in the world to use air-to-air missiles with electric-driven trellis.
          The missile provides for the destruction of various targets (highly maneuverable aircraft with an overload of up to 9 g, cruise missiles, surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles, strategic bombers and helicopters, including hover helicopters and other targets) from all directions and foreshortenings, day and night, in simple and difficult weather conditions, with electronic countermeasures, against the backdrop of the earth and water surfaces, on the principle of "let-forget", including with multi-channel firing.
          Key Features:
          starting weight, kg - 175
          length, m - 3,6
          diameter, m - 0,2
          wingspan, m - 0,4
          wheel span, m - 0,7
          the height of the targets hit, km - 0,02-25
          overload of hit targets, g - up to 9
          launch range:
          maximum, km - 80
          minimum, km - 0,3
          guidance system - inertial with radio correction + active radar homing
          warhead — rod + multicumulative
          warhead weight, kg - 22,5
          explosive device - laser non-contact and contact target sensor
          propulsion system - single-mode solid propellant rocket engine
          1. Alex 241
            0
            14 November 2012 22: 58
            R-33E: guided missile
            air-to-air class
            Long-range air-to-air guided missile R-33E is the main weapon of the MiG-31E interceptor.
            The missile provides the interception of air targets, including cruise missiles over a different surface, from all angles, day and night, in simple and difficult weather conditions, when exposed to natural and organized interference; the missile control system as part of the MiG-31E complex provides independent guidance of missiles fired from one or more interceptors at one or more targets at different altitudes with different flight speeds; the propulsion system is launched after it is separated from the carrier aircraft.
            Key Features:
            starting weight, kg - 490
            length, m - 4,15
            case diameter, m - 0,38
            warhead weight, kg - 47
            warhead - high-explosive fragmentation
            wheel span, m - 1,1
            wingspan, m - 0,9
            launch range, km - 120
            the height of the targets hit, km - 0,05-25
            target speed, km / h - 3000
            homing head - Doppler semi-active radar homing head
            propulsion system - dual-mode solid propellant rocket engine
            guidance system - inertial guidance in the initial phase of flight and semi-active radar homing in the final phase of flight
            non-contact target sensor - active pulse with a range of 20 m
            overload of hit targets, g - 4
            1. Alex 241
              0
              14 November 2012 23: 01
              Guided missile R-27R1 (R-27ER1)
              A medium-range missile with a semi-active radar homing head is designed to destroy air targets at any time of the day, in simple and difficult weather conditions, in the front and rear hemispheres, including against the background of various underlying surfaces, with active maneuvering and interference counteraction of the enemy.
              The missile guidance system implements the modernized method of proportional guidance both in the inertial-corrected guidance section (flight with radio correction) and in the semi-active homing area after capturing the target on the flight path.
              Key Features:
              starting weight, kg - 253 (350)
              length, m - ~ 4 (~ 4,7)
              maximum case diameter, m - 0,23 (0,26)
              wingspan, m - ~ 0,77 (~ 0,8)
              wheel span, m - ~ 0,97
              warhead - rod
              warhead weight, kg - 39
              explosive device - radar, non-contact and contact target sensor
              propulsion system - single-mode solid propellant rocket engine (dual-mode solid propellant rocket engine)
              launch range, km:
              for fighter type targets - 50-60 (60-62,5)
              for other types of targets up to - 75 (up to 90-100)
  39. mazdie
    0
    14 November 2012 22: 19
    Personally, the comments were more interesting to read than the article itself. Special thanks to VAF
  40. Alex 241
    +4
    14 November 2012 23: 05
    a little off topic, but nonetheless ................
  41. +2
    14 November 2012 23: 21
    Specifically in the subject, Sanya! Conclusions suggest themselves ....
    1. Alex 241
      +1
      14 November 2012 23: 44
      An important role is played by the pilot. A weapon, whatever it may be in the hands of a professional, is a formidable thing.
  42. +1
    14 November 2012 23: 48
    Of course the pilot! Talk about controlled aircraft! Exceptionally professionalism and flair of the pilot determine the outcome of the battle!
    1. Alex 241
      +2
      15 November 2012 00: 01
      Fiction but nice damn it
      1. +2
        15 November 2012 23: 53
        Alex 241

