Anti-ship and anti-radar missiles for Su-33?

[Maverick Su-35S]

Hello,

 

 

I don't know if our simulated Su-33 is a different version than the Su-33 described on wikipedia, but logically, a navy aircraft should be able to have anti-ship missiles (if not anti-radar as well) even from the start. I know that if our DCS Su-33 would have these missiles implemented, it would mean that the Su-25T pilots are being eclipsed or are somehow seen as useless, but if in reality the Su-33 does actually use those missiles, why not in DCS as well? As long as the Su-25T is flown for free in DCS, there is nothing unfair to have such possibilities on a payware product like the Su-33. The "game" is already "upset" by having the Harrier with anti-radar missiles and the JA 37 with anti-ship missiles versus a poor Su-25T with no anti-ship dedicated missiles at all, although it carries 2 good anti-radar missiles (the KH-58).

 

What is the reason for not having the Su-33 carry the nowadays Su-33 missiles?

 

Thanks you!

[Silver_Dragon]

Wikipedia has not a valid source, the Su-33 never was implemented with guided air to ground weapons. That has only rockets and bombs.

[bolek]

Wikipedia has not a valid source, the Su-33 never was implemented with guided air to ground weapons. That has only rockets and bombs.

 

Actually, it's pretty funny, the source that wikipedia quotes seems quite valid (they should know :)):

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20110613004238/http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su33/arms/

 

and it agrees with you (no guided air to ground).

[GGTharos]

Jane's defense speculation based on airshow mock ups was responsible for the idea that the su-33 was equipped with every armament under the sun.

[ebabil]

it's quite odd that a naval plane doesn't carry an anti-ship missile

[AeriaGloria]

Fleet defense. The F-14 doesn’t have dedicated anti ship missiles. If they needed guided munitions they would’ve gotten the MiG-29K over the Su-33. At least they eventually got some by ordering with the Indian Navy about ten years ago.

 

Too bad about the Kuznetsov....

[Rushx]

Upgraded Su 33 better weapons, better radar and better RWR!

 

 

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/su-33-flanker-d-su-27k-sea-flanker/

[Rushx]

Upgraded Su 33 better weapons, better radar and better RWR!

 

 

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/su-33-flanker-d-su-27k-sea-flanker/

 

 

 

 

Demonstration video upgraded Su 33!

 

 

Edited December 13, 2018 by Rushx

[Rushx]

Demonstration video upgraded Su 33!

 

 

 

 

Link work!

[AeriaGloria]

As far as real images I only see Su-30s in that video firing AG missiles

[Esac_mirmidon]

The Su-33 never fielded any antiship missile, never ever.

[Rushx]

As far as real images I only see Su-30s in that video firing AG missiles

 

 

Watch the right side L150 Pastel RWR receiver Su 33 cockpit!

 

 

 

 

 

SPO-32 / L150 Pastel digital receiver

 

Pastel entered development in 1982, possibly as a reaction to poor performance of Soviet fighters in the Middle East. By 1983 the initial design was produced. It was intended for the Mi-28, MiG-29K/M, Su-27M and others.

Pastel is a family of new generation digital RWRs.

Su-25TM installation

Scans from 1.2-18GHz threat frequencies.

Accuracy is 3-5° with pinpoint location antenna, 10° in rough location antenna. 128 reprogrammable radar types. Detection range minimum of 120% of the radar’s range. 3 modes- operational target, programmed target, most dangerous target.

Detects and finds direction for pulse, pulse-doppler and CW mode radars in search, track and illumination modes. Classifies multiple threats by danger, with full display of all information about most threatening radar presented to crew. Controls EW systems, has the ability to control and assign targets to 6 anti-radiation missiles such as the Kh-31. Aural warnings for high threat situations.

Pastel may be made available for upgrade packages or built into new export models of the Mig-29 and Su-27 families. Source aerospace.boopidoo.com

General data:

Type: ESM Altitude Max: 0 m Range Max: 222.2 km Altitude Min: 0 m Range Min: 0 km Generation: Early 1990s Sensors / EW: SPO-32 Pastel [L-150] – ESM

Role: RWR, Radar Warning Receiver

Max Range: 222.2 km

[Esac_mirmidon]

So?

 

What the L150 have related to antiship missiles in the Su-33?

[Falcon_S]

The Su-33 never fielded any antiship missile, never ever.

 

Anti-ship: Su33 can carry and be a launch platform but can't guide it or find targets. Lock and guidance coming form other sources... maybe satelites or equipped aircrafts for that.

