Fighting for a place on the deck
The key requirements for the ship's aircraft are a large range, the presence of highly effective means of hitting well-protected naval targets and universalism. Compare these indicators MiG-29K and Su-33KUB.
The only aircraft carrier Admiral in the Russian Navy Fleet Of the Soviet Union, N. G. Kuznetsov, it was decided to re-equip the ship's MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB instead of the Su-33 fighters that were previously part of its air group.
The first was soo
The expert community did not attach much importance to this information. In any case, a detailed analysis of the feasibility of such a step with a comparison of the expected combat effectiveness of the various options for the composition of the air group in the open press could not be found. Meanwhile, this is a very important and far from unambiguous question. The choice of the main ship's aircraft was actively discussed back in Soviet times. Different options were considered. The main disputes were about the fighter - the composition of the helicopter part of the air group did not cause any particular doubts. One option involved equipping the “Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union N. G. Kuznetsov” with Su-33 aircraft only. In accordance with another, it was supposed to put exclusively the MiG-29K on the deck of the aircraft carrier. Arguments were given in favor of a mixed group. As a result, we settled on the first option. And then, in the 90s and early 2000s, the then leaders of the marine aviation more focused precisely on the heavy fighters of the Su-33 family as the main aircraft. What does the decision on the re-equipment of the aircraft carrier on the MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB mean? Perhaps the former chiefs, experts and naval pilots were mistaken in choosing the Su-33? Maybe the corruption component played a cruel joke, the personal interest of decision-makers to support the Sukhoi firm specifically? And if they were right and wrong today?
Let us try to figure it out, starting from combat expediency, that is, from assessing which version of our only aircraft carrier’s aviation group is more effective in solving the tasks that will be assigned to it by the ship’s aircraft.
In peacetime, they should primarily include participation in peacekeeping missions, the protection of Russian citizens in zones of military conflicts and the evacuation of them, as well as from areas of man-made and natural disasters. The groups of naval forces assigned to accomplish this task must ensure the protection of civil aircraft, various ground targets, and Russian citizens from the attacks of hostile troop formations.
Among the main tasks that can be assigned to carrier-based fighter aircraft in wartime, first of all, it is necessary to note the reflection of the strikes of enemy aircraft against connections of surface ships of the Russian Navy. Such attacks can use up to 40 – 50 aircraft. Fighters are able to make a significant contribution to the defense of our formations from cruise missiles, destroying the most dangerous targets beyond the reach of the ship’s air defense weapons. An important role can be played for the defeat of the connections of the surface ships of the enemy, especially large ones. The task of covering up the actions of strike groups of long-range (sea-rocket-carrying) aviation is extremely important. Accompanying them with fighters will, if not eliminate the threat from the enemy, then at least minimize losses to an acceptable level. At the same time, the effectiveness of our aviation will significantly increase.
Let us try to compare which composition of the fighter air group is more effective in solving these problems.
Less is more
First of all, the possible number of different types of fighters is noteworthy. The deck area of the Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union NG Kuznetsov is 14 700 square meters. Underdeck hangar has dimensions 7,2x26x153 meters. In these areas, with the exception of the volumes required for the helicopter group of the ship, it is possible to deploy the 24 Su-33 fighter. This is well known. The effective footprint of the MiG-29K or MiG-29CUB is about one and a half times smaller. That is, instead of 24 Su-33 you can place 36 MiGs. The win is obvious. But there is a serious limitation. The composition of simultaneously used aircraft in strike (or sent to intercept) is limited by the number of deck positions for the preparation of aircraft. On American aircraft carriers, this standard value - 40 units. That is, more than 40 machines in one group will not be sent anywhere, since the preparation time for the next one is at least 50 minutes. During this time, the first has already burned a significant part of the fuel, sharply reducing its combat radius. On the Russian aircraft carrier of such positions only 16. Therefore, assessing combat effectiveness, we should proceed from the fact that in actions requiring the involvement of the maximum number of aircraft, more than 16 units our aircraft carrier cannot simultaneously use, regardless of what type of aircraft these aircraft are.
Now we compare the tactical and technical characteristics of the MiG-29K / KUB and alternatives from the Su-33 family. It is not worth considering the Su-33 itself, but the Su-33CUB, which was supposed to replace it, since back in the end of the 90-s it was a bet that was made on this version.
