MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: Flankers in a striker or attack role  (Read 13499 times)

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Flankers in a striker or attack role
« on: June 14, 2007, 12:50:39 AM »
Going over some specs on different Flankers and reading about the different anti-ship missiles and large payloads they can carry they seem very capable in this role.   I think Flankers are un-proven in this role compared to F-15E, I can't seem to find anything about them used this way.   Does anybody know more information about this thanks. 

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2007, 12:45:47 PM »
I'd say the F-15E is pretty unproven in the anti-shipping role as well... I guess you are asking two questions.

Regarding the naval strike, they are pretty much unproven because the proposed upgrades for the Su-33 (Su-33M/MK) and Su-34 (Su-32FN) didn't get any orders. The multi-role Flankers are capable of AShM but most operators don't use it for this role. The only exception is China, which has the Su-30MKK2 on order for the PLANAF, it is a derivative of the KnAAPO-built Su-30MKK optimized for the maritime attack role. So I'd watch the news on China/Russia exercises involving the Navies. China was also interesting in the Su-33, so I guess they will be upgraded.
The Russians might be upgrading the Su-33 fleet once the new carriers are ready, but until then I am pretty sure the ASh role is left to the Su-24M, Tu-22M, and the fleet / coastal defences.

Regarding the strike role, the multi-role Flankers have not proven themself yet outside the test-range. Again, I'd say that this is because they are not mature in the A-S role yet. If you look at export customers, they first and foremost need a new fighter for air defense. The aircraft are not even fitted with the full A-S suite yet (same for the Rafale/Typhoon by the way, and haven't seen a Gripen prove itself in the A-to-S role either). Also the first Su-30MK demonstrator came about in 1993, the F-15E had already had the opportunity to prove itself in the Gulf in 1991. If you look at all the conflicts since then, I'm pretty sure the Flanker will never catch up with that anymore (and that is a good thing... peace).

I'd watch the Su-34, in production right now. It already set various payload/distance records for its class, beating the F-15E.

The only problem I have, is that IMHO Western ASMs, AShMs and PGMs are way better than the Russian equivalents.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 01:17:24 AM by Webmaster »
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2007, 03:22:55 AM »
Webmaster
Do you have a link to where I could read about the testing and breaking the F-15E records.  That sound very interesting and hope China never buys the Su-34 in large numbers.   Can you imagine twenty or thirty of them coming toward a carries and its outer picket ships loaded with super fast anti-ship missile?   There so big and fast even the carries AWAC aircraft would be in danger.   The US Super Hornets would have to use up so much fuel flying at near max speed to try to engage there ship killer as far away from the carrier as possible.         

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2007, 10:01:37 AM »

The only problem I have, is that IMHO Western ASMs, AShMs and PGMs are way better than the Russian equivalents.

Hmmm, i haven't seen anything in the west like a supersonic antiship missile like the Indo Russian Brahmos, neither an antiradiation missile like the Raduga (anti AWACS).

That flanker has set many records (payload altitute) in class c, i'll post them latter....

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2007, 03:59:22 PM »
No, I don't have a link. The Su-32MF holds at least 5 altitude/weight records since 1999/2000. I presume they were previously held by the F-15E, since that's the only one in that weight class (25-35 tonnes) which comes close in terms of payload/performance. Not sure though.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2007, 12:39:38 PM »
valkyrian. From what i remember, they won't need the anti-AWACS. One growler or whatever they use these days can just jam the whole darned thing.
-JCLim

Offline Sergei

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: by
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2007, 01:11:00 PM »
Interesting comparisons. And at what here Tu-22M3?

Webmaster, you're mistaken: to China have been put 24 Su-30MK2 (not Su-30MK3 or Su-30MKK3)... One of them has sufferred accident by spring of 2004 (both the pilot катапультировались).

Family of fighters Su-30 at least don't concede F-15E (result of conditional air fights between Indian Su-30K(not Su-30MKI) with American F-15C - 9 victories by indians and one drawn game - as was to be shown). The onboard radio-electronic equipment of fighter Su-30MK2 surpasses F-15E. It's the fact. The nomenclature of arms is very wide - from rockets of a class "air-air" up to antiship rockets. About fine flying characteristics Su-30, I think, already everyone know.

The only thing that doesn't suffice Su-30 - is a participation in operations. As they say, all is learnt in fight. ;)
Жыве Беларусь!

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2007, 01:37:40 AM »
Webmaster, you're mistaken: to China have been put 24 Su-30MK2 (not Su-30MK3 or Su-30MKK3)... One of them has sufferred accident by spring of 2004 (both the pilot катапультировались).

yep, I suppose I made a typo there and forgot they were delivered already. By the way, what's happening on the -MK3 development? Has China ordered any of them yet?

Family of fighters Su-30 at least don't concede F-15E (result of conditional air fights between Indian Su-30K(not Su-30MKI) with American F-15C - 9 victories by indians and one drawn game - as was to be shown). The onboard radio-electronic equipment of fighter Su-30MK2 surpasses F-15E. It's the fact. The nomenclature of arms is very wide - from rockets of a class "air-air" up to antiship rockets. About fine flying characteristics Su-30, I think, already everyone know.

Hmm, I think they were F-15C in the first place, not that it matter much on the outcome. The Indian victory was not suprising and in my opinion not worth much other than for PR, see other topics about this. We are talking about air-to-surface here. I don't think you would say with such confidence that the Su-30MK2's equipment for air-to-surface surpasses the F-15E's... which can carry as wide a range of weapons, or even wider.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline Sergei

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: by
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #8 on: October 23, 2007, 12:03:29 PM »
I'm ready to argue with you.

 Su-30MK3 were not delivered China and any other country of the world. They at all were not delivered on export. As to its differences from Su-30MK2 I should be translated on English that clause which at me is. One of these days I shall lay out.

Now as to "advantage" F-15E above Su-30MK2... What spectrum of an ammunition can apply F-15E? AGM-65 "Maverick" different updatings, AGM-88 "Harm", a plenty of aviation bombs, which most part is directed at the purpose by means of satellite system GPS (+ JDAM and others)...

What arms can apply Su-30MK2? Rockets of a class " air a surface " X-29T and X-29L, противорадарные Х-31P, antiship rockets X-31A and X-35... And here with aerial bombs has strained. KAB-500Kr and KAB-500L + KAB-1500Kr... It was a little... Until recently. Seven-mile steps create Russian satellite system GLONASS which will be especially used in the military purposes. And under this system the whole spectrum of aviation bombs is created: KAB-500S, UPAB-1500 and other kinds of aviation bombs. Apparently, on a spectrum of rocket arms the Russian fighter bypasses American, but here on bombing - while lags behind. But this business of 1-2 years.
Жыве Беларусь!

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #9 on: October 23, 2007, 05:15:28 PM »
I agree with this statement the Su-30MK3 were not delivered China.   The basic reason was because Russia didn't want to export the tech needed to use Russia's better anti-ship missile nor the missile themselves.   Russia also didn't want to let China have the codes to setup their own anit-ship and other Chinese made weapons.   This was the main reason why this Su-30MK3 order was killed and soon after China began producing the JH-7 and building there own J-11B to carry out these missions.   There are threads in the Chinese forum that can better explain this.

Sergi the F-15E and US made smart weapons are basically still ahead of Russia for a few reasons.   These bombs and missiles that you have listed X-29T and X-29L, противорадарные Х-31P, antiship rockets X-31A and X-35, I have questions.   First are they all being produced and fielded in active squadrons?   How many Russia pilot really dropped  KAB-1500Kr?   How many squadrons are really have the equipment to mark targets plus the training on how to use them?   To me and I don't say this in a mean way or bragging way just that the US Air Force has many fully trained F-15E pilots and squadrons equipped and ready.   There fully trained and can deploy almost anyway around the world in under 36 hours.     The Flanker is a very capable aircraft and in many ways can and does out performs F-15C or F-15Es but Russia lacks the whole package to bring it all together.   A lot of the Russian made LGB and missiles are never seen or delivered to active squadrons from what I hear.   If the squadrons don't have these weapons how could there maintenance and pilots train?   A friend told me less then seven American squadrons Navy/Air Force are armed with 9X missiles, something I'm hunting down to find answers too currently.  If true its one of my country's best weapons and export customers have them but my own active forces on large scale doesn't?  See where I'm going with this just because things are made doesn't mean there in the field and active, and people know how to use them.   F-15E pilots and there crews pilots/back seat guys.field maintenance, the daily weapons used, etc are at this higher level right now is what I'm trying to say.   If Russia had the funding, the need, I'm sure in time they could do the same thing and do it well.   smile face

One other thing the 9 victories and one draw over the American F-15C which is a proud feat for the Indian Flankers with Israeli and French systems on the inside not Russian, I don't not take that away from them.   But they put a range cap on the American Slammer which takes away tactics and one of our best weapons.   Think of a boxer with a 35 inch reach and that's how he trained his whole life throwing these long range punches and he throws them well.  Now you put him in a fight and tell him you can't punch the other guy further then 30 inches away?   Its a big difference and the host country setup the rule and the Americans pilots don't get to train in advance for hours with these rule or setups.   Not many aircraft can sneak up on F-15Cs without a Slammer being shot at them at some point.   I'm sure not many aircraft can sneak up on a bars radar equipped Flanker either without a AA-12 coming there way as well.   Most times talking to real F-15 pilots these mock training combat the winners and loses are pre-arranged.   He told me there many problems at these type of events who's really dead?  Dumb out range rules like you can't shoot me from there? Nobody in position to see if rules are really followed?   All kinds of crap you wouldn't believe even simple radio problems.   Aircraft that were thought to be dead aren't an come back into the action, then thrown out but the aircraft killed aren't fixed right because fuel is low?  All kinds of stuff happen like even in modern times.   Talk to real fighter pilots that go up against each other in closely match aircraft and there tell you about a lot of bingo fuel no winners flights. 

Offline Sergei

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: by
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #10 on: October 24, 2007, 11:19:17 PM »
I don't deny, that in VVS of RF very few such kinds of an ammunition as KAB-1500Kr, X-31A, X-31P and X-35 (about KAB-500S and UPAB-1500 I'm, in general, silent, the truth, them only have started to test), but I'm firmly convinced, that by 2010 of their delivery will be firmly adjusted.

Situation will be better than now! ;)
Жыве Беларусь!

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Flankers in a striker or attack role
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2007, 01:52:10 AM »
I agree things are looking better for Russia's AF just finished read about a Bear upgrade program.   To me just about any mission or task can be carried out in a Fulcrum or Flanker it's only a little funding and training holding them back.   A off the wall question and one you may not able to answer but with out going nuclear could Russia hold off the determined  Chinese attack both by ground and air?  I would assume some of Russia best trained and equipped personnel and units are already on China's border.   I know it's a complex question it just seems like China has so many divisions.   Thanks

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA