Military Review

Presentation of the new Su-30CM on KADEX-2014

69
The III International Exhibition of Arms and Military-Technical Equipment KADEX-25 ended on May 2014 in Astana, at which the presentation of the latest Su-30SM fighter with tail number “16 red” built by Irkutsk was held aviation plant of OJSC "Corporation" Irkut ", the blog reports bmpd.




Apparently, the aircraft with the 10MK5 1017 serial number is the first Su-30CM that the Russian Air Force received in the 2014 year, and the 17-th produced aircraft of this type. The first flight of the car took place in Irkutsk 25 February 2014, and on May 20 it traveled from Irkutsk to Astana to take part in the KADEX-2014 exhibition.

It is noted that at present the Irkutsk Aviation Plant conducts flight tests four more Su-30SM under serial numbers 10MK5 1018 (first flight 10 March 2014 years) 10MK5 1019 (22 of March), 10MK5 1020 (31 of March) and 10MK5 1101 (25 April ).

Irkut Corporation produces Su-30CM fighters under two contracts for 30 aircraft each, which were signed with the Russian Ministry of Defense in March and December 2012 of the year. In November, the 2012 of the Russian Air Force received two Su-30CM fighters, in the 2013, the 14 fighters.
Photos used:
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ImPerts
    ImPerts 26 May 2014 11: 52
    +9
    Beautiful car! What can I say ...
  2. Giant thought
    Giant thought 26 May 2014 11: 53
    +5
    Well, look, envy what kind of combat aircraft we have.
  3. MOISEY
    MOISEY 26 May 2014 11: 53
    +2
    It's nice to see again the good competition between KB "MIG" and "SU"
  4. Kornilovets
    Kornilovets 26 May 2014 11: 54
    +4
    And what is the difference between SU ​​30 cm and SU 35, why do we need this machine if there is SU - 35?
    1. supertiger21
      supertiger21 26 May 2014 12: 15
      +10
      Quote: Kornilovist
      And what is the difference between SU ​​30 cm and SU 35, why do we need this machine if


      Su-35 single and more designed for air battles. Su-30 two-seater, more convenient for shock work and for educational purposes.
      1. Kornilovets
        Kornilovets 26 May 2014 12: 18
        +2
        So for strikes more SU - 34 is suitable ...
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 26 May 2014 12: 23
          +2
          Su-34 is sometimes too much. For example, does it make sense to drive a 34-ku to destroy the entrance to the cave? Or a point strike with guided missiles?
          1. patsantre
            patsantre 26 May 2014 12: 30
            +5
            30 and 34 are about the same in price and cost of operation, you mean that 30ka is a light version of the bomber, but then it makes no sense. We have about 30 about 2 varieties in the army. This is a tribute to the need to keep in shape different industries and factories. From such mottling only harm actually.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 26 May 2014 12: 50
              +3
              you mean that 30ka is a light version of the bomber, but then it makes no sense.

              Not only. It can be used both as a training one, and as a full-fledged combat one (unlike the Yak-130), and as a control, reconnaissance, and target designation plane. That is a much larger range of tasks. The 30th is more versatile than the 34th.
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 26 May 2014 13: 37
                +1
                Quote: Wedmak
                you mean that 30ka is a light version of the bomber, but then it makes no sense.

                Not only. It can be used both as a training one, and as a full-fledged combat one (unlike the Yak-130), and as a control, reconnaissance, and target designation plane. That is a much larger range of tasks. The 30th is more versatile than the 34th.
                - another difference - MiG-35 - EASY front-line fighter, the name speaks for itself. SU-30 is a HEAVY multi-functional aircraft that can cover significant distances.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 26 May 2014 13: 38
                  +1
                  another difference - MiG-35 - EASY front-line fighter

                  We talked about the Su-35, and not about the MiG.
              2. patsantre
                patsantre 26 May 2014 14: 54
                +2
                In principle, the Su-30 can be adjusted to the level of the Su-34 in terms of combat capabilities (in terms of strikes on the ground), unless of course it is inferior to it at all. And then the Su-34 will no longer need. And what prevents the Su-34 from being used as a control, reconnaissance and target designation aircraft? Any modern fighter can do this, but this is not his task at all. During this decade, we are armed with only heavy fighters arriving 5 (!!!) types, do you think this is normal?
                1. PLO
                  PLO 26 May 2014 15: 28
                  +7
                  Su-30SM not reach the Su-34 as you do not pull

                  During this decade, we are armed with only heavy fighters arriving 5 (!!!) types, do you think this is normal?

                  the decisions are quite logical and justified, despite a seemingly large number of types.
                  although I also think that, in principle, it would be possible to do without the Su-30SM, but unfortunately NAPO and KAPO are unlikely to be able to give out the required number of aircraft, and Irkut is certainly a leader in performance.

                  in any case, the diversity of technology is better than the uniformity of its absence)
                  1. Tolerast
                    Tolerast 26 May 2014 15: 39
                    0
                    Good girl. All right. Keep a plus from the liberal
                    1. patsantre
                      patsantre 26 May 2014 21: 31
                      0
                      Quote: olp
                      Su-30SM not reach the Su-34 as you do not pull

                      Quote: Wedmak
                      I agree, it will not work out, and it is not necessary.

                      And the specifics? What is so special about the Su-34 that it never will be on the Su-30? TTXs are approximately the same, any avionics can be put on, you can live without a microwave and a toilet, an armored cabin is more for attack aircraft, but we have an information security system here.
                      There is no need for 2 types at once. It would be more logical to leave 34, having modernized it along the road.
                      1. supertiger21
                        supertiger21 26 May 2014 22: 19
                        +1
                        Quote: patsantre
                        What is so special about the Su-34 that it never will be on the Su-30?


                        1) The combat load is 1,5 times higher.
                        2) Significantly higher combat radius.
                        3) Armor (not a big effect, but still survivability increases).
                        4) Lower price.

                        Quote: patsantre
                        It would be more logical to leave 34, having modernized it along the road.


                        You are so impatient No. , years will pass and you will have both modernization and new modifications. The plane has only been adopted, and you already demand more.
                      2. PLO
                        PLO 26 May 2014 22: 44
                        +2
                        And the specifics? What is so special about the Su-34 that it never will be on the Su-30? TTXs are approximately the same, any avionics can be put on, you can live without a microwave and a toilet, an armored cabin is more for attack aircraft, but we have an information security system here.

                        Su-34 stupidly more)
                        From this, in fact, its advantages follow: more fuel (12 tons on the Su-34 and 9.5 tons on the Su-30) and accordingly a longer range, a large payload of almost 1.5 times. Built-in LTPS is also a big plus.

                        Of course, you can live without a microwave, they say that pilots still don't use it because there are rumors that it is intended for "space food" that no one buys for pilots.

                        but the presence of a toilet is a huge plus, the ability to cope with a small need for long-distance flights IMHO is very useful and certainly has a very beneficial effect on morale)

                        and an armored cockpit is a very useful thing, especially for a strike aircraft, and when an air defense breakthrough at low altitudes is still the most effective way.


                        There is no need for 2 types at once. It would be more logical to leave 34, having modernized it along the road.

                        Yes, actually the Su-34 is already a completely modern aircraft, and work on modernization, in principle, is ongoing.
                        as I said, IMHO, the Su-30SM is a necessary measure, because NAPO and KAPO cannot provide the necessary pace of aircraft production immediately.
                      3. Tolerast
                        Tolerast 27 May 2014 00: 03
                        0
                        All is correct. Necessary measure. Yes. But this does not negate the fact that the Su-30SM is an excellent modern multi-role fighter. We have nothing better than him in the Air Force. Su-35 still has to get new missiles and fully become on combat duty. But, again, aligning these two aircraft is not entirely correct.
                2. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 26 May 2014 15: 56
                  +2
                  Su-30SM not reach the Su-34 as you do not pull

                  I agree, it will not work out, and it is not necessary. Although aviation is now moving towards greater versatility, in my opinion a specialized bomber is better than a multifunctional one, don’t understand what. You won’t teach anything to pilots either, purely for psychological reasons. But to make a specialized support aircraft out of a Su-30SM is necessary. It can provide a strike to the main group of the Su-34, both by reconnaissance and by covering air defense and electronic warfare.
              3. supertiger21
                supertiger21 26 May 2014 22: 14
                0
                Quote: patsantre
                unless of course he is inferior to him at all. And then the Su-34 will no longer need.


                The Su-30 does not pull like a drummer to the Su-34. Although it would be because the 30s have a combat load of 8000 tons, and the 34th has 1,5 more up to 12000 tons.

                Quote: patsantre
                And what prevents the Su-34 from being used as a control, reconnaissance and target designation aircraft?


