Military Review

In Kubinka, they are preparing for a large-scale campaign to modernize Su-25 attack aircraft

59
It is planned to modernize several dozen Su-121 attack aircraft at the facilities of the 25 Aircraft Repair Plant in Kubinka (Moscow region). After modernization, the aircraft will turn into a modification of the Su-25CM3. It is reported by the Interfax-AVN news agency, citing a source in the military-industrial complex.

In Kubinka, they are preparing for a large-scale campaign to modernize Su-25 attack aircraft


According to the agency interlocutor, the modernization work on the first batch of Su-25 attack aircraft should be completed by the end of this year.
Agency interlocutor Interfax-AVN:
The technical documentation required for the upgrade was transferred to 121-th ARZ last year. Prior to this, the Su-25CM3 attack aircraft underwent special flight tests, during which both new means of defense of the attack aircraft and new types of guided and unguided ammunition were tested.


Modernization attack aircraft concerns not only weapons, but also means of electronic warfare. The plane uses the GLONASS navigation system. The cabin is equipped with a digital display to display the operational situation in the air and on the ground. Su-25M3 has the ability to destroy four ground targets in one attack using guided munitions. The total attack load of the attack aircraft is 6 tons using 10 suspension units. The maximum take-off weight is 17,6 tons. The range of operation of the Su-25CM3 is about 1850 km.




To date, about two hundred Su-25 attack aircraft are in service with the Russian Air Force. Pilots of several Su-25 attack aircraft of the Russian Air Force will demonstrate their skills in the framework of the Aviadarts-2015 aviation competition.

The Ministry of Defense publishes material from the opening ceremony of the Aviadarts-2015 competition:
59 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Baikonur
    Baikonur 29 May 2015 14: 01
    +7
    Modernization modernization! Here is the key to success!
    Modernized, modernized, and modernized!
    Keep it up! We need to modernize even more, wider and deeper!
    So that our modernization will be the most modernized in the world !!!
    (Sorry, of course - this is from joy for the success of the Russian Air Force!) soldier
    1. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 29 May 2015 14: 07
      +6
      It is frustrating that the new attack aircraft was never made and apparently is not planned.
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 29 May 2015 14: 13
        +1
        Quote: Sith Lord
        a new attack aircraft was never made and apparently not planned.

        Apparently bet on the Su-34.
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 29 May 2015 14: 22
          +3
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Quote: Sith Lord
          a new attack aircraft was never made and apparently not planned.

          Apparently bet on the Su-34.


          Unfortunately, in our time attack aircraft are "dying out" so to speak. They are gradually replaced by fighter-bombers and helicopters. Perhaps in 20 years they will completely occupy their niche.
          1. Vladimirets
            Vladimirets 29 May 2015 14: 24
            +1
            Quote: supertiger21
            ! Unfortunately, nowadays stormtroopers are "dying out"

            Why "Unfortunately"? This is life, even during the Second World War the concept of a fighter-bomber seemed absurd, but now nothing.
          2. Ponomarev
            Ponomarev 29 May 2015 14: 46
            +7
            I think they will not die out. The capabilities of the modernized SU-25 are more than enough to fight the groups of ISIS militants if the SGA can advance them to our borders. After all, it will be there that the trump card of the classic attack aircraft will be needed - armor. In other hypothetical theaters, I think universal machines are preferable.
          3. Ponomarev
            Ponomarev 29 May 2015 14: 46
            +3
            I think they will not die out. The capabilities of the modernized SU-25 are more than enough to fight the groups of ISIS militants if the SGA can advance them to our borders. After all, it will be there that the trump card of the classic attack aircraft will be needed - armor. In other hypothetical theaters, I think universal machines are preferable.
          4. URAL72
            URAL72 29 May 2015 14: 53
            +16
            "Unfortunately, nowadays attack aircraft are 'dying out' so to speak. They are gradually being replaced by fighter-bombers and helicopters."

