Su-27KUB

[Pilotasso]

goolge= R-27EA's on the Mig-15 ;)

[Alfa]

goolge= R-27EA's on the Mig-15 ;)

 

Hehe yeah true :) .

[Force_Feedback]

Mig-15s should have a small head on RCS, the fan blades are hidden well :P BTW, is Albania still flying them?

 

So Alfa, when will the Russians allow press near the 27-KUB? That thing has nearly the same fetish-value for me as the su-34/32/27FN, so that's why I require a cabin and cockpit shot (and close-ups of the seats and canopy hatches).

 

Is it still having the Zhuk-ME, or did they install some newer radar? Now if it only got the nice flat nose from the su-34, then it would be an uber plane. And is it still limited to 8.5 G (I know, 0.5 G means squat, but still)

 

Oh, and did they fix the FSC, or do the canards still fly off at high speeds?

[Alfa_Kilo]

So Alfa, when will the Russians allow press near the 27-KUB? That thing has nearly the same fetish-value for me as the su-34/32/27FN, so that's why I require a cabin and cockpit shot (and close-ups of the seats and canopy hatches).

 

Is it still having the Zhuk-ME, or did they install some newer radar? Now if it only got the nice flat nose from the su-34, then it would be an uber plane. And is it still limited to 8.5 G (I know, 0.5 G means squat, but still)

 

VVS accepted the first two Su-32 (or is the VVS version called Su-34?) on 15th Dec'06. They expect a full regiment by 2010.

 

I believe the entry into the Su-27KUB's cocpit is similar to the Su-32, ie through a hatch in the nose gear bay, there being no cockpit hatches. I wonder what happens in case of a belly landing... :(

 

The current radar is the Zhuk-MFSE PESA. Is the Su-33 rated at 8.5G? I thought it was 8G...

[Alfa]

So Alfa, when will the Russians allow press near the 27-KUB?

 

Heh good question - I would like to know too :) .

 

That thing has nearly the same fetish-value for me as the su-34/32/27FN, so that's why I require a cabin and cockpit shot (and close-ups of the seats and canopy hatches).

 

Unfortunately I don't think that any cockpit picture have been published - the most revealing photos I have seen(been around for a while now) were the ones at the bottom on this web page: http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/flankers_pages/su-27kub.htm (photos from the Airfleet magazine) showing the Zhuk-MSE radar....but no cockpit shots.

 

Is it still having the Zhuk-ME, or did they install some newer radar?

 

Yes, as Alfa_Kilo mentioned, word is that they replaced the Zhuk-MSE(planar slotted array) with the Zhuk-MSFE passive phased array version - I wonder if they will stick with that or change it again to a large version the new Zhuk-MAE AESA set(fitted to the MiG-35).

 

Now if it only got the nice flat nose from the su-34, then it would be an uber plane.

 

It won't get the "duck nose" radome of the Su-34 - the Su-27KUB really has nothing to do with the Su-34 although the cockpit arrangement has some superficial resemblence to this(actually quite different when you study the pits closely). The KUB airframe is derrived from the Su-33 one and although it is more "beefy"(and has bigger "aerodynamic surfaces") compared to this, it is much more nimble and fighter-like than that of the Su-34 - and of course the Su-34 was designed with a different radar(B004 phased array) in mind, which may have something to do with the shape of the radome.

 

And is it still limited to 8.5 G (I know, 0.5 G means squat, but still)

 

I don't know what the G-rating of the KUB airframe is FF - but given that all aerodynamic surfaces(wings, tailplanes, vertical stabilizers and canards) are different(and bigger) from those of the Su-33, I don't think we can derrive anything from comparing it to the Su-33 airframe......but we can safely assume that it will be a heck of a lot more agile than the Su-34 dedicated bomber(IIRC rated at 7 Gs only).

 

Oh, and did they fix the FSC, or do the canards still fly off at high speeds?

 

The KUB has a new digital FBW FCS, so that is another aspect apart from the above to make comparisons in flight characteristic between the KUB and Su-33 rather difficult.

[Force_Feedback]

I was referring to the incident on 16-06-2000 with that new digital FCS, when the right canard ripped off, damaging the cockpit section and the right side canopy. All the sources I've read state a G limit of 8.5 for both the Su-27K as the -KUB.

 

The basis for testing the KUB was the su-27IB, which in turn became the Su-34/32, only after those a real su-27KUB came to life, so it is derrived from the Su-34, but is based on the su-27k airframe, rather than being a more radical modification like the su-34. 'Inspired by' would be a better description I guess ;)

 

As for belly landings, well, the canopy hatches can be jettisoned, or removed by the ground crew if time is not the issue. I don't think belly landings are an option on a carrier deck, especially on the Kuznetsov, when land bases are out of reach it's either refuel in mid-air to reach land, or a controlled ejection.