                Everything has its time, they just adopted it. When they created the F-15, it also for over a decade did not have, for example, a shock modification.

                Quote: patsantre
                only heavy fighters arrive 5 (!!!) types


                If we consider the 4th generation, then only 3. The Su-34 is not positioned as a heavy fighter, but as a front-line strike aircraft. Well, the PAK FA needs to be considered separately, because it is a fighter of the next generation.
  5. Wedmak
    Wedmak 26 May 2014 12: 17
    0
    The difference is in the crew (sometimes two pilots are better than one) and on-board equipment. And in application. Essentially, they are one and the same class of machines. But the Su-30SM can be more fully used in naval aviation, pilot training, and work on ground targets.
  6. grandfather_Kostya
    grandfather_Kostya 26 May 2014 23: 28
    0
    It seems in the commercial of Sukhoi that it was said that the double SU-30 is designed to work in a group with faster single-seat fighters: the co-pilot is engaged in the distribution of target designation to the entire group, the search and identification of air, ground and sea targets, and of course it can do a lot.
  • Kornilovets
    Kornilovets 26 May 2014 11: 58
    +4
    For example.

    Su-30SM - (serial upgraded) Su-30MKI, designed for the Russian Air Force. The first flight was September 21, 2012. From 2013, flight tests of the aircraft will begin [8]. As of 2014, 60 Su-30SMs were ordered for the Russian Air Force (16 vehicles were delivered - 3 to the Chkalov GLIC, 3 to the Lipetsk Air Center, 10 to the Domna Air Base near Chita), and 5 aircraft for the Russian Navy.

    TECH SPECS

    Crew: 2 person
    Length: 21,9 m
    Wingspan: 14,7 m
    Height: 6,36 m
    Wing area: 62 m²
    Weight:
    empty: 18800 kg
    normal takeoff: 24900 kg
    maximum take-off: 34500 kg
    ultimate take-off: 38800 kg
    fuel: 9640 kg
    Engine: 2 × turbofan "AL-31F" (AL-31FP on the Su-30M2)
    Link:
    maximum speedless: 2 × 7770 kgf
    afterburner: 2 × 12500 kg
    thrust vector deflection angles (for AL-31FP): ± 16 ° in any direction, ± 20 ° in the plane
    thrust vector deflection speed (for AL-31FP): 60 ° / s
    weight: 1520 kg
    Maximum operational overload: +9 G

    Flight characteristics

    Maximum speed:
    by the ground: 1350 km / h (1,13 M)
    at an altitude: 2125 km / h (1,9-2,0 M for the version with PGO)
    Distance flight:
    at the ground: 1270 km
    at the height of: 3000 km
    combat radius: 1500 km
    Flight duration: 3,5 h (without refueling)
    Service ceiling: 17300 m
    Rate of climb: 13800 m / min (230 m / s)
    Length of takeoff: 550 m
    path length: 750 m
    Thrust:
    normal take-off weight: 1,00
    with maximum take-off weight: 0,84
    at maximum take-off weight: 0,76
    Wing load:
    with normal take-off weight: 398 kg / m²
    with maximum take-off weight: 532 kg / m²

    weaponry

    Cannon: 30-mm integrated gun GSh-30-1
    Suspension Points: 12
    The combat load: 8000 kg
    Suspension arms:
    6 medium-range guided missiles R-77, R-27R or R-27ER, R-27T or R-27ET with TGS and 6 melee missiles R-73 with TGS;
    Free-fall bombs weighing 500 kg (up to 8 units) or 250 kg (28 units);
    Containers KMG-U (up to 7 units) or blocks NAR C-13 and C-8 (up to 4 units);
    Various combinations of guided and unguided weapons of various classes are possible.
  • Kornilovets
    Kornilovets 26 May 2014 11: 59
    +1
    __________________________

    Su-35 (according to NATO codification: Flanker-T + [2]) is the Russian generation 4 ++ super-maneuverable multi-role fighter developed at the Sukhoi Design Bureau and is a deep modernization of the T-10S platform. The modification for the Russian Air Force is designated as Su-35S.

