Russian Air Force numbers and procurement plans

Isos wrote:WTF, where are the 400+ Mig29 and 400+ Su-27 from cold war ??? Do they still use them or are they keeped in "storage" (i.e outdoor suffering from weather) ?

I've run the numbers on the Flankers a while back and given reasonable losses (a good 125 over a quarter century) on a yearly basis (post Cold War) the numbers in RuAF service now, check with what was inherited from Soviet Frontal Aviation and Air Defense.

The Fulcrums were probably dumped, possibly due to their useless engines in the years of financial strain (90s and early 00s).

Isos wrote:WTF, where are the 400+ Mig29 and 400+ Su-27 from cold war ??? Do they still use them or are they keeped in "storage" (i.e outdoor suffering from weather) ?

Mig-29 - last USSR version was the 9.13S of which only about 20 were built. The previous patch produced was 60-80 9.13 version and prior to that the 9.12 version which was the Mig-29 basic fighter. There is 1 combat squadron of Mig-29S's operational for the VKS and is deployed in Armenia. There are hardly any 9.12's still flying and about 40 9.13's used in training units and air demonstration units.

Su-27 - there are 6 combat squadrons of the Su-27P still operational and being phased out by the Su30SM, Su-35S and Su-27SM3. Another 40 or so are used in training units. Half of -27P's are scheduled to be rebuilt as the Su-27SM3 over the next 3 years.

Isos wrote:WTF, where are the 400+ Mig29 and 400+ Su-27 from cold war ??? Do they still use them or are they keeped in "storage" (i.e outdoor suffering from weather) ?

Franco's numbers does not include assessments for the non-upgraded MiG-29, Su-27, MiG-31 etc, only concerns upgraded or new birds. Also i have realized Su-24s, upgraded or not are not included as well. There are still several hundred non-upgraded fighter and attack aircraft in VKS/VMF.

Still, if i'm to reflect back, back in say 2010 i would have hardly believed VKS and VMF would have as many upgraded and especially new birds as they have today! So it's a great improvement to date.

PS: Here are some recent details regarding current VKS/VMF fighter holdings including older types and plans for future:
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2326878.html

George1 wrote:In next year Su-30SM and Su-34 contracts are near completion. So my question is, will be additional contracts for these 2 types? For Su-34 officials had stated before years that number of 124 could reach 140

The present Su-34 contract has an option for a further 16 aircraft which should be done. I then suspect a third contract for another 100 or so over the 2021-2030 armament program would be in order.

The present Su-30SM contracts call for 88 aircraft for the VKS and 28 for the Naval Aviation to be delivered by the end of 2018. The VKS has already said they want a total of 120 -30SM's and the Navy have stated they want up to 50. So expect there will be further orders for 2019 and 2020.

franco wrote:There are hardly any 9.12's still flying and about 40 9.13's used in training units and air demonstration units.

There is a very small numbers of 9.12 flying, in russianplanes.net it is possible to find recent pictures of these planes in operational units. For example, one in Privolzhski and another in Armenia:
http://russianplanes.net/id199472
http://russianplanes.net/id197725

A breakdown of combat aircraft received in 2016;

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2358587.html

According to this article all 10 first Su-35s of the second order (50 aircrafts) have been delivered in 2016. So the only aircrafts that we wait are the 2 "above the plan" Su-34s

Total number of combat aircafts delivered by now including 2016 deliveries are:

MiG-29SMT: 44, excluding the UBMs
Su-30M2: 20
Su-30SM: 81, 66 for Air force and 15 for the Navy
Su-35S: 58
Su-34: 98 with pre-production models, 91 without them
Yak-130: 89

Just adding my thanks for the excellent work in this thread

It's really quite a rapid & impressive re-armament program even if it's in many ways only been catching-up for the lost '90s.

Now they should just ordered Pak Fa and Mig-35.

Bomber Update:

Su-24MR
- reconnaissance version, very limited offensive ability
- ~60 aircraft
- 4 squadrons and 3 flights (Saki, Monchegorsk, Chernyakhovsk)
- operational squadrons at Varfolomeyevka, Chelyabinsk, Millerovo, Shatalovo

Su-24M
- 20-40 upgraded to -M2 standard and suspect most of the rest to SVP24
- ~120 aircraft
- 7 VKS squadrons (Gvardeiskyy, Monchegorsk, Millerovo, Chelyabinsk x2, Kurba x2)
- 2 VMF squadrons (Saki, Chernyakhovsk)

Tu-22M3
- around 10-12 upgraded to -22M3M standard or SVP24-22
- ~ 55 aircraft
- 2 regiments or 4 squadrons (may be as low as 9 aircraft per)
- operational units at Srednyy, Shaikovka, Olenegorsk

Tu-95MS
- 8-10 upgraded to -95MSM standard
- ~53 aircraft
- 3 regiments (squadrons may be as low as 6 aircraft per)
- Ukrainka x2, Engels

Tu-160
- 6 upgraded to -160M standard
- ~16 frames (all may not be usable)
- 1 regiment (squadrons may be as low as 6 aircraft per)
- Engels

franco wrote:
Tu-22M2

You mean Tu-22M3

Also from the above list it seems Russians are not yet able to produce any more new Tu-160 airframes. I remember they wanted to pursue a low-rate production of the type. So far in 2016 they produced none of that.

If one of these aircrafts proved its reliability in the last year, its the Su-24. Heavily used in Syria, Electronic warefare against Donald Cook, simulated attacks against Donald. Very nice Aircraft which completed the small numbers of Su-34 in the last decade and in Syria. Hope they will keep them.

The duo Cheap simple Aircraft with an exppensive and superior Aircraft is well used by Russia. They adapted this strategy for the military transition between USSR and Russia in every aspects of their military : (tanks t-72/90 + t14), aviation (Su 27/30 + Pak fa Su35 or Ka52 + Mi 24/28), naval (upcoming new frigates and destroyer with cheap corvetes and old modernized vessels) more special force with less conscripts...

With their strategy of big concentrated attacks, its better than having just small amount of very good stuff. 1000 T-72+250 T-14 is better than 400 t-14.


Do you know if there are some Tu-22 still in service franco ? It was a very good concept of cheap bomber but not very good according to pilot to fly. A modernized version with todays flight controls would make it a good bomber which could help Tu-22M in attacking naval carriers and bombing mission.


Mixing cheap in big numbers with quality in low numbers is a very good tactic. The logistic and the cost of maintenance however would be great.

mack8 wrote:A fantastic update as always Franco, many thanks!

May i ask, do you have similar details for VMF Su-33 and if possible Tu-142 and Il-38, and also for DA Tu-160, Tu-22M and Tu-95s? Also, any figures for Yak-130 too?
I know some time back you said helicopters are much harder to track, so i'm not going to ask about them again, though of course, any numbers would be most welcomed!

Thank again for the great work you are doing, your number crunching is probably the most accurate one can get on VKS and VMF.
 

Not a lot for the VMF but here goes:

Su-33 - 16-20 aircraft, a few have SVP24's added. There was talk of 16 getting upgraded but last report talked of only 6 or 8. And with Su-30SM's arriving at this unit who knows what the future holds. Stationed at Severomorsk

Il-38 - 30 plus frames around. Actually flying would be the 8 rebuilt -38N's and about 8 of the old plane. Talk is of 24 or so being rebuilt. Organized into 3-4 squadrons and operating out of Severomorsk, Elizovo and Nikolaevka.

Tu-142 - 30 plus frames around of all models. Actually flying would be less then 20 IMO. There are reports of 3-4 being modernized to -142M standards and up to 24 in total being planned. Not a lot of info here, especially from MoD sources. Aircraft operate out of Mongokhto and Kipelovo-Fedotovo.

Am working on an Attack Helicopter Update for you.

KiloGolf wrote:

franco wrote:
Tu-22M2

You mean Tu-22M3

Also from the above list it seems Russians are not yet able to produce any more new Tu-160 airframes. I remember they wanted to pursue a low-rate production of the type. So far in 2016 they produced none of that.

Good catch

Corrected and thanks

The new Tu-160M2 has not started production yet. They are gearing up but don't believe first aircraft is planned until something like 2023.

Isos wrote:If one of these aircrafts proved its reliability in the last year, its the Su-24. Heavily used in Syria, Electronic warefare against Donald Cook, simulated attacks against Donald. Very nice Aircraft which completed the small numbers of Su-34 in the last decade and in Syria. Hope they will keep them.