MiG-29K is one of the most advanced fighters of the Russian aircraft industry. With a maximum take-off weight of about 24 tons, it has a distillation range of two thousand kilometers, and with three PTBs - three thousand. In the KUB version it is somewhat smaller. The aircraft is equipped with a highly effective radar "Zhuk-M". It is capable of detecting and escorting air (up to 100 – 170 km by fighter-bombers) and surface targets, making the MiG-29K a multipurpose vehicle. This is especially important for the ship fighter. The maximum combat load is about four thousand kilograms. Airborne electronic equipment allows the use of a wide range of the most advanced weapons on eight suspension nodes, among which, first of all, it is necessary to call medium-range missiles RVV-AE (up to six units), short-range P-73E (up to eight units), up to four anti-radar X-31P rockets (PRR), or up to four X-31 or X-35E anti-ship missiles, or up to four KAB-500 aircrew bombs.
The Su-33KUB is a deep modernization of the Su-33 ship-based fighter. The first flight of this car made in April 1999. The layout of the aircraft is almost identical to the recently launched Su-34 fighter-bomber. Their mass and dimensional characteristics almost coincide. Su-33KUB has a distillation range of 3200 kilometers, and from PTB to 4000 kilometers. The maximum combat load is six thousand kilograms. Introduced technical innovations (for example, an “intelligent” adaptive wing with a flexible toe cap) greatly facilitate the use of this aircraft from the deck of an aircraft carrier, despite its significant take-off weight (maximum - up to 38 tons). Like the MiG-29K, it, unlike its prototype Su-33, is a multi-purpose machine that allows a wide range of weapons to be used, both air-to-air and air-to-surface, including the long-range R-27Р missiles and the latest RVV- AE, as well as the anti-ship missile "Moskit", the use of which with the MiG-29K is not provided. The Su-33KUB program was minimized at the start of the 2000's. There is no data on the onboard radar and other radio-electronic equipment that can be installed on it. However, it can be assumed, given the proximity of its mass and dimensional characteristics with the Su-34, that they are identical to the latter. Naturally, adjusted for the specifics of the tasks of the ship fighter.
Comparing the air groups made up of these two types of vehicles, it should be noted that the available flying resources will certainly benefit the air group on the MiG-29K, which, by virtue of its strength, can provide at least one and a half times the number of sorties per day than the Su-33CUB .
Further and longer
However, in the flight range of the Su-33KUB has a significant superiority. Depending on the combat load from 800 to 1000 kilometers, its range of action for solving various tasks can be as large as the MiG-29K has 450 – 600 kilometers (both estimates do not include PTB). At sea, this is the most important indicator, since operating from a single airfield, such as decks, fighters should be able to preempt the enemy. American aircraft carriers are capable of attacking in large groups at a distance of up to 800 kilometers. Accordingly, our ship attack aircraft should have at least an equivalent range. According to this indicator, the MiG-29K does not fully meet the requirements of the modern sea war.
As stated, an important task is to escort naval missile-carrying and long-range aviation in strikes against large enemy surface ships, primarily aircraft carrier, in the interests of overcoming the countermeasures of the fighters of their air defense system. The firing range of the missiles is about 400 kilometers. Taking into account the time margin for a possible air battle, the MiG-29K can escort for a distance not further 400 – 500 kilometers from its airfield, which implies the approach of the aircraft carrying group of our fleet to the line 800 – 900 kilometers from the main forces of the enemy and thus puts it under the possible hit his deck fighters. When using Su-33KUB, this figure is already 1100 – 1200 kilometers. That is, the main ship group remains far beyond the reach of the deck aircraft of the American aircraft carrier. Equipment MiG-29K PTB solves the problem. However, this greatly reduces its ability to conduct maneuverable air combat. There is a risk of not fulfilling the task of repelling enemy fighter attacks.