 

 

Кроме того, ╚Москит╩ был установлен на экраноплане "Лунь", его можно применять в частях береговой обороны и в морской авиации (Су-33,Су-27,Су-32ФН). На корабельном самолете Су-27К(Су-33) под фюзеляжем между мотогондолами может быть размещена одна ракета 3М80.

 

Source: http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/pkr/moskit.html

[Rushx]

Lock On Su 33 and KH 41!

 

 

[Satarosa]

As far as real images I only see Su-30s in that video firing AG missiles

 

 

 

And Su-35

[Silver_Dragon]

Anti-ship: Su33 can carry and be a launch platform but can't guide it or find targets. Lock and guidance coming form other sources... maybe satelites or equipped aircrafts for that.

 

 

 

 

Source: http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/pkr/moskit.html

 

Mock up missile, show on a air festival, similarly to a "claimed" Su-32 ASW aircraft never developed. The Air launcher version never was enter in service on russian air force and the Su-33 not get the necesary hardware to use them. The old Lomac FC-1 antiship / guided capabilities was deleted from Su-33, confirmed by military personal on Russia armed forces (By ED).

Edited December 13, 2018 by Silver_Dragon

[Esac_mirmidon]

People are persistent as heel with the same debates over and over again.

[Falcon_S]

... (By ED).

 

Do not believe too much to ED.

 

People are persistent as heel with the same debates over and over again.

 

Please show some respect to people and their interests. With all respect to you but it does not have to every debate stop because of your conclusions or knowledge.

 

What if I tell you that real RU pilot, right now sit with me and think different than you about your limited knowledge? ;)

Edited December 13, 2018 by Falcon_S

[FSKRipper]

Do not believe too much to ED.

 

 

 

Please show some respect to people and their interests. With all respect to you but it does not have to every debate stop because of your conclusions or knowledge.

 

What if I tell you that real RU pilot, right now sit with me and think different than you about your limited knowledge? ;)

 

Nice that you ask. I prefer believing ED more than a person I never met, never spoke to before and don't even know really exists behind his/her anonymous forum account. :smilewink:

 

The funny thing is these forums are literally brimming over with experts and RL pilots. What I want to say is that if no one to this point was able to bring evidence of this lodout it must be highly confidential. Telling us you got this information from a RL russian pilot and posted it on these boards would mean you and he just betrayed your country :music_whistling:

 

Don't know if I would be messing with the FSB...

Edited December 13, 2018 by FSKRipper

[Falcon_S]

We do not have access to confidential documents and we do not have anything else than to believe or do not believe in something or someone. But our belief or not belief does not give us the right to that We challenge someone's opinion or attitude... especially with disdainful posts.

 

The funny thing is these forums are literally brimming over with experts and RL pilots.

 

I agree.

 

Over and out.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Ask your Russian pilot friend If the Moskit was ever fielded, im saying again, FIELDED, that was the exact word used by me, for the Su-33. If you have that interesting source of information is no more a question of beleive or not.

 

I really hope you probe me wrong, you know, to improve my limited knowledge.

[Falcon_S]

Ask your Russian pilot friend If the Moskit was ever fielded, im saying again, FIELDED, that was the exact word used by me, for the Su-33. If you have that interesting source of information is no more a question of beleive or not.

 

I really hope you probe me wrong, you know, to improve my limited knowledge.

 

As i said:

Su33 can carry and be a launch platform

 

*limited knowledge = we do not have access to documents, programs, projects...

 

:pilotfly:

[Esac_mirmidon]

Like any other airframe in the World with enough resources, development and military interest to field and use a weapon system.

 

But from "can" to actually "use" there is a huge gap.

 

Even the Su-33 had not a SPO mounted from years since entering service because it was developed to use a more advance version never installed until very recently.

 

So the Su-33 "can" use the L150 but only fielded 25 years later.

[FSKRipper]

As i said:

 

 

*limited knowledge = we do not have access to documents, programs, projects...

 

:pilotfly:

 

Maybe we had a misunderstanding. Because you said don't believe ED in this case I implied that you or your pilot friend have more relevant information on this subject than ED. If that isn't the case I would stick with ED...

 

I would also hope that we are wrong because I would like this option for the Su-33 which is a real impressive plane in my opinion.

 

But like you stated "can carry" it is the same as the F-15C with bombs. The Eagle can carry bombs but was never fielded with them so we wont get the option from ED.

Edited December 13, 2018 by FSKRipper