            Tell it to Iraq or Syria. The attack aircraft disappears in Europe, there is a unification to save. They are not going to fight the army, like the USSR. The Americans returned from the reserve A-10. For a large, real war, where the infantry is actively operating, there is no need to do without an attack aircraft and a turntable. Bombing Yugoslavia or Libya, this is one thing, but Iran, you can’t take it with precision strikes, everyone will take an automatic machine, and they will put a bazooka, ATGM or ZU-23 on each pickup. Do not get enough rockets, NURSs are needed. Well, the operating costs of the Su-34 and Su-25, - land and sky, price, - also ...
          5. max702
            max702 29 May 2015 15: 16
            +10
            Quote: supertiger21
            Quote: Vladimirets
            Quote: Sith Lord
            a new attack aircraft was never made and apparently not planned.

            Apparently bet on the Su-34.


            Unfortunately, in our time attack aircraft are "dying out" so to speak. They are gradually replaced by fighter-bombers and helicopters. Perhaps in 20 years they will completely occupy their niche.

            All this is fiction. unfortunately stormtroopers have always been treated with disdain as underplanes with all the consequences .. and this is scanty funding. Residual allocation of resources for development, fine-tuning and equipment .. But in fact, this is the MOST REALLY BEING AIRCRAFT! Performing the lion's share of the work for the ground forces (for which the Air Force itself was created). for example, the magnificent aircraft with a colossal budget, the most complex technologies Su27, Mig31 and other legendary aircraft .. But! Where did they fight especially? Single cases of DB..A "rook" from combat missions did not climb out in any conflict over the past 30 years ... how many lives the soldiers would have saved if at least half of the forces and resources that were invested in the Su27 or the same were spent on the development and production of this machine Mig31 .. The same picture is observed abroad. look at the history of the creation and use of the A-10 thunderbolt, everything is the same .. and when they start thinking it’s not clear ..
            1. Victor the Great
              Victor the Great 29 May 2015 16: 14
              +2
              Quote: max702
              But in reality this is the MOST REALLY BOWING PLANE!

              good
              I remembered the attitude to this kind of machines before WW2 as secondary, and nevertheless it was the German "things" that paved the way for the blitzkring, it was the Henschel that instilled terror in the British in the Mediterranean and Africa, it was the IL-2 that hacked the fascist defenses, and only A -20 one of the few could somehow fight against German armored vehicles on the western front.
          6. Victor the Great
            Victor the Great 29 May 2015 15: 46
            0
            Quote: supertiger21
            Unfortunately, in our time attack aircraft are "dying out" so to speak. They are gradually replaced by fighter-bombers and helicopters. Perhaps in 20 years they will completely occupy their niche.


            Nevertheless, the A-10 attack aircraft was and remains the fear and horror of the Arabs.
            In the Iraqi war alone, destroying> 1100 tanks,> 2000 armored vehicles and the number of other equipment, which is many times more than the rest of the aviation, and the rest of the arms combined hi
            And the most terrible weapons turned out to be air-to-ground missiles with self-homing (exactly what we are behind, because the x-25 itself has not shown itself in 40 years, and the new x-38 has a weight of 550 kg) And only then a 30mm machine gun and NUR ...
          7. Knight Rider
            Knight Rider 29 May 2015 15: 49
            +1
            Quote: supertiger21
            gradually replace fighter-bomber and helicopter

            and shock drones
          8. ancient
            ancient 29 May 2015 16: 45
            +1
            Quote: supertiger21
            ! Unfortunately, nowadays stormtroopers are "dying out"


            I agree, but it would be more correct to say THEM, attack aircraft ... "are dying out."
            A fighter-bomber will never be able to replace an attack aircraft. And a helicopter ... will not "take away" so much, and it is limited in armament (I mean ours).
            Even at the stage of the first wave of modernization, it was planned to put the 195th instead of the R-295s (with a draft of 5 tons and a specific consumption rate even less), but ... it rolled like that and it wasn’t installed and saved on that .. well, exactly on the same path as the su-27SM ... we wanted the best, but we got it ... we got what we got soldier
        2. ancient
          ancient 29 May 2015 16: 40
          +3
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Apparently bet on the Su-34.