    TECH SPECS

    Crew: 1 people
    Length: 22,18 m
    Wingspan: 14,75 m
    Height: 6,43 m
    Wing area: 62,04 m²
    Leading edge sweep angle: 42 °
    Chassis: tricycle, with a front strut, retractable
    Weight:
    empty: 19000 kg [source not specified 327 days]
    normal take-off weight (2 x RVV-AE + 2 x P-73E): 25300 kg
    maximum take-off weight: 34500 kg
    fuel mass: 11500 kg
    Engine:
    engine type: two-circuit turbojet with afterburner and controlled thrust vector (turbofan engine with OVT)
    model: "AL-41F1S"
    thrust:
    Maximum: 2 × 8800 kg
    afterburner: 2 × 14000 kgf [20]
    traction vector control:
    thrust vector deflection angles: ± 15 ° in the plane
    thrust vector deflection rate: 60 ° / s
    engine weight: 1520 kg
    EPR: 0,5–2 m² [19] [non-authoritative source? 327 days]

    Flight characteristics
    Su-35S at MAKS-2013.

    Maximum speed:
    at the ground: 1400 km / h
    at altitude: 2500 km / h (2,25Maha, at altitudes greater than 11 km)
    afterburner: Mach 1,1 [22]
    Range of flight:
    at the ground (altitude 200 m, speed 0,7 Mach): 1580 km
    on high:
    without PTB: 3600 km
    with 2 PTB-2000 L: 4500 km
    Ceiling: 18 000 m
    Rate of climb: 280 m / s
    Length:
    take-off run (full fast and the furious): 450 m
    mileage (with normal take-off mass, brake parachute, use of brakes): 650 m
    Thrust-to-weight ratio (near the ground, at n.o.):
    normal take-off weight: 1,1
    with maximum take-off weight: 0,811
    Wing load:
    with normal take-off weight: 410 kg / m²
    with maximum take-off weight: 611 kg / m²

    weaponry

    source [23]

    Cannon: 30 mm aircraft gun GSH-30-1
    The combat load: 8000 kg
    Suspension Points: 12
    Armament:
    Air-to-air:
    Long Range Missile:
    RVV-DB
    medium range:
    6 × P-27ER, P-27P, P-27T
    10 × RVV-AE
    short range:
    4 × P-73
    Air-to-ground:
    Anti-ship missiles:
    6 × X-31 2 × X-59M
    Long-range air-to-ground missile
    Precision ammunition:
    6 × X-29
    X-25
    C-25LD
    6 × CAB-500
    CAB-1500
    Unmanaged ammunition:
    C-25 (NAR)
    C-8
    bombs for various purposes and caliber up to 1500 kg
    1. marder4
      marder4 26 May 2014 13: 53
      0
      very often there are sayings that the Su-35s is just an intermediate option, while the T-50 will be finalized and organized for serial production (unfortunately I do not know under what designation this army machine is supposed to be delivered) ...
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 26 May 2014 15: 57
        0
        This is even officially stated. Su-35 will be in the troops for a long time together with the T-50.
  • Wiruz
    Wiruz 26 May 2014 12: 02
    +3
    Great car! Spinning in the air almost like the thirty-fifth, which by the way at last year’s MAKS lit up like once the thirty-seventh!
    1. Ustin
      Ustin 26 May 2014 14: 50
      0
      "Thirty-fifth" is spinning worse so far (this is for reference).
  • Gagarin
    Gagarin 26 May 2014 12: 12
    +5
    It's a pity all the same that the Su-37 did not go into the series.
    Beautiful and just fantastically maneuverable bird.
    As I understand it, all the best of it went into business in the 30th and 35th.
    1. Anton Gavrilov
      Anton Gavrilov 26 May 2014 12: 40
      +1
      In fact, this was a separate version of the Su-35, with different avionics and engines.
    2. patsantre
      patsantre 26 May 2014 14: 56
      +1
      The current Su-35 will be abruptly.
  • Leshka
    Leshka 26 May 2014 12: 14
    +1
    this is beauties
  • Gagarin
    Gagarin 26 May 2014 12: 17
    +14
    The following from Poghosyan would like to implement PAK DA.
    He promised - WORK!
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 26 May 2014 12: 26
      +2
      You have a plus. To wait from PAK YES still for a long time ... And this picture has little in common with him.
      1. PLO
        PLO 26 May 2014 13: 16
        +1
        Product 54 seems to be conceived as a replacement for long-range Tu-22M3 bombers
        it’s a pity that this project wasn’t managed to be implemented

  • Gagarin
    Gagarin 26 May 2014 12: 23
    +4
    Well, minus is for what, for my flag in the avatar? Or did you not like the layout of the SU?
  • kuzia-roker
    kuzia-roker 26 May 2014 12: 25
    0
    Quote: ImPerts
    Beautiful car! What can I say ...

