Military Review

Three terrible virtues of the Su-24

155
Three terrible virtues of the Su-24

44 a year ago made the first flight of a Su-24 front-line supersonic bomber with variable wing sweep. We learned what frightened NATO with it, what the Fantasmagoria device would do for the plane and where the Su-24 would carry the atomic bomb in the event of a major war.


Designed to deliver tactical nuclear weaponsThe Su-24 flies faster at low and ultra-low altitudes, skirting the terrain and remaining invisible to enemy radar. A perfect ejection seat allows the crew to escape in critical situations.

The flight and combat qualities of the aircraft were appreciated in other countries. "The Su-24 poses the potentially greatest threat to European states among all combat aircraft in service with the front-line aviation USSR Air Force, - wrote the English magazine "Air international". “It has superior performance in terms of combat load / range and is capable of invading while following terrain.”

Of particular concern was the long range of the aircraft, as evidenced by the huge overhead tanks with a capacity of two and three thousand liters. On the external suspension, the Su-24 could carry three liters of fuel in three 8000 tanks. According to Western experts, almost the entire territory of Europe was in the range of the constantly growing Su-24 groupings at air bases in the GDR, the Baltic States and Ukraine.

In NATO, the bomber was named Fencer - fencer.

Weapon

On eight suspension points, the Su-24 is capable of delivering 7,5 tons of various types of good to the enemy XNUMX: from unguided rockets to half-ton corrected bombs. There are missiles in the assortment of weapons to destroy enemy radars - they are controlled from a container suspended under a bomber with the wonderful name "Phantasmagoria" and are aimed at the target by its radiation.

The aircraft can carry missiles to destroy runways, small ships and surfaced submarines. He has a variety of bombs in his arsenal: for bridges and bunkers, tank columns and scattered infantry.

Su-24 is able to mine the terrain from the air, conduct reconnaissance and aerial photography, transmitting information to the earth via closed communication channels. For defense against fighters, the bomber is equipped with air-to-air missiles capable of attacking the interceptor from any angle. The six-barrel cannon under the bottom, which is covered with a fairing, helps to fight back.

nearly invisible

Despite the rich assortment of hanging weapons, the main task of the Su-24 in a serious war is to deliver one tactical nuclear bomb of 150-300 kilotons to the enemy’s rear to destroy an important strategic object - for example, a ballistic missile launcher. The flight characteristics also selected flight characteristics — first of all, the ability of a bomber to fly at supersonic speeds at low and very low altitudes, bending around the terrain and remaining invisible to enemy air defenses.

- At the Su-24 for the first time in the domestic aviation pilot and navigator were next to each other. This is very convenient from the point of view of interaction: the navigator can not only tell something to the pilot on the radio, but also show a gesture. This is especially important when flying at low altitudes, when the situation on earth is changing rapidly, and the time for aiming is reduced to the limit, the pilots said. - On the other hand, such a cabin layout worsens the view: the pilot is on the right, the navigator is on the left. But this is also a question of interaction: the field of view is divided into sectors, and everyone is watching their side.

The aircraft is equipped with wings with variable sweep: from 16 to 69 degrees. The wings are rotated in increments of 5 degrees, allowing the pilot to select the optimal mode for a specific task.

- When flying at ultra-low altitudes, bumpiness is possible due to turbulence. Air perturbations reach the ground, are reflected from it and shake the plane, the pilots continued. - Again, the level of air heating over the field one, above the forest another, over the sea is third. Therefore, any fighter with good handling in this mode will shake. And Su-24 on supersonic with folded wings (sweep angle 69) goes quietly, like a flat iron.

Protection

The bomber is equipped with ejection seats K-36, famous for exceptional reliability and not just save the lives of testers and combat pilots. According to its characteristics, the seat guarantees safe ejection at all altitudes and speeds above 70 kilometers per hour.

November 11 1975 of the 63 Bomber Aviation Regiment Su-24 crew was preparing to fly. Was given the command to start the engine. As the engine rotor was unwound, the pressure in the bomber's hydraulic system began to rise and the aircraft control knobs, which were in the rear position, went forward to neutral. Right, navigator pen, in short - so that the radar tube does not interfere with the control of the aircraft - she caught hold of the bailout system check and pulled it out. Unsuspecting navigator Osmanov bomber flew into the air without a plane.

At a regular height, the parachute opened and soon the Ottomans landed safely nearby. After the incident, the aircraft control system was improved. The crew of the bomber, who unwittingly tested the rescue system, received a personalized gold watch from the general designer of the aircraft Pavel Sukhoi and personal protective helmets from the chief designer of the ejection seats Guy Severin.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.rg.ru/
155 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Tarpon
    Tarpon 22 January 2014 08: 49
    +40
    44 years ago, the Su-24 front-line supersonic bomber with a variable wing sweep made its first flight.

    Thanks to the Su-24, he gloriously performed his role in the history of the Armed Forces. Now a word for the Su-34.
    1. Romn
      Romn 22 January 2014 09: 15
      -23%
      Now, rather word to the future of PAK YES good
      1. almost demobil
        almost demobil 22 January 2014 11: 14
        +14
        Quote: Romn
        Now, rather word to the future of PAK YES

        What does it have to do with PAK YES? request
      2. Polovec
        Polovec 22 January 2014 14: 47
        +3
        Are you from the street, friend? And then PAK YES?
      3. djachaev
        djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 52
        +4
        Well PAK YES I think we’ll hardly see the next 10 years.
        1. Rus2012
          Rus2012 22 January 2014 15: 05
          +4
          Quote: djachaev
          Well PAK YES I think we’ll hardly see the next 10 years.

          ... no wonder, because for the Yankees he will be "invisible", but his blow will be real! bully

          The first PAK DA bomber prototype is to take off in 2019. Finally, the first production aircraft of the new model will enter the Air Force in the 2025 year. Thus, in the coming months, the PAK DA program will enter the stage of creating a project for the construction of new aircraft.

          http://topwar.ru/37737-nazvany-sroki-realizacii-proekta-pak-da.html
          1. djachaev
            djachaev 22 January 2014 15: 25
            +2
            Beautiful photo. The main future PAK YES so that it is not inferior to the Amer V-2.
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 22 January 2014 16: 09
              -1
              The Kazan branch of Tupolev JSC hosted a meeting dedicated to the creation of a promising long-range aviation complex (PAK DA). It is to replace the current strategic missile carriers Tu-95 and Tu-160, and it is assumed that the new aircraft will be built by KAPO. The event in Kazan confirmed the previously disseminated unofficial information that the machine will be subsonic and made according to the "flying wing" scheme. Experts suggest that the project may not be anything new - almost a copy of the American B-2.
              1. bif
                bif 23 January 2014 00: 40
                -1
                Quote: rolik2
                Experts suggest that the project may not be anything new - almost a copy of the American B-2.

                What sofa are these echperts from?
                In the article, a sufficiently authoritative site in the 2010 year suggested that it was justified what PAKDA and its possible characteristics would be.
                http://paralay.com/pakda.html
        2. The comment was deleted.
      4. Grenader
        Grenader 22 January 2014 18: 21
        +4
        Quote: Romn
        Now, rather word to the future of PAK YES good

        Learn the mathematical part of the Su-24 - front-line PACDA-strategic.
    2. Polovec
      Polovec 22 January 2014 10: 50
      +38
      He gave eleven years to this plane. I love him with all my heart.
      1. Polovec
        Polovec 22 January 2014 11: 46
        +23
        Let the adherents of technology "that does not break" do not reproach me, but one of the main advantages of the Su-24 I consider the possibility of its maintenance and repair in completely "wild" conditions. It is only important. so that the technical staff is qualified and not lazy.
        Only a little alcohol on the T-6 ... :-)
        But on the T-6MR, this was all right! :-)
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 22 January 2014 12: 05
          +16
          Only a little alcohol on the T-6 ... :-)
          But on the T-6MR, this was all right! :-)

          Breathed and rubbed a little layer ??? wink
          1. VAF
            VAF 22 January 2014 14: 26
            +3
            Quote: Wedmak
            Breathed and rubbed a little layer ???