          This cannot be a priori soldier An attack aircraft is a battlefield plane ... do you know the bend radius on the Su-25th? wink
          I report 550-700 meters depending on speed starting from 470 km / h to 550 km / h and this is with a combat load of 1,5 tons
          Almost around the tail like a helicopter wink
          1. Aleksandr1959
            Aleksandr1959 29 May 2015 16: 45
            +4
            And the issues of combat survivability are of considerable importance. On the Su-25, they are designed specifically for the battlefield aircraft.
      2. URAL72
        URAL72 29 May 2015 14: 45
        +2
        The frustrating thing is that the new attack aircraft was never made and apparently not planned. "

        There are plans. There is no case. The plant in Ulan Uda can no longer build them. This is from official statements. I heard the YAK adapts the Yak-130 to attack aircraft. But I think this is for third countries.
        1. Aleksandr1959
          Aleksandr1959 29 May 2015 17: 07
          +2
          The plant in Ulan-Uda made the Su-25UB and produced several Su-39 (Su-25TM)
          The Su-25 was produced by the Tbilisi Aviation Production Association named after G. Dimitrov
          By the way, the Georgians, together with Israel, built a variant of the Su-25 called "Scorpion" from the aircraft remaining at the plant.
      3. REXSTORZ
        REXSTORZ 29 May 2015 14: 48
        0
        There is a so-called priority)
        new attack aircraft not yet a priority
      4. avt
        avt 29 May 2015 16: 31
        +4
        Quote: Sith Lord
        It is frustrating that the new attack aircraft was never made and apparently is not planned.

        Come on ! The car is really good in hull and time-tested, there is a modernization potential and has not been exhausted - the main thing is that if a new side is installed, the weapon guidance means are no worse than the "Kaira" was on the MiG-27, and if they use a dviglom, it will work properly until adopting flying saucers!
        Quote: Vladimirets
        Apparently bet on the Su-34.

        No. You bent it! "Rook" plane of the battlefield and complements the turntables, but not the average bombers.
      5. The comment was deleted.
      6. the polar
        the polar 30 May 2015 11: 26
        0
        And where is the normal link to this news about the modernization of the SU-25?
    2. NO PASARAN
      NO PASARAN 29 May 2015 14: 08
      +6
      Great plane, plane is a combat worker with a glorious fate.
      It flies again, once in 25 years they haven’t developed anything new ...
      1. Oznob
        Oznob 29 May 2015 14: 36
        +2
        Yak-130 can not replace it in the tasks of the attack aircraft?
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 29 May 2015 16: 02
          0
          Quote: Oznob
          Yak-130 can not replace it in the tasks of the attack aircraft?


          I don’t know the truth or not, but somewhere there was infa that a light attack aircraft could be made on the basis of the Yak-130.
        2. PROXOR
          PROXOR 29 May 2015 16: 42
          +8
          Quote: Oznob
          Yak-130 can not replace it in the tasks of the attack aircraft?

          Guys! The Yak-130 is primarily a training aircraft. It can fulfill its functions as an attack aircraft, but in the absence of counteraction in the air and from the ground. SU-25 is a TANK. Moreover, it is very convenient for working in mountainous terrain. He has under his wings only 8 suspension points. I believe that the SU-25 is very early to write off. Replace his engines, modern avionics, modern sighting system and he will flatten bearded and Ukrainians like nuts !!!!
          How many fighters are grateful to them for their work, when the flyers hollowed the bearded, who locked ours in the ring.
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. URAL72
          URAL72 29 May 2015 15: 00
          +6
          "Can't the Yak-130 replace it in attack aircraft missions?"