    I was wondering if if you put a motor from a Bosch washing machine in your grandmother’s washing machine, how does it get stuck interestingly?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 26 May 2014 12: 29
      +1
      Well, as if the Su-30SM has little in common with the Su-27. The glider is similar, so aerodynamics are the same everywhere.
    2. tormazok
      tormazok 26 May 2014 12: 30
      0
      There are developments that are ahead of their time, and if you stick modern technologies and materials in them, I think it will turn out that little thing!
    3. Dezinto
      Dezinto 26 May 2014 12: 38
      +5
      Is not a fact. There is a run-in case. Proven options that smoothly improve. And it is expensive to push money into the latest, from scratch, designs, and not the fact that it is effective.

      It’s such arrogant Americans that they can push their 7 lards of printed wrappers into the completely new idea of ​​a destroyer. Which is also of course necessary.

      But I’m talking about something else - improving is cheaper and more effective than inventing.
      1. aksakal
        aksakal 26 May 2014 21: 06
        +1
        Quote: DEZINTO
        But I’m talking about something else - improving is cheaper and more effective than inventing.
        - It’s not always a fact, especially when the invention manages to go to a new level. Of course, a very successful design can be upgraded for a long time, which we see with the example of the SU-27 and MiG-29 gliders, but the T-50 has a completely different glider, and not the fact that it is worse.
  • jovanni
    jovanni 26 May 2014 12: 28
    +1
    He is not only beautiful, but he can also be a-a-a-a-ak ....... eh ...
  • Gagarin
    Gagarin 26 May 2014 12: 28
    0
    You are right, I think this is explained by elementary poverty, I hope everyone will catch up with time, there will be new designs for gliders, but for now ... we are tuning what is.
    Quote: kuzia-roker
    I was wondering if if you put a motor from a Bosch washing machine in your grandmother’s washing machine, how does it get stuck interestingly?
    1. ivan.kormoran
      ivan.kormoran 26 May 2014 13: 19
      -8
      The guy, before climbing with comments about Russian armaments, first of all, look at yourself in Independence, but what you can, the stronghold was leaked, only to shoot civilians from the bushes and rob banks. Follow the liver and dry rations. Salo is eaten.
  • siberko
    siberko 26 May 2014 12: 48
    +1
    just do not do 1 or 5 pieces, but dozens and in the Russian Air Force and not sell it to everyone ... and the plane is very beautiful!
  • Arh
    Arh 26 May 2014 12: 51
    +8
    My Favorite Dryers !!! ***
    1. Arh
      Arh 26 May 2014 13: 25
      0
      RUSSIAN CHAMPION! ! ! ***
  • navara399
    navara399 26 May 2014 13: 01
    +1
    Nice plane. We loaded the plant with an order, and there will be a niche for it. The war was won by more than one make and modification of the aircraft. The golden phrase: "So it must be so!"
  • novel68rus
    novel68rus 26 May 2014 13: 01
    +1
    I read somewhere that su 30 is not inferior to f22 in a training battle .. it competes with him on equal terms. despite the fact that this is a 4th generation car or 4+ ..
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Tolerast
      Tolerast 26 May 2014 13: 15
      +3
      In close air combat, it is most likely even superior. Maneuverability is much better. Yes, only such situations in modern warfare are very rare ... Eh, where are you the glorious times of Korea and Vietnam? But the F-22 is extremely rare in the wild. No one really knows what the F-35 is. And other western fighters of the 4+ generation can be made quite confidently on Sushka.
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 26 May 2014 14: 59
        0
        Quote: Tolerast
        But the F-22 is an extremely rare beast in the wild.

        Nuuu how to say. So far, more than 10 times more "frequent" than the Su-30SM.
        1. Tolerast
          Tolerast 26 May 2014 15: 54
          0
          But the raptor will certainly no longer be released. And, I'll tell you a secret, our amerskiye "partners" well, just really do not want to use it in their wars. Only against evil Godzills and other Decepticons on the screens. I'm not hinting at anything winked
          In addition to jokes, the F-22 along with Rafal are the most dangerous opponents for our Sushki. But 150-200 pieces of T-50 will give us advantage. It is a pity that soon.
          1. patsantre
            patsantre 26 May 2014 21: 36
            0
            Quote: Tolerast
            But the raptor will certainly no longer be released. And, I'll tell you a secret, our amerskiye "partners" well, just really do not want to use it in their wars.