        Class! good
        And what kind of movie?
        1. Alex 241
          +1
          15 November 2012 23: 54
          The series STARIES
  43. 0
    14 November 2012 23: 55
    Amerikosy!
  44. +1
    15 November 2012 00: 00
    Thank you, very interesting interview.
    1. Alex 241
      +1
      15 November 2012 00: 02
      Not at all, I was glad to help. good
  45. +5
    15 November 2012 00: 05
    Here, take a look at this.
    1. Alex 241
      +1
      15 November 2012 00: 14
      Hunter, thanks, glaring facts, I had no idea. About the South African pilots I heard as a cadet, strong fighters, Now I’ll throw you an interesting film, I don’t know, maybe they saw it.
  46. Alex 241
    +2
    15 November 2012 00: 16
    .........................................
  47. +1
    15 November 2012 00: 19
    Glory to our asses!
  48. Alex 241
    +1
    15 November 2012 00: 20
    It's hard not to join drinks
  49. +2
    15 November 2012 00: 33
    Studio "Wings of Rossi" made a good film about another ass.
    1. Alex 241
      +4
      15 November 2012 00: 36
      Here's another one for your attention.
  50. BRATISHKA
    +1
    15 November 2012 10: 10
    Fear NATO, Fear Pentagon
  51. 0
    15 November 2012 12: 03
    The development of humanity cannot do without military super-toys. If only aliens would attack, people would stop killing their own kind with precision weapons...
  52. USNik
    +3
    15 November 2012 14: 31
    The article is uninformative, in the spirit of comparing a sausage with a finger. Where is the comparison of the range of aircraft with the same combat load and without PTB? Where is the comparison of the capabilities of the on-board computer? Where, in the end, is the cost of equipment and its operation?? In general, you can find out much more in the comments.
  53. 77bor1973
    -1
    15 November 2012 20: 33
    But China was interested in the Su-34!
    1. 77bor1973
      +1
      15 November 2012 22: 04
      But China was not interested in the Yak-130!
  54. 0
    15 November 2012 21: 48
    I don’t know exactly how it is with the performance characteristics, but ours is more beautiful.
  55. Nymp
    +1
    16 November 2012 00: 20
    The armored cabin is great, our fellows, the main thing is that he can perform aerobatic maneuvers that are not available to the Americans!
  56. +1
    18 November 2012 15: 29
    The Su34 is a sawn-down Su-27IB “fighter-bomber” that falls just short of the F-15 Eagle. It’s a shame until our troops receive it; the Americans will rivet the next generation.

    Secondly, it is not clear what is meant by "bookmark" - no one can explain what kind of crap it is and how it works

    The manufacturing country is trying to make complex weapons in such a way, including with the help of bookmarks, that they cannot be used against itself. How effective it is is another question.
    1. 0
      18 November 2012 18: 13
      Quote: nightingale
      Su34 is a sawn-down Su-27IB “fighter-bomber”....

      Exactly, and the F-22 is a slightly sawn-down Wright brothers' plane.
  57. 0
    18 November 2012 16: 11
    Here is an example of the use of bookmarks: the Germans found one of the bookmarks but could not figure it out, although they were more educated and better prepared professionals: according to a signal from Voronezh at 3:30 a.m. on November 14, 1941. The German headquarters in Kharkov at 17 Dzerzhinsky Street took off, along with the commander of the 68th Wehrmacht Infantry Division, the head of the garrison, Major General Georg Braun. In retaliation for the explosion, the Germans hanged fifty and shot two hundred Kharkov hostages.
  58. Magnets
    0
    11 June 2014 23: 32
    In the place of the pilot who had a stomach ache, any of us would prefer the Su-34 armored sortie. laughing