            No, Denis! are you talking about "land" under the regulations wink
            And the windshields of the lantern are "wiped" (washed), and at the stations .. exclusively for cooling and "written off" (and then spilled) from the "operating time of stations") drinks or from "pressing" (washer)
        2. VAF
          VAF 22 January 2014 14: 22
          +5
          Quote: Polovec
          But on the T-6MR, this was all right! : -


          On MR? wink Here on the MP .. yes .... "distillery" fellow Of course, you can not compare with the MiG-25RB or Tu-22R, but anyway .. very long, +! drinks
          1. Polovec
            Polovec 22 January 2014 14: 43
            +3
            Question for connoisseurs: "which bird loves alcohol?"
            Answer: "Crane, of course"
            1. VAF
              VAF 22 January 2014 14: 47
              +2
              Quote: Polovec
              Question for connoisseurs: "which bird loves alcohol?"
              Answer: "Crane, of course"


              laughing +! drinks
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  2. Bongo
    Bongo 22 January 2014 08: 51
    +14
    This unique aircraft, which is still the basis of front-line bomber aircraft, deserves a much more detailed and detailed article.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 22 January 2014 08: 57
      +18
      Su-24 is a Soviet Russian front-line bomber with a variable sweep wing, designed to launch missile and bomb strikes in simple and difficult weather conditions, day and night, including at low altitudes with targeted destruction of ground and surface targets.

      As of 2011 year, the average age of the Su-24, armed with the Russian Air Force, was 25-27 years. It was originally planned to replace 60 — 70% of the Su-24 fleet with the latest Su-34, and the rest would be upgraded to the Su-24M2 option. However, after a series of disasters, it was decided to write off all the Su-24 by the 2020 year. Also in February of the 2012 of the year it was announced that the Su-24 bombers would be removed from service with the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus. Until 2015, the 103 Su-24 Air Force of the Russian Federation will be disposed of.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 22 January 2014 09: 02
        +14
        And what in return? Something I can not believe that they will replace the Su-34 in the ratio 1: 1.
        In addition, the latter has not yet got rid of many "childhood" diseases.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 22 January 2014 10: 34
          +2
          Something I can’t believe that they will be replaced by the Su-34 in a 1: 1 ratio.

          Calculations of the ordered quantity of the Su-34 show that this is exactly how it will be - 1: 1. True, what will replace the intelligence versions is not entirely clear.
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 22 January 2014 10: 41
            +5
            You want to say that for the remaining 6 years, the Su-34 will completely replace those written off by the Su-24? Of course, I would really like to believe in it, but I doubt it. what
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 22 January 2014 10: 55
              +2
              Uh ... why in 6 years? If I'm not mistaken, the replacement will occur as the Su-24 goes out of service and pilots are recruited / trained.
              1. Bongo
                Bongo 22 January 2014 10: 58
                +4
                So until the 2020, it is planned to write off all the Su-24, so the 6 years it turns out.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 03
                  +4
                  Now Novosibirsk produces 12 Su-34 per year, threatening to increase production. Over the 6 years, this will be the minimum plus 72 of the aircraft to the existing ones. And now the flying Su-24 is not much more. Given the great efficiency of 34, they will not be needed by the hundreds anymore.
                  1. Gamdlislyam
                    Gamdlislyam 22 January 2014 11: 09
                    +5
                    Now in the Russian Air Force operated about 350 machines. Still, approximately, 200 are on storage bases.
                    1. Wedmak
                      Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 15
                      +2
                      Now the Air Force of the Russian Federation employs about 350 vehicles.

                      Are these the ones that fly? Or, together with those that are due to lack of spare parts, are waiting for repairs, etc.?
                    2. VAF
                      VAF 22 January 2014 14: 32
                      +3
                      Quote: Gamdlislyam
                      Now the Air Force of the Russian Federation employs about 350 vehicles.


                      Well, it's you. Dear. very much ... "bent" repeat
                    3. Bronis
                      Bronis 22 January 2014 15: 28
                      +4
                      Quote: Gamdlislyam
                      Currently, the Russian Air Force operates about 350 vehicles

                      The Commander-in-Chief voiced the figure in the 124 Su-24 for the 2012 year. So Su-24 is changed to Su-34 1 to 1 or so.
                      1. Gamdlislyam
                        Gamdlislyam 22 January 2014 17: 20
                        +5
                        Quote: Bronis
                        The Commander-in-Chief voiced the figure in the 124 Su-24 for the 2012 year. So Su-24 is changed to Su-34 1 to 1 or so.

                        Dear Bronis colleague, Commander-in-Chief Bondarev V.N. voiced the number of 122 aircraft in operation, but he talked about MiG-31. And 124 aircraft relate to the Su-34, which should be delivered to the troops by 2020. This was in April 2013.
                        Su-24 was more at the beginning of January 2013. Nevertheless, these are front-line bombers (performing, in addition, the functions of fighter-bombers, which are no longer in the Air Force today), also capable of carrying nuclear warheads, rather than highly specialized interceptors.
                      2. Bronis
                        Bronis 22 January 2014 23: 08
                        0
                        Alas, not really like that ... after all, 124 at 2012 year
                        http://www.armstass.su/?page=article&aid=103639&cid=25%3C/ref%3E
                        This was Zelin voiced ... with a surname forgot.
                      3. Gamdlislyam
                        Gamdlislyam 23 January 2014 08: 22
                        +2
                        Quote: Bronis
                        Alas, it’s not quite so ... all the same, 124 for 2012. He also voiced this Zelin ... forgot his name.

                        Dear colleague Bronis, I re-read the article on your link. Alas, you are forgotten. Article of November 7.11.2012, XNUMX. The article is cited by the author Sergei Yuferev several slightly different numbers (Zelin has nothing to do with it).
                        "As of 2012, the Russian Air Force has up to 224 Su-24 bombers (including 40 Su-24M2). Another 51 aircraft are in service with the Russian Navy."
                        And here is the article review from the words of Zelin:
                        "At the previous MAKS aerospace show, held in August 2011, Russian Air Force Commander-in-Chief Alexander Zelin noted that the Air Force expects to acquire 120 new Su-34 front-line bombers, of which 5 squadrons of 24 aircraft each will be created. has already begun to enter combat units - currently there are 2 contracts for the supply of these aircraft. The first of them was signed back in 2008. This contract provides for the supply of 32 bombers to the troops in 2009-2013. Currently, the Russian Air Force received 16 such bombers, and by the end of the year, after the transfer of the next batch from the factory, their number will reach 26 units.
                        In 2013, the implementation of the second major contract will begin, which provides for the supply of 92 bombers to the troops in the period from 2013 to 2020. At the same time, it is not an exception that in the next 2-3 years plans for the acquisition of front-line Su-34 bombers will be adjusted upward - aircraft of this class are vital for the Russian Air Force. Based on the given pace of construction, it can be assumed that by 2025 the number of Su-34s in the army could reach 180 aircraft. In this case, they will completely replace the front-line bombers Su-24M and M2 in the troops, the most modern of which will be sent to storage bases. "
                      4. Bronis
                        Bronis 23 January 2014 19: 22
                        0
                        May Vaf come with us ...
                  2. The comment was deleted.
                  3. aviamed90
                    aviamed90 23 January 2014 08: 41
                    0
                    Gamdlislyam

                    "additionally performing the functions of fighter-bombers"

                    Not certainly in that way.

                    The goals and objectives of the IBA are distributed between the ShA and the FBA.
            2. Bongo
              Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 10
              +9
              Quote: Wedmak
              Now Novosibirsk produces 12 Su-34 per year, threatening to increase production. Over the 6 years, this will be the minimum plus 72 of the aircraft to the existing ones. And now the flying Su-24 is not much more. Given the great efficiency of 34, they will not be needed by the hundreds anymore.

              Some of the already released Su-34s cannot be called fully-fledged combat vehicles, especially considering the problems with avionics, these are rather "flying desks". Flying Su-24s are much more, not far from me Khurba airfield, I have the opportunity to observe. Regarding the number, with all due respect, I cannot agree with you. Fighter-bomber aviation was withdrawn from the Air Force. The impact capabilities of the existing machines are not enough. They got to the point that they began to hang NURSs on the Su-27 in the front regiments.
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 20
                +4
                Some of the already released Su-34s cannot be called fully-fledged combat vehicles, especially considering the problems with avionics, they are rather "flying desks".

                I disagree. A pair of Su-34s showed this in August 2008. But they were still the firstborn. It's just that the new car is being revised and tested. Strong weaknesses are identified, tactics of application are developed.
                There are much more flying Su-24s, not far from me the Khurb airfield, I have the opportunity to observe. Regarding the number, with all due respect, I can not agree with you.

                I do not have exact data, but according to reviews of knowledgeable people on this forum, the condition of many cars is deplorable.
                The shock capabilities of existing machines are not enough.

                Who would argue. And NURSES on the Su-27 have long had the opportunity to hang.
                1. Bongo
                  Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 26
                  +11
                  No one claims that the Su-34 is a bad plane and is not needed. This car is waiting in the army with impatience. The more he lingered on 20 years. But apparently you do not have information with what difficulty is the development of the machines of the first batch. On these machines there was not even a single option for installing electrical wiring. In general, you consider using the Su-27 as a shock justified.
                2. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 32
                  +2
                  But apparently you don’t own the information with what difficulty the development of the first batch cars is going on. On these machines there was not even a single option for wiring.

                  I heard about the problems of the first parties. But it seems like last year’s deliveries have already fixed many problems and good reviews have gone.
                3. Bongo
                  Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 34
                  +5
                  I do not argue, the problems are eliminated and the car is brought up to standard. I'm talking about the fact that you should not consider the machines of the experimental series that are in the center of combat use are fully combat-ready.
                4. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 41
                  +2
                  I'm talking about the fact that you should not consider the vehicles of the experimental series located in the center of combat use completely combat-ready.

                  Well hello. They are already delivered to the troops.

                  I’ll mention a few more quotes from the news:
                  Number of times.
                  Earlier it was reported that by the end of 2015, it is planned to include 70 Su-34s in the Russian Air Force.
                  Number two.
                  In mid-August 2013, Sukhoi purchased 184 unified state identification systems for front-line Su-34 bombers worth 1,5 billion rubles.
                  Number three.
                  Colonel Vitaliy Shkolenko, commander of the 105th air division, noted that “in 2013, as part of various combat training activities, this aircraft complex (Su-34) showed itself only on the positive side, all flight tactical, command and staff and strategic exercises were carried out only on marks “good” and “excellent”. The unit became the best military unit in the Western Military District in the 2013 school year. ”
                5. VAF
                  VAF 22 January 2014 14: 54
                  +7
                  Quote: Wedmak
                  I’ll mention a few more quotes from the news:


                  Denis, everything is true .. but do not forget where these "news" "legs grow" from wink

                  Never in my life was there a case that an official would speak critically .. never.
                  The slightest criticism "led" ... to "consequences" ... Examples of "carriage" (Mikhailov, Kvochur, etc.)
                  But the last name is breathtaking. Assy, Heroes, Professionals and WHAT ????
                  The system she’s such a brother .. system wassat
              2. VAF
                VAF 22 January 2014 14: 46
                +1
                Quote: Bongo
                . I'm talking about the fact that you should not consider the vehicles of the experimental series located in the center of combat use completely combat-ready.


                Do not think correctly. an aircraft ready for combat use, although one type of TSA is already combat ready. soldier

                And there is no such criterion of "completely" is "or - or".

                But here there is a nuance the crew must be combat ready wink
      2. VAF
        VAF 22 January 2014 14: 41
        +4
        Quote: Bongo

        Some of the already released Su-34s cannot be called fully-fledged combat vehicles, especially given the problems with avionics


        Here you are wrong. all cars (serial) and the 1st and 2nd series are already modified according to avionics for the 3rd series soldier Including 4 pre-production!
        True, the only negative for the 1st series,. It is still the lack of APU recourse

        Quote: Bongo
        There are much more flying Su-24s, not far from me the Khurb airfield, I have the opportunity to observe.


        Here I agree completely, but the su-24 is actually more than Khurba, Chelyabinsk, Marinovka, Morozovsk, Voronezh (Buturlinovka and Monchegors) and Lipetsk soldier

        Quote: Bongo
        . Regarding the number, with all due respect, I can not agree with you. Fighter-bomber aviation was withdrawn from the Air Force. The shock capabilities of existing machines are not enough


        Here +!

        Quote: Bongo
        . We got to the point that NURSY began to hang in combat regiments
        on the Su-27.


        What is surprising? request All my life on the Su-27, starting with the "C" series, they hung NAR, NURs and "cast iron" and along the "grid" ... forward "from a dive" soldier
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 15: 33
    +1
    Quote: Bongo
    You want to say that for the remaining 6 years, the Su-34 will completely replace those written off by the Su-24? Of course, I would really like to believe in it, but I doubt it. what


    Why doubt?! Over 46 units of the Su-34 have already been delivered. 78 contracts remain to be delivered. In total, by 2020 the Air Force will have 12 Su-34 squadrons (124 units).
  • VAF
    VAF 22 January 2014 14: 30
    +4
    Quote: Wedmak
    True, what will replace the intelligence versions is not entirely clear.


    Denis, Mr. In the form. In which he is now .. that's all, a bit old however!
    For peacetime conditions, nothing else. but for "affairs" definitely not !!! soldier
    For the time being, they will use the Su-34 and Su-30SM for reconnaissance. with KKR (complex reconnaissance container) "Aist" soldier
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 15: 35
    0
    Every new plane has "childhood" illnesses.
  • Gregazov
    Gregazov 22 January 2014 12: 15
    +4
    During my service at the Chkalov Research Institute (now GLITs), the main reason for the death of test pilots is the Su-24. As a rule, 1-2 people per year.
    1. VAF
      VAF 22 January 2014 14: 56
      +2
      Quote: GregAzov
      During my service at the Chkalov Research Institute (now GLITs), the main reason for the death of test pilots is the Su-24.


      Stogov and Gorelov .. if you soldier
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 15: 27
    0
    Interesting movie, watched!
  • NC1982
    NC1982 22 January 2014 09: 00
    +7
    I expected more from the article, more information and interesting facts, after all, the car is exceptionally interesting, deserves a more detailed article ..
  • Bongo
    Bongo 22 January 2014 09: 19
    +8
    Quote: Romn
    Now, rather word to the future of PAK YES

    PAK YES is a replacement for the Tu-95 and Tu-160, but not the front-line Su-24. Yes, and take off the PAK YES apparently still not soon.
    1. djachaev
      djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 50
      +1
      Quote: Bongo
      PAK YES is a replacement for the Tu-95 and Tu-160, but not the front-line Su-24. Yes, and take off the PAK YES apparently still not soon.


      I agree! For the Su-24, the replacement is the Su-34. A PAK YES to the troops is promised after 2020.
  • borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 22 January 2014 09: 34
    +5
    From the Don.
    We stood, then still secret T-8s, in 70 years. Testing them, the pilots were happy with such handsome men!
    1. boom_bah
      boom_bah 22 January 2014 13: 08
      +5
      T-8 is a Su-25.
  • Old_kapitan
    Old_kapitan 22 January 2014 09: 49
    +2
    I read a lot about Su-24, so the fact that the article is small doesn’t worry at all. But for this:
    The unsuspecting bomber navigator Osmanov flew into the air without an airplane.
    sincere thanks to the author - have not heard. He put a plus from the heart.
    1. Polovec
      Polovec 22 January 2014 14: 53
      +3
      This was the first manned K-36 ejection at zero speed and zero altitude. After this incident, they began to hang "eggs" on the stabilizers and changed the shape of the ejection handles. There is an error in the article about checks.
      1. VAF
        VAF 22 January 2014 15: 00
        +6
        Quote: Polovec
        After this incident, they began to hang "eggs" on the stabilizers and changed the shape of the ejection handles. There is an error in the article about checks.


        That's right ... the handle pulled the "holders", and the safety checks are "removed" after getting into the cockpit and fastening either the IPS or putting on the belts soldier
  • Tatarus
    Tatarus 22 January 2014 10: 04
    +3
    And that really no modification can raise such a masterpiece to the modern level?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 22 January 2014 10: 39
      +1
      Their service life is coming to an end. IL-2, IL-4 were also masterpieces.
      1. boom_bah
        boom_bah 22 January 2014 13: 10
        +1
        The designated service life will be extended to 35 years.
    2. almost demobil
      almost demobil 22 January 2014 11: 23
      +4
      Quote: Tatarus
      And that really no modification can raise such a masterpiece to the modern level?

      The plane is beautiful, several times seen at the airshow. In flight, it looks very impressive with a swept wing. But the masterpiece in it is not enough, one of the most unsuccessful planes of Sukhoi, difficult to fly and very alert. At first, there were generally 5-6 catastrophes per year. God forbid that the Su-34 be cured more quickly from childhood sores and more likely replaced.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 31
        +9
        Quote: almost demobilized
        The plane is beautiful, several times seen at the airshow. In flight, it looks very impressive with a swept wing. But the masterpiece in it is not enough, one of the most unsuccessful planes of Sukhoi, difficult to fly and very alert. At first, there were generally 5-6 catastrophes per year. God forbid that the Su-34 be cured more quickly from childhood sores and more likely replaced.

        Most of the sores and deficiencies over the years of operation were cured and eliminated. The current Su-24M are very different from the first series Su-24. Although the plane is really very difficult. But I would not hurry to send him to resign, the possibilities for modernization are still there.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 34
          0
          But I would not rush to dismiss him, there are still opportunities for modernization.

          What are the features? How many boards are suitable for this modernization according to the resource of the glider (they don’t do new ones)
          1. Bongo
            Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 40
            +5
            Until now, planes from the late 70s are flying into the air, these are also those without the letter "M". Many cars produced in 88-90 are still in very good condition and have a long service life. at least 10 years will be able to fly.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 49
              0
              Many cars produced 88-90 years are still in very good condition and have a long resource. 10 years at least they can fly.

              And to perform tasks in modern warfare? I repeat the question about modernization - what and how can be modernized? Already faced with the fact that modern equipment not only does not fit into the volume of aircraft, but also is not suitable for energy consumption.
              1. Bongo
                Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 54
                +8
                The latest version of the modernization of the Su-24М2-quite modern and efficient aircraft. A popovod energy consumption and size, so the electronics have become much less energy-intensive and more miniature.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 22 January 2014 12: 16
                  0
                  The latest upgrade option for the Su-24M2 is a fully modern and combat-ready aircraft

                  I do not argue. But still, it is becoming obsolete. While the entire park is being replaced, it will come and its time will go to rest.
                  And in the context of energy costs and dimensions, so electronics has become much less energy-intensive and more miniature.

                  Please clarify, for the most part, consumer electronics. Although this reduction in size and energy consumption was reflected in the military, it was not so much affected.
                  New systems built-in radar, electronic warfare systems, control, aiming, the radar itself, increasing the power of on-board computers, various automatic systems and more - all this business eats all the savings that we received on miniaturization of electronics.
            2. djachaev
              djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 38
              0
              Quote: Bongo
              10 years at least they can fly.


              Most likely they will not have time to fly for more than 5 years, because rapidly replaced by modern front-line bombers Su-34.
            3. VAF
              VAF 22 January 2014 15: 22
              +4
              Quote: Bongo
              Until now, planes from the late 70s are rising into the air, these are also those without the letter "M


              No ... all .... no T-6 is flying in the air anymore ... all the remaining simple 24s are in the Guards.
              Only the 4th Su-24MR fly soldier
      2. djachaev
        djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 46
        -1
        Quote: almost demob
        But there is little masterpiece in it, one of the most unsuccessful Sukhoi aircraft, difficult to pilot and very emergency. At first, there were generally 5-6 disasters per year. God grant that they quickly cure Su-34 from childhood sores and replace them soon.


        They replace it, but the bomber was quite successful. At least better than the MiG-27.
        And accident rate is not to blame Sukhoi Design Bureau designers. It’s just that many have expired since the aircraft have been in service since 1970.
        1. almost demobil
          almost demobil 22 January 2014 17: 01
          +3
          Quote: djachaev

          They replace it, but the bomber was quite successful. At least better than the MiG-27.
          And accident rate is not to blame Sukhoi Design Bureau designers. It’s just that many have expired since the aircraft have been in service since 1970.

          Did you seriously write this, or just like that? Is a bus better than a motorcycle? At leisure, read somewhere about aviation, well, there about bombers, fighters, attack aircraft. Maybe you can catch the difference. Immediately figure out who is better! lol
          And the accident rate at the SU 24 was high during the entire period of its operation and, first of all, due to unsuccessful decisions of the designers.
      3. Polovec
        Polovec 22 January 2014 14: 55
        +2
        Write about what you understand.
      4. VAF
        VAF 22 January 2014 15: 19
        +5
        Quote: almost demobilized
        In flight, it looks very impressive with a swept wing


        You had to at least once look at it aerobatics .. here then would be in complete awe.
        Yes, the car is complex and strict in terms of restrictions and it was very emergency, the only plane where it is prescribed in the RLE .. fire, parachute and you don’t need any small gases or stopcranes. 1st or second stage of fire extinguishers ... fuel line .. however.

        The cockpit is "stupid" I agree ... you can find hell knows what kind of "dryuchkov and" up and down "and" left and right "and" obliquely ".. in general .. you need to get used to soldier

        Well, the su-34th unfortunately will not be able to reach the level of flight on the PMI. As on the 24-ke ... they have already chosen everything .. but ... request But .. same ... tolerant, but if you compare. Then the 24-ke is incomparably better!
    3. VAF
      VAF 22 January 2014 15: 11
      +8
      Quote: Tatarus
      And that really no modification can raise such a masterpiece to the modern level?


      Wake up surprised, but the modification "hefest and t" is exactly what the "doctor ordered", although even here we must say thanks to the "Arabs", because. first, "ours" (well, it is clear which ones) "rejected" him and "shoved" Poghosyan's "Gusar", but "hefest" "made" several MK-nis .... then they were surprised request and why this MK can use the X-31. but the "vaunted Hussar" is not wassat

      Thank God .. "brought to their senses" and "put" in .. place !!!

      But there is no way to return the "old" glider .. T-6 (ie Su-24). ke with a roll of more than 70 and an overload of more than 4 already .. as on a .. "cart". and because of the "Tsagiv aerodynamic knives" the car lost 15% of its range recourse

      And before .. "song" .. wide ass ... really "stood" like a monument .. how you stream .. so it will stand! good

      Plus, before the "Owl" stood right in the nose and there was no need to hang Fanstosmogoria under the belly wink
      Yes, a lot of things are possible, but .. it will be more than the article itself drinks
  • SibRUS
    SibRUS 22 January 2014 10: 44
    0
    F-111 Americans have long been sent to the scrap, and what's interesting is that there was no direct replacement. It is possible and in our Air Force are working on options.
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 22 January 2014 10: 49
      +8
      Quote: SibRUS
      F-111 Americans have long been sent to the scrap, and what's interesting is that there was no direct replacement. It is possible and in our Air Force are working on options.

      The Americans replaced them with the F-15E, of course, in terms of low-altitude flights with rounding the relief, the replacement is not equal, but the shock "Eagle" is quite a worthy car.
      Here, in general, an analogy with Su-27 and Su-34 arises. I am not sure that with all its merits, the latter will also be able, like the Su-24, to perform low-speed high-speed throws.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 06
        +1
        I am not sure that for all its merits, the latter will also be able to perform low-speed high-speed throws like the Su-24.

        And what will keep him? Aerodynamics, in my opinion, is better than that of the Su-24, the engines are more powerful, the view is excellent, the avionics are the latest. Yes, and a little more gifts can take.
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 16
          +7
          Ie, you will undertake to assert that the Su-34 is able to perform low-altitude flights in the same way as the Su-24?
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 23
            -3
            I do not presume to approve, because I do not own all the information on this aircraft. Nevertheless, I see no obstacles to the flight of the Su-34 on NVD.
            1. Bongo
              Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 36
              +7
              On supersonic as Su-24? Not sure.
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 22 January 2014 11: 43
                +1
                Why not sure? Engine power allows you to develop speed at ground level of 1400 km / h.
                1. VAF
                  VAF 22 January 2014 15: 37
                  +5
                  Quote: Wedmak
                  Engine power allows you to develop speed at ground level of 1400 km / h.


                  Denis, just not "engine power" but ... aerodynamic layout! wink
            2. lazy
              lazy 23 January 2014 14: 47
              +4
              - When flying at ultra-low altitudes, bumpiness is possible due to turbulence. Air perturbations reach the ground, are reflected from it and shake the plane, the pilots continued. - Again, the level of air heating over the field one, above the forest another, over the sea is third. Therefore, any fighter with good handling in this mode will shake. And Su-24 on supersonic with folded wings (sweep angle 69) goes quietly, like a flat iron.
              therefore, the su-24 at the PMV feels better than the su-34. At least I heard from the pilots that when the su-27 was accompanied by the su-24 at the pmv, then after half an hour of flight they asked us to rise higher because of the clatter. This is not a su-34 reproach, there is no perfection in life, and if we win in something, we lose in something
      2. Gamdlislyam
        Gamdlislyam 22 January 2014 11: 43
        +3
        Quote: Bongo
        Here, in general, an analogy with Su-27 and Su-34 arises. I am not sure that with all its merits, the latter will also be able, like the Su-24, to perform low-speed high-speed throws.

        Dear colleague Sergey, the Su-34 was originally developed as a replacement for the Su-24, taking into account the experience of operating the predstvichnika. Yes, and, overloads the Su-34 holds larger than the Su-24.
        "The creators of the Su-34 took into account the experience of the combat use of aviation at low altitudes. As on the Su-27IB, the cockpit was made (for the first time in world practice on machines of this class) in the form of a single armored capsule. Other vital components of the aircraft also had similar protection. In particular, the consumption of the fuel tank and engines. All this, combined with the protective equipment implemented on the Su 27 aircraft, provided the Su-34 with high combat honor in low-altitude flight over enemy territory saturated with air defense systems. " (Link: http://airspot.ru/catalogue/item/suhoy-su-34)
      3. samoletil18
        samoletil18 22 January 2014 16: 15
        +3
        Quote: Bongo
        Here, in general, an analogy with Su-27 and Su-34 arises. I am not sure that with all its merits, the latter will also be able, like the Su-24, to perform low-speed high-speed throws.

        Is it because of the lack of variable sweep?
    2. djachaev
      djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 35
      0
      Quote: SibRUS
      Americans F-111 have long been sent to the scrap, and here's the interesting thing - there was no direct replacement.


      Just the same, the F-111 was a replacement. It was replaced by the F-15E, also very suited for assault missions.

      Our Su-24 is also being replaced. And as far as I know, by the end of 2015 they plan to utilize more than 70% of the entire fleet of dry ones. They will completely replace the Su-34.
      1. servant.
        servant. 22 January 2014 15: 14
        0
        Not from a good recycling life, but from the full development of a resource ....
  • Bongo
    Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 14
    +7
    Quote: Gamdlislyam
    Now in the Russian Air Force operated about 350 machines. Still, approximately, 200 are on storage bases.

    Have you heard that we have planes from "storage" returned to service? You can forget about them, especially since they are stored in our climate under the open sky, and, as a rule, are subjected to ruthless plundering, this is not Davis Montan.
    1. Gamdlislyam
      Gamdlislyam 22 January 2014 12: 02
      +2
      Quote: Bongo
      Have you heard that we have planes from "storage" returned to service?

      Dear colleague Sergey, information on the MiG-31 passed last year. It was the machines taken from the storage bases that went through modernization, and then they entered the combat units.
      By the way, those 40 cars (Su-24) that were modernized at the Novosibirsk plant in 2007-2012 were also taken from storage bases.
      1. Bongo
        Bongo 22 January 2014 12: 07
        +4
        Can I have a reference? Something I doubt, I have repeatedly observed how our planes are stored "in storage".
      2. servant.
        servant. 22 January 2014 15: 12
        +4
        So let's say not from storage bases but from disbanded regiments ... Even in units there is a supernumerary equipment stored, but as a rule it is already scrap metal, dismantled with dead engines and removed units .. At storage bases it’s not better ..
        At one time, the SU-17 was put into storage, and a couple of years later, during the next company in the Caucasus, the need for such an aircraft became clear, they decided to remove it from storage. As a result, not a single aircraft could be selected at one of the storage bases ...
        1. VAF
          VAF 22 January 2014 23: 58
          +4
          Quote: serviceman.
          At one time, the SU-17 was put into storage, and a couple of years later, during the next company in the Caucasus, the need for such an aircraft became clear, they decided to remove it from storage. As a result, not a single aircraft could be selected at one of the storage bases ...


          Absolutely central, +! soldier
          The same "baida" was with the MiG-27K, for the First Chechen, .. the same "Wishlist", in Lipetsk there is a "carriage" and a "small cart" .... but upon closer examination .. more than half of everything is missing recourse
  • shtanko.49
    shtanko.49 22 January 2014 11: 16
    +3
    There was information that in the conflict with Georgia, the SU-34, which suppressed the enemy’s air defense, helped a lot, which means it is a worthy replacement for the SU-24, and it would be better if they complemented each other's capabilities.
  • Bongo
    Bongo 22 January 2014 11: 47
    +4
    Quote: Wedmak
    Well hello. They are already delivered to the troops.

    Hello smile You mentioned the first delivered vehicles, and they just went to the center of combat use, surely you are on course. The news is certainly positive, but you shouldn’t believe everything, for sure, not everything is so smooth.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 22 January 2014 12: 10
      +1
      You mentioned the first vehicles delivered, and they were just going to the center of combat use, for sure you are on track.