          Are you reading about Ukraine? Su-25s (though without electronic warfare and even elementary heat traps) pour in from the sky like pears, while the Yak-130 has no protection whatsoever. As I wrote, Yak is developing a ground attack aircraft based on the Yak-130, but apparently for export. And according to the range of ammunition, a very serious car, the load is true up to 3t., And NO armor! But it may come in handy at bases in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, but as a reserve, in case of emergency.
          1. Mikhaylych
            Mikhaylych 29 May 2015 16: 08
            +6
            In Ukraine, everything is streaming from the sky and Sushki and MiGs and Miles, Ana and so on, the lack of experience in combat use and the unpreparedness of the pilots do their job. In Syria, at the beginning of the war, there were big losses, but now it is a very rare occurrence there. Almost all cars go astray on the second and third approach to the target with unguided weapons. I can’t even imagine how the Su-34 is attacking, it’s almost a 100% loss of a car worth 130 million bucks. With active hostilities, the role of attack aircraft is simply irreplaceable (North Caucasus, Georgia, Syria, Iraq). Attack aircraft and helicopters in the front line are simply irreplaceable.
            1. monopodman
              monopodman 29 May 2015 19: 35
              +3
              Why did you triple the price of the Su-34?
    3. Juborg
      Juborg 29 May 2015 14: 14
      +2
      An excellent combat aircraft, this is not the vaunted A-10 crap in Iraq. Upgrading it will only benefit him. For local conflicts, the ideal machine, and with the cover of electronic warfare, will be a thunderer. So you have to rename from "Rook" to "Thunderbolt". Indeed, in Afghanistan and Georgia, they worked almost blindly, across the squares, the time has come and for them it is becoming highly accurate.
      I love this car, "war horse". Good luck to this magnificent machine for the protection of our state and people.
      1. g1v2
        g1v2 29 May 2015 14: 45
        +3
        The plane is excellent, amazing survivability. But let's look at the war with Georgia and the war in the Donbass. The lightly armed militiamen landed a couple - three of the rooks' links, and also damaged a couple of links so that although they reached the airfields, they could not participate in the battles without a long repair. Hence the conclusion - it is necessary to work on their modernization, change in the strategy and tactics of application and think about its future fate. Nevertheless, in 2008 we lost 3 rooks, and the air defense of the rodents, although it was reinforced by the Ukr, was not a layered defense. Hence the conclusion - we must either work on the aircraft and its tactics or change it to something else - for example, Su34.
        1. veksha50
          veksha50 29 May 2015 15: 36
          +1
          Quote: g1v2
          Hence the conclusion - we must either work on the aircraft and its tactics


          That's just because of the violation of the tactics of using the SU-7B in the conflict between Arabs and Jews, these planes initially suffered quite large losses ... Being just fighter-bombers ... And they died during the attack ... One of the reasons was the rude violation of tactics - approach to attack an object several times ...

          And about reliability ... Who to believe ??? According to one source - a super-reliable machine ... But even now, in the comments on this article - some say unreliability ...

          Where is the truth brother (s) ???
          1. Aleksandr1959
            Aleksandr1959 29 May 2015 17: 00
            +1
            One of the reasons was a flagrant violation of tactics - approaching an attack aircraft several times ...

            It is precisely this reason that Deinekin noted in his article when he analyzed the causes of such large losses of the Ukrainian Air Force during the hostilities in the South-East of Ukraine

            “Either there the pilots are not able to attack the targets as they should, and leave after completing the mission, or the routes are used the same, or they are awaited by the MANPADS arrows already prepared for the appearance of the aircraft,” these words are the former commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, Colonel-General Peter Deinekin explains the large losses of the Su-25 attack aircraft by the Ukrainian troops.

            http://vz.ru/society/2014/7/23/696931.html
            1. veksha50
              veksha50 29 May 2015 19: 59
              +1
              Quote: Aleksandr1959
              It is precisely this reason that Deinekin noted in his article when he analyzed the causes of such large losses of the Ukrainian Air Force during the hostilities in the South-East of Ukraine


              Well, again the same rake ...

              But all this experience was summarized (I mean - military operations), GRU collections with a signature stamp of two zeros were sent out in parts for study ...

              I think that with the collapse of the USSR and the division of the armed forces, all this information was with ukroletchikov ...

              But - they considered it ... skalsky, unnecessary .. Well, thank God, less harm was done to New Russia ...
      2. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 29 May 2015 15: 17
        +1
        Quote: juborg
        this is not the vaunted A-10 you crap in Iraq.

        And what happened in Iraq with the A-10? request
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 29 May 2015 16: 05
          +1
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Quote: juborg
          this is not the vaunted A-10 you crap in Iraq.

          And what happened in Iraq with the A-10? request


          I don’t understand what the A-10 was screwed up in Iraq ?! As far as I know, they, along with the AH-64 helicopters, turned a significant part of Iraqi armored vehicles into piles of burned metal, so I don’t think that he was there in some way unsuccessful .. . request
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 29 May 2015 18: 31
            0
            that screwed up ... they only fight in Afghanistan where there is no air defense.
            The Apaches were hiding behind the dune, and then they were only shot on the road.
          2. Zuborez
            Zuborez 30 May 2015 06: 50
            -1
            Quote: supertiger21
            As far as I know, they, along with AH-64 helicopters, turned a significant part of Iraqi armored vehicles

            In which Iraq? First or second?
            In the second, the Apaches never took off serviceable, although they went on combat missions. Yes, and the abandoned tanks shown by the NATO TV-tower did not pull on the promised thousands of those destroyed in battle.
            The "partners" love to forget about "no losses" and "a thousand Altai armored policemen were killed." Now the Ukrainians have been taught laughing
      3. veksha50
        veksha50 29 May 2015 15: 31
        +2
        Quote: juborg
        the time has come and for them it becomes highly accurate.


        I appeal not only to you, Yuborg, but also to knowledgeable people ...

        Here is one of the first factors named - the ability to work on GLONASS ...

        How would I, the old one, understand the fact that, in my opinion, GLONASS will work in global peace time (some casuistry), but during the global armed conflict, we will not let the US satellite system work, nor will they - ours ??? After all, logically, right ???

        In the old Soviet times (in the 70s), whole regiments of Mig-15, 17, 19 were in reserve ... So, just in case ...
        And now it seems to me that it is necessary to provide for the need to work without any satellite prompts, both for the car and the pilot ...

        I don’t know, maybe I’m talking nonsense, but often this idea visits ...
    4. fox21h
      fox21h 29 May 2015 14: 35
      +3
      Oh, how many of these handsome men were cut into needles in the 90s thanks to traitors who deepened и broadened и drunken dereger.
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 29 May 2015 14: 58
        0
        And what is heard about the Su-39? So many hopes were pinned on him ...
    5. ancient
      ancient 29 May 2015 15: 45
      +7
      Quote: Baikonur
      (Sorry, of course - this is from joy for the success of the Russian Air Force!)


      Okay, since the time for the SLOGAN, then .. will do! drinks

      But at last HAPPINESS or MIRACLE happened ... finally "stubborn" fool "Urya-patriots" will understand .. that we haven't had CM3 yet ... only they will just go ... before that everyone was CM !!!
      How many he told ... he said, no ... only an all-weather "strategic bomber-missile carrier" ... and you, that is, I ... the enemy-saboteur, the 5th column, the State Department, and in general ... go to Israel wassat ..nothing is forgotten.
      And there’s not much joy ... again, in order to save money, and for technical reasons (the lineup does not allow, but if you hang it outside, then you can’t take anything apart from the guns or take off constantly and with maximum take-off weights and the enemy should be around 4 U-turn lol , In short, "we rolled the SALT-25" and "cut off Hephaestus" will be put, ie. SVP-24-25, which, in principle, is not even bad ... there will indeed be an opportunity for "free maneuver" and, of course, accuracy.
      Well, BKO "Vitebsk" good





