Military Review

In Russia, the modernized Su-25UB was prepared for testing.

54
In Russia, tests of the two-seater Su25UBM will soon begin, reports Rossiyskaya Gazeta with reference to Interfax-AVN.




“The modernization of the Su-25UB combat attack aircraft is due to the fact that it is easier to perform daily combat missions on a two-seat attack aircraft. And, above all, at night. Su-XNUMHUBM will have increased efficiency of combat work at night, ”a source in the military-industrial complex told the agency.

According to him, "the tests will last about two years and will include the order of 150 flights."

The interlocutor noted that “according to the on-board radio-electronic equipment, armament and combat effectiveness, the Su-25UBM aircraft will be almost identical to the most advanced modification of the Su-25 attack aircraft - the Su-25СМ3 aircraft”.

“Earlier, two modernizations of the single-seat combat attack aircraft Su-25 were carried out (versions of the Su-25SM and Su-25SM3),” the source recalled. - The first 16 Su-25SM3 aircraft in November last year were received by the pilots of the assault aviation regiment of the first Guards mixed aviation division of the Southern Military District, stationed in the Kuban city of Primorsko-Akhtarsk. "

Help "WG": "Subsonic attack aircraft Su-25, known by the nickname" Grach ", operated from 1981 year. The aircraft is designed for round-the-clock support of ground forces over the battlefield with a direct view of the target. In the 2009 year, purchases of this type of attack aircraft for the Russian Air Force were resumed, it is assumed that they will remain in service at least until the 2020 year. ”
Photos used:
Tatyana Andreeva / RG
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 14 October 2015 15: 04 New
    +7
    Have you installed a thermal imager?
    1. MIKHALYCH1
      MIKHALYCH1 14 October 2015 15: 07 New
      +8
      Quote: Zaurbek
      Have you installed a thermal imager?

      All set ... They have been checking for a long time!
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 14 October 2015 15: 15 New
        -14
        That would also create a completely new attack aircraft. Not all the same fly on the junk of the seventies!
        1. Juborg
          Juborg 14 October 2015 15: 29 New
          +33
          This junk has not yet driven one barmalea into a hole. It’s too early to write off the old man, the flying tank is very tenacious and it’s very hard to shoot it down, and the machine itself is very reliable, plus the thrust-weight ratio is excellent, plus it doesn’t matter to it, mountains, or fields of the North American continent (well, this is in case help in the fight against IS in the United States!)
          1. opus
            opus 14 October 2015 15: 45 New
            +3
            Quote: juborg
            or fields of the North American continent (well, this is in case of assistance in the fight against IS in the United States!)

            far from America for the "old man" ... Razi from Cuba, but you can "forget" about Cuba in the light of new trends
            Well, if only Texas declares independence and asks for help.
            Again, there’s nothing to carry (there are no rollers, they made a mess with Mistralmi), and a transatlantic flight to the SU-25, even with refuellers, is not real.
            An air toilet and an air shelter will be required.
            1. Juborg
              Juborg 14 October 2015 19: 14 New
              +4
              Quote: opus
              Quote: juborg
              or fields of the North American continent (well, this is in case of assistance in the fight against IS in the United States!)

              far from America for the "old man" ... Razi from Cuba, but you can "forget" about Cuba in the light of new trends
              Well, if only Texas declares independence and asks for help.
              Again, there’s nothing to carry (there are no rollers, they made a mess with Mistralmi), and a transatlantic flight to the SU-25, even with refuellers, is not real.
              An air toilet and an air shelter will be required.


              In vain you are so, St. America has an access through Alaska. Our veterans, Rastargueva and Polyanskaya on Mi-24V from Torzhok to Miami flew in, and I’ll tell you a real feat, without a single shot.
          2. demo
            demo 14 October 2015 15: 47 New
            +7
            If our opuses that we exchange here are read (for sure) there, behind a puddle, then they will have a completely unambiguous opinion that the Russians are manic obsessed with the total destruction of the United States.