            There were no tasks for the raptors.
            And if the need arises - modernized and put on stream. Nothing will hurt.

            Quote: Tolerast
            In addition to jokes, the F-22 along with Rafal are the most dangerous opponents for our Sushki. But 150-200 pieces of T-50 will give us advantage. It is a pity that soon.

            And with the 2500 F-35 by then, what do you want to do? :)
            1. supertiger21
              supertiger21 26 May 2014 22: 26
              +1
              Quote: patsantre
              And with the 2500 F-35 by then, what do you want to do? :)


              We are not waging a cold war or an arms race, so we don’t need a similar number of fighters. Yankees love to "direct democracy", which is why they need so many F-35s. We, in turn, are only for defense, so we have no need in dozens of 5th generation fighter squadrons.
              1. Tolerast
                Tolerast 26 May 2014 23: 14
                0
                Yes, this penguin is some kind of stormtrooper. Against the new Afghans and done.
            2. Tolerast
              Tolerast 26 May 2014 23: 10
              0
              Destroy in places of basing. It was still not enough to wait until they arrived and play ping pong with them (someone: Air Force and US Navy versus Air Force and Air Defense of the Russian Federation?). We deploy an air wing in Poland — catch Iskander, nest in Bulgaria — accept a cruise missile, settled in Kherson — eat sabotage from special forces.
              We are not Iraq and not Serbia.
              PS. There will be 2300 of them. They will not be pulled. F-16 will rule the ball for a long time.
  • Tolerast
    Tolerast 26 May 2014 13: 07
    0
    Yes! I already want to see these aircraft in dozens of combat units. And with suspended missiles.
    1. Russ69
      Russ69 26 May 2014 13: 41
      +1
      Quote: Tolerast
      Yes! I already want to see these aircraft in dozens of combat units.

      BBO, this year will get a dozen ...
      Pilots and technical personnel of one of the aviation units of the Eastern Military District (BBO), deployed in the Trans-Baikal Territory, began accepting Su-30SM multipurpose fighters, Colonel Alexander Gordeev, head of the BBO press service, said.
      By the end of this year, a dozen new Su-30SM fighters are planned to enter the Eastern Military District.
      Now the personnel of the air base from Transbaikalia with industry representatives check the completeness, documentation and technical readiness of the products, then perform test flights. After signing the acceptance certificates, the new Su-30SM will go to the air unit.
      Read more: http://vpk-news.ru/news/20420
      1. Tolerast
        Tolerast 26 May 2014 14: 46
        +1
        In Domna, huh? So it will already be a whole aviation regiment (one squadron on SMKs is already there) drinks Like a balm on my liberal soul.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Gomel
    Gomel 26 May 2014 13: 32
    0
    people! who will give a competent explanation about the color indication and numbers (for example, in this article, "sixteen red")
    What is the meaning and necessity of this? After all, for armored vehicles or ships this is not? Is it just aviation troubles?
    I often meet in articles I would like to expand the "field of knowledge" :)
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 26 May 2014 13: 40
      +2
      The number is issued in the order of issue. Sometimes the truth is that the military assigns their numbers, they know better. Color means belonging to any compound, regiment, base, detachment, squadron.
  • kuzia-roker
    kuzia-roker 26 May 2014 13: 35
    +1
    Quote: DEZINTO
    Is not a fact. There is a run-in case. Proven options that smoothly improve. And it is expensive to push money into the latest, from scratch, designs, and not the fact that it is effective.

    It’s such arrogant Americans that they can push their 7 lards of printed wrappers into the completely new idea of ​​a destroyer. Which is also of course necessary.

    But I’m talking about something else - improving is cheaper and more effective than inventing.

