Su-30, Su-33, Su-34 and Su-35 News thread, pictures and discussion

TomcatViP said:
He is flying a wartime mission with his Smartphone?!! :eek: :confused::D

Selfies can kill you, definitively.

Regarding the Su-25 filmed ejection in the story, I guess it was a collision with a power cable?

View attachment 736070
Click to expand...

Yes collision with high tension power cables back in June 2022, about 30 km north east of Belgorod.
 
Has there been any official statements from Russian sources or reputable assessments to suggest that Russian RWR gear has been underperforming?
 
Here is different version of the video, does the su-34 detect being targeted? It is hard to understand how the Sam launches where detected. This version of the video says that there were two SAMs a patriot and NASAMS. The su-34 gets damaged but survives the attack. Sounds scary hearing the distance getting shorter and shorter.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QWQh4RjcN-I
 
Last edited:
The range would suggest a satellite acquisition and tracking ( I am guessing that the remote commanding operator is seeing both the Su-34 and the Patriot missile through overhead IR sensor).
Then there is the constant high G maneuvering. That is difficult to understand given the distance at which the missile is when they start jinking hard (80 km)

What I would suggest is that they have identified a particular aspect in dynamic maneuver where the missile can lost the track. What I can understand is that this is not a simple high G circling. Given the duration of the maneuver the presumed circling would have produced multiple case of overlapping heading.
So first, they fly toward the presumed launch point (north, 350). Then they are beaming 90 degree. But why the constant high G maneuvering? Mariupol looks to be flat terrain.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
The range would suggest a satellite acquisition and tracking ( I am guessing that the remote commanding operator is seeing both the Su-34 and the Patriot missile through overhead IR sensor).
Then there is the constant high G maneuvering. That is difficult to understand given the distance at which the missile is when they start jinking hard (80 km)

What I would suggest is that they have identified a particular aspect in dynamic maneuver where the missile can lost the track. What I can understand is that this is not a simple high G circling. Given the duration of the maneuver the presumed circling would have produced multiple case of overlapping heading.
So first, they fly toward the presumed launch point (north, 350). Then they are beaming 90 degree. But why the constant high G maneuvering? Mariupol looks to be flat terrain.
Click to expand...
Run the missile out of energy after the rocket motor burns out?
 
My understanding is that constant changes of direction force the missile to recalculate a new interception route and to change its own trajectory several times, creating extra drag, consuming more fuel, and reducing its kinetic energy when the engine is off.
 
That looks more something out of a stupid Russian flight sim. At 80km, The pilots was probably not yet tracked by the missile itself but by the radar that picked him in the first place. Radar send correction courses not live coordinate of a target. I would even say that altering your flight vector repeatedly while staying inside the refresh box doesn´t change much to anything.
 
Depends on how the fire control operates. If it attempts to predict the flight path, then constant direction changes could work. I’ve no idea if that is the case though.
 
AGS-1787 said:
You could also try to make it hard for the SAMs radar to keep a lock
Click to expand...

I feel that is hard to do with a remotely modern radar. But perhaps some older sets have a liability, or perhaps they just think they do.
 
Josh_TN said:
I feel that is hard to do with a remotely modern radar. But perhaps some older sets have a liability, or perhaps they just think they do.
Click to expand...
Given the (very low) known loss rate after initial successes with patriots, they appear to know what they do.
We saw some VKS anti-missile maneuvers on video, but they don't match what we hear here.
 
Another Su-30SM2 lot delivered to VKS few days ago.
bmpd.livejournal.com

Новые истребители Су-30СМ2 для ВКС России

Как сообщило 10 августа 2024 года ПАО Объединенная авиастроительная корпорация (ПАО ОАК, входит в Госкорпорацию Ростех), входящий в её состав Иркутский авиационный завод (ИАЗ) изготовил и передал Министерству обороны России новые многофункциональные истребители Су-30СМ2.…
bmpd.livejournal.com bmpd.livejournal.com

And here a recent Su-35 documentary (not sure if posted before). Elements of interest are apart from lots of AAM (R-37,77,73/74) footage they do talk about i think the possible upcoming combat with the F-16. What do they say roughly about that?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vxRsGxRrC0
 
Last edited:
They say that the R-37M not only has a long range, but is also very effective against maneuverable targets. It was already said earlier, according to the results of the application in Ukraine, that the probability of defeat is approaching 100%. The targets were Su-25, Su-27, Su-24 and MiG-29
 
Kinda curious on what's on the red circle ? This is a still from that documentary on the Su-35 engagement.
 