            Well, let!
        2. RUSIVAN
          RUSIVAN 14 October 2015 15: 37 New
          -1
          Do you want us to have a semblance of F 35, modern but with a bunch of flaws ???
          1. Pilot
            Pilot 14 October 2015 16: 39 New
            +3
            Advanced development remains, and weaknesses are gradually eliminated. This has always been the case with everyone.
          2. DarthVedro
            DarthVedro 15 October 2015 10: 10 New
            +1
            It is not so much modern as multi-purpose. It is with this that the dampness of its design is associated. Multipurpose vehicles rarely turn out to be successful - an example of aircraft carrying cruisers of the 1143 Kiev project, which could have done just a little, is not too old
        3. NEXUS
          NEXUS 14 October 2015 16: 22 New
          +1
          Quote: Basarev
          That would also create a completely new attack aircraft. Not all the same fly on the junk of the seventies!

          The old man will still fight, it’s too early to write him off. The SU-34 is replacing him and the Yak-130 is trying to upgrade to the level of an attack aircraft and they will probably make it an attack UAV (the most armed of attack drone). But I think when the attack aircraft fleet will be equipped with new Su-34 and Yak-130 (new modification), maybe it’s worth making an UAV out of SU-25 ...
          1. Eugene-Eugene
            Eugene-Eugene 14 October 2015 16: 36 New
            +9
            What does the bomber and light combat training? There is no replacement for the rooks, so they are modernizing them, just as the Americans have their own A-10.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 14 October 2015 16: 54 New
              +2
              Quote: Eugene-Eugene
              What does the bomber and light combat training? There is no replacement for the rooks, so they are modernizing them, just as the Americans have their own A-10.

              Here is a link for you, check out. Http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/66816/.
              And another article from the VO http://topwar.ru/82927-proekty-modernizacii-samoleta-yak-130-legkiy-shturmovik-i
              -bespilotnik.html
          2. SIvan
            SIvan 16 October 2015 12: 16 New
            0
            Quote: NEXUS
            The old man will still fight, it’s too early to write him off. The SU-34 is replacing him and the Yak-130 are trying to upgrade to the level of an attack aircraft and they will probably make it an attack UAV (the most armed of drone drones).

            The Su-34 cannot replace Grach in any way. They are not armored, can not operate effectively at low altitude and speed. Khrushchev replaced the attack aircraft with fighter-bombers, the results were negative.
            Then they returned to the attack aircraft, they showed themselves well in Afghanistan.

            Yak-130 - again, where is his armor? She is not, which means he cannot directly support the troops in battle. Maximum chase gangsters who do not even have Zushka.

            Therefore Rook is necessary.
        4. Homo
          Homo 14 October 2015 18: 19 New
          +1
          Quote: Basarev
          That would also create a completely new attack aircraft. Not all the same fly on the junk of the seventies!

          The Americans created the "new" F35. hi
          1. theadenter
            theadenter 15 October 2015 04: 00 New
            0
            The F-35 is a multi-functional aircraft, not an attack aircraft. With its capabilities, price and disadvantages - it is better not to fly close at all. Well, from afar you need to use expensive ammunition.
            But the old people, imprisoned for one task - are much simpler to manage and cheaper.
        5. exalex2
          exalex2 14 October 2015 19: 19 New
          +2
          Quote: Basarev
          Not all the same fly on the junk of the seventies!

          Not everything “old” is bad, and not everything “new” is good. Here's how to look. Not obvious. Without changing the design, just changing the on-board equipment, much more can be achieved than creating a new aircraft, especially when there is no money .. (((
        6. Vladimir 1964
          Vladimir 1964 14 October 2015 20: 56 New
          0
          Quote: Basarev
          That would also create a completely new attack aircraft. Not all the same fly on the junk of the seventies!


          Dear Arseny, why reinvent the wheel if this model fully complies with the requirements and has a modernization resource.