The duo Cheap simple Aircraft with an exppensive and superior Aircraft is well used by Russia. They adapted this strategy for the military transition between USSR and Russia in every aspects of their military : (tanks t-72/90 + t14), aviation (Su 27/30 + Pak fa Su35 or Ka52 + Mi 24/28), naval (upcoming new frigates and destroyer with cheap corvetes and old modernized vessels) more special force with less conscripts...

With their strategy of big concentrated attacks, its better than having just small amount of very good stuff. 1000 T-72+250 T-14 is better than 400 t-14.


Do you know if there are some Tu-22 still in service franco ? It was a very good concept of cheap bomber but not very good according to pilot to fly. A modernized version with todays flight controls would make it a good bomber which could help Tu-22M in attacking naval carriers and bombing mission.


Mixing cheap in big numbers with quality in low numbers is a very good tactic. The logistic and the cost of maintenance however would be great.

Su-24M agreed. The old bird has impressed especially with the SVP24 and the high flight availability rate it has sustained.

And the same with the rest. IMHO the most important part of the 70% modernization goal is not having all new high tech weaponry but having basic modernized equipment that can compete and get the job done. Whatever new high tech equipment you have in addition, is a bonus.

franco wrote:

The new Tu-160M2 has not started production yet. They are gearing up but don't believe first aircraft is planned until something like 2023.

A logic option should be to restart production of Tu-160M2 until the number of all Tu-160s reaches the 30 approx. And after the introduction of PAK-DA to keep these Tu-160s as a supersonic bomber.

And then retire all Tu-22M3s and Tu-95MS

I don't think its reasonable to expect Tu-160 production to just start up at the snap of the finger.
As I posted in the Tu-160 thread they've been working up their titanium welding skills since the main wing beam is a huge titanium structure & the skills have been lost in the last 30yrs.

Nitpick: shouldn't Su-34 be counted in Bombers section?

hoom wrote:I don't think its reasonable to expect Tu-160 production to just start up at the snap of the finger.
As I posted in the Tu-160 thread they've been working up their titanium welding skills since the main wing beam is a huge titanium structure & the skills have been lost in the last 30yrs.

Nitpick: shouldn't Su-34 be counted in Bombers section?

Had done the Su-34 earlier, actually added the Bombers upon request. The first post was keyed on the new technology units but had some requests for more.

franco wrote:

Isos wrote:If one of these aircrafts proved its reliability in the last year, its the Su-24. Heavily used in Syria, Electronic warefare against Donald Cook, simulated attacks against Donald. Very nice Aircraft which completed the small numbers of Su-34 in the last decade and in Syria. Hope they will keep them.

The duo Cheap simple Aircraft with an exppensive and superior Aircraft is well used by Russia. They adapted this strategy for the military transition between USSR and Russia in every aspects of their military : (tanks t-72/90 + t14), aviation (Su 27/30 + Pak fa Su35 or Ka52 + Mi 24/28), naval (upcoming new frigates and destroyer with cheap corvetes and old modernized vessels) more special force with less conscripts...

With their strategy of big concentrated attacks, its better than having just small amount of very good stuff. 1000 T-72+250 T-14 is better than 400 t-14.


Do you know if there are some Tu-22 still in service franco ? It was a very good concept of cheap bomber but not very good according to pilot to fly. A modernized version with todays flight controls would make it a good bomber which could help Tu-22M in attacking naval carriers and bombing mission.


Mixing cheap in big numbers with quality in low numbers is a very good tactic. The logistic and the cost of maintenance however would be great.

Su-24M agreed. The old bird has impressed especially with the SVP24 and the high flight availability rate it has sustained.

And the same with the rest. IMHO the most important part of the 70% modernization goal is not having all new high tech weaponry but having basic modernized equipment that can compete and get the job done. Whatever new high tech equipment you have in addition, is a bonus.

True, the Su-24 has been reinforcerd after its performance in Syria. Many people has been a fan of the Su-25 instead of the Su-24, but while the Su-24 surprised to some, the Su-25 has been far less usable in a war with very low density of anti-aircraft weapons in the adversaries. The Su-24 proved to be more modern as military concept.

The same for the Tu-22 (I always use the generic name but is refered to the new generation, the first generation seems to be totally retired). The Tu-22 also proved to be modern as military concept.

I think Russia will keep both active long time still.

About the Tu-160 there are reports that talk about 50 units to be ordered.

Looking at the numbers, the reserves of Strategic Bombers are still far from a saturation. It would be necessary between 50 and 60 units to reach the saturation until the degree that today have the Interceptors. Then this the new order of production for the Tu-160 would replace the Tu-95 in the active service, but the Tu-95 (47 active and 12 in the reserve according to decent sources) would remain in the reserve, to complete the current fleet until the saturation of the reserve. The cathegory of Strategic Bomber has been in question for some decades, and the required production of Tu-160 was not completedd at the time. But the concept is proving to be still modern and useful as military concept, and the production is being restarted in the short-mid term. The new production line should be active by 2019-2020, and the production of the aircraft can remain until 2030 aproximately.

The Tu-PAK-DA needs still a lot of research and development. I hope to see the first unit by 2025, but the serial production surely will not be ready until 2030. And then yes, the orders of the Tu-PAK-DA will be likely mean a total decommission of the Tu-92, and a bigger presence of the Tu-22 in the reserve.

Tu-160 are very expensive. If the pak da is meant to replace them, it will be even more expensive. So I don't think they will replace Tu-22M with it. Their role is not the same. Tu-22M are more tactical bombers used for conventionnal bombing and Tu-160 strategic bombers armed with nuks. Actually they should make 2 pak da one "little" and one "big".

Isos wrote:

About the Tu-160 there are reports that talk about 50 units to be ordered.

Looking at the numbers, the reserves of Strategic Bombers are still far from a saturation. It would be necessary between 50 and 60 units to reach the saturation until the degree that today have the Interceptors. Then this the new order of production for the Tu-160 would replace the Tu-95 in the active service, but the Tu-95 (47 active and 12 in the reserve according to decent sources) would remain in the reserve, to complete the current fleet until the saturation of the reserve. The cathegory of Strategic Bomber has been in question for some decades, and the required production of Tu-160 was not completedd at the time. But the concept is proving to be still modern and useful as military concept, and the production is being restarted in the short-mid term. The new production line should be active by 2019-2020, and the production of the aircraft can remain until 2030 aproximately.

The Tu-PAK-DA needs still a lot of research and development. I hope to see the first unit by 2025, but the serial production surely will not be ready until 2030. And then yes, the orders of the Tu-PAK-DA will be likely mean a total decommission of the Tu-92, and a bigger presence of the Tu-22 in the reserve.

Tu-160 are very expensive. If the pak da is meant to replace them, it will be even more expensive. So I don't think they will replace Tu-22M with it. Their role is not the same. Tu-22M are more tactical bombers used for conventionnal bombing and Tu-160 strategic bombers armed with nuks. Actually they should make 2 pak da one "little" and one "big".

The Tu-PAK-FA will not replace the Tu-160. It will follow the Tu-160 at production level, but both aircrafts will remain together in the Russian fleet. If I would have to say which aircraft will be replaced by the Tu-PAK-FA I would say the Tu-95/142, that at the time likely will be only in the reserve.

In adition to the saturation of the current fleet of strategic bombers, it is likely to see the numbers of active and reserve strategic bombers increased by interation with the maritime patrol fleet.

eehnie wrote:

Isos wrote:

About the Tu-160 there are reports that talk about 50 units to be ordered.

Looking at the numbers, the reserves of Strategic Bombers are still far from a saturation. It would be necessary between 50 and 60 units to reach the saturation until the degree that today have the Interceptors. Then this the new order of production for the Tu-160 would replace the Tu-95 in the active service, but the Tu-95 (47 active and 12 in the reserve according to decent sources) would remain in the reserve, to complete the current fleet until the saturation of the reserve. The cathegory of Strategic Bomber has been in question for some decades, and the required production of Tu-160 was not completedd at the time. But the concept is proving to be still modern and useful as military concept, and the production is being restarted in the short-mid term. The new production line should be active by 2019-2020, and the production of the aircraft can remain until 2030 aproximately.

The Tu-PAK-DA needs still a lot of research and development. I hope to see the first unit by 2025, but the serial production surely will not be ready until 2030. And then yes, the orders of the Tu-PAK-DA will be likely mean a total decommission of the Tu-92, and a bigger presence of the Tu-22 in the reserve.

Tu-160 are very expensive. If the pak da is meant to replace them, it will be even more expensive. So I don't think they will replace Tu-22M with it. Their role is not the same. Tu-22M are more tactical bombers used for conventionnal bombing and Tu-160 strategic bombers armed with nuks. Actually they should make 2 pak da one "little" and one "big".

The Tu-PAK-FA will not replace the Tu-160. It will follow the Tu-160 at production level, but both aircrafts will remain together in the Russian fleet. If I would have to say which aircraft will be replaced by the Tu-PAK-FA I would say the Tu-95/142, that at the time likely will be only in the reserve.

In adition to the saturation of the current fleet of strategic bombers, it is likely to see the numbers of active and reserve strategic bombers increased by interation with the maritime patrol fleet.

That's the problem. Even the big military budget of USSR wasn't enough for a lot of Tu-160. If the Pak-Da (not Fa) is at the same price than Tu-160 Russia won't build them a lot and couldn't replace Tu-95 with them. Maybe it won't be as expensive as the Tu-160, a more conventional bomber with new technologies but not the last of te last super expensive tech.

Franco, again many thanks for your fantastic work!

Just to add something about the bombers, imo it appears the 50 or so Tu-160M2 vehiculated as being built in the 2020s could replace Tu-22M3 (which is not really a strategic bomber) almost one for one, while the PAK-DA could replace Tu-95 primarily. The supersonic Tu-160M2 and the subsonic LO PAK-DA will complement eachother in DA service.

Also from the above list it seems Russians are not yet able to produce any more new Tu-160 airframes. I remember they wanted to pursue a low-rate production of the type. So far in 2016 they produced none of that.

Yeah... of course... they can put the Tu-160 back into production by next tuesday... just like NASA can whack out a half a dozen new Space Shuttles in 6 months... or not.

They are planning to put the Tu-160 back into production with upgraded and improved design features and new tooling etc. The factory they make to build new Tu-160s will also make the PAK DA when it is ready.

The upgraded Tu-160 is supposed to fly in 2019 at the earliest and will be an upgraded existing air frame. New build models wont be produced until at least 2023 and after 50 or so have been built they will build PAK DAs in the same factory.

There will likely be a lot of unification of the designs of both aircraft, though the PAK DA might only have two engines for much lower flight speeds... likely being subsonic.

The duo Cheap simple Aircraft with an exppensive and superior Aircraft is well used by Russia.

True but the cost of keeping a 1970s aircraft in service can only increase over time.

Eventually they will have enough Fullbacks and so the Fencers can be retired.

Or passed on to allies who could use the capabilities at reduced costs (Syria, Iran, Iraq, etc etc).

A logic option should be to restart production of Tu-160M2 until the number of all Tu-160s reaches the 30 approx. And after the introduction of PAK-DA to keep these Tu-160s as a supersonic bomber.

And then retire all Tu-22M3s and Tu-95MS

Probably the plan, though 50-60 Blackjacks is more likely...

Many people has been a fan of the Su-25 instead of the Su-24, but while the Su-24 surprised to some, the Su-25 has been far less usable in a war with very low density of anti-aircraft weapons in the adversaries.

I would disagree. The Su-25 is mobile artillery to support attacks and withdrawal. It was not designed for COIN type operations though it can perform in such situations.

Look at the conflict in Georgia... a few were hit but only a couple were actually brought down... they seemed to be very useful for ground support.

Tu-160 are very expensive. If the pak da is meant to replace them, it will be even more expensive. So I don't think they will replace Tu-22M with it. Their role is not the same. Tu-22M are more tactical bombers used for conventionnal bombing and Tu-160 strategic bombers armed with nuks. Actually they should make 2 pak da one "little" and one "big".

No need. Strategic PAK DA will have lots of fuel and about 10 tons of strategic weapons. That same aircraft in the Theatre role can carry reduced fuel and a much larger conventional payload for ground targets.

Tu-160s are not cheap but no strategic bomber is cheap. The PAK DA will be cheaper to operate without supersonic performance and therefore can be the numbers aircraft.

That's the problem. Even the big military budget of USSR wasn't enough for a lot of Tu-160. If the Pak-Da (not Fa) is at the same price than Tu-160 Russia won't build them a lot and couldn't replace Tu-95 with them. Maybe it won't be as expensive as the Tu-160, a more conventional bomber with new technologies but not the last of te last super expensive tech.

Blackjacks were not unaffordable. Their production was in foreign countries so after 1991 production was no longer possible at any price.

added the Bombers upon request. The first post was keyed on the new technology units but had some requests for more.

Fair enough