Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

P

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
zyklon said:
An abundance of capital totally must be why the annual production rate for the Su-57 is a fraction of — if not an order of magnitude below — that of the F-35 or J-20. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I dont think F-35 or J-20 will meet Russian air force requirements. Su-57 is most complex and advanced fighter with longest range weopons and longest duration supe cruise. and highest altitude. i have observed its history on RT arabic so i am confident in my observation. further increase in range for Air to Air missiles.
India may get some version of it but it will have no bearing on Russian production since Russia does not need Indian money.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The defense industry is increasing supplies of Su-57 fighters with hypersonic weapons to the Russian troops​

Moscow. August 1. INTERFAX.RU - Deliveries of fifth-generation Su-57 fighter jets with hypersonic weapons to the troops are increasing, said Lieutenant General Alexander Maksimtsev, First Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS).

"The rate of delivery of fifth-generation Su-57 aircraft with modern airborne weapons and hypersonic weapons is increasing. New models of airborne weapons are also being delivered, allowing for a significant increase in the range of destruction of ground (sea) and air targets," Maksimtsev said in an interview with the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper.
Click to expand...

zyklon said:
Thank you for acknowledging one of at least a few areas where the Su-57 must improve to be considered a 5th gen fighter without an asterisk* or minus- sign. :cool:
Click to expand...
It is built for 5+ aka 5.5G requirements from ground up. and in 2018 the engine designer called it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

TSAMTO, November 13. General Designer and Director of the A.M. Lyulka Design Bureau Evgeny Marchukov told the Zvezda TV channel about the superiority of the second stage engine of the Su-57 fighter over all its analogues, RIA Novosti reports.

"I would say that this is generation 5+. <…> This is the generation that the engine corresponds to in terms of specific thrust, specific consumption and specific gravity," he noted.

E. Marchukov emphasized that in terms of specific thrust, the engine is a completely new product and has nothing in common with the Su-35 engine. It will allow fighters to take off and gain altitude faster, maneuver with high overload during air combat, and also fly at supersonic speed without using afterburners, the agency notes.

The Su-57 is a Russian fifth-generation multirole fighter developed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau using stealth technologies. The Aerospace Forces will receive the first serial batch of Su-57s in 2019.
Click to expand...
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
zyklon said:
An abundance of capital totally must be why the annual production rate for the Su-57 is a fraction of — if not an order of magnitude below — that of the F-35 or J-20.
Click to expand...
"Capital" has little to do with it. The Russians ordered enough Su-57s to replace obsolete Su-27 aircraft numerically.

Most of the Russian aviation park of fighter aircraft is fairly new. Unlike the US or Europe which still have huge numbers of Cold War era aircraft as a fraction of the park. The Su-35 entered service just a decade ago. Together with the Su-34 and Su-30SM.

The Su-35 also has a much higher lifetime than Soviet Cold War era aircraft. So they don't need to produce as many. It is way more capable. Longer range sensors and weapons mean you need less aircraft to cover a given area.

The main issue with the Russian Air Force is pilot training. The lack of cheap single engine prop and jet modern trainer aircraft is a serious bottleneck. Russia also lacks the vast DOSAAF infrastruture of the Soviets so the candidate fighter pilot pool is also much smaller.
 
Last edited:
zyklon

zyklon

Junior Member
Registered Member
pmc said:
Su-57 is most complex and advanced fighter with longest range weopons and longest duration supe cruise. and highest altitude. i have observed its history on RT arabic so i am confident in my observation. further increase in range for Air to Air missiles.
Click to expand...

Yes, watching RT arabic absolutely makes you a subject matter expert! :cool:


gelgoog said:
"Capital" has little to do with it. The Russians ordered enough Su-57s to replace obsolete Su-27 aircraft numerically.
Click to expand...

From your posts, you've obviously invested more time studying the Russian military than all but perhaps a few of the active posters here, if that. So will be happy to defer to you on figures and technical parameters with respect to them, if my assumptions are off.

From my understanding, Russia is currently inducting as many 5th gen fighters into service annually as Britain, or perhaps Britain and Italy combined or thereabouts.

Don't know about you, but that sounds totally inadequate for the amount of airspace that the VKS is responsible for, never mind the totality of threats posed by mortal enemies like Britain and Poland, adversaries like Japan, and frenemies like Turkey, among others.

gelgoog said:
Most of the Russian aviation park of fighter aircraft is fairly new. Unlike the US or Europe which still have huge numbers of Cold War era aircraft as a fraction of the park. The Su-35 entered service just a decade ago. Together with the Su-34 and Su-30SM.

The Su-35 also has a much higher lifetime than Soviet Cold War era aircraft. So they don't need to produce as many. It is way more capable. Longer range sensors and weapons mean you need less aircraft to cover a given area.
Click to expand...

How survivable is the Su-35, Su-30SM and Su-34 — or even the Su-57 — over the skies of Ukraine, especially as you get further away from the line of contact and closer to Kiev or certain other major urban population centers?

gelgoog said:
The main issue with the Russian Air Force is pilot training. The lack of cheap single engine prop and jet modern trainer aircraft is a serious bottleneck. Russia also lacks the vast DOSAAF infrastruture of the Soviets so the candidate fighter pilot pool is also much smaller.
Click to expand...

TBF, it takes years to train competent aviators, and even longer to build a professional corps of fighter pilots as an institution.

What you're telling us evidences years, if not decades of underinvestment in the VKS and its predecessor entities on the part of the Russian authorities.

Not here to insult or put down the VKS. Actually a fan, at least of their aesthetics, and would like to see them better nourished by the Russian leadership.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
zyklon said:
From my understanding, Russia is currently inducting as many 5th gen fighters into service annually as Britain, or perhaps Britain and Italy combined or thereabouts.
Click to expand...
No, the Russians are inducting way more. The Russians are building like a dozen Su-57 a year at this point. But as per the original plan production should switch to the Su-57M this year. Remains to be seen if it will happen.

The UK's F-35s are B models used in the Royal Navy carriers so they are fairly useless. The UK has 37 of those. Italy has 24 F-35A and 2 F-35B.

I say useless because the F-35B has compromised range, payload, and kinematics vs the F-35A.

The largest operators of the F-35 in Europe are the Netherlands and Norway with 40, and 52 F-35As respectively. Denmark has 17 F-35As.

There are no more F-35s operated by European countries yet.

Anyway, I like to joke about how the major powers in Europe have so few stealth fighters. It is some minor countries which actually operate most of the F-35s.

The majors operate Eurocanards like the Eurofighter or Rafale.

The majors either did not get the F-35 or got it in few numbers. It is the minor countries which used to operate the F-16 which are getting most of the F-35s. The Eurocanard operators are supposedly developing their own stealth aircraft.
In the case of the UK I would be more worried about USAF aircraft operating from there than the RAF.

zyklon said:
Don't know about you, but that sounds totally inadequate for the amount of airspace that the VKS is responsible for, never mind the totality of threats posed by mortal enemies like Britain and Poland, adversaries like Japan, and frenemies like Turkey, among others.
Click to expand...
I already talked about the others. Japan has 41 F-35A. But remember in that theater the PLAAF isn't that far.

Turkey's Air Force is a mess, they have F-16s. Most are old aircraft with Turkish upgrades. Heck they still operate the F-4 I think.

Anyway it is a bit much to compare Su-57 vs F-35 production numbers like that. The Su-57 is a heavy twin engine aircraft. It is like you are comparing Su-27 vs F-16 production.

Yes the Russians are totally outnumbered. At least on paper. The question is how many of those aircraft are actually operational. On both sides.

The Su-57 was originally meant to be sort of the tip of the spear. You would have mixed Su-57 and Su-35 units.

zyklon said:
How survivable is the Su-35, Su-30SM and Su-34 — or even the Su-57 — over the skies of Ukraine, especially as you get further away from the line of contact and closer to Kiev or certain other major urban population centers?
Click to expand...
The Su-35 is pretty survivable. It was designed with some RCS reduction kind of like the Super Hornet. It has MAWS also.

Russia won't operate the Su-57 deep into Ukraine. It is not part of Russian doctrine, the VKS is meant to support the ground forces across the frontlines. Plus they don't want to lose it and make it available for enemy examination.

As a bomber the current Su-57 is kind of lame. The engines are underpowered and the payload isn't that large. The airframe is not reinforced for bombing like the Su-34.

But still the Su-57 can carry 10000 kg on 12 points vs 8500 kg on 10 points on the F-35A.
The Su-57M will likely have more payload.

zyklon said:
TBF, it takes years to train competent aviators, and even longer to build a professional corps of fighter pilots as an institution.

What you're telling us evidences years, if not decades of underinvestment in the VKS and its predecessor entities on the part of the Russian authorities.
Click to expand...
Well the USAF is also still operating the ancient T-38 Talon. They are just as screwed as the VKS.
The thing is a lot more people fly private aircraft in the US so the aviator pool is larger.

zyklon said:
Not here to insult or put down the VKS. Actually a fan, at least of their aesthetics, and would like to see them better nourished by the Russian leadership.
Click to expand...
The propeller trainers got delayed because of lack of proper engines. But the UTS-800 started being delivered recently. The VK-800SM engine is expected to be certified this year and the VK-650 engine was certified, so the VK-650S turboprop should be developed eventually.

They asked MiG to develop a single engine trainer with the Al-222-25 jet engine as well. So the situation could change next decade.

They do have quite a few Yak-130s.
 
Last edited:
P

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
zyklon said:
From my understanding, Russia is currently inducting as many 5th gen fighters into service annually as Britain, or perhaps Britain and Italy combined or thereabouts.

Don't know about you, but that sounds totally inadequate for the amount of airspace that the VKS is responsible for, never mind the totality of threats posed by mortal enemies like Britain and Poland, adversaries like Japan, and frenemies like Turkey, among others.
Click to expand...
here you understanding become limited. this F-35 is basically a glide bomb vehicle with limited missile ability.
Su-57 is AI powered AWACS/JSTAR combined taking roles from Su-34 which cannot fly that high for long distance recon against ground targets.
Thinge become too complex for Arabic thats why i have to switch the language to make it one link. what that 5G really means in Su-57 context. internal and external is different time line.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
July 5, 2022, 02:58

Shoigu: New missile for Su-57 capable of destroying stealth targets completes state tests​

The first serial deliveries into operation are planned for the end of the year.
MOSCOW, July 5. /TASS/. State tests of short- and medium-range air-to-air missiles for the fifth-generation Su-57 fighters will be completed this year, with the first serial deliveries planned for operation by the end of the year. This was announced to journalists on Tuesday by Russian Defense Minister General of the Army Sergei Shoigu at a conference call at the military department.

He specified that the medium- and short-range air-to-air guided missiles were developed by the Vympel design bureau, which is part of the Tactical Missile Weapons (KTRV) corporation, and are "intended to equip the modern Su-57 aviation complex and other carriers."
"The use of new weapons will increase the combat effectiveness of carrier aircraft in aerial confrontations and expand the range of air targets that can be hit, including small-sized ones and those manufactured using stealth technology," the Defense Minister noted.
Click to expand...
 
N

NorthKimBestKim

New Member
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
Not true. Add up all modern Su-27SM, Su-30, and Su-35 and the Russians had more Flankers than India. And then there are the Su-34s, like another hundred aircraft.

As for the T-90 the initial versions, before the T-90M came out, had little advantage over much cheaper T-72 tank upgrades. And NATO has less tanks in Europe than Russia anyway.


Libya was making business deals with the West...


Which can be crushed anytime Russia wants. Bomb Azeri oil and gas facilities...


If the Syrians don't want to fight there is little Russia could do there. Hezbollah was doing the ground fighting and Russia was doing the aerial support. Where was the Syrian army?

Kinzhal can also be carried by the Su-34.
The Tu-22M3 cannot launch

The US is supposedly much wealthier than Russia and yet all its bombers are Cold War era.


Don't be fooled by the name it's a different SAM system.


The Russians are building submarines faster than the US right now. They are launching 1 attack and 1 strategic sub a year. While the US...


They replaced the engines after 2014. But you can't expect to develop and produce a new gas turbine at a snap of the fingers. It took like four years.

Zircon was also a fantasy, until it wasn't. Or Avangard, etc.

Leader and Storm were design proposals which AFAIK never got funded to detailed design phase. There are dozens of such designs which never get pursued.

"Super Gorshkov" and PAK DA were funded for detailed design phase. They will be made eventually.

Su-75 is an initiative from UAC not requested by the MoD. Made with internal funds.
The T-14 only passed its trials recently. Remains to be seen what they will do with it.
Click to expand...
1) So what you're saying is that Russia wouldn't benefit from having 100 Su-30 extra for Ukrainian battlefield? And India having 100 less Su-30. Yes, Russia has more when you add Su-35 and Su-34, but Su-34 is more of a substitute for Su-24 and Su-25 - no where near replacing those numbers 1-by-1.

Russia should also have had several hundred more T-90 tanks - and equally so, India should have had less in its inventory. I'm glad to see that drones are wrecking havoc on tanks, as the decision to sell so many to India has threatened the existence of it's neighbours for far too long.

Then Grigorovich (Talwars) being delivered, which is nothing short of being totally insane given the situation Russian surface fleet is in. The last thing India needs is to be given (sold) another frigate, yet, Russia did so just one month ago.