          Something like this. hi
        7. DarthVedro
          DarthVedro 15 October 2015 10: 06 New
          0
          What's the point? Probable opponents of new attack aircraft are not expected. Just updating the park is the thing. Another thing, to reduce the cost of attacks on low-security targets, it would be necessary to continue the late Soviet research on the subject of the most unified and cheap turboprop attack aircraft, otherwise the gap has remained unmet since Soviet times
          1. Basarev
            Basarev 15 October 2015 13: 01 New
            0
            Still, it’s a mess when the plane is older than the pilot at the helm. According to the canon, it should be like in Switzerland - the equipment is necessarily younger than the youngest soldier and at the same time the army is engaged in its immediate task, and not the construction of cottages or outfits in the kitchen.
            1. SIvan
              SIvan 16 October 2015 12: 22 New
              0
              1) Switzerland does not need as much military equipment as we need.
              2) You have strange logic, iPhone. It is necessary to buy a new iPhone every year. If the Su-25 turned out to be very successful in terms of security and survivability, why not just upgrade the electronics and weapons?
              3) Are we still the army is engaged in the construction of cottages?
        8. basilisk
          basilisk 16 October 2015 02: 36 New
          0
          And SU 39? What is not a modern attack aircraft?
          1. SIvan
            SIvan 16 October 2015 12: 29 New
            0
            Su-39 is also called Su-25TM.

            Let's first read about the Su-25T:
            The design of the aircraft is similar to the Su-25UB (about the modernization of which is written in the article) (unification of 85%). The difference is in a single cabin (while maintaining the Su-25UB armored unit), an extra-precancer compartment, which houses the Shkval sighting system equipment, and an extended keel.

            There is a project to finalize the Su-25T to the Su-25TM (Su-39).

            So much for the “new” attack aircraft.
            And Basarev above proposes to develop something ABSOLUTELY NEW just for the sake of novelty.
            Sorry, but I can not post it. Also, however, not a completely new development - based on the Su-34.

  2. Meh-forester
    Meh-forester 14 October 2015 15: 08 New
    +6
    And the testing ground for us just drew. so that there is where to experience .....
  3. Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 14 October 2015 15: 09 New
    +4
    A great plane - a workaholic of heaven, wings on ailerons in the blood of spirits and Czechs!
  4. Kiroant
    Kiroant 14 October 2015 15: 11 New
    +2
    Wonderful car! God forbid, the right amount in the troops!
  5. horoh
    horoh 14 October 2015 15: 12 New
    +4
    Nevertheless, the Rook is a cool airplane, and certainly necessary !!!
  6. dr.star75
    dr.star75 14 October 2015 15: 13 New
    -2
    Interesting: have long been decided, or in recent weeks? wink
  7. forester
    forester 14 October 2015 15: 15 New
    +4
    I admire our aircraft engineers - and after decades, much of what they did has exhausted their capabilities. Well, the 25th has proved its effectiveness more than once and enjoys well-deserved respect among pilots and horror among enemies
  8. morozik
    morozik 14 October 2015 15: 15 New
    +24
    ______________
    1. Engineer
      Engineer 14 October 2015 15: 18 New
      +4
      oil prices forgot)
      1. dsi
        dsi 14 October 2015 15: 24 New
        +6
        oil prices forgot)

        no, we just scored on them!
  9. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 14 October 2015 15: 23 New
    +3
    Yes, the weapon becomes so sophisticated (and accurate) that the second simply asks for the cockpit. Everywhere, and in helicopters, and in airplanes. And the plane is very successful. And according to the scheme, and by efficiency, and by survivability. No one else has this. Is that A-10, but I like ours more.
  10. Leks69Rus
    Leks69Rus 14 October 2015 15: 27 New
    +8
    I don’t understand why, speaking about our technology all the time, someone will mention that it is said to be old and originally from the 80s. Dear, and that the Americans are fighting only brand new f22 and change equipment every 3 years? Quite the contrary, in spite of its colossal budget, all successful equipment is used to the maximum. The only caveat is that they have it constantly being upgraded! And so if you measure the dates of occurrence, then they and we have almost all come from the 80s. So we need to modernize the equipment and not write garbage that the su-25 is outdated. Not outdated, but it is necessary to upgrade to the cm3 version.
    1. AndreyS
      AndreyS 14 October 2015 16: 16 New
      +4
      Quote: Leks69Rus
      I don’t understand why, speaking about our technology all the time, someone will mention that it is said to be old and originally from the 80s.

