SU-34 Flanker (Platypus>>THATS AN AUSSIE THING)

[Webmaster]

I heard that in 1997, an order for 12 SU-32FN (a maritime strike version of the -34) had been placed by an unmaned country. Can anyone confirm this rumor? If so, who is the unnamed country??

Low speed series production has just been started for Russia itself. I haven't heard of such an order, and I think that it would be strange if that unnamed country would not have been know by now. Where did you read/hear this?

My research only shows this event in 1997 concerning 12 aircraft...

Aug 1997  Indonesia signs contract for 12 Su-30KI   
Late 1997  Indonesia cancels contract for Su-30KI 

[Gripen]

that indonesia thing could be what i heard. it never said if it was cancelled... but the book was made in like... 2000 so why wouldnt it say that the deal was cancelled?

[Raptor]

Ok. Sorry i haven't posted in a while. been to Indonesia. Hm. I its not the platypus. I was thinking of the Navy Flanker. Sorry... 

[Webmaster]

To be honest, that's even stranger. The only option back then would be India I think, which ultimately ordered the MiG-29K. I'll have to investigate. Nowadays the Su-33 is being ordered by China though, but in far greater numbers (up to 100), which is currently overhauling the ex-Russian carrier and plans to develop 2 or 3 of its own carriers. The Flanker section will soon be updated with this and other Flanker news.

[Gripen]

OK, so more info on the SU-34..

Official Nato name: Fullback

Two were delivered to the Russian Air Force on 4th January 2007, and 6 more will be delivered by the end of the year

Russian Defence minister said that their will be 58 SU-34's by the year 2015.

Price tag: $120 million (im assuming USD??)

[Raptor]

'Fullback'? What sort of name is THAT?

[Globetrotter]

I think that name is not correct. Why? Genneraly, they put names that start with "f" onto fighters. Well, I could say that this is not a fighter because, among other obvious reasons, the name is Su-34, and Russian generally reserve even numbers for Bombers. (There are exeptions like Su-25, and MiG-27)
So maybe hey should change the name to one that starts with "b"...

[Cobra2]

Well it can carry R-27s, R-73s, R-77s and other ordnance aswell as KAB-1500s, RBK-250s etc. so its kinda both 
And its designed for both roles I think  and its also comparable to our A-10 is what I heard.

[Gripen]

maybe because it is a variant of the Flanker, so NATO continued the fighter codenames instead of giving it a bomber name..


and i thought it was a fighter/attacker like the f-18?

[Raptor]

I didn't get part of it, but never mind. NATO codenames the Russian Fighters as all starting with 'F', yes, and bombers with 'B'.

Now here's the catch. Explain Su-25 "Frogfoot"

[Gripen]

maybe the guy who names them was drunk and he called it after a bomber instead of a fighter?

[Webmaster]

It's a fighter-bomber, just like the Su-7, Su-17 Fitter, Su-24 Fencer. So F is correct. It's of course strange, but the B is reserved for the real strategic bombers, not frontline tactical (fighter)bombers. It's like calling a Tornado GR.4 a bomber, it is, but would you call it that? Don't forget the Su-34 still carries AAMs, including R-77 AMRAAMski, which gives it better AA capability than most western fighter-bombers/strikers. Let's see, in a conflict, I would call Backfire over the radio, you know it's a bomber of good size, which has no defensive weapons, but probably fighter escorts, and it's on its way to attack your carrier. But when two Su-34s are coming in, it means they have A-A weapons as well, are agile and fast, it's likely they are on a bombing mission, but it would make more sense to call them out as fighters than bombers, right?

Anyway, designation systems never make total sense! It's impossible to classify so many designs. Especially when it's either F or B.