Given the situation of Kuznetsov, another mistake was selling Vikramaditya.

Don't even get me started on Russia's decision regarding the 10-year lease of Akula.

Then Russia bying Mistral from France and now you're saying that giving India Su-57 is also a "great decision" and your defense of this decision is that the Indian Su-57 will be "downgraded" (the ones you have now) and not the so-called "new Su-57M" which is supposed to be better.

We're still waiting for the Su-75 "Checkmate" dream as well - that "project" is as real as the Ghost of Kiev.

Selling S-400 to Turkey (a NATO member) totally insane. And Turkey thanks you by whopping pro-Russian forces from Libya, Syria to Armenia (Nagorno-K).

Interesting that you claim that Russia "lost nothing in Libya", when there is a matter of fact that Libya was generally pro-Russian.

You know who else has some deals with the West? Algeria. Would you claim that Russia "lost nothing in Algeria", if the Imperial NATO Forces decide to decimate and destroy the whole Algeria and cutting it up in several territories? I have a feeling you sure would say the same: "Russia lost nothing there". The West has their "list" of pro-Russian countries which they have dismanteled one-by-one since early 2000s. Their focus on Al-Qaeda was very short lived in Afghanistan, as they decided quickly to follow up on the "General Clark's" list of countries that need to be smoked.

2) Regarding Syria, which is a massive loss for Russia (no need to sugarcoat it), you claim that if Syrians didn't want to fight, there is nothing "Russia can do". Spending 9 years there, then being overwhelmed by (again) pro-Turkish forces in about 9 days. Why is it like "Syrians suddenly decided not to fight"?

Russia and the rest of USSR decided not to fight for the USSR structure and they bended over for a massive Demo-Crazy Zombie entry between 1989 - 1991, giving Russia so many problems and challenges that Russia is still struggling with today. Not to mention taking away 34 years of progress - and yes, I really do mean that Russia has generally lost 34 years of progress after letting yourself being screwed brutally by Demo-Crazy Zombies, because you can just imagine where USSR would be today if it didn't bend. Now the Western Imperial Alliance has another USSR 2.0 plan for you - to break Russia into another 15 Demo-Crazy pieces.

You know who DOES fight for the Russian Federation and giving their lives every day? North Korean forces.

Do you ever wonder about how extremely BAD situation today's Russia would be in if China and North Korea let themselves be banged by Demo-Zombies back in 1989 - 1991? They are the one having your back now, supporting you whilst Russia is dealing with its mistakes from 1989 - 1991.

3) Ok, so Su-34 can carry Kinzal, but Tu-22M3 cannot. You forgot one little detail, which is Su-34 can only carry it if Su-34 is not smoked into oblivion by Imperial NATO Forces as they are able to do every time they brutally attack a pro-Russian ally.

And the case point of Ukraine shows that RuAF has serious problems with coordinating and achieving air superiority in the areas extremely close to the Russian border and into areas of Eastern and Southern Ukraine which are supposed to be more Russia-friendly.

4) U.S. Cold War era bombers are not of (too much) relevance as their B-2 and coming B-21, which is more relevant, but even U.S. B-52s and B-1 Lancers are better maintained than most of (if not all) Tu-95 "Bears", which are pretty much singing their last song given its age and over-use. The only ones that are being kept "fit" for fight is Tu-160.

5) Buk-M3, no one cares about it. All of pro-Russian (even Iran) based themselves on "invincible" SAM networks, and each time they're getting smoked by the Western / Israeli air power.

There is a reason (and much of Global South was thirsting for it) that finally a non-Western air force (Pakistan with Chinese weapons) defeated several pro-Western advanced fighters (Indian Rafales). Please, do tell us the last time a pro-Russian (or Russian) air force was able to score at least 4 to 6 kills in a given day against a pro-Western (or Western) aircraft?

Having a gigantic air force (which U.S. and China has) is and will always be better than any SAM network. Period. Air Force (and Naval) Brutality wins every time and smokes one SAM-system after the another as the combined Air and Naval forces are able to bring the war to the enemy territory, whilst SAM systems do not have that ability.

I know that many pro-Russians still brag about Serbia downing F-117 back in 1999, and yet completely ignore that Serbian forces where still smoked and Serbia lost Kosovo entirely. But yeah, woo hoo, ONE F-117 was shot down. I guess that has stopped the Imperial NATO forces since 1999 - or did it?

Now, 26 years later, it is North Korean forces that defend, liberate and give lives of the territory of the Russian Federation against Imperial fanatics that want Russia cut up in another 15 pieces.