      I agree with you! About Amerovsky A-10, they write like this:
      "... In October 1975, the first production A-10A, officially named Thunderbolt II, took off in honor of the famous P-47 Thunderbolt World War II fighter-bomber. Since March 1976, aircraft began to arrive at units of the Davis-Monten, Arizona airbase [4]. The first A-10 squadron reached combat readiness in October 1977 ..."
      So Grach is the latest system !!!!!!!!!
      1. SSeT
        SSeT 14 October 2015 22: 39 New
        0
        Warthog, fuck! Drying used to be adopted and replacements are not even foreseen! Upgrade and build the benefit of the Rooks, it allows, just change the electronics, it’s a special type of battlefield machine - and made soundly and stitched a beard like deaf and dumb!
  11. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 14 October 2015 15: 30 New
    +2
    Yeah, fly over Primorsko-Akhtarsk, as if wound up, they scare vacationers;)
  12. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 14 October 2015 15: 32 New
    +9
    This is good, of course, but what then is with Su 39?
    1. Aleksandr1959
      Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 16: 12 New
      +12
      It seems that in any way. Ulan-Ude released them a couple of pieces. And the predecessor of the Su-39, Su-25T, after transferring several machines by the GLITs to the Lipetsk Center, still produced by the Dimitrov TAPO, was noted in Chechnya ... and that’s all. Vladimir Petrovich Babak, Chief Designer of the Design Bureau named after P.O.Sukhogo for Su-25, who is also the President of the Scientific and Production Complex “Sukhoi Assault Rifles” apparently stopped betting on both the Su-25T and the Su-25TM (Su-39). And the equipment for almost twenty years since the end of the state tests of the Su-25T stepped forward. Although Commander-in-Chief Bondarev, once mentioned recently that the PAK SHA will be made on the basis of the Su-25UB.
      By the way, a good photo. Su-25TM (Su-39) manufactured by Ulan-Ude. The company Ulan-Ude bear is depicted on the air intake. I was just almost like that (without the presence of people around, but with the presence of a bottle in the area of ​​the wheel of the main rack) was presented in 1997 when I was dismissed from the army. From the fraternal collective of OKB im. Dry.
      1. Eugene-Eugene
        Eugene-Eugene 14 October 2015 21: 03 New
        0
        Are there any details about PAK SHA?
        1. Aleksandr1959
          Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 21: 47 New
          0
          In addition to the words of the Commander-in-Chief Bondarev that the Su-25UB glider will be adopted as the basis, there are no special details. Strictly speaking, this is the idea of ​​V.P.Babak with the Su-25T and Su-25TM. Take the spark glider as a basis. But what are the ideas now ... Maybe the second crew member will be, maybe the second cabin will be used for an additional fuel tank (such information also slipped), maybe they will be used for the Su-25T or Su-39 under the instrument compartment ...
          On the one hand, this reduces the time (it is not necessary to design a completely glider radically new), on the other hand, new equipment must be squeezed into this glider.
          How will the idea be worked out with radar? Already on the Su-25SM3 they were going to place it inside the bow of the airframe instead of the container version. But, something about the further development of this idea, I have not yet seen the materials. Well, etc.
          One of the main issues is the number of crew members (two or one).
          1. SSeT
            SSeT 14 October 2015 22: 58 New
            0
            Development of ideas of SU-39 in a new quality? Electronics has become much more miniature, a compact AFAR in the nose, optics in the influx - wow notes? The 2nd pilot is needed, frees the pilot from profile work .. AND DO NOT HUNT GRANDMAN! (to invent a bicycle). IL-2 of the new century! hi soldier
    2. basilisk
      basilisk 16 October 2015 02: 43 New
      0
      Opa took off the tongue, here is the machine !!!
  13. TIO1969
    TIO1969 14 October 2015 15: 41 New
    +2
    Quote: Basarev
    That would also create a completely new attack aircraft. Not all the same fly on the junk of the seventies!


    And who said that Russia is not being created! In the near future, we will at least see a variant of the attack aircraft based on the Yak-130. But not to use what is good, which has proved and PROVES (maybe at this very minute!) Its effectiveness, it would not be right.
  14. lelikas
    lelikas 14 October 2015 15: 41 New
    +2
    It seems that for now ....
  15. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 14 October 2015 15: 43 New
    +3
    The modernization of the Su-25UB combatant attack aircraft is due to the fact that it is easier to perform all-day combat missions on a two-seat attack aircraft. And, above all, at night. The Su-25UBM will have increased efficiency in combat work at night.

