Su-25T...what a turd

[Eddie]

BTW, in a recent conflict, NATO did not know where the targets were. And with over 22 000 sorties with F-16, F-15's, Fa-18's, Tornados ... they managed to destroy only 17 mobile targets. And that was in over two months period, in en environment of full air superiority.

 

And which conflict would that be?

[GGTharos]

ORLY?....

 

 

F-22's and 35's will operate out of there too. I hear they also have no trouble with rain, deserts, or sea environments (well, the 22 might not like salt as much). ;)

 

PS As for the old school Soviet planes on a modern battlefield they have one major advantage: they don't care for the wind, snow, rain or crappy runways, they operate in any conditions with minimal maintenance, which is something the F-22 and the F-35 can only dream on.

[JCamel]

And which conflict would that be?

I'm going to guess at the Yugoslavia thing. Most of the targets they did get were designated by SF paratroopers.

Edited July 17, 2012 by JCamel

[JCamel]

Would like to read about that...

Of course I'm talking about visual range engagement when I say dogfight. In medium range engagements, the F-22 locked an AMRAAM before it was even detected. If the F-22 has an external fuel tank, then things change. Those tests were minus the PIRATE system.

 

It all boils down to conventional maneuverability and thrust-to-weight ratio. The F-22's thrust vectoring proved nigh on useless, yet that was the reason it was selected above the YF-23, which was the better aircraft by every other performance parameter, with a thrust-to-weight ratio some 25% better.

Edited July 17, 2012 by JCamel

[GGTharos]

Of course I'm talking about visual range engagement when I say dogfight. In medium range engagements, the F-22 locked an AMRAAM before it was even detected. If the F-22 has an external fuel tank, then things change. Those tests were minus the PIRATE system.

 

It has more fuel internally than an F-15C with an external tank ... AND less drag. PIRATE won't change much. IRST's still need to be told where to look for long-range detections. Head-on, the IRST will only be useful against legacy, uncooled aircraft. In WVR, it won't make a difference because in that range you may as well use the radar.

 

The only problem is that you probably won't know that 22 is coming, or where he's coming from. Eventually, the 22 may be equipped with the 9X Block 2. What then?

 

It all boils down to conventional maneuverability and thrust-to-weight ratio. The F-22's thrust vectoring proved nigh on useless, yet that was the reason it was selected above the YF-23, which was the better aircraft by every other performance parameter, with a thrust-to-weight ratio some 25% better.

Actually it is quite useful. What on /earth/ are you talking about? It makes good old cruising more efficient to start with. And the YF-23 didn't and wouldn't have that much better TWR - it would have grown in weight too, and it had other problems as well; the engines themselves were rejected completely.

 

What does any of this have to do with the 25?

Edited July 17, 2012 by GGTharos

[Alfa]

Sadly no, but the Mercury pod is on the Su-25T.

 

The TM introduced a few other avionics upgrades including an air-to-air radar and some radar guided missiles, giving it a bit of a leg up in air-to-air engagements.

 

The radar in question is called "Kopyo"(small version of Zhuk-M) and is carried in a belly-pod - it is a multifunctional set with both air-to-air and air-to-ground mapping modes and as such actually much more sophisticated than those installed in base-line MiG-29 and Su-27 versions.

 

The air-to-air modes would provide the Su-25TM with "self-escort" capabilities, but the air-to-surface modes in combination with a further developed version of the Skhval system are more important for its role as attack aircraft - ability to find targets by itself at longer range. The radar also support radar guided anti-ship missiles in these modes.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I'm going to guess at the Yugoslavia thing. Most of the targets they did get were designated by SF paratroopers.

Yes, it was NATO use of military over Yugoslavia. Special Force paratroopers? Hmmm ... interesting.

[Groove]

A Longbow pilot once told me their expected survival time on battlefield if cold war would get hot - 16 Minutes.

 

So is the Longbow just good for some insurgence in Afghanistan?

[MadTommy]

A Longbow pilot once told me their expected survival time on battlefield if cold war would get hot - 16 Minutes

 

If true that is a frightening fact. :noexpression:

[Ironhand]

If you do not know about it, there are a number of videos here about the Su25

http://flankertraining.com/ironhand/a2g.htm

Out of curiosity, just what version (Flaming Cliffs 1.x, 2.0, other?) of the -25T is this? If it helps anyone, there is an introductory flight for the aircraft on the Flight Basics page at Flankertraining.com as well as well.

 

 

 

Rich

[Hellfire257]

This thread is blasphemy! I miss my normal Su-25 though... :(

[JCamel]

The radar in question is called "Kopyo"(small version of Zhuk-M) and is carried in a belly-pod - it is a multifunctional set with both air-to-air and air-to-ground mapping modes and as such actually much more sophisticated than those installed in base-line MiG-29 and Su-27 versions.

 

The air-to-air modes would provide the Su-25TM with "self-escort" capabilities, but the air-to-surface modes in combination with a further developed version of the Skhval system are more important for its role as attack aircraft - ability to find targets by itself at longer range. The radar also support radar guided anti-ship missiles in these modes.

If it's a A-G radar, it should be able to see through clouds too???

[159th_Falcon]

If it's a A-G radar, it should be able to see through clouds too???

Im no expert but i guess it depends on the cloud in question.

I wouldn't be surprised if certain types of clouds or precipitation could hinder radar operation.

[JCamel]

It has more fuel internally than an F-15C with an external tank ... AND less drag. PIRATE won't change much. IRST's still need to be told where to look for long-range detections. Head-on, the IRST will only be useful against legacy, uncooled aircraft. In WVR, it won't make a difference because in that range you may as well use the radar.

The system can be told where to look though, by more advanced radar on specialist planes like AWACS or advanced ground radar that can detect stealth. A symbol then appears on the helmet optics and a laser can be used to initiate a track. Naturally, it'll never be used against an F-22 in a real fight anyway.

 

The only problem is that you probably won't know that 22 is coming, or where he's coming from. Eventually, the 22 may be equipped with the 9X Block 2. What then?

Out-climb it.

 

Actually it is quite useful. What on /earth/ are you talking about? It makes good old cruising more efficient to start with. And the YF-23 didn't and wouldn't have that much better TWR - it would have grown in weight too, and it had other problems as well; the engines themselves were rejected completely.

 

What does any of this have to do with the 25?

Don't know where your info. is coming from, the same GE and P&W engines in the selection process were trialed on both aircraft. The YF-23 had a loaded TWR of 1.36 vs about 1.09 for the F-22. It had a lower RCS and a greater range (so much for TV making cruising more efficient), greater acceleration, greater climb rate, less drag, faster supercruise etc. etc.

 

The confusion was that the TV would yield some kind of Harrier-like advantage but it doesn't because it can't actually brake the aircraft, or oppose momentum in a given direction, it can only change the direction the nose is pointing in. It's as useful in a dogfight as keepy-uppy skills in a football (soccer) match.

[Boberro]

I can't seem to understand why is this discussion still on... Plain and simple, the Su-25T is a plane for real men with hairy chests, that was always the deal, no questions about it. If you can't handle the lack of of sissy-boy avionics

 

Not without reason A-10 is being called "GheyTen" :megalol::megalol::megalol:

[Hellfire257]

Your claims are meaningless without evidence.

[159th_Falcon]

Your claims are meaningless without evidence.

We would have shown it if it wasn't for the fact its weapons are so powerful that even the evidence gets destroyed.......:D

[mvsgas]

I hate how this threads always turn into: "Well I read in the net this aircraft can do that" etc. All this opinions and no actual documents, not one aircraft manual...sigh

 

I like the SU-25, I think it is better than the 25T. Still, the 25T with light load is faster than A-10 and can be very maneuver. I specially like that if you try to fly it like a fighter it will fight back.

[Alfa]

If it's a A-G radar, it should be able to see through clouds too???

 

Yes, but again its a multifunctional radar similar in design and functionality to e.g. the APG-73(of F/A-18C).

 

The "Kopyo" radar is a smaller version of the Zhuk-M(for MiG-29M/K and SMT) - smaller because it was meant for multirole upgrading of aircraft such as MiG-21 and MiG-23 for which the Zhuk-M would be too large.

 

In the case of the Su-25TM there was no room in the nose for such a radar since this space is occupied by the Skhval, so it was instead installed in a an external pod.

[159th_Falcon]

I specially like that if you try to fly it like a fighter it will fight back.

+1

[Eddie]

Oh dear, looks like factual accuracy has left this thread. I should've known really when someone started making claims about Raptor vs. Typhoon dogfights.

 

What was this thread about again, oh yeah the SU-25. Pah, if the Russians ever get around to fitting some avionics in to the thing it might be worth while.

[GGTharos]

I hear the Su-25SM variant is successful, though apparently it's not getting the uprades they would like it to.

[JCamel]

The Raptor vs Typhoon dogfights are factually accurate.

[joey45]

Hold on, I have this cool gif for those that do not like the Cy-25T

 

For the job it is designed to do, it works.

Fly it like it is meant to, it works.

make a mission where it will fail, I will make a mission that it was designed to fly in.

[pyromaniac4002]

The confusion was that the TV would yield some kind of Harrier-like advantage but it doesn't because it can't actually brake the aircraft, or oppose momentum in a given direction, it can only change the direction the nose is pointing in. It's as useful in a dogfight as keepy-uppy skills in a football (soccer) match.

 

There's simply no way that anyone involved in choosing between the YF-22 and YF-23 expected thrust vectoring to do anything "harrier-like." Being able to maintain control past 110 degrees angle of attack is useful in its own right, and to boil the worth of thrust vectoring down to whether or not you can pull some Tom Cruise, stop-in-mid-air move is pretty ridiculous. Just because the Typhoon doesn't have thrust vectoring doesn't mean you need to pretend that

 

And I'm sure you're using the assumption that the F-22 is flying on a full tank of gas while the thrust-to-weight figures you're using for the YF-23 may be 50% fuel, given that the F-22 boasts a much more comparable 1.26 T/W ratio at 50% fuel.

 

Out-climb it.

 

:megalol:

 

I don't get this beef that Typhoon fans have with the F-22. A Typhoon isn't exactly what I think of when someone asks me about the F-22's arch-rival, so why is it so offensive to admit that an F-22 will simply outmatch the Typhoon on most, if not all levels? It's a $150 million plane, it damn well should. It's the nature of a 5th generation aircraft versus a 4.5.

 

Now for a quick token Su-25 comment... I think it's a fine aircraft. It's not pretty, it's relatively old, and I tend not to fly it, but in the right hands it's definitely an effective aircraft. It would need to be for having been around in one form or another for so long. I'm right there with you in admitting that when I'm choosing my slot on a server, I'll always take my beautiful death machine A-10C over an Su-25T, but it doesn't mean the Frog is a waste of time in its company.