  2. REXSTORZ
    REXSTORZ 29 May 2015 14: 05
    +3
    the car is good not for nothing that it is called a flying tank)) it showed well And in Afghanistan Chechnya and Georgia too))
    But like all equipment requires modernization for successful interaction and the use of new ammunition)
  3. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 29 May 2015 14: 07
    +4
    It is very good. Onboard the Su-25M3, the GLONASS navigation satellite system is installed, which allows you to set the final point of flight with an accuracy of 10 meters. As a result, a combat aircraft can effectively conduct sorties without the support of ground services, even in zero visibility conditions.
    Su-25CM3 attack aircraft can hit air and ground targets under any meteorological conditions, including in the absence of a given target in view of the fighter. In addition, it can eliminate not only large-scale stationary objects, but also small-sized targets, including both mobile and stationary objects.
    In the case of the Su-25, for the effective destruction of the target, the requirement was the presence of direct visibility, and when conducting operations in mountainous areas - reducing the aircraft to an extremely small height.
    Su-25СМ3, using an upgraded guidance system, can launch rockets or drop bombs, even at a considerable distance from a given target, or because of clouds. All that is required of a fighter pilot is the exact coordinates of the object.

    Attack "Grach" can reach speeds up to 975 km / h when flying over the ground. The practical ceiling of a combat aircraft ranges from 5 to 10 thousands of meters. Without refueling, the Su-25CM3 can overcome up to 1850 km.
    In the process of modernization and refinement of the Su-25, the designers of the Sukhoi Design Bureau managed to triple the combat effectiveness of the new aircraft. The rocket armament of the deeply modernized Rook is based on guided missiles of the "air-to-air" and "air-to-surface" categories. Also on board the fighter can be up to 8 laser-guided bombs. In the lower bow of the Su-25SM3, there is a GSh-30-2 double-barreled cannon of 30 mm caliber, loaded with 250 rounds.
    1. Aleksandr1959
      Aleksandr1959 29 May 2015 14: 42
      +2
      By the way, which plane is in the photo? Judging by the shape of the cockpit and ATGM "Whirlwind" on the suspensions (not very visible, but you can see it) this is either Su-25T or Su-39 (Su-25TM)
      1. gjv
        gjv 29 May 2015 17: 33
        +2
        Quote: Aleksandr1959
        By the way, which plane is pictured?

        Yes, normal ATGM "Whirlwind" is visible. And you can also see a suspended container under the fuselage - this is "Spear-25" or "Mercury". And a beautiful blue and white coloration. This is the Su-25TM.
        1. Aleksandr1959
          Aleksandr1959 29 May 2015 17: 58
          0
          "Mercury" was also suspended on the Su-25T. And the coloring ... is similar to Ulan-Udinskaya, but the bear is not visible for some reason
          But, judging by the tail number, still the Su-25TM. The first Ulan-Udinsk machine had a B.N. 21.
    2. URAL72
      URAL72 29 May 2015 15: 09
      +1
      "On board the Su-25SM3, the GLONASS navigation satellite system is installed, which allows you to set the final flight point with an accuracy of 10 meters. As a result, a combat aircraft can efficiently conduct sorties without the support of ground services, even in zero visibility conditions."

      I will add: this is also fuel economy, since the plane goes exactly on purpose along the shortest route. You can increase both the ferry range and the combat radius if the enemy does not have serious air defense ...
      1. ancient
        ancient 29 May 2015 16: 58
        +3
        Quote: URAL72

        I will add: this is also fuel economy, since the plane goes exactly on purpose along the shortest route. You can increase both the ferry range and the combat radius if the enemy does not have serious air defense ...


        Controversial ... very controversial ... the route is already laid along the shortest straight line (or direct, "called orthodromies), bypassing the enemy's air defense counteraction zones, naturally), therefore," cut "even more straightforward, without intelligence data on the deployment of enemy forces and means in this area ... a game of Russian roulette. soldier
        They save on reducing the speed of the engine rotors (reducing speed), increasing the flight altitude (decreasing the specific consumption), selecting the sweep and angle of attack, and of all sorts of all sorts of lotions.
        Well, what's the point of leaving an airplane at a given point? RSBN is already programmed for access to the KPM (usually the DPRM of the landing course), but in GPS, as in ADNS, two points are set, this one end of the strip, and the second fifty kilometers back with the landing course ... then you have a constantly remaining distance to the strip and the LBU (linear lateral deviation), but it’s not difficult to calculate the height multiplicity of 2 m ranges (i.e., an example is 200 meters high — 4 km range or vice versa .. you have a range to the strip, so you know what the height should be) ,those. you formed your own glide path and now ... with any appearance, even in milk and in any conditions (lack of work of the TRS and landing systems of the airfield, lighting systems, etc. etc. you can freely go in and sit down) soldier
  4. NEXUS
    NEXUS 29 May 2015 14: 08
    +4
    The thing is good. The old man GRACH is still flying. And there you look and the shift will arrive in time.
  5. taseka
    taseka 29 May 2015 14: 08
    -3
    New ones need to be done, not "deeply" modernized! And here they also write - "block" modernization or "system and hardware"
  6. Ppsh
    Ppsh 29 May 2015 14: 13
    +1
    About the combat load in 6 tons in more detail ....
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 29 May 2015 14: 18
      +1
      Quote: PPSh
      About the combat load in 6 tons in more detail ....