 

The cool thing is that the KUB has now FP engines and that with a bigger wing surface and similar empty weight should make it superior to the vanilla su-27K, so pilots would be trained on an airframe that is better than the ones they will be flying after :P

[Alfa_Kilo]

The cool thing is that the KUB has now FP engines and that with a bigger wing surface and similar empty weight should make it superior to the vanilla su-27K, so pilots would be trained on an airframe that is better than the ones they will be flying after :P

 

So in the near future, a potential AV-MF fighter pilot will graduate through the following....

 

Yak-52 (Su-49?)

L-39

Yak-130 (twin engine, good performance for an AJT)

Su-25UTG (dodo)

Su-27KUB (uber fighter bomber)

Su-33

 

.....what a rollercoaster ride!

[Force_Feedback]

Huh, I thought it was yak-52M, Yak-130 (since it's an AJT and a lead-in JT in one), Su-27KUB, Su-33?

 

Once the KUB is operational there is no need for the dodo UTG, same applies for the Yak-130, but it has to finish goverment trials fiirst, and the KUB lags even further behind, as it's still in the prototype/flight testing stage, AFAIK it's not yet accepted for state trials.

[Kusch]

Su-27KUB video (older version Su-27KUB/ 1999)

 

http://video.aviacia.ru/429

[Boneski]

Hmm... cool, but i'm not sure i like the side-by-side cockpit configuration. makes a fighter look fat to me.

 

 

But the TVC nozzles look sweet.

 

 

It's a killing Machine.... not a Super Model Bro! Cut it some slack! LOL!!:pilotfly:

[EvilBivol-1]

Rumor's going around that Russia might be looking at the new MiG-29K/KUB combo as their replacement for the Su-33. Would appear to make more sense that way. Mi-28 vs. Ka-50 fiasco, anyone?

[RvETito]

Posted in this russian forum section- http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=23880 says that on 25th june the prototype of the single seate MiG-29K has made it's first flight, test pilot- the usual suspect- Pavel Vlassov. It has new engines rated at 9000kgf of thrust without TVC, totaly new front fuselage section, modified wind (Krueger flaps added), totaly new (compared to 9-31) avionics. Appears to be the single seater for India.

[thesystem]

Yes it is for india, for theyr carrier!

[Alfa]

Su-27KUB video (older version Su-27KUB/ 1999)

 

http://video.aviacia.ru/429

 

Another interesting find Kusch! :) .

 

I am a little puzzled by the title of the video though. As far as I can see Apakidze only appears in the video at the very beginning(on the phone in the briefing room), while the guy flying the aircraft in the video is Victor Pugachev(?).

 

Anyway, it is interesting that there doesn't appear to be any MFDs in the pit - at least not on the pilot's side. I suppose there can be two explanations for this:

 

a). the prototype in the video is for flight testing only - i.e. pit not in final configuration(like you said "older version of Su-27KUB").

 

b). there are MFDs but situated in center of pit and therefore not visible in the footage(maybe intentionally).

[Alfa]

Rumor's going around that Russia might be looking at the new MiG-29K/KUB combo as their replacement for the Su-33. Would appear to make more sense that way. Mi-28 vs. Ka-50 fiasco, anyone?

 

Well you know how it is with rumours :) .

 

But then I wouldn't exclude the possibility either - with the "Indian order" there is now is a fully developed up-to-date MiG-29K/MiG-29KUB combo available + a production line in place, which needless to say makes it a lot more feasible than earlier for the Russian navy to consider the MiG-29K.

 

Moreover, with both Russia and India placing orders the initial costs of development and production line setup would be spread over a larger number of airframes and thus help to reduce cost per unit for both parties.

[Force_Feedback]

Timur Apakidze was a great guy, nobody should die in such manner, RIP (again). Don't be mistaken, the first two KUB airframes were su-33 converts, and you know how it is with Russian prototypes, first the airframe, then the electronics (plus new MFDs need to be certified and such).

As you all know the Su-27KUB and su-34 are one of my biggest fetishes, especially electronics wise, so this video is really nice, I've seen it posted a while ago, but thought it was with that song that Timur sang. If only he ejected 6 years ago :/

 

Realy nice video, guess they folded the wings before taxiing, that or the ramp officer is some ace

[Force_Feedback]

The 'production' Su-27KUB will have 5 MFDs, 4 with a 15 inch diameter, and one with 21'. A HMD/HMS is also planned to remove the need for a HUD. The plane weighs as much as the single seat su-33 due to composite use. This combined with a greater wing area, new seamless elastic composit leading edge flaps, bigger control surfaces and uprated engines with TVC will make this plane very, very capable. Fact remains that the design itself is over 10 years old already, and will not come into service for at least another 5-10 years. By the time it takes the skies it will already be obsolete compared to the Rafale-M and F-35C.

[EvilBivol-1]

Well you know how it is with rumours :) .

 

But then I wouldn't exclude the possibility either - with the "Indian order" there is now is a fully developed up-to-date MiG-29K/MiG-29KUB combo available + a production line in place, which needless to say makes it a lot more feasible than earlier for the Russian navy to consider the MiG-29K.

 

Moreover, with both Russia and India placing orders the initial costs of development and production line setup would be spread over a larger number of airframes and thus help to reduce cost per unit for both parties.

According to press releases, the Russian Navy plans on constructing 3-4 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in the 50K ton class, but with about 30 aircraft on-board. Unless they're including helicopters in that number (which they probably are), it would seem to point to the MiG rather than the Sukhoi. But anyway, the MiG-29K/KUB combo is more logical in light of not having such a combo from Sukhoi.

 

Reliability of these press releases is a whole other question though. Supposedly, a new contruction dock is being built in Severodvinsk.

[EvilBivol-1]

A HMD/HMS is also planned to remove the need for a HUD.

Have you come across any Russian HMS/D designs, besides the old one? I haven't.

[Pilotasso]

Considering the economical capacity and overall pilot training readiness makes no sense for russia to spend on 4 nuclear carriers. Seems to me that is a tactical departure not to mention mismatch of todays needs.

Funds for pilot training would serve russia far better.

[Force_Feedback]

Have you come across any Russian HMS/D designs, besides the old one? I haven't.

 

Так што, чипуху пишут на aviaport.ru? А у вас есть ссылка на ети новости про атомных авиационных крейсера?

[Pilotasso]

Que falta de cortesia em falar uma lingua que mais ninguem compreende. :D

tsss tsss

Deixo-te a adivinhar o que esta mensagem significa, boa sorte. :)

[Alfa]

According to press releases, the Russian Navy plans on constructing 3-4 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in the 50K ton class, but with about 30 aircraft on-board.

 

Well I have seen the Russian minister of defence quoted as saying that Russia plans on operating "several aircraft carriers" in the future. I have not heard anything about the number or their size, but four vessels sounds quite likely as it would be a continuation of what has been the case with past designs - i.e. there were four Kiev class vessels, just as the "Kuz" was the first of four vessels to replace them - although the last two would have been of larger design yet.

 

I am a little more sceptical about the size though - considering that Russia:

 

a). ...has previous experience operating vessels in the 40K + range and found those to be inadequate exactly due to their size - the conversion of the Gorshkov currently being carried out for the Indian navy is not a new idea, it was initially proposed for the Soviet navy, but rejected and all four vessels redrawn from active service.

 

Even the larger "Kreml class"(65 k of displacement) to which the Kuznetsov(and Varyag) belongs was something of a compromise to the four vessels in the ~ 80k range the navy really wanted.....two of which they started building in the early nineties before the economic realities lead to their cancellation.

 

b). ...despite economic hardship has invested a great deal of money keeping the Kuznetsov in service and refining on the design.

 

With those things in mind it would seem a little strange if they were to "start from scratch" and go for a design roughly the size of the Kiev-class. I would have thought that they would simply revive the "Ul' Yanovsk" design or, if that isn't economically feasible/acceptable, base a new modern design on the Kuznetsov.....e.g. with nuclear propulsion.

 

Now I know that someone would jump out and say that the strategic situation is different now from what it was during the cold war and that this would warrant a different approach to new carrier designs - but I just don't see this as being the case. The political situation may have changed, but the Soviet naval doctrine was largely derrived based on geographical realities/spheres of interest, which remain and are radically different from those of other nations operating aircraft carriers. Moreover, unlike the US, the Soviet Union never considered the use of aircraft carriers as the "mainstay" of naval power - this status was assigned to the submarine fleet and the role of aircraft carrying ships was merely to support and protect them. Unless Russia has(or is going to) radically change the naval doctrine in regards to the importance placed on submarines, I don't see their philosophy in regards to the use of aircraft carriers changing either.

 

Reliability of these press releases is a whole other question though. Supposedly, a new contruction dock is being built in Severodvinsk.

 

Indeed - I wouldn't be surprised if it was a case of "observers" taking it upon themselves to speculate on what that rather vague official Russian mention of new aircraft carriers could mean - perhaps with an eye on what other nations(such as Britain and France) are planning :) .

 

Unless they're including helicopters in that number (which they probably are), it would seem to point to the MiG rather than the Sukhoi.

 

Hmm I beg to differ Evil.