6) Regarding Russia "building SSNs faster" than the U.S. Last time I checked, the U.S. has about 24 Virginia SSN. That is a lead Russia has absolutely no ability to match or overtake with its current 5 Yasen-M, and do let us know how many Yasens is Russia hoping to produce? Do you know the target number U.S. has for Virginias? At least 65. Is Russia going to build anything close to this number? Nope, I guess not. Let's not include rest of the Imperial structure (Western Europe, Poland and Turkey) and whay they plan to build, so that they can attack and destroy Russia and Belarus, and they will start by dismantling easely Transnistria and Kaliningrad as a "snack". The same chicken snack I had yesterday for lunch. That is how they view Transnistria and Kaliningrad.

7) Russia replaced gas turbines after 2014, sure, but yet again you fail to admit another Russian screw up, which is that Russia already got "Orange Revolution" 10 years prior to 2014 - back in 2004. Still, Russia just continued as nothing happened when "Scarface" took power.

8) Zirkon is no magical weapon. Any pro-Western force will target without any mercy any ship that can carry Zirkon.
If a Gorskhov frigate is carrying Zirkon, you can bet that the Gorskhov will get a visit by a combined force of B-2 (and B-21 when it's ready) and Virginia SSN in the middle of the night. Not to mention everything else, from F-22 / F-35, etc.

9) Regarding PAK DA and "Super Gs", I still have serious doubts they will be built over the next 10 to 15 years. Remember, we have no idea who will take after Putin, as there is a chance that another round of pro-Gorba and pro-Yeltsin traitors are waiting for Putin's death. After all, Russia (USSR) failed to stop Gorba and Yeltsin's power and there is no guarantee that Russia won't fail again.

10) Su-75 "Checkmate" is also another "Shtorm" and "Leader", going nowhere. Hoping back in 2021 that UAE would fund it.

11) Sure, T-14 Armata is introduced in very limited numbers, but the facts are that Russian planning during 2010s envisioned Russia having about 2.300 of these in 2020. And the result in early-August 2025 is clear - Russia failed on that target.

Russia needs to stop selling stuff to extremist Hindutvas whilst lacking most the the stuff they're selling in sufficient numbers.
 
P

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
It is obvious in pics only missiles and drones. what is missing is how they achieve real time surveillance. It is that Bomber and perhaps satellites just like in previous post if fighter can deal with stealth targets in air than it is much more capable against ground targets.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1951325825787113585


related to above. It is the longest article that is dedicated to any missile. basically saying Onyx range will reach 1000km. and this missile not a single shot down in Ukraine conflict.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Anti-ship missile "Onyx": supersonic and long-range​

After the modification, the P-800 anti-ship missile should, without any stretch or reservations, become the "long arm" of the Russian fleet. So that it could even fly to Lvov...
Click to expand...
 
2handedswordsman

2handedswordsman

Junior Member
Registered Member
NorthKimBestKim said:
1) So what you're saying is that Russia wouldn't benefit from having 100 Su-30 extra for Ukrainian battlefield? And India having 100 less Su-30. Yes, Russia has more when you add Su-35 and Su-34, but Su-34 is more of a substitute for Su-24 and Su-25 - no where near replacing those numbers 1-by-1.

Russia should also have had several hundred more T-90 tanks - and equally so, India should have had less in its inventory. I'm glad to see that drones are wrecking havoc on tanks, as the decision to sell so many to India has threatened the existence of it's neighbours for far too long.

Then Grigorovich (Talwars) being delivered, which is nothing short of being totally insane given the situation Russian surface fleet is in. The last thing India needs is to be given (sold) another frigate, yet, Russia did so just one month ago.

Given the situation of Kuznetsov, another mistake was selling Vikramaditya.

Don't even get me started on Russia's decision regarding the 10-year lease of Akula.

Then Russia bying Mistral from France and now you're saying that giving India Su-57 is also a "great decision" and your defense of this decision is that the Indian Su-57 will be "downgraded" (the ones you have now) and not the so-called "new Su-57M" which is supposed to be better.

We're still waiting for the Su-75 "Checkmate" dream as well - that "project" is as real as the Ghost of Kiev.

Selling S-400 to Turkey (a NATO member) totally insane. And Turkey thanks you by whopping pro-Russian forces from Libya, Syria to Armenia (Nagorno-K).

Interesting that you claim that Russia "lost nothing in Libya", when there is a matter of fact that Libya was generally pro-Russian.