      Confused comrade:

      - normal payload - 1 ton
      - she, "reloading" - 2,5
      - and 6,5 is the take-off mass

      (c) Wiki

      PS: Reminded: "comrades, I was wrong .. water boils at 100 degrees, and 90 degrees, comrades - it's a right angle" laughing
      1. figwam
        figwam 29 May 2015 14: 33
        +2
        Empty weight 9 tons, normal take-off 15 tons, maximum combat 4,4 tons.
      2. Volodin
        Volodin 29 May 2015 14: 40
        +3
        Quote: Cat Man Null
        - and 6,5 is the take-off mass

        (c) Wiki


        It's a pity, not to the "Murzilka" link ...
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 29 May 2015 15: 13
          +1
          Quote: Volodin
          It's a pity, not to the "Murzilka" link ...

          Guilty, bruised, getting better:

          Empty weight: 9315 kg
          Curb weight: 11 600 kg
          Normal takeoff weight: 14 600 kg
          Maximum takeoff weight: 17 600 kg

          The combat load:
          normal: 1400 kg
          Maximum: 4400 kg

          The funny thing is that (c) Vika, with reference to the Data Source: Ildar Bedretdinov. Attack aircraft Su-25 and its modifications. - Edition 2. - Moscow: Bedretdinov & Co Publishing Group LLC, 2002. - S. 73-120, 292. - 400 sec. - ISBN 5-901668-01-4

          Fuck, where did I go for the first time? feel
  7. Aleksandr1959
    Aleksandr1959 29 May 2015 14: 39
    +3
    This means that the production of the Su-39 (Su-25TM) at the Ulan-Uda aircraft plant has finally put an end to it.
    The practical ceiling of a combat aircraft is from 5 to 10 thousand meters

    If up to 10 thousand m is the presence of a sealed cabin.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 29 May 2015 18: 27
      0
      up to 14600, is it generally a Russian site or whose? in light of the "incident" with the Malaysian Boeing ...
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. KBR109
    KBR109 29 May 2015 14: 41
    -2
    tongue tongue
    Country Russia
    TYPE Sturmovik
    CREW 1 person
    POWER PLANT Two turbojet engines R-195
    Rod, kN 2 x 44,13
    GEOMETRIC DATA
    Aircraft Length, m 15,36
    Aircraft height, m ​​4,80
    Wingspan, m 14,36
    Wing area, m2 33,70
    WEIGHT DATA
    Maximum take-off, kg 17.600
    Normal take-off, kg 14.600
    Empty curb weight, kg 9.500
    Domestic fuel, kg 5.000
    LTH
    Maximum speed, km / h M = 0,82
    - at sea level -
    Cruising speed, km / h -
    Maximum speed at the ground, km / h 975
    Maximum rate of climb, m / s -
    Practical ceiling, m 5.000-10.000
    Practical range, km -
    Range, km 1.850
    Max. operational overload 6,5
    Combat load, kg 6.000 kg at 10 nodes of the suspension
    WEAPONS Well you damn citizens and give! IL-2 in overload took up to 0.8t. if with a fresh engine (norm 0.6) wassat
    1. ancient
      ancient 29 May 2015 15: 32
      +3
      Quote: KBR109
      Domestic fuel, kg 5.000