 

For a start it is common practise to state the absolute maximum number of aircraft that can be carried - meaning filling up both flight deck as well as hanger deck, which in reality would be impractical operational procedure. E.g the US Nimitz carriers are said to be able to accomodate up to some 90 aircraft, but how many are they actually carrying? :) . Another example is the modified Gorshkov design which was stated as being able to carry up to 30 fixed wing aircraft and 6 helicopters - yet India only ordered 16 MiG-29K fighters - four of which being the two-seat MiG-29KUB combat trainer variant. This indicates to me that the intended airwing will consist of only one squadron - e.g. 12 single-seaters and 2 twin-seaters with the remaining two twin-seaters being used for training purposes ashore.

 

If a design under consideration for the Russian navy is larger, the stated number of aircraft(around 30) is a maximum number and even includes helicopters, then that would IMO point towards the Su-33 rather than the much smaller MiG-29K :) . But the biggest indication.....

 

But anyway, the MiG-29K/KUB combo is more logical in light of not having such a combo from Sukhoi.

 

But Evil.....such a combo is (or will be) available from Sukhoi - thats the thing ;) .

 

I think a lot of people(myself included) have been wondering why Sukhoi would undertake the development of such a radically new Su-33 design, when there aren't any obvious potential customers for it.......the effort would certainly seem to be an insane "overkill" if was merely to equip the Russian navy with 4 or 5 airframes to replace the Su-25UTGs :) . If it, on the other hand, turns out to be the first step in longer term carrier program that involves four vessels, then it does make a lot more sense :) .

 

Even so I still don't think the MiG-29K/KUB can be excluded as an option for the Russian navy - apart from the earlier mentioned opportunities arising with the Indian order in terms of developement/production matters, the smaller MIG-29K design would provide the Russian navy with more flexible options in terms of airwing configurations than with Su-33s alone :) .

[Tranquil]

If the Russian navy were to procure the KUB's they would be the only nation on earth to operate a heavy maritime tactical strike platform with the ability to employ Air Launched Cruise Missiles, heavy Anti-Radiation & Anti Ship weapons.

There is no analogue currently in service anywhere in the world. The system far surpasses the woeful capabilities of the current 'default' western maritime strike aircraft. And in many way's out performs the next generation system in all the important areas: range with X payload and max bring-back load.

A rich SEA / Pacific nation purchasing a CV and KUB's, could overnight become the dominant player in the region. This is probably a good thing for America's lapdog.. expedites their requirement for Raptor's.

 

Im a huge MiG-29 fan with the K/SM/SMT variants being probably my 'favourite' aircraft of all time. I unfortunately don’t think they are the ideal choice for maritime operations. This is mainly due to the range issue and comparative low powered radar.

Flexibility is nice to have, but when likely operations are going to involve trucking bomb's from A to B, intercept's, escorts and CAP. Payload, range, bring-back & logistical footprint are the decisive factor's.

[EvilBivol-1]

Here is a link to the original press release, but it's in Russian:

http://lenta.ru/news/2007/06/23/aircarrier/

 

Так што, чипуху пишут на aviaport.ru?

I don't know, just haven't seen anything myself. Chizh posted that he had asked the manufacturer of the Russian-produced Schel-3UM if there are any new projects in development and the answer was no. But there may be other companies, I guess. Can you link me the aviaport posts?

 

Alfa,

 

In reference to the number 30, it does say fixed and rotary winged aircraft, though I'm not certian if that means their total would add up to 30 or simply that the carrier would operate both.

 

Indeed - I wouldn't be surprised if it was a case of "observers" taking it upon themselves to speculate on what that rather vague official Russian mention of new aircraft carriers could mean - perhaps with an eye on what other nations(such as Britain and France) are planning :) .

Actually, all of the numbers (3-4 carriers, around 30 a/c, and 50K tons) were quoted from Masorin's statement.

 

If a design under consideration for the Russian navy is larger, the stated number of aircraft(around 30) is a maximum number and even includes helicopters, then that would IMO point towards the Su-33 rather than the much smaller MiG-29K :) .

But is it significantly larger? I think that if they want to fit a decent number of aircaft on such a small carrier, the MiG-29 is a better "fit".

 

But Evil.....such a combo is (or will be) available from Sukhoi - thats the thing ;) .

Really? Are there plans for an upgraded single-seat Su-33? Otherwise, the two-seater is all they have and it doesn't seem optimal to operate outdated single-seaters with modern two-seaters. Unless they dump the single-seaters all together. None of this makes much sense to me, especially when a fully developed combo is already available from MiG - moreover, one which is being field-tested conceptually and operationally by India.

 

At the end of the day though, this is Russia we're talking about and I personally don't take any of the above too seriously yet. If I was a betting man, I would look past the technical merits of either the ship or the aircaft and place my bets on the company that can make the fatter bribe - and historically that would be Sukhoi. :)