You know who else has some deals with the West? Algeria. Would you claim that Russia "lost nothing in Algeria", if the Imperial NATO Forces decide to decimate and destroy the whole Algeria and cutting it up in several territories? I have a feeling you sure would say the same: "Russia lost nothing there". The West has their "list" of pro-Russian countries which they have dismanteled one-by-one since early 2000s. Their focus on Al-Qaeda was very short lived in Afghanistan, as they decided quickly to follow up on the "General Clark's" list of countries that need to be smoked.

2) Regarding Syria, which is a massive loss for Russia (no need to sugarcoat it), you claim that if Syrians didn't want to fight, there is nothing "Russia can do". Spending 9 years there, then being overwhelmed by (again) pro-Turkish forces in about 9 days. Why is it like "Syrians suddenly decided not to fight"?

Russia and the rest of USSR decided not to fight for the USSR structure and they bended over for a massive Demo-Crazy Zombie entry between 1989 - 1991, giving Russia so many problems and challenges that Russia is still struggling with today. Not to mention taking away 34 years of progress - and yes, I really do mean that Russia has generally lost 34 years of progress after letting yourself being screwed brutally by Demo-Crazy Zombies, because you can just imagine where USSR would be today if it didn't bend. Now the Western Imperial Alliance has another USSR 2.0 plan for you - to break Russia into another 15 Demo-Crazy pieces.

You know who DOES fight for the Russian Federation and giving their lives every day? North Korean forces.

Do you ever wonder about how extremely BAD situation today's Russia would be in if China and North Korea let themselves be banged by Demo-Zombies back in 1989 - 1991? They are the one having your back now, supporting you whilst Russia is dealing with its mistakes from 1989 - 1991.

3) Ok, so Su-34 can carry Kinzal, but Tu-22M3 cannot. You forgot one little detail, which is Su-34 can only carry it if Su-34 is not smoked into oblivion by Imperial NATO Forces as they are able to do every time they brutally attack a pro-Russian ally.

And the case point of Ukraine shows that RuAF has serious problems with coordinating and achieving air superiority in the areas extremely close to the Russian border and into areas of Eastern and Southern Ukraine which are supposed to be more Russia-friendly.

4) U.S. Cold War era bombers are not of (too much) relevance as their B-2 and coming B-21, which is more relevant, but even U.S. B-52s and B-1 Lancers are better maintained than most of (if not all) Tu-95 "Bears", which are pretty much singing their last song given its age and over-use. The only ones that are being kept "fit" for fight is Tu-160.

5) Buk-M3, no one cares about it. All of pro-Russian (even Iran) based themselves on "invincible" SAM networks, and each time they're getting smoked by the Western / Israeli air power.

There is a reason (and much of Global South was thirsting for it) that finally a non-Western air force (Pakistan with Chinese weapons) defeated several pro-Western advanced fighters (Indian Rafales). Please, do tell us the last time a pro-Russian (or Russian) air force was able to score at least 4 to 6 kills in a given day against a pro-Western (or Western) aircraft?

Having a gigantic air force (which U.S. and China has) is and will always be better than any SAM network. Period. Air Force (and Naval) Brutality wins every time and smokes one SAM-system after the another as the combined Air and Naval forces are able to bring the war to the enemy territory, whilst SAM systems do not have that ability.

I know that many pro-Russians still brag about Serbia downing F-117 back in 1999, and yet completely ignore that Serbian forces where still smoked and Serbia lost Kosovo entirely. But yeah, woo hoo, ONE F-117 was shot down. I guess that has stopped the Imperial NATO forces since 1999 - or did it?

Now, 26 years later, it is North Korean forces that defend, liberate and give lives of the territory of the Russian Federation against Imperial fanatics that want Russia cut up in another 15 pieces.

6) Regarding Russia "building SSNs faster" than the U.S. Last time I checked, the U.S. has about 24 Virginia SSN. That is a lead Russia has absolutely no ability to match or overtake with its current 5 Yasen-M, and do let us know how many Yasens is Russia hoping to produce? Do you know the target number U.S. has for Virginias? At least 65. Is Russia going to build anything close to this number? Nope, I guess not. Let's not include rest of the Imperial structure (Western Europe, Poland and Turkey) and whay they plan to build, so that they can attack and destroy Russia and Belarus, and they will start by dismantling easely Transnistria and Kaliningrad as a "snack". The same chicken snack I had yesterday for lunch. That is how they view Transnistria and Kaliningrad.

7) Russia replaced gas turbines after 2014, sure, but yet again you fail to admit another Russian screw up, which is that Russia already got "Orange Revolution" 10 years prior to 2014 - back in 2004. Still, Russia just continued as nothing happened when "Scarface" took power.

8) Zirkon is no magical weapon. Any pro-Western force will target without any mercy any ship that can carry Zirkon.
If a Gorskhov frigate is carrying Zirkon, you can bet that the Gorskhov will get a visit by a combined force of B-2 (and B-21 when it's ready) and Virginia SSN in the middle of the night. Not to mention everything else, from F-22 / F-35, etc.

9) Regarding PAK DA and "Super Gs", I still have serious doubts they will be built over the next 10 to 15 years. Remember, we have no idea who will take after Putin, as there is a chance that another round of pro-Gorba and pro-Yeltsin traitors are waiting for Putin's death. After all, Russia (USSR) failed to stop Gorba and Yeltsin's power and there is no guarantee that Russia won't fail again.

10) Su-75 "Checkmate" is also another "Shtorm" and "Leader", going nowhere. Hoping back in 2021 that UAE would fund it.

11) Sure, T-14 Armata is introduced in very limited numbers, but the facts are that Russian planning during 2010s envisioned Russia having about 2.300 of these in 2020. And the result in early-August 2025 is clear - Russia failed on that target.

Russia needs to stop selling stuff to extremist Hindutvas whilst lacking most the the stuff they're selling in sufficient numbers.
Click to expand...
While you got most of the points i don't understand the so much chest thumping. That 7th point, man lol.

Russia is doing what it can better do given the circumstances. They needed for example a quick buck, there were no plans for Kiev carrier and no forseeing replacement engine for the three Grigorovich frigates for the next 5 years, so why not sell these hulls to those who can afford them? They messed up for sure with the USSR matter, so they can draw their bold and bloody conclusions. But anyway, it will find it's way, the hard way. As of matter of AD, at Yom Kippur war and Vietnam, the results said the opposite. The freshest examples of modern missiles systems vs classic old school air superiority comes from the Iran-Israel war. But this is another topic that i want to discuss some day. Russian armed forces after 3 years at war is at the most combat readiness as it can be. And it's a formidable force even it can't reach parity with US. They can't, and probably do not have the same military objectives. As for the bombers scheme, ok, but it's just a delivery system, costly and dangerous to operate. TEL's are the future. Even though, after the wow attack on strategic bombers bu SBU the numerous strategic bombers disabled will be replaced in no time with ressurected hulls of the tons sitting at depots, modernised and ready to serve another 40 years lol.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
@NorthKimBestKim
Russia's Su-35 and Su-30 combined alone are more than the Su-30 the Indians have numerically.

As for the Su-34 it can carry 14t payload while the Su-24 can carry 8t. The available Su-34 fleet is already more capable than the Su-24s they still had. Even with less numbers. Had the RuAF not been expanded and aircraft lost over Ukraine the original planned purchases of Su-34 would have been enough.

As for the Su-25 there was a planned replacement in the 1990s but that program went nowhere. Now they are thinking of replacing it with armed drones.
FWIW the US has no replacement for the A-10 either. Other countries don't even operate such aircraft.

The Russians could upgrade like 3x T-72 to T-72B3M standard or build 1x new T-90 for the same price. Both had the same gun, sensors, engines. Both had the same ammo.

So they just did the upgrades.

It is only with the T-90M upgrade which can fire the latest Svinets-2 rounds that this makes more sense to buy.

The Grigorovich was developed as a stopgap in case the Gorshkov took too long to develop. It used Ukrainian engines. Those engines aren't available to Russia anymore but India could still buy them. So the Russians could have scrapped the hulls, but this way they got money from them by exporting them to India.

With the Gorshkov design being complete it makes no sense to continuing building obsolete Grigorovich frigates.

The government does not want the Checkmate, at least not yet, this is a UAC program. It uses existing components from the Su-57 so I don't think it will be the that hard or expensive to do.

The S-400 didn't help Turkey invade anyone. And because of the S-400 sale the Turks didn't get the F-35. You tell me if it was a bad export.

The Libyans had not bought weapons since like the 1970s. They gave up their own nuclear and missile programs. They exposed themselves to Western aggression by their own choice. By believing Western propaganda that the West is peaceful.
Mind you Libyan oil was extracted by Western oil companies. Libya still got attacked anyway, because the West wanted a bigger cut.

Russia isn't the Soviets with their plan for global dominance of Communism. The days of draining the treasury giving weapons to struggling nations like Syria are over.

Plus Russia is still at Tartus last time I checked.

The Russians might lose a base in the Mediterranean in the worst case but it is a NATO lake anyway. NATO controls both the Strait of Gibraltar and the Dardanelles. Let the Turks fight Israel.

The Soviets plus Russia and Ukraine did sell China the military equipment which enabled China's military to make its massive leap in capabilities in the 1990-2000s. Which was the foundation for current systems.

The Soviets had big issues. The Warsaw Pact countries were mostly bankrupt and with the collapse of the oil price the Soviets couldn't bail them out anymore. Poland is a good example of this. As for the breakup of the USSR it was a combination of Gorbachev's inneptitude and Yeltsin's lust for power.

The Russian armed forces have a sensor and networking issue.

The Russian IADS has a communications layer for air targets, it is a bit of a mishmash of systems, but it sort of works.

The worst thing is the communication of ground targets or assigning them between the air and ground forces. The ground forces supposedly have systems for communicating ground targets but I think they aren't that pervasive.

The aircraft lack modern sensor pods for the most part. The sensor satellite network has poor coverage, and there are no proper sensor drones.

It is all caused by a weak Russian electronics base. Nothing new unfortunately. The problem goes way back to WW2.

The Tu-95 was built with aluminium alloys of the kind used in the B-29. The B-52 was built with more modern aluminium alloys which suffer less from fatigue issues.

I think the Tu-95s were built in like the 1980s. Soon they will be 50 years old and the airframes will start to crack.

The B-1 isn't that much better. It needs a lot of expensive maintenance to keep the airframe viable. It was originally designed as a high altitude bomber then retrofitted for low altitude hastily. The airframe doesn't endure low altitude flight all that well.

Because the Tu-160 is more modern with more modern materials like titanium in the wingbox it has a higher lifetime.

The Tu-95 and Tu-22 airframes will expire soon and are supposed to be replaced with PAK DA. At best those airframes will last another decade and then planes will start dropping from the sky.

Israel had to use long range standoff weapons against Iran. Much more expensive rocket and jet engine powered munitions. Which they have limited stocks of. The Iranian SAMs mitigated damage by like two orders of magnitude versus air dropped bombs. Because that is the difference in price between both.

Don't underestimate the value of SAMs.

F-16s keep getting destroyed in Ukraine quite often. Always due to "accidents" of course.

SAM systems are an order of magnitude cheaper than aircraft. And that is just acquisition cost. Nevermind maintenance which is way more expensive on aircraft.

Russia always had a weaker economy vs its opponents so they need to use more cost effective systems.
The Russian air doctrine is based on their experience from WW2. And it has served them well.

The US took the F-117 out from service after being lost over Serbia. While the US was still operating older F-15 and F-16 aircraft. You tell me if its shot down was significant.

Russia is expected to field 12x Yasen.

The Yasen is way larger and more capable than the Virginia. The Russians don't call them cruisers for no reason.

The US also planned for like 750x F-22 and got less than 200x.

The truth is that the US has like 24x Virginias and they will get double that at best. They already want to replace it with a new attack sub. They built those 24x subs in 25 years if they are to build 65x maybe by 2060 that could be done.

Russia isn't the USSR let alone the US. It has a much smaller economy.

The Russians plan to make a cheaper nuclear attack submarine called Laika. That is supposed to be the counter to Virginia. Supposed to be built in more numbers than Yasen.

Transnistria isn't part of Russia.

If NATO invades Kaliningrad then they lose the Baltics.

If NATO blockade Russian ships in the Baltic then the Russians close NATO ship transit in the Baltic down with missiles. Zircon has over 1000km range. So you tell me.

Russia does not need Kaliningrad as a missile battery to close down the Baltic. Their missiles can do it from over twice the distance.
NATO idiotic claims about how invading Kaliningrad would secure the Baltic ship transit are a pure crock of shit nonsense.

Claims that invading Kaliningrad would secure neighboring countries from Iskander launches are also moronic when Russia is developing 1000km range Iskander versions and mass manufacturing Oreshnik.

NATO generals are morons.

The Russians dumped money into Ukraine and then the US lost the elections after the Orange Revolution. Of course then the US funded a coup and outlawed the opposition. So the hybrid war started.

It is not just ships. Zircon can be launched by Bastion-P land batteries. Probably aircraft eventually as well. They can air launch the Oniks and it is the same size.

In the Baltic you won't be operating the Virginia, and in the White Sea Russia has Harpsichord.

The Virginia would likely be detected.

PAK DA is being built already. Once Project 22350M is designed it will get built.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top