    That is, no matter how we distorted our modernizations with a single-seat attack aircraft, no matter how we created the super-sophisticated Su-39, but all the same, when we switched from “daytime” to “all-weather and all-day”, we had to return to the classic “pilot + URO operator” scheme.
    1. Aleksandr1959
      Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 16: 16 New
      +1
      One of the points identified during the state tests of the Su-25T was: "the psychophysiological state of the pilot when performing a number of combat regimes is close to the limit." These conclusions were made by specialists of the Institute of Aviation and Space Medicine. And it was about first-class test pilots.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 14 October 2015 17: 49 New
        +2
        Quote: Aleksandr1959
        One of the points identified during the state tests of the Su-25T was: "the psychophysiological state of the pilot when performing a number of combat regimes is close to the limit." These conclusions were made by specialists of the Institute of Aviation and Space Medicine. And it was about first-class test pilots.

        Yeah .. and now we put the combat pilot in the cockpit, release it where the air defense fire is not introductory, but harsh reality - and we demand to find and hit the armored vehicles, which, such bastards, actively maneuver and hide behind landscape elements and smoke. Moreover, this must be done without interrupting the monitoring of air and ground conditions and piloting. belay
        1. Aleksandr1959
          Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 18: 39 New
          +2
          You are absolutely right. I wrote about that. One of the comments of test pilots was the difficulty of combining the piloting process with the aiming process for a number of combat modes. It was, I repeat. remark of military test pilots of the first class. At one of the meetings with the then Chief of the GLITs, Lieutenant General Yu.P. Klishin, the question was raised about the advisability of creating an attack aircraft with two crew members in the future. Perhaps now the technology has gone far ahead, but in my opinion this issue has not been removed so far.
        2. SSeT
          SSeT 14 October 2015 23: 03 New
          0
          Well, at the training ground the attack of the group goal is also a test of nerves and reactions, and in battle ... oooh ..
          I definitely for 2. This is the mind now. and then you can replace it with a tank! and the two somehowdrinks more handy! soldier
  16. ratfly
    ratfly 14 October 2015 16: 20 New
    +1
    Everything goes to ensure that the attack aircraft will be unmanned. PAK SHA will be network-centric.
  17. Belarus
    Belarus 14 October 2015 16: 26 New
    +2
    Guess once where these tests will take place soldier
    1. Aleksandr1959
      Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 17: 16 New
      0
      As always, in 929 GLITS MO (Akhtubinsk).
  18. lopvlad
    lopvlad 14 October 2015 16: 36 New
    +2
    One thing is clear that the basis of the new attack aircraft needs to be taken from an SU-25 glider and not invented from scratch. Russia has not had decades or so much finance for the PAK-SHA project from scratch that the PAK-FA project which is still not in service has demanded.
    1. Aleksandr1959
      Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 16: 53 New
      +1
      I agree with you. The glider and the Su-25 and Su-25UB have already been tested in different variations. For example, in the Su-25T and Su-25TM (Su-39), the Su-25UB glider was taken as the basis. The second cabin was involved under the instrument compartment. The complex to ensure the combat survivability of the Su-25, and especially the pilot's survival in the conditions of counteracting air defense, proved to be excellent in real combat conditions.
  19. slizhov
    slizhov 14 October 2015 17: 40 New
    +1
    Most important - THERE IS WHERE TO TEST !!!
    1. Aleksandr1959
      Aleksandr1959 14 October 2015 18: 25 New
      +1
      If, following the example of the Su-25, then even before the completion of the State tests, in 1980 tests were carried out (Rhombus theme) - "Tests of the Su-25 attack aircraft in special conditions of mountainous terrain". i.e. in Afghanistan. Including with real combat use on calls of ground forces. But, this topic was carried out after confirming the main characteristics set by the TTZ, during the State tests in the then 8 more GNIKI Air Force named after V.P. Chkalov (now 929 GLITS MO), Akhtubinsk. All front-line aircraft are tested there.
  20. Korgot
    Korgot 15 October 2015 03: 41 New
    -1
    I am not a pilot, but why is it just being modernized. there is not a simple fire control system there ...