      This is the weight of the fuel with PTB, internally (5 fuel tanks), the total weight of 3000 tons, or if you want through the volume, the total operational capacity of 3660 liters. (fuselage - 2386 l, each plane - 637 l).
      Not Range, but Range, with 4 PTBs soldier
      The maximum operational from -2 to +8 (for each aircraft separately, depending on the state of the glider, strength limitations).
      Combat load .... this is a song wassat and WHAT is not 60 tons ???? wassat

      Maximum 4 kg .. MAXIMUM, normal (this is when at least somewhere you can fly it is 340 kg) soldier
      In short ..... tired of fixing it already ... urya. Means urya ..... but you MINUS! soldier
  10. KBR109
    KBR109 29 May 2015 14: 52
    -2
    Max. operational overload 6,5
    Combat load, kg 6.000 kg at 10 nodes of the suspension
    ARMAMENT
    One 30-mm double-barreled gun GSH-30-2 in the lower nose with 250 cartridges.
    Bomb load: Up to 8 laser-guided bombs,
    8-10 x 500-, 250-kg bombs, 32 x 100-kg bombs, armor-piercing bombs, napalm tanks NUR: 8-10 PU UB-32-57 (320 (252) x 57 mm)
    or 8-10 240-mm blocks NAR type C-5 (57 mm), C-8 (80 mm), C-24 (240 mm) and C-25 (340 mm).
    PW: Air-to-Air P-3 (AA-2) or P-60 (AA-8)
    air-surface 25ML X-X-C and 29L 25L
    Containers SPPU-22 with double-barreled 23-mm gun GSH-23L with 260 cartridges.
    1. ancient
      ancient 29 May 2015 15: 06
      +2
      Quote: KBR109
      : Up to 8 laser-guided bombs,


      Come on, come on ... from this place in more detail ...... "highlight" how you wake up or in what "way" wink
  11. BARR-D
    BARR-D 29 May 2015 15: 13
    +1
    The good news, but one thing, the real state of affairs with personnel and equipment at 121 is far from ice. I speak like he lived in the city (for reference: Kubinsky 121ARZ is located near the village of Stary Gorodok, but they call him Kubinsky at the Kubinka station in Belarus, because there weren’t any town in the USSR until some years, there were only solid radio frequency in the district , well, you understand) and worked at this factory.
    1. shans2
      shans2 29 May 2015 16: 30
      +2
      how much time has passed since ?, a lot has changed over the past 5 years.
  12. KBR109
    KBR109 29 May 2015 15: 15
    0
    A) Ground Hand B) Aircraft "gunner" in pair C) Satellite hi
    1. ancient
      ancient 29 May 2015 17: 03
      +1
      Quote: KBR109
      A) Ground Hand B) Aircraft "gunner" in pair C) Satellite


      A) still here and there ... with a huge interference recourse
      But B) and C) ... this is .. "fantastic" (advertisement for Hochland cheese) wassat
  13. gcn
    gcn 29 May 2015 15: 38
    +2
    With powerful electronic warfare, it will somehow be easier for the guys to know that the aircraft is protected not only by armor, heat. traps and skill pilot.
  14. Urri
    Urri 29 May 2015 18: 25
    0
    The vulnerability of attack aircraft is very strongly shown by the events in the LDNR. With equal forces and even a mediocre air defense organization, the losses of attack aircraft will quickly grow to unacceptable.
    Americans are not in vain investing billions in drones. And it is the attack aircraft - the first candidate for transfer to robots. Not remotely controlled, namely robots, with a maximum of AI.
  15. monopodman
    monopodman 29 May 2015 19: 36
    0
    A question for knowledgeable people - did the Su-25SM3 become a night machine? And what are the most basic improvements in avionics compared to the Su-25 and Su-25SM?
  16. Termit1309
    Termit1309 30 May 2015 04: 19
    0
    Ten suspension nodes of a maximum of 500 kg each. (although I’m not sure that each one, well let it be).
    10 to 500? Like 5ton feel Maybe my calculator is broken wassat