Sukhoi Su-25

Avimimus said:
Makes a lot of sense to me! I'll now be more careful when approaching nuclear submarines (not that I'm likely to get much in the way of opportunities to do so).
Click to expand...
While US subs have a lot more escorts than we did in 2001, I dare say that the crews are much more relaxed than we were in October 2001.

Stay 500m away and listen to the lack of noise.
 
Combat-Master said:
Azerbaijans SU-25M underwent weapons systems modernisation in Turkey, seen in the image below carrying KGK-82 wing assisted glide bombs
FvwcRiGWAAIfmbq
Click to expand...
gyrbowlwgaesral-jpg.70737
 
Combat-Master said:
A more comprehensive modernisation then I first thought it would be. SOM SAHIN (HAWK), a new variant of the SOM cruise missile developed specifically for Azerbaijan ?
Click to expand...
Apparently so.
Also, explains why Azerbaijan went for Turkish proposal over Sukhoi (sm3 as an example) - it is just plain better, for a fraction of price.
 
Ainen said:
Apparently so.
Also, explains why Azerbaijan went for Turkish proposal over Sukhoi (sm3 as an example) - it is just plain better, for a fraction of price.
Click to expand...
Su-25SM3 is more comprehensive one though. It's also new RWR with the ability to cue anti-radiation missiles, and, more importantly, MAWS (even just lower hemisphere) and new LD/FLIR station, even as limited as SOLT-25 by dimensions. And likely, a complete repair/overhaul of the airframe and engines. There is no mention of anything like that in Turkish proposal, so no wonder it's cheaper.
 
Anduriel said:
Su-25SM3 is more comprehensive one though. It's also new RWR with the ability to cue anti-radiation missiles, and, more importantly, MAWS (even just lower hemisphere) and new LD/FLIR station, even as limited as SOLT-25 by dimensions. And likely, a complete repair/overhaul of the airframe and engines. There is no mention of anything like that in Turkish proposal, so no wonder it's cheaper.
Click to expand...
All that effort ultimately produced a yet another rocket lobber incapable of anything else, because it followed the original concept dating back to 1960s.

Comprehensiveness with faulty concept is not an advantage, it's going deeper down into the pit. It doesn't require a lot of guessing to see them suffering losses or being ineffective at Karabakh...and given what we can see in yak-130m, Russian industry still hasn't learned anything.

Turkish upgrade, on the other hand, is a lot of new quality for the Azeri AF.
 
Ainen said:
All that effort ultimately produced a yet another rocket lobber incapable of anything else, because it followed the original concept dating back to 1960s.
Click to expand...
Rocket lobber not by technical inability of Su-25SM3 use modern munitions. It's because battlefield is not permissible enough to use anything else, and for JDAM-ER/UMPK/etc and missiles there are much more capable platforms. A-10C would not fare better for that matter despite having even more capability than SM3, for the same reasons.
Su-25SM3 would also be more capable on Karabakh theatre, just like A-10C and this Turkish upgrade. For simple reasons:
1. Armenia doesn't have Ukrainian amount of SAM batteries, AA and NATO support in detection of Azerbaijan aircrafts.
2. Azerbaijan itself doesn't have much choice in planes, as the only other plane they have is MiG-29. So they have to make a Su-25 as cruise missile/JDAM carrier, because MiG-29 would do other tasks, even if Su-25 is not the best platform for it. And it will remain so until they get a proper multirole platform, like JF-17 bl.3.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom