Russian a-10 a-like

[ФрогФут]

However, if they wanted to put the 88 on the A10C they could do so.

Such missiles have minimum launch speed.:)

[Boberro]

The A-10 did not have a fire control computer until the early 90s. So no CCIP, CCRP or computed gun pipper for Hogs during Desert Storm. Except for the superiour Maverick missile, Soviet Su-25 as they flew in Afghanistan were probably more accurate weapons platforms than contemporary A-10s.

Su-25 is rather not precise tank killer as A-10A is thanks to Mavericks.

Soviets used Su-25 successfully thanks its toughness, simpleness and effectiveness against rebels. So rocket pods, gunpods, blind bombs. That is enough to kill rebels, it is enough to kill ISIS now.

It performs good in this role, so Russians were pleased. But can it do anything more? No, basic Su-25 cannot do what A-10A did - use Mavericks to easily kills tanks, armory ect.

Newer versions of Frogfoot yes, but still they are in the factory instead of airfield.

 

The A-10A is pretty blind itself.. You only really have the AGM65Ds that provide any optics. And the newer SU-25's can be equipped with the Kopyo radar pod that give it a pretty good air to ground radar capabilities.

Why do you compare in this moment newer Su-25 with the A-10A which almost is no used in the missions? It is a bit retarded :P

And Su-25 cannot use radar now as I read it was rejected as not needed. Said one of the military man from the interview in 2009 if I remember correctly.

 

Basic A-10A from 70-80s has no means of measuring the distance to the target, except manual input for depression for the sight.

Yup, but at the end A-10A got those things, where Su-25 was abandoned for years as "vanilla".

In the meantime we got A-10C with upgrade suites, meanwhile Su-25 is being slowly updated to SM standard, recently better suite.

My point is - we compare both planes, while A-10A got upgrades, becomes A-10C while Su-25 stayed for decades in the basic form.

What do you want to compare if it takes 20+ years to build new optics pod since the last one was used in the T series around 1994?

 

Basic Su-25 has laser rangefinder, ballistic computer, has BIG rockets, is much faster and much smaller, which makes it more difficult to hit with the AAA.

Yes but still you have to use your eye to catch target. This means better no clouds, mist or dark. You expose yourself when looking for targets from the cockpit.

 

It has some guided weapons, but they are rather massive and are used vs bunkers/buildings.

The only advantages of the basic A-10A are range and AGM-65.

Any new missile in production for the series?

Smaller than Kh-25 but more effective than Vikhr? Is "Hermes" missile still in development, as I've seen the news ages ago but still no any real picture of it.

It seems to be nice project.

[wasserfall]

 

Yup, but at the end A-10A got those things, where Su-25 was abandoned for years as "vanilla".

In the meantime we got A-10C with upgrade suites, meanwhile Su-25 is being slowly updated to SM standard, recently better suite.

 

Keep in mind the political changes off the former Soviet union and the lack off money to develop anything.

Sukhoi was struggling to keep it's head above the water.

[Frosty]

General consensus it seems is that the fall of the Soviet Union was the worst thing to happen to DCS

[tflash]

It's very different tactics also: the A-10C is optimized to work with JTAC's and small groups in contact with the enemy; the Su-25 is more a classic ground attack / assault aircraft ideally suited to support advancing forces on the frontline.

 

Majority of sorties in SU-25 still today is with unguided rockets / 100 KG bombs. It's fast and efficient. Unguided weapons do not necessitate a direct kill to generate the wanted effect. When it's raining bombs, enemy positions/columns will go in hiding, even when the bombs are not directly obliterating them. To make use of this you need fast, dynamic tactics.

 

But am I right the SU-25SM can also deploy the KAB-500 laser guided bomb?

[ФрогФут]

Yup, but at the end A-10A got those things, where Su-25 was abandoned for years as "vanilla".

In the meantime we got A-10C with upgrade suites, meanwhile Su-25 is being slowly updated to SM standard, recently better suite.

My point is - we compare both planes, while A-10A got upgrades, becomes A-10C while Su-25 stayed for decades in the basic form.

What do you want to compare if it takes 20+ years to build new optics pod since the last one was used in the T series around 1994?

Yes, we had some problems in 90-s and beginning of 00s. Now we're catching up. A-10C hasn't got all of it's features in one suite as well.

Yes but still you have to use your eye to catch target. This means better no clouds, mist or dark. You expose yourself when looking for targets from the cockpit.

Small secret: to find targets you need wide FOV sensor and it can only be eye. Pods are excellent for tracking, precise aiming, identifying and searching in the specific area, but you find this area with your eyes anyway.

And it is very new for me, that IR or CCD can see through clouds.:))

Any new missile in production for the series?

Russian military are not talking about weapons much.

[danilop]

It's very different tactics also...

 

This.

 

You cannot directly compare machines designed for hugely different military doctrine. Sort of comparing apples to oranges.

 

Every aircraft has to fit its designed role which in turn has to fit current military doctrine. That is how it's done in first class air forces.

 

Both A-10 and SU-25 fit their respective air force doctrines PERFECTLY!

[Frosty]

I don't want to hear about how they can't be compared for the nth time again, It isn't even what I goddamn asked about.

 

This was about finding a better alternative to the SU-25T which is as I understand (At this time) it as the SU-25KM.

 

If I see another god damn post about how they can't be compared...

 

TL: DR.

Comparisons between the A-10A\C and the su-25T\M\KM are now off topic.

Edited November 1, 2015 by Frosty

[pepin1234]

Russian military are not talking about weapons much.

 

that's true.

[Perun]

I don't want to hear about how they can't be compared for the nth time again, It isn't even what I goddamn asked about.

 

This was about finding a better alternative to the SU-25T which is as I understand it as the SU-25KM.

 

If I see another god damn post about how they can't be compared...

 

TL: DR.

Comparisons between the A-10A\C and the su-25T\M\KM are now off topic.

 

You did not ask for it?

 

So you are one of the fools that wants already declare a winner of a debate instead of keeping a discussion fair and equal for evaluation of capabilities and limitations?

 

The problem is not A-10 or Su-25 or which is better in what or what philosphies they have been designed by, what you care is that a debate goes the way you want it to go so others have to tell all the fancy words you want to here to aggree with you and your biased opinion... Just one of these kind of people that have no buisness being on forums.

[PiedDroit]

[..]This was about finding a better alternative to the SU-25T [..]

Well, no, the initial question was "is there anything Russian as good as the A-10? because SU-25 is Ehhh".

 

Which clearly sounded like saying that A-10 rocked and was totally unmatched even by an aircraft specially designed for the same role.

 

No wonder that a lot of people wanted to demonstrate the opposite.

Trying to bury the debate by editing your initial post is kind of rude.

If you don't like the discussion, call it a day and don't answer anymore but don't try to end it forcefully, people still want to add things and debate, this is not *your* thread :thumbup:

[Frosty]

You did not ask for it?

 

So you are one of the fools that wants already declare a winner of a debate instead of keeping a discussion fair and equal for evaluation of capabilities and limitations?

 

The problem is not A-10 or Su-25 or which is better in what or what philosphies they have been designed by, what you care is that a debate goes the way you want it to go so others have to tell all the fancy words you want to here to aggree with you and your biased opinion... Just one of these kind of people that have no buisness being on forums.

 

we've been though all the options already.

 

su-24 - not the right type of aircraft

su-34 - still not right

mig-23 still not right

 

 

any american aircraft - not Russian

 

we are looking at aircraft to replace the su-25 in the same role, as far as i know the yak-130 was looked at for being a CAS support aircraft but it has fewer hardpoints compared even though it is WAY faster, very good trait for strike aircraft in the same role as the su-25. the other option is the su-25M, but it doesn't have a electro-optical TV like the KM or the T. as well as not being in service.

 

 

km even has Double the FOV of the T. a HMD so the possibility of targets being marked with a piper. the box showing the point the TV is looking at can extend past the bounderys of the HUD

 

another quote

 

all-weather and day/night performance

(wiki)

this means that it could have the white hot night mode of the mercury. something the T needed in a pod

 

state-of-the art safety and survivability features

(wiki)

 

this could also imply that it has better jamming capability

 

ability to use Mark 82 and Mark 83 laser-guided bombs and air-to-air missiles, the short-range Vympel R-73

much better than the T

 

the wiki also goes on to mention that the KM will feature a Glass cockpit and multi-display panel. pin point accuracy and the like.

 

i'm sure a lot of the avionics will be replaced and improved up to the standards of the su-25SM. though it is not confirmed

 

 

if you have a better aircraft in mind please share it with us after you have read the entire thread

[Esac_mirmidon]

Oh please dont use wiki to support your claims.

 

Wiki is the Carlo Kopps fanboys source.

[PiedDroit]

The thing is there is no aircraft that will do exactly what the A-10 does, as all the aircraft are different, their capabilities overlap, they don't match exactly.

 

For example for CAS, the SU-25 is a good match (weaponry, survivability) but is also faster and doesn't have the avionics.

Some aircraft will do COIN as the A-10 can do but won't be as survivable (Super Tucano), but they have other advantages (cheaper).

Some other aircraft will do precision bombing just as well (SU-34) but in the other hand will bring other capabilities (long range strike, speed) and other disavantages (less maneuverable slow and low, less survivable, more expensive etc).

 

There is no good answer to your question I'm afraid :cry:

Edited November 1, 2015 by PiedDroit

[Evilducky]

Source on that ?

 

 

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su25/

 

"An upgraded version for the Russian Air Force, the Su-25SM entered service in January 2007. The upgrade includes new navigation computer, Pastel countermeasures suite, SUO-39 fire control system and Phazotron Kopyo-25M radar."

 

http://www.airvectors.net/avsu25.html

 

"The upgrade involves a service-life extension program (SLEP) to increase airframe life and reduce operational costs, installation of a modernized cockpit, and fit of the "Pantera (Panther)" navigation-attack system, featuring a new digital processor; new digital subsystems; a GLONASS-GPS receiver; and a Kopyo-25SM radar mounted in a pod. Early concepts envisioned a nose-mounted radar, but that proved too expensive. The Klen-PS targeting system and the R-95Sh engines are retained; the engines are old-fashioned, but they are very sturdy and reliable."

 

And if your OK with Wiki *I know its not the greatest source*

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25

 

"Su-25UBM

 

The Su-25UBM is a twin seat variant that can be used as an operational trainer, but also has attack capabilities, and can be used for reconnaissance, target designation and airborne control. Its first flight was on 6 December 2008 and it was certified in December 2010. It will enter operational use with the Russian Air Force later. The variant has a Phazotron NIIR Kopyo radar and Bars-2 equipment on board. Su-25UBM's range is believed to be 1,300 km and it may have protection against infra-red guided missiles (IRGM), a minimal requirement on today's battle fields where IRGMs proliferate."[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25#cite_note-70][/url]

[Frosty]

Oh please dont use wiki to support your claims.

 

Noted. Dunno who kopps is though~

[javelina1]

Never mind.

Found what I was looking for was a su-25KM (nick name: scorpion)

 

 

I thought there was some airframe I've never heard of. Turned out what I was looking for was an upgraded su-25. And after looking at that cockpit, I know what I'd rather fly.

 

Wow, that is a "busy" cockpit. Looks cool though.

[Evilducky]

Actually... Can we just all agree that we need a DCS level Su25 in this game.. I dont care what version.. HAHA

[tflash]

^^+1 !

[Frosty]

Su-25KM +1

[Cadarth]

[joke]Sienar Fleet Systems TIE/sa +++![/joke] ;)

Edited November 1, 2015 by Cadarth

[Alfa]

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su25/

 

"An upgraded version for the Russian Air Force, the Su-25SM entered service in January 2007. The upgrade includes new navigation computer, Pastel countermeasures suite, SUO-39 fire control system and Phazotron Kopyo-25M radar."

 

Not correct though - in the end the Russian airforce rejected the radar as part of the SM upgrade.

 

Here is a better source - an old(from ~ 2001) interview with a Sukhoi representative describing the -SM upgrade:

 

"There were two aircraft of the Sukhoi Attack Aircraft Concern (Sturmoviki Sukhogo in Russian) shown at a static display during the MAKS 2001 air show. The Su-39 (Su-25TM) has been repeatedly displayed around earlier and is known to the public well enough, while the Su-25SM upgraded by the Air Force's 121st aircraft repair plant at Kubinka was shown for the first time. The Su-25 upgrade is aimed at expanding their combat capabilities, enhancing lethality and slashing operating and maintenance burden. The plane's navigational accuracy is to grow by an order of magnitude while its ordnance's efficiency is to hike by two to three times.

 

Along with repair, the upgrading of the aircraft included a wide range of improvements through the installation of advanced avionics:

 

- creating a new cockpit-management system with a color multi-purpose display;

 

- fitting the PrNK-25SM sight/navigation system with a satellite navigation capability, which is compatible with the GLONASS (Russia) and NAVSTAR (USA), and MF OES Zakhvat multipurpose optoelectronic system;

 

- replacing the T8-54 weapons management system with the SUO-39;

 

- fitting a new aircraft transponder.

 

Among other modifications are the new Banker-2 radio and ARK-M automatic radiocompass, MSPU voice information equipment and a data preparation panel, a new backup gyrohorizon, an airborne video monitoring system and SVR-25 information registering unit, SOK-UBD built-in test system, UBR-P universal airborne registering unit, PGL-40-2SM AC generator. The KS-1 anti-surge system is replaced by a more up-to-date ESVS one.

 

The upgrade increases combat payload on the new MBD3-U2T-1 bomb racks up to 5,000 kg and expands their ordnance list allowing R-73E air-to-air guided missiles and S-13T rockets with blast fragmentation and armour-piercing warheads, etc. The new modes of regular ordnance employment enable the aircraft to fire Kh-25ML and Kh-29L missiles in horizontal flight, carry out navigational bombing both day and night time in all weather conditions, and engage two air targets during one attack.

 

An electronic intelligence station, the successor to the obsolete radar warning system, that detects emitting air defence radars and warns the pilot of the threat degree considerably reduces a possibility of hitting the modernised aircraft.

 

Vladimir Babak, the president of the Sukhoi Attack Aircraft scientific and production concern was kind enough to grant this interview to our magazine.

 

- The skinny has it that Sukhoi Attack Aircraft worked on the modernisation of the Su-25 ground attack aircraft for quite a long time but it is only this year that we have seen the upgraded aircraft. How did the idea of modernisation originate?

 

- This idea was suggested three or four years ago. The Air Force voiced a wish for an upgraded Su-25, and it literally took me one night and two sheets of paper to write down "an image of the upgraded aircraft", which were the initial data for the modernisation of the Su-25. That was based on the aircraft combat employment experience, on our research and production experience. However, the original proposals were somewhat wider than those demonstrated at the exhibition. We believed, the aircraft needed a built-in radar, which was suggested to the Air Force. It was based on all those requirements that we set today, too. But then the military was not ready for addressing this question. Yet a year and a half ago the Air Force decided for the upgrade of the Su-25, but without fitting the radar. Today we have a decision signed for the modernization of three Su-25 aircraft this year.

 

- Why the Air Force's 121st aircraft repair plant at Kubinka was chosen to be a production base?

 

- It is a more rational decision than teaming with a commercial plant. Besides, it cuts down expenses and allows repairing aircraft along with its upgrading. To be more correct, modernization and repair are done at the same time. According to my estimate the 121st aircraft repair plant is capable of upgrading fifteen to twenty aircraft a year. That is quite enough.

 

We had disagreement on this issue with the production plant in Tbilisi (Tbilisi Aerospace Manufacturing, TAM). On the one hand Vazha Tordia, Director General of the TAM is ready to cooperate with Russia, on the other hand he focuses on the upgrade variant that was exhibited this year in Paris. We have made several attempts to set the modernization of the Su-25 at the TAM going, we have had meetings and discussions but failed to move beyond that point.

 

As early as the time that we started working on the first upgrade variant that included the radar, we gathered a representative meeting attended by the chief air forces' engineers of the Air Forces from Ukraine, Belorussia and other CIS countries. Prior to that we had calculated that it would be more cost-effective to modernize the Su-25 at one plant both from the production preparation point of view, personnel involved and financial reasons. But Ukraine wanted to go it alone, the same with Belorussia. We suggested that tests be carried out together, which is also quite expensive. They are still thinking.

 

Actually, we have only assembled the aircraft and demonstrated it at the MAKS 2001 air show. Now we have to work everything through and get ready for the tests. Currently, we have removed all the equipment and handed it over to the St.Petersburg-based Elektroavtomatika design bureau for all the algorithms to be tested on the test-beds. As all algorithms and interrelations are tested and the aircraft finalised, we will start flight tests. I believe the modernised aircraft will make its first flight in late November.

 

What was changed in the modernised aircraft? Will it be easier for the pilot to handle it?

 

On the one hand, it will be easier, on the other hand - more difficult. It is going to be easier because we excluded many extra operations. On the other hand, we introduced new equipment, a new sight system, new displays. It all has to be mastered. But basically easier, of course. I have identified for myself that the simple Su-25 is somewhat the same as the first grade of school, the Su-25SM - eighth - ninth grade, when Su-39 - is a graduation year of the college. The sight system changed its computer and indication. The previous ASP-17 sight was built 25 years ago. Now it is a completely digital system. Elektroavtomatika developed a very good computer-reliable, with high processing speed. But increased accuracy of combat employment requires more than a computer; it needs more accurate initial information. That is why we had to change all sensors: angle of attack ones, inertial system, air signals system, Doppler radar sensor. We hope these measures will dramatically increase accuracy of horizontal flight bombing, while the precision of navigation should be increased iteratively.

 

The most important is that it will allow more accurate bombing as 90-95 per cent of combat tasks are accomplished using non-guided weapons. Laser- or TV-guided missiles require certain skills from the pilot and if he has not been properly trained then accuracy is out of question.

 

Have you made provisions for a twin-seater which will enable pilots to undergo required training?

 

Out of the three aircraft that we plan to modernize by the end of this year one is a twin-seater. Its upgrade pattern is identical to the single-seat aircraft. Frankly speaking I would like the twinseater to be upgraded to the variant with the radar. Or with the Shkval - in other words to get back to the variant that we started with when we made the first Su-25UB at the aircraft plant in Ulan-Ude. At that time we wanted to commonise its nose part with the Su-39 to be able to fit Shkval on the twinseaters. That is why we are going to have a kind of split variant. The Su-25UB coming from the Air Force will be upgraded to the basic variant, while the aircraft that will be built from scratch - to the other one. But it still has to be given a thought.

 

Can the Su-25SM be compared with the Scorpion?

 

We see the Scorpion as an aircraft one class below. Their upgrade doesn't cover even a half of what we have done. They did not replace the sensors, which will affect bombing accuracy. However, they gained from another point having made provisions for TV-guided weapons. We have not done that yet.

 

How long the Su-25 family aircraft may remain in service?

 

Quite a long time. The aircraft turned out to be a very harmonious one. The aircraft's airframe was designed according to the pattern, which is ideal for an aircraft from the viewpoint of combat employment. Separately located engines, a strong cockpit, a straight wing, a debugged control system. It is a simple and reliable aircraft capable of accomplishing almost any mission. From the airframe point of view and with the current state of affairs, it may fly another hundred years if we assume 20 flying hours a year. Of course the equipment requires more frequent replacement. Besides, I don't think the Su-25SM is the last upgrade. As a platform the aircraft may be used for at least thirty years.

 

It turns out that the Air Force will not need a new attack aircraft for another three decades. What is in store for the Su-39 then?

 

If we take the tasks that we face today, there is the need for the Su-25TM (Su-39). Our Customer, our Air Force are quite interested in this system. There are some tasks that are too tough for the Su-25. The Su-25TM is capable of landing a regular bomb with the bull's eye accuracy wherever it is required. It fights armoured vehicles and carries out its tasks at night and in bad weather conditions. The Su-25TM packs missiles that not only stop the modern tank but literally tear it apart. It makes a good psychological effect. The Su-25TM pilots say they just enjoy performing missions.

 

Probably, the regiments must be equipped with aircraft of all types - ordinary the Su-25, Su-25SM and Su-25TM (Su-39). Each of them will be found use for."

[Boberro]

The Su-25TM packs missiles that not only stop the modern tank but literally tear it apart. It makes a good psychological effect. The Su-25TM pilots say they just enjoy performing missions.

 

Probably, the regiments must be equipped with aircraft of all types - ordinary the Su-25, Su-25SM and Su-25TM (Su-39). Each of them will be found use for."

As we see 14 years later Su-25TM is still not being manufactured again :P

I read that TM upgrade was considered as over sophisticated and too expensive, thus SM cheap suite was done.

Wish it was another, as I see it as only one plane which can stand against A-10C without making own cheeks red.

[Evilducky]

That was an interesting read Alfa. Didn't know that.

[Alfa]

As we see 14 years later Su-25TM is still not being manufactured again

 

Yes the last part was a little "sales pitch" for the Su-25TM/Su-39 :D

Edited November 1, 2015 by Alfa