Su-24 Fencer

Sujoy wrote:

TR1 wrote:How exactly has the US Navy accepted the Su-24 jammed Aegis??!?!

The US had send two destroyers to the Black sea . The USS Donald Cook and USS Taylor . Pentagon had then stated -

“The Donald Cook’s mission is to reassure NATO allies and Black Sea partners of America’s commitment to strengthen and improve interoperability while working towards mutual goals in the region ."

Donald Cook & Taylor were supposed to be in the Black Sea for an extended period of time . However , the Donald Cook cut short it's mission & left immediately after the incident . Pentagon has NOT clarified why it left abruptly .

The Pentagon actually used the term "provocative" and "un professional" to describe the incident.

From that to the Su-24 jamming anything is a huge jump.

Su-24 was designed to penetrate western IADS with Patriot and HAWK complexes and naval AEGIS is practically not much different than Patriot. It have 4 SPY-1B radar antenna, which cover its own sector to cover full 360°, so in one direction cover only 1 radar antenna. Similarly as with Patriot in AEGIS this SPY-1B radar do both, searching for targets and engaging them with missiles. By the size, this radar is comparable with 64N6 radar from S-300, so probably Su-24 jammers are able to jam SPY-1B radar, specially in so short distances (depend of what kind of jamming it use and how powerful jammer is), when it is meant to jam Patriot radar. True, it work in different band, than Patriot, but it was not unknown for Soviets and considering Su-24 was designed to penetrate western air defense (also on the sea), than most probably Su-24 jammers were calibrated for SPY-1 radar from AEGIS too.

Su-24 wasn't designed with Patriot in mind though.

medo wrote:Su-24 was designed to penetrate western IADS with Patriot and HAWK complexes and naval AEGIS is practically not much different than Patriot. It have 4 SPY-1B radar antenna, which cover its own sector to cover full 360°, so in one direction cover only 1 radar antenna. Similarly as with Patriot in AEGIS this SPY-1B radar do both, searching for targets and engaging them with missiles. By the size, this radar is comparable with 64N6 radar from S-300, so probably Su-24 jammers are able to jam SPY-1B radar, specially in so short distances (depend of what kind of jamming it use and how powerful jammer is), when it is meant to jam Patriot radar. True, it work in different band, than Patriot, but it was not unknown for Soviets and considering Su-24 was designed to penetrate western air defense (also on the sea), than most probably Su-24 jammers were calibrated for SPY-1 radar from AEGIS too.

Anyway Su-24 did that penetration through Low altitude using Reliyef terrain following radar, not jamming.

If it ever use for jamming it will do it from standoff range, which what Su-24MP did. Even in self protection case the jammer will still be sized to the power aperture product of the radar it designed to jam and that's obviously effective not at the distance where the visual identification can be made for that Su-24.

Self protection jammer anyway is usually for tracking radar working at C, X or Ku Band where the airplane can still physically provide internal space for the antenna. Lower band jammer like S or L-Band requires pod or larger antenna that take up more space and this is kinda difficult to hide. Did USN publish any photo on the Su-24 i wonder ?

Stealthflanker wrote:Did USN publish any photo on the Su-24 i wonder ?

No they did not . Whenever they are at fault they choose not to publish any pics . Two years ago the US Navy shot dead an Indian fisherman off the coast of Dubai mistaking them to be pirates . Even in that case they did not release any pics.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/indian-fisherman-killed-3-injured-in-firing-from-american-navy-ship/article1-890192.aspx

TR1 wrote:Su-24 wasn't designed with Patriot in mind though.

The Su-24M was designed concurrently if not after the Patriot's initial version.

The Kh-58 capability speaks to this, as well.

If it is cheap, they should have upgraded quite a few more Su-24's with it. I heard great things about it and could be used for a large amount of aircrafts. MiG-29's, etc.

70 - 80 is quite a low number compared to all the Su-24M's Russia has. But then again, equipment is old, so they may not bother?

Fantastic info mate +1 to you tomorrow.

I think one segment of those modernization of RuAF planes is not that much mentioned as it should be and it is data link network capabilities. All the time western medias and NATO gives to their planes the upper hand, because they have data link network with sharing situation picture between the planes and command center, that not every one in the group need to turn on their radars and other sensors, etc. RuAF Syrian operation show, that RuAF have the same data link network capabilities, where they share their situation picture between the planes and where one in the group have radar on and mapping the ground to search for targets and deliver them to the other in group or share the picture from UAV and coordinate the work. Satelitte navigation and data link network give night capabilities even to Su-25SM, which doesn't have night equipment.

The only thing, which we still have to see is the night picture from Platan complex in Su-34.

I wonder if any Su-30SM throw any bomb in this operation in Syria or are they only for air protection and as command plane to coordinate the work with the group.

A couple of questions.... how many of the fleet of Su-24's were upgraded to have GLONASS? All of them, or the majority?
What type of Su-24's are in Syria? The M or M2?
The plane that was shot down...what model was that?

Nice comment on the SVP-24 system;
http://sputniknews.com/military/20160103/1032630510/russia-nato-military-superiority.html

Su-24М practice mid-air refueling over Kaliningrad region. http://www.ng.ru/video/566745.html
I wonder, for how many more years they'll be flown?
There were unconfirmed reports in the Russian media that 27 officers asked for resignation on the USS Cook after the Su-24 flyby, & that 2 planes were involved- the probable EW plane was at a distance & didn't fly over the ship. Does it all make sense?

Tsavo Lion wrote: Su-24М practice mid-air refueling over Kaliningrad region. http://www.ng.ru/video/566745.html
I wonder, for how many more years they'll be flown?

i guess that until the end of that decade will be withdrawn from russian air force

SU-24M Nº55 RF-92014 just repaired and repainted, received at Monchegorsk   >>>  http://russianplanes.net/regs/RF-92014

Newly painted navy badges:
-the Navy flag with the cross of Saint Andrew
-the Russian flag at the helm of the tail
-the inscription of naval aviation,which is not visible here:  MA-BMФ РОССИИ (Naval Aviation-Military Marine Fleet of Russia)

The 98th SAP (composite air regiment) of Monchegorsk was transfered two years ago form West MD to North JSC (Joint Stategic Command)
Is part of the 45 Army of Air Force and Air Defence Forces of North JSC  ( 45º A. VVSiPVO ), comanded by the chief of North Fleet

wilhelm wrote:A couple of questions.... how many of the fleet of Su-24's were upgraded to have GLONASS? All of them, or the majority?
What type of Su-24's are in Syria? The M or M2?
The plane that was shot down...what model was that?

If you are talking about SVP24 , the upgrade was done in "arround 45" of "arround 50" planes , exact number unclear , depends of the source and the date to which it refers

SVP24 is only a system for calculate a classic bombing , by gravety , for not propelled munition (like in WW2) but calculated with "GPS" coordenates and a computer
As the physics is a exact science , the accuracy is so good than a guided munition , but you have not to spent a lot of money for electronics systems in each guided bomb, as the system is installed in the airplane
Is a good solution in the "old soviet style" , same results without dilapidate resources.
The western military corporations only work for produce more and more expensive systems and win a lot of money for pay big bonus to its shareholders

Of course a couple of planes or so , was deployed al Lipestk
The Chelyabinsk regiment was equiped with this upgrade about 2012-3 , and was spected Morozovsk also was equipped just before receive the SU-34
A squadron of Morozovsk with SVP24 was transferred to Gvardeyskoye-Simferopol  in late 2014-2015 after Crimea returns to Russia
Other squadron was sent to the new 11 SAP , composite regiment of Marinovka , not clear if all the 12 planes have the system
Not necesary more SVP24 in Su-24 as is being replaced with SU-34
About the Su-24M2 , the only regiment is Khurba, but is near to complete its complement of Su-34

About the planes in Syria , were of Chelyabinsk (2 BAP) in the first moments, but also several planes of other regiments have participated in the operations
The plane shot down was based in 2 BAP
RF-90932 (ex-26) https://russianplanes.net/images/to177000/176753.jpg
Got Nº83 , because the tail number was changed to and register was deleted in most SU-24&25 for operations in Latakia

Although not likely due to newer aircraft although there was talk about Argentina making a potential purchase. But does any know approximately the price of Su-24M- gefest if Russia was to sell it. Just not sure what second hand aircraft likely go for.

Although there is potential to sell I think Russia will focus on selling newer items over selling older systems plus Su-24 must be getting pretty worn now.

Fitting it with a downgraded AESA radar like the Su-34s set would allow it to use AAMs...

An Su-24 with the G&T bombing system and the ability to use 200km range RVV-BD AAMs as well as R-77M and R-73 missiles would make it a very potent system.. though an AESA will crank up the cost.... perhaps a more conventional radar that gives it air to air capability too like off the Su-27SM3 or something....

I am sure the Russians might offer them a deal just to see the UK squirm.... Malvinas...

The UK takes every opportunity to show it is not Russias friend.... why would Russia care if this upsets them?

Does anyone think that Russia would be able to find a market or be willing to sell off some of its Su-24? As it replaces them with Su-34. Or do we think that they are getting too old and worn to sell? And which country would likely buy them?

They are still capable aircraft but like any ageing equipment they are only going to get more and more expensive to operate over time.

Certain components can be upgraded and improved, but at the end of the day if you want a strike aircraft you are probably better at looking at something like an Su-30... not exactly brand spanking new in design but with a range of options and equipment fits to allow a range of roles and differing levels of performance to meet almost any ones needs.

Buying Su-24s might make sense if you already have some in service and want to boost numbers, but they will likely be cheap because they wont last for ever.

Personally I would think buying Su-30s would add more value as it would be a capable fighter as well as capable strike platform and does not have the complication of swing wings... which might be a maintenance and support issue over time.

Add the capacity to launch the new kh-38 based cruise missile and it became a very good plateform against Saoudi arabia or other US bases around Iran.

AFAIK the range of the export model Kh-38 is about 40km, but there are a few weapons they could adopt that are being developed that might be rather useful...
equally, however, I think an Su-30 could carry quite a payload of Kh-31s for use against ships as well as having space for self defence AAMs.

I would think a mix of anti ship Kh-31s with anti radiation Kh-31s as well as R-77s and R-73s for self defence would be a useful mix for an attack on shipping in the Persian Gulf... the ability to attack ships and defend itself from SAMs, plus the ability to defend itself from enemy aircraft and also the ability to shoot down cruise missiles would be rather valuable...

4G Sukhois have still a great value in the market (export orders for the Su-35 close to 100 million, though it is not clear what is included). Su-24 on the other hand are more than ok as shown in Syria with the new SVP-24 but still cannot be sold at the same prices, and as second hand they should be very cheap, overhauling included. For a developing country they would be a great buy IMO, especially if you protect them with some modern capable fighters and support assets. Not even sure Russia should be in a hurry to substitute them, at least while they have hours left in their airframes.

You can say the same for the Fencers analogue..the F-111, that was an extremely capable plane and still would be today. The US has nothing in that class today. Russia has a very good replacement in the SU-34. The US relies extensively on tankers, which are all good if you are fighting primitives that cannot take those out.