    I agree that these developments are enough to protect state borders and intercept air targets, but nevertheless, pin (e) wasps build up offensive weapons (in the main role is stealth development) and you won’t win a war on one defense and it’s time to think how we can respond to a direct threat without nuclear potential (which is also threatened by the United States and the European Union), and I believe that it is also advisable to develop them in stealth
    1. Dezinto
      Dezinto 26 May 2014 14: 32
      0
      Well then, I understand what you mean. I agree. If only we could launch a paper printing press. and riveting riveting. The Yankees don't bother at all. Government debt is growing. They extinguish it with wars. Although one fig is growing. And they swell, ahul ... rdy in development. They have robots and shmobots there. Damn enrage. Never answer for anything !!!
  • Alex_T
    Alex_T 26 May 2014 13: 36
    +3
    Spin in the air as he wanted. In the photo comes in to land.
  • silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 26 May 2014 13: 40
    0
    Marketing and product promotion is an integral part of any business ... if there is a platform for advertising - it must be used.
  • Magic archer
    Magic archer 26 May 2014 14: 32
    0
    If only there were more of them in the troops and equipped with sighting and navigation containers like the American Lantirn, then they would have left NATO "analogues" for a long time!
  • 52
    52 26 May 2014 15: 04
    0
    This week I’ll try to break out fishing on Ingoda near Domna, if I’m lucky, then I will observe aerobatics on Friday evening, just on the Su-30. Prior to this show, it was on the MiG-29. Good luck, I’ll shoot a video. smile
  • propolsky
    propolsky 26 May 2014 15: 11
    0
    The plane is what you should already have, now the main task is the mass development of ordinary pilots. Mass operation is a laborious task, both responsible and costly. God grant less loss in the process of this work!
  • cerbuk6155
    cerbuk6155 26 May 2014 15: 30
    0
    Great plane. More to such. You can’t save on aviation as well as on air defense. Then he comes across a little will not seem. good drinks soldier
  • CadetXXX
    CadetXXX 26 May 2014 16: 29
    +3

    You give SU 30 SM and MIG 35 to the Russian army, then in the west they will remember the mother’s former Kuzkin!)))
  • Tolerast
    Tolerast 26 May 2014 16: 39
    0
    What our Dryers are all the same sexy.
  • capex1
    capex1 26 May 2014 16: 42
    0
    Su-3oSM is not a plane, it is a blade that pierces the sky and a magnificent specimen to tear down the belly of a bald eagle. Have you seen how he flies !!!! So that we all fly like that !!!!
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 26 May 2014 19: 38
      0
      Beautifully written, but ... on the photo Su-35
    2. CadetXXX
      CadetXXX 26 May 2014 20: 26
      +2
      He does not fly, he just soars! Although it does not belong to the 5th generation, well, he’ll kick an ass for the Americans too!
  • Alex_T
    Alex_T 26 May 2014 19: 42
    +2
    Demonstration flight Su-30SM at the exhibition KADEX-2014
  • Velesovich
    Velesovich 26 May 2014 20: 58
    +1
    This predatory profile in itself inspires respect and some sense of primitive fear. T-50, with all due respect to him, does not cause such emotions. I have not seen a single fighter more beautiful than an airplane of the Su-27 family. The fighter must be a predator. Something tells me that the Eurogays will do the trousers with one look of these cars in the event of a military collision.
  • sergkar
    sergkar 26 May 2014 22: 05
    +3
    Quote: ivan.kormoran
    The guy, before climbing with comments about Russian armaments, first of all, look at yourself in Independence, but what you can, the stronghold was leaked, only to shoot civilians from the bushes and rob banks. Follow the liver and dry rations. Salo is eaten.


    Actually, here they are discussing an airplane, not events in Ukraine. And if a person lives in Ukraine, this does not mean that he agrees or supports what is happening there.
    A man rejoices with us the successes of our aviation, and he is immediately slapped, they say do not poke around, not about you. Somehow bydlya it looks!
  • vetlan19
    vetlan19 26 May 2014 23: 53
    0
    Quote: Kornilovist
    Kornilovets
    Today, 11: 58

    for example.Su-30SM - (serial upgraded) Su-30MKI, designed for the Russian Air Force. The first flight was September 21, 2012. From 2013, flight tests of the aircraft will begin [8]. As of 2014, 60 Su-30SMs were ordered for the Russian Air Force (16 vehicles were delivered - 3 to the Chkalov GLIC, 3 to the Lipetsk Air Center, 10 to the Domna Air Base near Chita), and 5 aircraft for the Russian Navy.
    TECH SPECS


    Are there comparative tables for a quick and clear view of the aircraft manufactured for the Air Force? I would like to look into them from time to time, and immediately have an idea about the subject of the conversation. I really don’t feel like crawling over many sites - a lot of time is spent and sometimes the essence of the question starts to get lost: What do I want to find out?
  • Zomanus
    Zomanus 27 May 2014 02: 30
    0
    Yes, to be honest, to the left, which planes are better. The main thing is to update the flying fleet as soon as possible. How to use these flying machines is not such a significant issue.