      Ah, here you are. I agree, not everything is going smoothly. However, these first vehicles already participated in the military operation. And he showed himself not very bad. This is almost the same as giving the machine gun to the graduate of the school, showing him how to shoot, taking him to the training ground for a couple of hours, shooting and then sending the bandit out of the captured house.
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 22 January 2014 12: 12
    +1
    Su 34 is planned to purchase at least 200 pieces. And given that the fleet will come to replace 24ok Su30 about 100 pcs. everything will be fine. Moreover, the structure of aviation is changing, planes have become more powerful and the difference between the front-line bomber and the fighter has been leveled. Now the same Su 30 takes a bomb load more and carries it further than Su 24. For its time, the car was not bad, but everything passes. Moreover, it was one of the most emergency aircraft in the Soviet Union.
    1. boom_bah
      boom_bah 22 January 2014 13: 30
      +3
      Sergey, I hope you joked like that. There is a difference between a front-line bomber and a fighter, and the point is not in the bomb load, but in the sighting and navigation systems and the range of applied ASAs.
      The Su-24 was the most emergency in the first years of operation - the aircraft for that time was very complex, part of the design decisions in terms of the airframe, engine and their systems were used for the first time, it was necessary to finish everything during operation in the army. You would know how many complex improvements it has been completed - probably, like on any machine in aviation.
      And about 100 pcs. Su-30 for the MA Navy - a dubious figure of some kind. There are so many Su-24s there.
      1. 1c-inform-city
        1c-inform-city 22 January 2014 18: 52
        0
        Of course, I understand that sighting equipment is different, but then the same su30 bomb load
    2. djachaev
      djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 24
      +1
      Quote: 1c-inform-city
      Su 34 is planned to purchase at least 200 pieces.


      Not quite right. The Russian Ministry of Defense said that 124 aircraft would be bought.
      The first contract for 32 aircraft, deliveries of 2009-2013 (fully completed), the second contract for 92 aircraft, deliveries of 2014-2020.
      1. Bronis
        Bronis 22 January 2014 15: 16
        +1
        Quote: djachaev
        Not quite right. The Russian Ministry of Defense said that 124 aircraft would be bought.
        The first contract for 32 aircraft, deliveries of 2009-2013 (fully completed), the second contract for 92 aircraft, deliveries of 2014-2020.

        Contracted Yes - 124 Aircraft. Bondarev at different times voiced the possibility of increasing to 140-200 pcs. Well, so Bondarev says a lot. request Not always true. At the same time, there was information that they plan to purchase the 50 Su-30 for the Navy. But it is PLANNED, and not signed a contract. Here, quite possibly, it will come true. Something must come to the Navy aviation
      2. 1c-inform-city
        1c-inform-city 22 January 2014 18: 16
        0
        Infa has already passed that more contracts are being prepared in addition to the signed ones. Words are not mine, but Mr. Borisov.
  • typhoon7
    typhoon7 22 January 2014 13: 05
    +4
    Quote: Polovec
    He gave eleven years to this plane. I love him with all my heart.

    He will still serve his country. soldier
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. boom_bah
      boom_bah 22 January 2014 14: 11
      +2
      The author probably wanted to say at speeds of 0 ... 1300 km / h, altitudes of 0 ... 20000 m. But he did not say.
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 04
    -4
    According to its characteristics, the chair guarantees safe bailout at all heights and speeds above 70 kilometers per hour.


    I think the author wanted to say over 700 km / h
    1. Gamdlislyam
      Gamdlislyam 22 January 2014 14: 26
      +3
      Dear colleague dzhachaev, the author wrote what was indicated in the technical characteristics of the ejection seat! soldier And there it was recorded that bailout is possible at zero altitude, at a speed of 70 km / h, i.e. during take-off or landing (this seat was originally developed for the Yak-38 - a vertical take-off and landing aircraft).
      This case showed that the parameters for the use of the ejection seat are wider than the designers wrote in the passport.
      1. djachaev
        djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 59
        0
        Well, if so, then thanks for fixing my mistake.
      2. VAF
        VAF 22 January 2014 15: 35
        +3
        Quote: Gamdlislyam
        And there it was recorded that bailout is possible at zero altitude, at a speed of 70 km / h


        Speed ​​limits for K-36 seats "go" exclusively with the ability to reset the flashlight with high-speed pressure. For different types of aircraft and their twin, they are different.
        In reality, the chair "shoots" with the parameters 0 to 0, i.e. 0 altitude and 0 speed.
        But the most important 0 is at 0 vertical rate of decline !!!!

        In the absence of this 0 -0 height, it increases significantly !!! soldier
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. aviamed90
        aviamed90 23 January 2014 09: 32
        +1
        Gamdlislyam

        I will support you.

        TTX K-36, its real capabilities and limitations on its use on the Su-24m are not the same thing.

        For Su-24m with K-36dm:

        "Operating restrictions.
        By means of salvation.

        n. 20
        Safe emergency escape is provided by:

        - on the takeoff and run (at a speed of 75 km / h or more) and in climb (according to the conditions of normal operation of the parachute system);

        - in horizontal flight (the time of normal operation of the parachute system):
        - at a speed of 950 km / h or more without roll - without height limit, with a roll of 90 deg. - from a height of 150 m or more, with a roll of 180 deg. - from a height of 200 m or more;
        - at a speed of 950-1200 km / h - at an altitude of 40 m or more above the terrain;
        - at a speed of more than 1200 km / h - at a height above the terrain of 80 m or more .... "

        There are still time limits for triggering elements of the parachute system, the effects of air flow on crew members and the strength of the curtain.

        This is recorded in the RLE Su-24m.
  • Ivan Petrovich
    Ivan Petrovich 22 January 2014 14: 06
    -4
    if I’m not mistaken, such a bomber was shot down in Chechnya by a manual Igla type air defense system
    so talk about the perfection of protection ...
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 22 January 2014 14: 09
      +6
      And in Iraq, the planes of the Western coalition were knocked down by "Needles" and "Arrows" and so what?
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 14: 15
    +1
    By the way, the American analogue of the Su-24 is the F-111, which was withdrawn from service in 1998 and replaced with the F-15E Strike Eagle.
    Due to problems in the 90s, supplies of the Su-34 were postponed. Therefore, the Su-24 has only just begun to be replaced with new-generation front-line bombers.
  • Bongo
    Bongo 22 January 2014 14: 52
    +5
    Quote: vaf
    What's surprising? All my life on the Su-27, starting with the series "C", they hung up NAR, NURs and "cast iron" and along the "grid" ... forward "from a dive"

    Do you think this application of the machine is correct?
    1. VAF
      VAF 22 January 2014 15: 30
      +3
      Quote: Bongo
      Do you think this application of the machine is correct?


      Of course not, but ... they "re-reformulated" to the point that there is no one to perform the functions and tasks of the IBA.
      So they mold and "tie" ... what is soldier
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 15: 11
    +2
    Interestingly, the Su-24 has Air-to-Air missiles and a cannon. This means that in addition to shock work, it can stand up for itself and air combat. That is, unlike the Su-25, it does not have to fly on a mission under cover for fighters.
    1. VAF
      VAF 22 January 2014 15: 45
      +6
      Quote: djachaev
      Interestingly, the Su-24 has Air-to-Air missiles and a cannon. This means that in addition to shock work, it can stand up for itself and aerial combat.


      Only theoretically .. and basically the R-60s were designed to deal with helicopters.
      The cannon is definitely not .. since you will not "enter" a normal fighter in the required angle (the overload is too small), well, for firing from such a "weapon", "stabilization" is necessary. trimming .. otherwise .. everything will fly away like in the light of day !!! soldier

      Quote: djachaev
      . That is, he, unlike the Su-25, does not have to fly on a mission under the guise of fighters.


      Any aircraft performing an IBA and FBA task needs air cover !!!
      And the Su-25SM has been carrying R-73 and 73M missiles for a long time, and the pilot has a "gap", so just the Su-25 can, if necessary, go ... on his own ... although ... it is undesirable !!!
      1. djachaev
        djachaev 22 January 2014 16: 12
        0
        Quote: vaf
        And the Su-25SM has been carrying R-73 and 73M missiles for a long time, and the pilot has a "gap", so just the Su-25 can, if necessary, go ... on his own ... although ... it is undesirable !!!


        It’s very doubtful about the Su-25. The aircraft is subsonic, the ceiling is less than 5 km. The Su-24 at least has supersonic sound. But I won’t judge that. 60 and R-73 will protect only in the near radius (although they are unlikely to help against the fighter).
        I agree! For any strike machine you need a cover in the form of fighters.
        1. VAF
          VAF 22 January 2014 23: 48
          +5
          Quote: djachaev
          About the Su-25 is very doubtful. The aircraft is subsonic, the ceiling is less than 5 km.


          Why are you so "stuck" in this .. "ceiling" request , and even more so .. supersonic recourse "thermal" rocket is much more willing to enter the ass with a torch. no FDI will save, and in the PPP as well.
          And just in case .R-73M "flies" for 40 km winkand escape from it ..... very, very problematic! soldier
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 23 January 2014 00: 01
            +5
            Quote: vaf
            "thermal" rocket is much more willing to enter the ass with a torch. no FDI will save, and in the PPP as well.

            laughing
            Greetings, Sergey.
            hi
            This phrase once reminded me of some gatherings with transport aviation fliers ...
            After ... the eleventh glass of tea, one of them said:
            - Do you know what a fighter pilot is? This is when "there is fire in the woman, but horror in the eyes." But in our transport - the real beauty of flight ...
            laughing
            Just good memories. I hope not hurt anyone.
            repeat
            1. Alex 241
              Alex 241 23 January 2014 00: 17
              +4
              Lesh, hi Sergey
              Quote: Aleks tv
              This is when "there is fire in the train,
              1. Aleks tv
                Aleks tv 23 January 2014 00: 30
                +1
                Quote: Alex 241
                Lesh, hi Sergey

                Hi Sanya.
                drinks
  • Dima
    Dima 22 January 2014 15: 22
    +5
    I wonder when and what will change the Su-24 of the Black Sea Fleet? There was once infa that the Su-30s. But somehow I don’t hear anything about this lately .. If the Su-30SM + anti-ship missiles to them appeared there, it was a good force. And a good argument in the region. But taking into account what is happening in Ukraine, it is not clear whether this will be or not. what
    1. VAF
      VAF 22 January 2014 15: 46
      +1
      Quote: DimaM
      I wonder when and what will change the Su-24 of the Black Sea Fleet? There was once infa that the Su-30s. But somehow I don’t hear anything about this lately .. If the Su-30SM + anti-ship missiles to them appeared there, it was a good force. And a good argument in the region


      The thought is true and practical, +! But planned in the guards Su-30M2. but not SM .. and now ... until the pause recourse
      1. boom_bah
        boom_bah 22 January 2014 22: 59
        0
        Pause, because there’s nowhere to take 30CM / M2. So, you will not believe, they fly not only on MPs, but also on a few simple ones. At the annual renewal. There you go. They would extend it further by technical condition, but the problem is in the legs - the front ones have one developer, the main ones have another. It's hard to agree with everyone.
        1. VAF
          VAF 22 January 2014 23: 54
          +1
          Quote: boom_bah
          You won’t believe it, they fly not only on MPs, but also on a few simple ones. At the annual renewal.


          This year I was "an opportunity" in Simferopol. Well, I dropped in to the peasants .. fortunately, next to each other .. so that "bachiv" is what I say .. T-6 were all on the group in the sump, under guard, all were mothballed, though there were 3 of them in the TECHi ... but there regulations. in my 600 hours did .. then I don’t know.
          Everyone is only talking about the Su-30M2 drinks
      2. Ustin
        Ustin 23 January 2014 16: 00
        +2
        We are already working vaf in this direction.
  • djachaev
    djachaev 22 January 2014 15: 47
    0
    And why, by the way, are the Su-34s not being exported? For example, India can be delivered. Moreover, the Indians need replacing the obsolete Jaguar and MiG-27 fighter-bombers.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 22 January 2014 16: 18
      +1
      We ourselves would saturate the troops so far. And the car is generally shock, with a large radius of action, good load. A very powerful argument in politics.
    2. samoletil18
      samoletil18 22 January 2014 16: 38
      0
      Quote: djachaev
      Indians need replacing obsolete fighter-bombers Jaguar and MiG-27.

      Jaguars scared us in childhood. I did not even suspect that they were still flying.
      There was an article on VO about a light fighter. I am not an aviator (but a sympathetic one), and I have more of a question for those who really understand. Su-24 are released. What if we make refuellers for the MiG-29, -35 from them? The loads are no longer the same in this capacity, a high-torque machine, after all, it will normally take fuel. And with a changed radius of action, MiGs from "front-line soldiers" are transformed into a long-range vehicle. Or is this all necessary in fig?
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 22 January 2014 16: 52
        +2
        If you make tankers for MiG-29, -35 from them?

        Too little fuel is taken on board for refueling. It turns out that one Su-24 tanker will refuel one MiG. While consuming the same fuel. Well .. I think so.
        1. djachaev
          djachaev 22 January 2014 17: 01
          +1
          I agree! Moreover, we have the IL-78 in the role of refueling, which can simultaneously refuel two aircraft.
          1. samoletil18
            samoletil18 22 January 2014 17: 06
            0
            This is understandable, but to drive the IL-78 to refuel a pair of MiGs is too curly, and the topic was developed in the USSR. Just nothing concrete on this topic came across. What ended did not understand.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 22 January 2014 17: 32
              0
              Well, to begin with, the Mig-29 is a light front-line fighter according to our classification. He does not need a long range, there is drying for this. In my opinion, it is not needed there at all (on the MiG-29). Is it that with a long haul it will do, and even that ... PTB for what?
          2. Wedmak
            Wedmak 22 January 2014 17: 29
            +1
            IL-78 is, which can simultaneously refuel two aircraft.

            There was a picture even with three cones. Although, is it possible in practice, I do not know.
      2. Gamdlislyam
        Gamdlislyam 22 January 2014 17: 51
        0
        Quote: samoletil18
        Su-24 are freed. If you make tankers out of them

