JJ_Alfa - Su25TP?

[britgliderpilot]

While doing a bit of research on the various Su25 variants, I came across a proposed variant, to be called the Su25TP . . . . a version of the Su25TM modified for carrier ops.

 

Was apparently considered for carrier ops by the Russian Navy, and is actually the first indication I've seen that ED's carrier-capable Su39 may actually have had a basis in real life.

 

 

Check this link:

 

http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avsu25.html

 

 

It's not a particular surprise that they may have had more information than us, but it's not something I've ever seen referred to on the boards - you?

[Alfa]

Hello Britglider,

 

Yes I am aware of this proposed "Su-25TP" variant(I actually mentioned it on my website), but it never materialised into an actual aircraft - not even a prototype :) .

 

To be honest I am very sceptical about the feasibility of a carrier capable Su-39 - with the flight characteristics of the Su-25T in the back of the mind, I have a hard time imagining an even heavier(re-inforced airframe) version taking off and landing from a carrier with heavy strike ordinance - it would be very overweight and very underpowered for the purpose.

 

Besides, the Su-25 was designed as an anti-tank aircraft and is not exactly the type of aircraft you would think of first for a long range naval strike aircraft......the more I think about it, the less sense it seems to make :D

 

But you are right - apparently someone at Sukhoi seriously considered this at one point :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

While doing a bit of research on the various Su25 variants, I came across a proposed variant, to be called the Su25TP . . . . a version of the Su25TM modified for carrier ops.

 

Was apparently considered for carrier ops by the Russian Navy, and is actually the first indication I've seen that ED's carrier-capable Su39 may actually have had a basis in real life.

 

 

Check this link:

 

http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avsu25.html

 

 

It's not a particular surprise that they may have had more information than us, but it's not something I've ever seen referred to on the boards - you?

[SUBS17]

It would make more sense if the carrier had a catapult.

[Alfa]

It would make more sense if the carrier had a catapult.

 

Yes but even so I have my sincere doubts about the usefulness of an Su-25 variant operating in the sea attack role.....not least considering the philosophy behind the ship(Admiral Kuznetsov) from which it would operate.

 

-JJ.

[britgliderpilot]

Yes but even so I have my sincere doubts about the usefulness of an Su-25 variant operating in the sea attack role.....not least considering the philosophy behind the ship(Admiral Kuznetsov) from which it would operate.

 

-JJ.

 

In the maritime strike role, perhaps - even if you just used it as a missile truck.

 

It might have been of *some* use if the Russian Navy had been able to go for the proper expansion of the Navy and use the future carriers as force projection assets (like the USN carriers), and needed a carrier-based ground attack aircraft in the vein of the A4 and A6 . . . . . but that's speculation. Usefulness of an Su25 on the Kuznetsov has been battered to death by now ;)

[Alfa]

In the maritime strike role, perhaps - even if you just used it as a missile truck.

 

The Su-25 airframe makes for a poor "missile truck" Brit.....it can only carry two AshMs for a start and, as Chizh has explained on an earlier occasion, it makes for a poor delivery platform for the Kh-31A, as this missile requires the launching platform to travel at 600+ km/h in order for the missile´s built-in booster to be able to accelerate the missile into a speed where the ramjet sustainer can start up.

 

It might have been of *some* use if the Russian Navy had been able to go for the proper expansion of the Navy and use the future carriers as force projection assets (like the USN carriers), and needed a carrier-based ground attack aircraft in the vein of the A4 and A6 . . . . . but that's speculation.

 

Yes but it was not a question of whether the Russian(or Soviet rather) navy had been able to employ such a doctrine Brit....they never had any such intentions. The ambitious aviation cruiser program they had to abandon(including the 80.000 ton vessels) in 1991, was not a case of attempting to "mirror" US aircraft carrier doctrine, but merely a case of improving on the nature of vessels/aircraft they had developed earlier for their own "aircraft carrier" doctrine/philosophy.

 

Usefulness of an Su25 on the Kuznetsov has been battered to death by now ;)

 

Hehe...sorry if my opinion is counterproductive for your "Su-25TP" project, but for what it is worth(probably not much), you can count on my support for a flyable Su-25UTG/internet trainer feature :) .

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[britgliderpilot]

Hehe...sorry if my opinion is counterproductive for your "Su-25TP" project, but for what it is worth(probably not much), you can count on my support for a flyable Su-25UTG/internet trainer feature :) .

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

No worries, I'm in agreement about the usefulness of such an aircraft and wasn't planning to mod one anyway ;)

 

 

However, if you go visit the Su25UB thread you'll notice that I've made a start on the Su25UTG idea already . . . . grin.