It is interesting to compare the capabilities of both variants of the air groups in the air defense of naval connections. First of all, let us estimate the composition of the patrol group during actions from the “airborne alert” position. Assuming that up to 50 percent of the total resource can be allocated for these purposes, we have: MiG-29K (with PTB) provides round-the-clock patrol of a pair of fighters at a distance of up to 300 kilometers, an air group on Su-33KUB - up to 400 kilometers or more. At the same time, the Su-33KUB, due to the greater amount of disposable weapons and capabilities of the on-board RESs (on an aircraft that is heavier, actually accommodating more powerful RESs), obviously has advantages in aerial combat compared to the MiG-29К.
With actions from the “duty on deck” position, no more than 16 vehicles can be put into battle, respectively, the Su-XNUMHKUB combat capabilities will be higher than the MiG-33К group of similar composition. At the same time, the line of entry into the battle of Su-29KUB fighters will be significantly further than MiG-33K, and therefore, the ability to defeat enemy strike aircraft before they reach the line of launching the anti-ship missiles is much larger.
Need "moskitonosets"
It is interesting to compare the capabilities of different compositions for the defeat of enemy surface ships. The attack air group of sixteen fighters can have about eight vehicles equipped with anti-ship missiles, and the rest will solve the tasks of combat support — additional reconnaissance of the target, cover of attack aircraft from attacks of anti-aircraft fighters, and suppression of ship-borne anti-aircraft weapons. When operating on the ultimate radius, the MiG-29K can carry no more than two X-35 anti-ship missiles (total 16 missiles) with a firing range of about 150 kilometers. These missiles have a subsonic flight speed, and despite the fact that they are going to the target at extremely low altitude (from 5 to 20 m), their time in the zone of possible destruction by air defenses before reaching the line of the task can be 30 – 50 and more than seconds, which is longer in the duration of the firing cycle of the air defense systems. This means that at least one-time firing can be performed on them not only with short-range and self-defense complexes, but also medium-range air defense systems. The Tikonderoga type missile cruiser has eight target channels in the Aegis system. There may be two or three such ships in an AUG order. And also destroyers like "Orly Burke" with not smaller opportunities. Even with the measures to suppress the air defense, there is little chance of success of such an attack.
A somewhat different picture is when using the anti-ship missile system Moskit, which can go to the target at extremely low altitudes, but at a speed of about 1000 meters per second. In this case, it will be only 8 – 12 seconds in a possible fire attack zone of the AIA, which is significantly less than the firing cycle and even the reaction time of the most advanced AIA air defense, not to mention the speed limit, which in most cases lies within 700– 800 meters per second. In this interval only individual EW products with a particularly short reaction time can be triggered. Accordingly, the eight "Mosquitoes" have much more opportunities for defeating powerful ship groups than the sixteen anti-ship missiles of the X-35.
That is, against large compounds, such as the United States AUG, it is more advantageous from an operational point of view to have Su-33KUB. The superiority of the air group on the MiG-29K will only affect the fight against numerous small, weakly protected groups of ships and light forces of the fleet, where the disposable aviation resource and a large number of means of destruction take the first place. Similarly, when solving problems of destruction of ground objects that do not have particularly powerful air defense. This is especially true in peacekeeping operations or in ensuring the evacuation of civilians and Russian citizens in the face of opposing hostile troop formations.
Finally, it should be noted that the significant maximum combat load and large weight and size characteristics of the Su-33KUB make it possible to create on its basis special EW planes (with REB collective defense equipment) and tankers. In this case, given the small capacity of the aircraft carrier "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union NG Kuznetsov", it is possible to make special equipment outboard, ensuring its use on aircraft with appropriate modernization.
Leave the sea of battle Sukhoi
To summarize: the Su-33KUB heavy fighter-bomber is more consistent with the requirements for the domestic ship-based aircraft than the MiG-29K. And the choice made by 25 years ago was quite reasonable. The proposed line to replace the Su-33 with the Su-33CUB is more in the interest of the fleet than replacing the "Dryers" with MiGs. The latest-made MiG-29 is a great car. But its battlefield lies over land. It is in the Air Force that such machines are needed in an amount of at least 2 / 3 of the total number of fighters. The 24 MiG-29K for the Russian fleet will not fundamentally solve the problem of filling enterprises with orders related to the production of machines under this brand. The Russian Air Force needs numerous and cheap light fighters. It is here that the field of activity for the famous MiG.
Information