        Such a modification already exists.
        1. samoletil18
          samoletil18 22 January 2014 23: 46
          +1
          Not to attach UPAZ, but to remake for specifically such an application with the maximum possible load of fuel and put it on the airfields next to MiGs.
          1. samoletil18
            samoletil18 23 January 2014 14: 59
            0
            the mass of weapons is possible up to 8t. With a ton of fueling equipment normally stays. So I thought about the possibility of extending the life of these magnificent cars. And for MiGs, empowerment.
  • Cant OFF
    Cant OFF 22 January 2014 15: 52
    +2
    Ball lightning and not a plane
  • Leshka
    Leshka 22 January 2014 16: 06
    0
    drop dead
  • samoletil18
    samoletil18 22 January 2014 16: 45
    +3
    Guys, what kind of claim to the author? The man recalled a good airplane, and what was not enough for the full picture is the world wide web. From me to the author +. The plane is 44 years old, and it works. Represent the Yak-3 in 1988? Technological progress, however.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 22 January 2014 16: 53
      +3
      So no complaints and not visible. Everyone agrees that the plane is good. It’s just that not everyone agrees that it is time for him to rest.
      1. samoletil18
        samoletil18 22 January 2014 16: 58
        +1
        Yes, I'm not talking about that. a couple of comments came across that not everything was written about the plane. I agree with you: the plane is excellent, but a masterpiece for its time.
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 22 January 2014 17: 00
    +1
    Sukhovsky KB - thanks! Initially, even Sukhoi himself, the more eminent aircraft designers who were in power (will not bother the ashes of the departed :) obviously "erased". But Poghosyan and his team were in the 90s, when many eminent aviation design bureaus collapsed. was able to continue working and the new Su-34, in particular, brought to the series.
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 22 January 2014 17: 02
    +3
    It is a pity, the article is too small about such a wonderful "device".
    But with pleasure and interest I read komenty.
    wink
    Thanks to the flyers who flew this "WORKING HORSE"!
    drinks
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 22 January 2014 18: 23
    +1
    A friend, still in the Far East flies on it, in the modification of a scout.
    Good car.
  • Technologist
    Technologist 22 January 2014 18: 34
    0
    An interesting story about an involuntary test of a catapult. A plus!
  • Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 22 January 2014 19: 04
    +3
    This is a compilation from http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bomber/su24.html
    Some fragments are reprinted verbatim. The "author" tried. Worked painstakingly, reprinting. And without reference to this source. True, the author is not listed on that site, but links to the primary sources are given.
    This article is also on the website of the Russian newspaper: http://www.rg.ru/2014/01/17/su-site.html
    You can congratulate this newspaper. She has talented journalists. They are even able to retype their Internet texts.
    1. Falcon5555
      Falcon5555 22 January 2014 19: 35
      +1
      ... from the Internet.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 22 January 2014 19: 22
    +1
    Guys, when the SU-24 takes off, everything walks in the chest, it is an indescribable state. Don't say that, but the plane is handsome.
  • vm68dm
    vm68dm 22 January 2014 19: 32
    +3
    Quote: Tambov Wolf
    Guys, when the SU-24 takes off, everything walks in the chest, it is an indescribable state. Don't say that, but the plane is handsome.

    Especially for you! hi
  • Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 22 January 2014 19: 33
    0
    "Well, how did this bastard know everything ?!": http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1792480
  • Johnagle
    Johnagle 22 January 2014 19: 48
    +7
    and here in it I - in the 90th year I was at the training camp in Berdyansk from the military department of the aircraft installer - served these dryings :)
    1. Johnagle
      Johnagle 22 January 2014 21: 25
      +1
      it was especially impressive when sometimes the "weather scout" "passed" at the maximum shaving over the strip - formula 1 was resting ...
      as well as racing engines on the ground - everything really shakes in the shower :)
  • Skiff-2
    Skiff-2 22 January 2014 20: 32
    0
    Quote: GregAzov
    During my service at the Chkalov Research Institute (now GLITs), the main reason for the death of test pilots is the Su-24. As a rule, 1-2 people per year.

    In the 90th year, techies from Kurdamir (Azerbaijan) complained about the unreliability of the onboard electronics on the Su-24, up to five failures per flight. Many pilots refused to retrain from Su-17 to 24-ki because of the notorious "flying coffin" ... Unreliable element base of avionics. But it looked very impressive both on the ground and in flight.
    1. smersh70
      smersh70 23 January 2014 00: 10
      0
      Quote: Skif-2
      In the 90th year technicians from Kurdamir (Azerbaijan) complained about the unreliability of on-board electronics on the Su-24
      on the other hand, they removed the Su-24 from the pedestal at the initial stage, put it in order and made it fly up)) they couldn’t fix the navigation component, but threw the bombs properly)) so it’s not a plane, but a song! handsome !!!!! hi
  • Crang
    Crang 22 January 2014 21: 35
    0
    Weapon
    7,5t is not a record to say the least. Some NATO fighters take more from NATO. For example, the F-15 takes an 11t TSA. So the combat load of 7,5 tons for the bomber, which is the Su-24 is clearly not enough.
    nearly invisible
    No less noticeable than other domestic aircraft of similar size. So far, we have created only two true "invisibles": the C-37 and the T-50.
    Protection
    KD-36 is also not the last word in technology. But the Su-24 is still a great airplane. Ageless.
  • samoletil18
    samoletil18 22 January 2014 23: 22
    +3
    And sadness longed for me to read the article and comments.
    Our Soviet backlog is beginning to go away forever. The Su-27 is also being finalized to the Su-30,34,35. But time is relentless. It remains to hope that new Russian Su, MiG, Tu, Yak, Be, Il, An will appear (this is if the Westerners split Ukraine and the Petriot will be in western Ukraine). We have something to be proud of! But the collapse of our homeland is not the first. We will be reborn yet. And the traitors will be rewarded. The main thing is that we make planes. And the F-35, if we create the engines, will get a competitor.
    Thanks to Soviet aviators and aircraft manufacturers! I’ll go my son for mathematics and physics; I’ll suddenly go to the Moscow Aviation Institute.
  • djachaev
    djachaev 23 January 2014 13: 38
    +1
    Quote: almost demob
    Quote: djachaev

    They replace it, but the bomber was quite successful. At least better than the MiG-27.
    And accident rate is not to blame Sukhoi Design Bureau designers. It’s just that many have expired since the aircraft have been in service since 1970.

    Did you seriously write this, or just like that? Is a bus better than a motorcycle? At leisure, read somewhere about aviation, well, there about bombers, fighters, attack aircraft. Maybe you can catch the difference. Immediately figure out who is better! lol
    And the accident rate at the SU 24 was high during the entire period of its operation and, first of all, due to unsuccessful decisions of the designers.


    You still don’t understand what I wrote? If you consider me a fool who does not understand the difference between a fighter and a bomber, then you are clearly mistaken. negative
    Comparing the Su-24 with the MiG-27 is quite correct, since the latter is also a strike aircraft and is practically not suitable for air combat.
    I explain that the MiG-27 is a strike machine created on the basis of the third-generation fighter MiG-23, and unlike its ancestor, the plane lost its flying qualities (including air combat) .Therefore, it can also be called a front-line bomber.

    And in my previous commentary, I wrote that the Su-24 is a much better strike machine than its predecessors, such as the MiG-27 and Su-17. That's it! laughing
  • aud13
    aud13 23 January 2014 20: 41
    +1
    Write-off, as I understand it, means disassembling these aircraft. Well, or use them as targets.
    I can’t understand everything. Is it really impossible to come up with a better application?
    If you can’t think of it now, then put it in storage for a while. You look, maybe after a while there will be a more worthy application for them. Only need to be stored for real.
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 25 January 2014 22: 41
    +2
    Here is a New Year tree from the Far East


    Immediately on December 31, before the New Year's feast

    And this is the view from the cab to the Khibiny
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 25 January 2014 22: 42
    0
    And these are New Year's departures in Lipetsk
  • Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 26 January 2014 07: 40
    0
    Rook is a real killer !!! His hands are up to his elbow in blood !!! Who do you think has flunked J. Dudaev - a rook, who has plowed all of Afghanistan - a rook. Honor and praise to the plane bearing the fury of Russia !!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Dwarfik
    Dwarfik 27 January 2014 09: 34
    +1
    Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
    Rook is a real killer !!! His hands are up to his elbow in blood !!! Who do you think has flunked J. Dudaev - a rook, who has plowed all of Afghanistan - a rook. Honor and praise to the plane bearing the fury of Russia !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    And "Rook" is not SU - is it called?
  • kadet54
    kadet54 28 January 2014 01: 10
    0
    By chance, none of the members of the forum served on the SU-24 at the Cherlyany airbase?