 

There's a quote from Chizh by MrWolf which may pose a bit a problem for the internet training bit, though . . . .

 

The markings are about right for the Su25UTG now, I've got the rear seating position about right, and at long last I've found out the fuel capacity of the Su25UB . . . . . that took a while.

 

The current problem is with the cockpits and spec.

The Su25T cockpits fit the shape properly (especially for the unperiscoped versions of the Su25UB), so I'm trying to find out what the spec level of the Su25UBM is now . . . . .

 

 

No hook, of course, but touch and go's from Saki are fun - now was there a way to allow spawning on the Kuznetsov through a MeInit edit?

[Alfa]

However, if you go visit the Su25UB thread you'll notice that I've made a start on the Su25UTG idea already . . . . grin.

 

Yes I saw that....thats why I mentioned it :)

 

There's a quote from Chizh by MrWolf which may pose a bit a problem for the internet training bit, though . . . .

 

Well the situation is, as you know, that the LAN trainer feature went out the window with the LAN mode - so a new WAN version will first have to be designed/coded and that apparently entails quite a lot of work......so it is probably not right around the corner.

 

The markings are about right for the Su25UTG now, I've got the rear seating position about right, and at long last I've found out the fuel capacity of the Su25UB . . . . . that took a while.

 

Hmm....why do you need the fuel capacity?. To my knowledge you cannot actually change this(coded with the FM).

 

The current problem is with the cockpits and spec.

The Su25T cockpits fit the shape properly (especially for the unperiscoped versions of the Su25UB)..

 

I dont know if it is possible(havent tried), but if it is, I would use the "vanilla" Su-25 pit for the Su-25UTG - the front seat is the same only with the addition of the AOA indexer. But it might not work because the functionality of the Su-25T FM(that the Su-25TM is using) exceeds what is supported by the "vanilla" Su-25 cockpit shape.

 

..so I'm trying to find out what the spec level of the Su25UBM is now . .

 

"Su-25UBM"?. I am not aware of such a version existing even in prototype form yet - it might, but I havent heard of it :) . The upgrade of the single-seat version, the Su-25SM, is a rather recent thing - the first prototype of such an upgraded Su-25 IIRC first appeared at MAKS-2001....so I dont know.. :) .

 

No hook, of course, but touch and go's from Saki are fun - now was there a way to allow spawning on the Kuznetsov through a MeInit edit?

 

Yes - and it will even allow the AI controlled aircraft to land on it again despite the lack of a hook.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[britgliderpilot]

Yes I saw that....thats why I mentioned it :)

 

 

Well the situation is, as you know, that the LAN trainer feature went out the window with the LAN mode - so a new WAN version will first have to be designed/coded and that apparently entails quite a lot of work......so it is probably not right around the corner.

 

 

Hmm....why do you need the fuel capacity?. To my knowledge you cannot actually change this(coded with the FM).

 

 

I dont know if it is possible(havent tried), but if it is, I would use the "vanilla" Su-25 pit for the Su-25UTG - the front seat is the same only with the addition of the AOA indexer. But it might not work because the functionality of the Su-25T FM(that the Su-25TM is using) exceeds what is supported by the "vanilla" Su-25 cockpit shape.

 

 

"Su-25UBM"?. I am not aware of such a version existing even in prototype form yet - it might, but I havent heard of it :) . The upgrade of the single-seat version, the Su-25SM, is a rather recent thing - the first prototype of such an upgraded Su-25 IIRC first appeared at MAKS-2001....so I dont know.. :) .

 

 

Yes - and it will even allow the AI controlled aircraft to land on it again despite the lack of a hook.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

 

OK then - in order . . . . ;)

 

 

Patience, then, for the Instructor bit . . . . will have a test version of this mod without instructor capability ready as soon as I can throw it together :)

It'll be fun to fly, but won't have any actual purpose.

 

 

Fuel is just for the sake of accuracy - the rear cockpit of the Su25UB takes the place of a fuel tank, reducing the total fuel capacity. That's as simple as a tweak in the MeInit.

 

 

Cockpits . . . well . . . you can use the Su25 cockpit, but you get the HUD whether you want it or not :p

You can get around that by setting a HUD failure in every mission, but given that we've got a HUD anyway and the difference in canopy bars etc . . . . I'm using the Su25T pit.

Also allows for use of this mod for weapons system training for the Su25T.

 

It's about balancing discrepancies, and which one you eventually choose to leave in :p

 

The ideal solution for the Su25UTG would be to use the Su25 cockpit, but with the Su25T's canopy bars and HUD failure programmed into every mission. However, playing with the canopy textures and 3D models is a Complete Pain, and as of yet I haven't found the right way to do it.

 

 

Ah, the joys of internet research :s

Now at Uni I could at least consult Janes, but I don't have that luxury here . . . . several sites claim the Su25UBM is planned, but of course it could be in the same boat as the Su25TP, Su25UTP, and so forth . . . .

 

 

Any chance you could tell me what that required MeInit tweak is? :p

[Alfa]

Patience, then, for the Instructor bit

 

Yeah I am afraid that will be required :)

 

Fuel is just for the sake of accuracy - the rear cockpit of the Su25UB takes the place of a fuel tank, reducing the total fuel capacity.

 

Yeah I know and good thinking Britglider, but...

 

..That's as simple as a tweak in the MeInit.

 

Well thats the thing ;) - you can change it in the MEinit, but as far as I remember it will not affect the quantity you have once you enter the mission - i.e. this is "hardcoded" with the FM, while the bit you can edit in the MEinit only affects the quantity as displayed in the Payload Editor.

 

Cockpits . . . well . . . you can use the Su25 cockpit, but you get the HUD whether you want it or not :p .

 

Ok I see :) ....but dont you mean "HDD"?

 

You can get around that by setting a HUD failure in every mission, but given that we've got a HUD anyway and the difference in canopy bars etc . . . . I'm using the Su25T pit.

Also allows for use of this mod for weapons system training for the Su25T.

 

It's about balancing discrepancies, and which one you eventually choose to leave in :p

 

Yeah I know what you mean :)

 

 

The ideal solution for the Su25UTG would be to use the Su25 cockpit, but with the Su25T's canopy bars and HUD failure programmed into every mission. However, playing with the canopy textures and 3D models is a Complete Pain, and as of yet I haven't found the right way to do it.

 

Hehe....well the ideal solution would be an official Su-25UTG :p

 

Ah, the joys of internet research :s

Now at Uni I could at least consult Janes, but I don't have that luxury here . . . . several sites claim the Su25UBM is planned, but of course it could be in the same boat as the Su25TP, Su25UTP, and so forth . . . .

 

ahh...no thats not what I meant :) . I can well imagine that an "Su-25UBM" is an actual plan....it would follow the trend of the MiG-29 and Su-27 upgrade programs..

 

- MiG-29 to MiG-29SMT

- MiG-29UB to MiG-29UBT

 

- Su-27S to Su-27SM

- Su-27UB to Su-27UBM

 

...i.e...

 

- Su-25 to Su-25SM

- Su-25UB to Su-25UBM

 

What I meant was that I havent seen any mention of an "Su-25UBM" upgraded Su-25UB being presented yet - in which case it would be difficult to find any information on it :) .

 

Any chance you could tell me what that required MeInit tweak is? :p

 

Sure - check your PM.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[britgliderpilot]

Well thats the thing ;) - you can change it in the MEinit, but as far as I remember it will not affect the quantity you have once you enter the mission - i.e. this is "hardcoded" with the FM, while the bit you can edit in the MEinit only affects the quantity as displayed in the Payload Editor.

 

Yeah, you'd think so - but changing the maxfuel number down does apparently edit the number physically carried forward into the mission from the mission editor.

 

Certainly the fuel gauge reads the right number . . . . so I guess it's working.

 

I doubt it'll change the handling much, but for flight duration and the necessity to carry external tanks, it's a nice tweak.

 

 

Ok I see :) ....but dont you mean "HDD"?

 

No, I mean HUD - the airspeed, altitude, and aircraft datum are displayed on the tiny little bit of glass the Su25 uses as it's glorified reflector gunsight. Haven't yet tried to turn on the Shkval with the Su25 pit.

 

 

Hehe....well the ideal solution would be an official Su-25UTG :p

 

Yes, but then I'd have nothing to do! ;)

 

 

 

What I meant was that I havent seen any mention of an "Su-25UBM" upgraded Su-25UB being presented yet - in which case it would be difficult to find any information on it :) .

 

Understood - Venik's site has some info on the Su25UBM idea, but, well . . . . . . ;)

 

 

 

Sure - check your PM.

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

I figured it out just now, and have been testing that bit - I have a new-found respect for the men who fly the Su25UTG off the Kuznetsov!

 

With the AFM, you spawn on the first launch position with everything switched off and no chocks . . . . . doubting I'd get airborne, I tried anyway, and wasn't even faintly surprised to go splash directly over the front :p

 

Launch position three worked a bit better, but still went splash.

 

I ended up right at the back of the deck, the good old Kuznetsov steaming flat out at 30km/h, brakes jammed on, throttles to max, start sliding, release brakes . . . . and even then it was marginal.

 

I think I need a headwind :p

 

The AI is landing just fine, haven't tried to make one launch yet . . . . grin.