Attachments

  • Combat Approved.png
    Combat Approved.png
    365.3 KB · Views: 51
Looks like a countdown tape that revolves around the circle to show when there is clearance for the missile to fire and when it is the optimal time to fire. And the 216 I think is kilometers. You guys agree?
 
paralay said:
They say that the R-37M not only has a long range, but is also very effective against maneuverable targets. It was already said earlier, according to the results of the application in Ukraine, that the probability
Click to expand...
stealthflanker said:
Kinda curious on what's on the red circle ? This is a still from that documentary on the Su-35 engagement.
Click to expand...
TMA1 said:
Looks like a countdown tape that revolves around the circle to show when there is clearance for the missile to fire and when it is the optimal time to fire. And the 216 I think is kilometers. You guys agree?
Click to expand...
They usually use that reticle for gun range, but the left side scale says the target is a bit over 160km? So I’m not sure; this hud has more symbology than the regular su-27.
 
It appears the latest Su-35s built have received a DIRCM? Probably must be related or even identical to the one on Su-57? A welcome development for VKS regardless, though you'd think the Su-34 would need a DIRCM (and MAWS too) the most.

Су-35 / Су-35С • Форум "Стелс машины"

Авиация, флот и космос - реальность и перспектива.
paralay.iboards.ru
 
paralay said:
They say that the R-37M not only has a long range, but is also very effective against maneuverable targets. It was already said earlier, according to the results of the application in Ukraine, that the probability of defeat is approaching 100%. The targets were Su-25, Su-27, Su-24 and MiG-29
Click to expand...

It is, but older Ukrainian fighter/attack planes have less effective RWR that either warns the pilot when it is too late or not at all. This makes ultra long range missiles very effective against them. Given the Russian preference for targeting western assets such as HIMARS, Abrams, etc, we may soon see how it performs against more modern RWR like ones on F-16.
 
siegecrossbow said:
we may soon see how it performs against more modern RWR like ones on F-16.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that early in 2023 Ukraine was able to get hold of a basically intact AA-13 Axehead missile and it turned it over to western missile experts to examine so they will know the strengths and weaknesses of its' seeker subsystem so as to fine-tune the F-16s RWR and ECM systems.
 

There is the full video out there but I chose the final landing sequence as it is the most dramatic and amazing part of an amazing and harrowing flight. Apparently this new su-35 was having flight logic issues and was constantly pitching up. The whole video you hear them troubleshooting the issues. There is the full video with translation of the speech.

Amazing stuff. He got as low as possible and just kept looping near the runway. He got aligned a few times but right during flair up the nose of the fighter just kept going upwards and he would have to abort and retry. Yes, he actually used the landing parachutes like dart fletchings causing the nose up action to straighten out just in time for landing. Very heavy, rough landing but absolutely incredible piloting skills.
 
TMA1 said:

There is the full video out there but I chose the final landing sequence as it is the most dramatic and amazing part of an amazing and harrowing flight. Apparently this new su-35 was having flight logic issues and was constantly pitching up. The whole video you hear them troubleshooting the issues. There is the full video with translation of the speech.

Amazing stuff. He got as low as possible and just kept looping near the runway. He got aligned a few times but right during flair up the nose of the fighter just kept going upwards and he would have to abort and retry. Yes, he actually used the landing parachutes like dart fletchings causing the nose up action to straighten out just in time for landing. Very heavy, rough landing but absolutely incredible piloting skills.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Amazing bit of flying.
Would like to know what the actual cause was but maybe a software patch sorted out the flight control laws issue.
 
Isn't FBW supposed to be quadruplex redundant or something? With the probably of total failure <10^-9 per flying hour, which means you need 1 billion flying hours to get a single failure.
 
Forest Green said:
Isn't FBW supposed to be quadruplex redundant or something? With the probably of total failure <10^-9 per flying hour, which means you need 1 billion flying hours to get a single failure.
Click to expand...
System didn't fail per se. It's a test flight with (as they've found) wrong code, system does exactly as coded.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom