Russian Air Force numbers and procurement plans

George1 wrote:


so for MiG-35s we have 4 delivered out of 6 ordered?

No, 4 out of 8

There was a contract as installation bath for two machines signed in february 2017 , just after the delvery of two prototypes, so the two first serial Nº10 an Nº11, are under that contract for two and the next 2 are under the contract for 6 signed in 2018

As in the case of MiG-29K, because the small number of MiG-35 to purchase, is for sure the two first serial planes for test are also transferrred to the service, in this case to Kubinka airbase


https://bmpd.livejournal.com/2438502.html
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4027093
February 17th, 2017
Two more MiG-35 fighter for test were ordered

Recall that at the end of 2016, JSC RSK MiG completed the construction of the first two experimental samples of the MiG-35 fighter jet at its Production Complex No. 1 in Lukhovitsy near Moscow under a contract for carrying out the corresponding R&D with the Russian Aerospace Forces.
The first built single-seat MiG-35 (9-41SR, side number "702 blue") made its first flight in Lukhovitsy on November 24, 2016, and the two-seat MiG-35UB (9-47SR, side number "712 blue") - about December 1 ... The beginning of official factory testing of both aircraft was announced during the presentation on January 26, 2017.

According to him, already this year it is planned to switch from factory tests of two existing aircraft in Lukhovitsy near Moscow to state tests at the State Flight Test Center in Akhtubinsk (Astrakhan Region).

"A little later, two more MiG-35s will join the state tests, the contract for which was recently signed.


https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3316363.html
August 23rd, 2018
Contract for six MiG-35 fighters
At the beginning of 2017, it was announced that a contract was signed for two more test planes of the MiG-35 fighter, but so far they have not been delivered. Initially, it was announced plans to complete the State tests of the MiG-35 fighter by mid-2018, however, the actual State tests were only started in May 2018.

Since 2013, the planned dates for signing the corresponding contract have been repeatedly postponed, and the number of MiG-35 fighters planned for purchase by the beginning of 2017 was reduced to 24 machines


https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4119273.html
New MiG-35 in Kubinka
August 22nd
According to spotters, during the last week in Kubinka to participate in the exposition of the International military-technical forum "Army-2020", which will be held from 23 to 29 August 2020, four MiG-35 fighters of the new construction of the Lukhovitsky Aviation Plant (LAZ) arrived named after P.A. Voronin - a branch of JSC "RSK" MiG "single-seat fighter MiG-35S with side number" 10 blue "and three two-seat fighters MiG-35UB with blue side numbers" 11 "," 12 "and" 15

The MiG-35S fighters with the side number "10 blue" and the MiG-35UB with the side number "11 blue" were built according to the contract concluded in February 2017 with the Russian Ministry of Defense for two pre-production samples of the MiG-35 fighter for their connection to the expanded program of the State tests of this type, both of these aircraft were transferred to the Russian Aerospace Forces in May 2019.

At the same time, two two-seat MiG-35UB fighters with blue side numbers "12" and "15" are the first aircraft built according to the Russian Defense Ministry signed in August 2018 with the United Aircraft Corporation JSC (UAC, which includes JSC "RSK" MiG ") to the contract for the supply of the first six production fighters MiG-35S and MiG-35UB with a contract execution period from 2018 to 2023. These first two fighters were delivered in the first half of 2020, and their arrival in Kubinka was their first public appearance.

In the video there are two more MiG-35: Nº14 and Nº16
https://www.1tv.ru/news/2020-10-02/394309-eksklyuzivnye_kadry_pervogo_kanala_iz_kabiny_pilota_istrebitelya_novogo_pokoleniya_su_57

At that time the total number of MiG-35: 6 delivered (out of 8 ordered)

- In 2019, 2 MiG-35 were delivered: Nº10 and Nº11 (under the 2017 contract for 2 machines)
- In 2020, 4 MiG-35 have been delivered: Nº12, Nº14, Nº15, Nº16 (under the 2018 contract for 6 machines)

Therefore, still there are 2 machines to deliver.
It is certain that a new contract will be signed this year or the next, probably for 14 or 16 more MiG-35s.

AMCXXL wrote:In the video there are two more MiG-35: Nº14 and Nº16
https://www.1tv.ru/news/2020-10-02/394309-eksklyuzivnye_kadry_pervogo_kanala_iz_kabiny_pilota_istrebitelya_novogo_pokoleniya_su_57

At that time the total number of MiG-35: 6 delivered (out of 8 ordered)

- In 2019, 2 MiG-35 were delivered: Nº10 and Nº11 (under the 2017 contract for 2 machines)
- In 2020, 4 MiG-35 have been delivered: Nº12, Nº14, Nº15, Nº16 (under the 2018 contract for 6 machines)

Therefore, still there are 2 machines to deliver.
It is certain that a new contract will be signed this year or the next, probably for 14 or 16 more MiG-35s.

These machines are for state tests (to be finished next year from what they said) and then for the Swifts?

Where would those additional 14-16 airframes go in your opinion? Will the MiG be bought in numbers similar to Su-35S for instance? That would mean a very big increase in the size of VKS' fleet...

NATO is significantly increasing their flights close to Russian borders (52 last week if I am not wrong) and I don't think they plan to stop anytime soon, I think that calls either to exhaust airframe hours from older planes or for smaller jets that can identify those NATO incursions for less money than Su-35S would do.

Supply of combat aircraft to the Russian Armed Forces in 2020

January 20th, 9:15
In 2020, the reduction in the supply of new military aircraft to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continued for several years. In fact, the Russian Aerospace Forces in 2020 received only relatively small batches of Su-35S fighters and Su-34 front-line bombers - a total of 14 aircraft (ten Su-35S and four Su-34s) - such a low level of deliveries was the last time a decade ago. The main event of 2020 was the long-awaited receipt by the Russian Ministry of Defense of the first serial fighter Su-57 (T-50S) - after a "false start" with the loss of the first actually built serial Su-57 in 2019. In addition, the Russian Aerospace Forces received in 2020 four "serial" (essentially pre-production) MiG-35S and MiG-35UB fighters and four Yak-130 combat training aircraft. Moreover, again, as in 2019,


Among the aircraft delivered to the Russian Armed Forces in 2020:

One fifth generation Su-57 fighter. At the end of December 2020, the first (actually the second) serial sample of the fifth generation Su-57 fighter with the tail number "01 blue" (aircraft T-50S-2, serial number 51002), built at Komsomolsk-on-Amur, was transferred to the Russian Ministry of Defense Aviation Plant named after Yu.A. Gagarin (KnAAZ, a branch of PJSC "Company" Sukhoi "). The aircraft should be part of the 929th State Flight Test Center of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation named after V.P. Chkalov in Akhtubinsk.

In August 2018, at the International Military-Technical Forum "Army-2018", the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and PJSC "Sukhoi Company"for the supply to the Armed Forces of the first two serial fighters of the fifth generation Su-57 (in the form of T-50S - T-50S-1 and T-50S-2) with engines of the "first stage" ("product 117"). The terms of the contract are 2018-2020, with the delivery of one aircraft in 2019 and 2020. In June 2019, at the Army-2019 International Military-Technical Forum, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and PJSC Sukhoi Company signed a contract for the supply to the Armed Forces of a total of 76 fifth-generation Su-57 serial fighters (including the first two contracted in 2018 of the aircraft) .Term of execution of the contract is 2027.

The first production aircraft Su-57 (aircraft T-50S-1, serial number 51001, tail number also "01 blue"), built by KnAAZ, made its first flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur in early December 2019 and was scheduled to be handed over to the Ministry defense on December 27, but on December 24, 2019, at the final stage of factory tests, crashed in an accident, due to, presumably, a failure in the aircraft control system.

The loss of the first production prototype of the Su-57 entailed major litigation at the personal level, including a change in the management of PJSC Sukhoi Company.

Flight tests of the second of the two contracted in 2018 godu serial sample Su-57 (T-plane 50C-2, serial number 51002) were launched in Komsomolsk-on-Amur in October 2020, he also received the tail number "01 blue", and as a result was handed over to the Ministry of Defense.

According to known data, under the 2019 contract, KnAAZ is to deliver two Su-57 fighters in 2021.


Four front-line bombers Su-34. During 2020, the Novosibirsk Aviation Plant named after V.P. Chkalov (NAZ, a branch of PJSC Sukhoi Company), four front-line Su-34 bombers were handed over to the Russian Aerospace Forces .

Of this number, two Su-34 aircraft were delivered in July 2020. They were formally the last ones manufactured by NAZ under a contract with the Ministry of Defense Russia from February 2012 for the supply of 92 Su-34 aircraft.The first of these two aircraft built in 2020 with serial number 11-07 (aircraft T-10B-136) and tail number "14 red" was transferred to the 47th mixed aviation regiment of the 105th mixed aviation division of the 6th Leningrad Red Banner of the Air Force and Air Defense Army of the Western Military District at the Baltimore airfield (Voronezh), and the second (presumably serial number 11-08, aircraft T-10V-137) and tail number "09 red" was transferred to the 968th separate mixed aviation regiment 4th State Center for Aviation Personnel Training and Military Testing of the Ministry of Defense of Russia named after V.P. Chkalov in Lipetsk.

In addition, in November and December 2020, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation received two additional front-line Su-34 bombers, manufactured by NAZ as an addition to the contract of February 2012 for the supply of 92 Su-34 aircraft. These two additional aircraft with red side numbers "12" and "19" (presumable serial numbers, respectively, 11-09 / T-10V-138 and 11-10 / T-10V-139) also entered the 968th separate mixed aviation regiment of the 4th Center in Lipetsk.

Thus, in total, under this long-term contract, 94 Su-34 aircraft were manufactured at NAZ. The first two Su-34s under this contract were transferred to Novosibirsk to the Russian Air Force (VKS) on December 24, 2013, the next 18 aircraft in 2014, another 18 aircraft in 2015, 16 in 2016, 16 in 2017. 12 in 2018, eight in 2019 and the last four in 2020.

Taking into account seven experimental flight and pre-production models, the total number of flight Su-34s built under all contracts is 138 units. Of the 131 production aircraft supplied by the Russian Aerospace Forces, two have been lost in the crash (in a collision on January 18, 2019 over the Tatar Strait) and four have been reliably written off. Su-34 aircraft are in service with nine squadrons of four combat aviation regiments of the Russian Aerospace Forces (2nd, 47th and 277th mixed, 559th bomber), as well as training centers in Lipetsk and Akhtubinsk.

In August 2020, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation signed a new three - year contract for the construction of another 24 front-line bombers Su-34. According to available information, the first two aircraft under this contract were built and flown to NAZ by the end of 2020, but have not yet been transferred to the Aerospace Forces.


Ten Su-35S fighters. In 2020, the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Plant named after Yu. Gagarin (KnAAZ, a branch of PJSC Sukhoi Company) handed over to the Russian Aerospace Forces the final ten Su-35S fighters built within the framework of a five-year contract concluded in December 2015 by the Russian Ministry of Defense with PJSC Sukhoi Company for the supply of 50 Su-35S fighters. The first ten Su-35S aircraft under this contract were built by KnAAZ in 2016, ten - in 2017, and ten - in 2018, ten - in 2019, and now ten - in 2020.

The first four Su-35S fighters, built by KnAAZ under the 2020 program, received in July 2020 the aerobatic group of the Russian Aerospace Forces "Russian Knights", these aircraft haveblue side numbers from "54" to "57". The first four Su-35S aircraft were handed over to the group in November 2018, and thus, as a result, "Russian Knights" have eight Su-35S fighters with blue side numbers from "50" to "57".

Three more Su-35S (side numbers are unknown) were transferred to KnAAZ to the Russian Ministry of Defense in July 2020, becoming part of the 790th Fighter Aviation Regiment of the 105th Mixed Aviation Division of the 6th Leningrad Red Banner Army of the Air Force and Air Defense of the Western Military District, stationed at the Hotilovo airfield in the Tver region. Earlier in 2018-2019, this regiment received 12 Su-35S, so that the total number of these machines in the 790th regiment reached 15.

The three final Su-35S under the 2020 program (and the 2015 contract) were delivered in November 2020. Two of them (red side numbers "08" and "11", registration numbers RF-95911 and RF-95912) became part of the 4th State Center for Aviation Personnel Training and Military Testing of the Ministry of Defense of Russia named after V.P. Chkalov in Lipetsk , and the third (presumable side number "10 red") remained in Komsomolsk-on-Amur (Dzemgi airfield), joining the 23rd Tallinn Fighter Regiment of the 303rd Guards Mixed Aviation Division of the 11th Army of the Air Force and Air Defense of the Eastern Military districts.

Taking into account the first contract of 2009 for 48 Su-35S fighters, the Russian Aerospace Forces received in this way from the end of 2012 to date 98 production Su-35S aircraft, one of which has been decommissioned by now.

On August 25, 2020, during the Army-2020 International Military-Technical Forum, the United Aircraft Corporation signed a new contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense for the supply of another 30 Su-35S fighters. According to available data, the first five Su-35S under this contract are to be delivered to KnAAZ in 2021, the remaining 25 aircraft in 2022-2024 .


Four MiG-35UB fighters. In the first half of the year and in the summer of 2020, four MiG-35 fighters were handed over to the Russian Ministry of Defense - three single MiG-35S with blue side numbers "14", "15" and "16" and one double with side number "12 blue". They were the first aircraft builtaccording to the signed in August 2018 by the Ministry of Defense of Russia and JSC "United Aircraft Corporation" (UAC which includes JSC "RAC" MiG ") contract for the supply of the first six" serial "MiG-35s and MiG-35UB with the term of the contract from 2018 to 2023. The construction of the aircraft was carried out at the Lukhovitsky Aviation Plant (LAZ) named after P.A. Voronin - a branch of JSC "RSK" MiG ". The aircraft are apparently used in the State Test Program.

Earlier in 2019, according to a contract concluded in February 2017 with the Russian Ministry of Defense for two pre-production samples of the MiG-35 fighter to connect them to the expanded program of state tests of this type, were built and handed over to the Aerospace Forces a single-seat fighter MiG-35S with the tail number "10 blue" and a double MiG-35UB with the tail number "11 blue".

PJSC "Corporation" Irkut "handed over to the Russian Aerospace Forces four Yak-130 combat training aircraft, built under an additional contract for the supply of several units (apparently these four) Yak-130, concluded by the Russian Ministry of Defense with PJSC "Corporation" Irkut "in 2019. The first two of these aircraft were actually built at the IAZ back in 2019.

commissioned at the end of January 2020, and two more (red side numbers "03" and "04") - presumably in June 2020. All four aircraft entered the training aviation base of the Krasnodar Higher Military Aviation School of Pilots (KVVAUL) named after A.K.Serov in Kotelnikovo (Volgograd Region), becoming the first Yak-130 in this airbase. The base in Kotelnikovo became the fourth training air base to receive Yak-130 combat training aircraft, after the training air bases of the same KVVAUL in Borisoglebsk, Armavir and Kushchevskaya. However, according to some reports, four Yak-130s delivered to Kotelnikovo are still not actually operated there.

Thus, since 2009, the Ministry of Defense of Russia has received a total of 113 Yak-130 aircraft under various contracts - of which 12 of the first two series were built at the Nizhny Novgorod Aviation Plant Sokol, and another 101 - at the Irkutsk Aviation Plant.

25 August 2020 of the year during the International Military-Technical Forum "Army-2020" the United Aircraft Corporation signed new contracts with the Russian Ministry of Defense for the supply of 21 more Su-30SM2 multifunctional fighter aircraft (for the Russian Navy's Naval Aviation) and 25 combat training aircraft in the period 2021-2025 aircraft Yak-130. All of them should be built at the Irkutsk Aviation Plant.


Supply of new production combat and training aircraft to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in 2008-2020




With regard to export supplies, we can say that, according to our information, in 2020 the Russian aviation industry delivered 40 new-build combat aircraft abroad, including 22 Su-35 fighters and ten MiG-29M/MiG-29M2 fighters to Egypt , eight Su-30SM fighters to Kazakhstan, and six Yak-130 combat training aircraft to Myanmar. Apparently, there were also transfers of combat aircraft from the presence (MiG-29 and Su-24M) to Syria and the Libyan National Army.

As for the supply of non-combat aircraft to the Russian Armed Forces in 2020, the program of serial production of military transport aircraft Il-76MD-90A at Aviastar-SP JSC in Ulyanovsk continued to slip, as a result of which in 2020 the Aerospace Forces did not receive a single aircraft of this type. Although the Aviastar-SP plant during 2020 took off three new Il-76MD-90A aircraft - aircraft with serial numbers 0203 (registration number RF-78658, first flight on March 17), 0204 (registration number RF-78659, first flight on August 26), and 0205 (registration number RF-78660, first flight on December 6) - however, none of them were officially handed over to the Russian Ministry of Defense by the end of the year.

These three IL-76MD-90A still not delivered are the fifth, sixth and seventh sides built by Aviastar-SP JSC under a contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense dated October 2012 for the production of 39 Il-76MD-90A units. Thus, to date, the Aviastar-SP plant has built a total of 11 copies (including the prototype) of the Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft and one prototype of the Il-78M-90A tanker aircraft.

In May 2020 it became knownthat the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, on new terms, renegotiated a contract with Aviastar-SP JSC for the supply of Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft. Under the new conditions, under the old contract in 2012, the plant will now deliver a total of 13 Il-76MD-90A aircraft, and from 2021 a new contract for the supply of 14 such aircraft until 2028 will enter into force. On December 18, 2020, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation also signed a state contract with Aviastar-SP JSC for the supply of ten new Il-78M-90A tanker aircraft.

In addition, apparently, the Russian Aerospace Forces in 2020 received another light twin-engine Diamond DA42T trainer aircraft, assembledsince 2017 JSC "Ural Civil Aviation Plant" (UZGA, Yekaterinburg) from machine kits manufactured by the Austrian company Diamond Aircraft Industries, having completed the contract for the supply of 35 aircraft to the Russian Ministry of Defense. The aircraft are intended to be used as training aircraft for training cadets of military transport aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces. The first three Diamond DA42T aircraft (presumably tail numbers from "051" to "053") under this contract were commissioned by UZGA at the end of 2017, and it was planned to commission 17 aircraft in 2018 and 15 in 2019. In fact, since 2017, information on the delivery of Diamond DA42T aircraft under this contract has not been published due to the political sensitivity of these deliveries in light of the current international situation. However, it is known that at the end of 2018 a batch of Diamond DA42T aircraft entered the Balashov Aviation Training Center of the Krasnodar Higher Military Aviation School of Pilots (KVVAUL) named after Hero of the Soviet Union A.K. Serov (Balashov, Saratov region), and that the assembly of these aircraft at UZGA continued until 2020.

On August 25, 2020, during the Army-2020 International Military-Technical Forum, the Russian Ministry of Defense signed a contract with UZGA for the supply of 20 additional Diamond DA42T trainer aircraft starting from 2021 .

In general, the signing in 2020 by the Russian Ministry of Defense of a package of contracts for new aviation equipment gives hope that the supply of combat aircraft to the Russian Armed Forces will start to grow again starting from 2021. Previously, we can expect the delivery in 2021 of 21 new-built combat aircraft (estimated, six Su-30SM2, six Su-34, five Su-35S, two Su-57, two MiG-35S) and several combat training aircraft Yak-130 , with further build-up from 2022. It can be expected that in 2021-2022 the "traffic jam" will also be finally overcome IL-76MD-90A.

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4240466.html

So we have 21xSu-30SM2 ordered all for Naval Aviation according to bmpd. No new contract for the VKS?

The Su-35s should continue to be 10 per year for 5 years, not good.
What about the IL-76PS90A? Is there finally something coming?
And what about a new long-range sea and anti-submarine aircraft ala Tu-214?

AMCXXL stated that modernization and need of newer aircraft to fill rolls are coming to an end as they have done most of the heavy purchasing and manufacturing last couple of years and with no new formations created, there isn't room for more aircraft.

So likely a lot of newer aircraft will be for replacing some older ones that are now needing replacement, and possibly forming the odd new formations in coming years.

They are also evaluating mig-35, su-57, su-57 + s-70 combot and soon su-30SM2 which could end up being better than su-35 thanks to the second pilot that makes work easier.

They will need time to figure out what combinaison of aircraft they need.

Su-57 is way better than su-35, the only advantage is that su-35 is a missile truck compare to su-57 which is limited by the bay size.

Isos wrote:Su-57 is way better than su-35, the only advantage is that su-35 is a missile truck compare to su-57 which is limited by the bay size.

If you take big missiles like say Kh-58, the Su-57 can carry already 4 of them in the tunnel were normally Flankers could only carry two at best. As to short range missiles, they have two bays for them. So the two extra suspension points the Flankers have per wing are compensated. Only when carrying 4 MRAAM in the tunnel with those rarely seen double ejectors and no ECM pods at the wingtips has the Flanker more missiles onboard, and that is the state as of now, before any potential improvements for the carrying capacity of the bays with newer missiles.

LMFS wrote:

Isos wrote:Su-57 is way better than su-35, the only advantage is that su-35 is a missile truck compare to su-57 which is limited by the bay size.

If you take big missiles like say Kh-58, the Su-57 can carry already 4 of them in the tunnel were normally Flankers could only carry two at best. As to short range missiles, they have two bays for them. So the two extra suspension points the Flankers have per wing are compensated. Only when carrying 4 MRAAM in the tunnel with those rarely seen double ejectors and no ECM pods at the wingtips has the Flanker more missiles onboard, and that is the state as of now, before any potential improvements for the carrying capacity of the bays with newer missiles.

Su-35 has the capacity to increasy by 1.5 or 2 the number of medium range missiles. Or just carry the same number as now (max number) but free hardpoints for other missiles.

Weapon bays will always limits the number of missiles. Carrying them externally impacts stealth(but that's not a big deal).

Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E wrote:The Su-35s should continue to be 10 per year for 5 years, not good. ...

Su-35 was a stop-gap for Su-57

With Su-57 being delivered Su-35 acquisition can be wound down

Isos wrote:Su-35 has the capacity to increasy by 1.5 or 2 the number of medium range missiles.

Why are you sure? We know the ejectors used in the tunnel and those are considered in the calculation above, I have not seen them anywhere else. In absence of proof that the same can be done for the other suspension points, my point above stands. There are double suspension pylons in the wings for rockets, I have never seen them for AAM. And the Su-57 can carry them too...

Weapon bays will always limits the number of missiles.

Not really. The Su-35 can carry 5x Kh-58 while the Su-57 should be able to carry 4 internally plus 4 more externally. Check the Su-35 booklet done by KnAAZ to see what the actual capabilities of the plane are. You may carry 2x R-77 more (12 vs 10) on the Su-35, but if you carry R-73 too, then you would not carry ECM, which is included standard in the Su-57.

Carrying them externally impacts stealth(but that's not a big deal).

It creates a huge RCS return and quite substantial drag too.

You never saw the twin launcher between the engines neither. It was just showed at static display as far as I know.

There is no reason they can't carry it on the other hardpoints. It's just two r-77 launchers instead of one on one hardpoint. It changes nothing and r-77 isn't that much heavy. Maybe the hardppoint at the extremity of the wings can't carry them but even with only the ones at the center x2, the one on the engines x2 and the first on the wings x2 carrying them that would be 12 r-77 on 6 harpoints. Then they would be left with another 6 hardpoints for r-77/73/ECM.

Su-57 comes with weapon bay. If you want to use it with exeternally mounted weapons then just buy su-35. It's cheaper.

And with the new small guided ground attack munition they will have launchers able to hold few of them per hardpoint making su-35 even a bomb truck.

Su-35 was a stop-gap for Su-57

With Su-57 being delivered Su-35 acquisition can be wound down

Their target is some hundreds of sukhoi in service. I doubt they can produce only su-57 even if that would be the best option.

Right now they have some 100 su 35 and something like 150 su-30SM. They ordered only 76 su-57. That's not even 350 jets. They will clearly need to keep producing flankers too unless they are able to make 24 su-57 per year and get a reasonnable cost.

IMO they will go for more than 76 su-57 but they won't be able to get enough of them to stop su-35 production.

Su-35 wasn't a stop gap. It was the best thing they could make to replace aging su-27.

Isos wrote:You never saw the twin launcher between the engines neither. It was just showed at static display as far as I know.

So what? Your assumption that that was a static display does not give you a free pass to present fictional double launchers on the rest of stations as an advantage of the Su-35 over the -57, there are weapons integration issues, clearances to the next stations, weight issues applying. It may work, it may not. And if it works, again, what prevents the -57 from doing the rest. It is very easy,
I am proving you it is not true what you have stated, you insist in defending what is simply wrong and making up more excuses.

LMFS wrote:

Isos wrote:You never saw the twin launcher between the engines neither. It was just showed at static display as far as I know.

So what? Your assumption that that was a static display does not give you a free pass to present fictional double launchers on the rest of stations as an advantage of the Su-35 over the -57, there are weapons integration issues, clearances to the next stations, weight issues applying. It may work, it may not. And if it works, again, what prevents the -57 from doing the rest. It is very easy,
I am proving you it is not true what you have stated, you insist in defending what is simply wrong and making up more excuses.

You proved nothing. You are just exposing your own concepts.

I proved you that they have a twin launchers that can increase the number of missiles on su-35.

It yet has to be seen if they can use it on the other hardpoint. I don't see why they couldn't at least use the ones that can carry big missiles like kh-31 which weight is 600kg. R-77 is less than 250kg (depend on the version). Those same launchers can launch usually r-77 so having 1 or 2 missiles on them won't change the aerodynamic.

In terms of integration it is very easy to update the software.

Su-57 is limited by its bay and will have only 4 medium range missiles internally and 2 short range. External pylon are not supposed to be used.

Those hardpoint are well isolated to not impact the others. Like I said only the 3 hardpoints at the extremity could not carry it. But even then its still much more than su-57 in stealth mode and its 4 r-77 + 2 r-73.

Isos wrote:You proved nothing. You are just exposing your own concepts.

I have proven your statement is a half truth at best, with facts and figures and not with rushed theories. Either you have reading problems or you are not reading the data I am providing, please point out how many more big missiles the Su-35 can carry compared to Su-57?

See here for your comfort:

I proved you that they have a twin launchers that can increase the number of missiles on su-35.

Oh boy... it was me that has mentioned them above before you said anything, and also the one that has linked that picture you posted, long time ago, so you are not demonstrating anything, this is all known and considered. The tunnel in the Su-35 is narrower than that in the Su-57, so they can carry, from what we know, the same number of MRAAMs there at best (I have already shown evidence that there is room for improvement on the Su-57), while in terms of big missiles the Su-57 has a big advantage with 4 missiles being carried in the tunnel by 1 or max 2 in the Su-35, depending on the weapon of choice.

It yet has to be seen if they can use it on the other hardpoint. I don't see why they couldn't at least use the ones that can carry big missiles like kh-31 which weight is 600kg. R-77 is less than 250kg (depend on the version). Those same launchers can launch usually r-77 so having 1 or 2 missiles on them won't change the aerodynamic.

Exactly, it has to be seen so you cannot pass it for a fact, there are all kinds of weapon integration issues we cannot know from the outside. Clearances to the next weapon station, launch envelope constraints, aero interference at supersonic speed, structural issues for unsymmetrical ejection on a double pylon etc. And, again, the Su-57 has wing stations widely spaced and at least the interior ones have high load capability. The two external one sin the Flanker are light load only, and the wingtip rails are needed for ECM. That leaves the Flanker with the same number of stations in the wings (2) compared to Su-57, if you consider that in the later the ECM is included and the SRAAM are in bays. Do you think they didn't make these calculations and took the Flanker as a baseline when they designed the external stations in the Su-57, so it would offer basically the same weapons carrying capabilities? Obviously VKS has a good plane already with the Flanker and does not want to lose out when changing to a newer one...

Su-57 is limited by its bay

They carry the same (AAM) or more (AGM) weapons in the bays than the Flanker in their corresponding tunnel...

With very big missiles we know the Flanker can potentially carry them in the centerline, with the Su-57 this would be more complicated maybe but it is unknown whether they have some plans about it, it would be pure speculation.

and will have only 4 medium range missiles internally and 2 short range.

As proven above, that is the same as Flanker! 4 MRAAM in the tunnel, 2 SRAAM + ECM in the wings, plus 4 stations free in the wings + 2 under the nacelles.

And of course, we cannot know whether plans exist to carry more AAMs in the bays. I think they will improve, simply because it makes sense and the space is there, we will see who is right in the end.

External pylon are not supposed to be used.

The Su-57 can decide to use them or not, for the Flanker it is a must. That is hardly and advantage of the Flanker...

Those hardpoint are well isolated to not impact the others. Like I said only the 3 hardpoints at the extremity could not carry it. But even then its still much more than su-57 in stealth mode and its 4 r-77 + 2 r-73.

Why would it matter for the Su-57 to be non-stealthy because of the external stations while it is OK for the Su-35? If the conditions are such that RCS is not a problem, both planes can be used with external storages, if they matter, then Su-57 can be used but Su-35 can NOT

GarryB wrote:That double launch pylon is interesting... the grid fins overlap... I wonder if the live rounds keep the fins folded till launch... perhaps snapping out when the rocket motor lights up after being thrown down on launch by the pylons pneumatic arm... It would make internal carriage much more efficient too with folded grid fins.

If they folded them then you could see the width those missiles are apart you could probably have a third launch arm between the existing missiles slightly lower down that could be launched first to clear the way for the other two to launch...

Perhaps with such a launch arrangement inside the Su-57M they could have more missiles carried internally...

The missiles are staggered and they are ejected downwards, so there is no contact between the fins. At transonic and supersonic speeds that layout must not be nice aerodynamically, but apparently it works well enough.

If they develop missiles with folding wings they could carry four in each bay of the Su-57, in the Flanker probably 3 would fit in parallel. The good thing with the bay in the Su-57 would be to have single ejectors for the big ordnance and double ones for smaller MRAAMs, that would make it mechanically easier. But of course we don't know for sure yet. The double ejectors would be also good for SDB type ordnance, I cannot imagine the Russian military does not have such plans for the future.

They might find they want a mix of all types which can be made affordable as their avionics and systems merge over time... certainly they cannot afford a fleet of only Su-57s, even if they wanted that, and the fact that they are ordering MiG-35s instead of more affordable MiG-29M2s suggest lower performance aircraft that are cheaper to operate is not what they want either for now.

They inherited a lot of different planes from Soviet union, removed many from service and now are working further to make the fleet more uniform, like with the new initiative to get all the Flankers operating with the same engines and the Su-30 with the radar of the Su-35. While I think bombers, attack planes and interceptors will continue to be used, in terms of fighters there should be some consolidation of types, leaving for the future just Su-35 and -30SM2, with Su-57 substituting them progressively. The light and middle fighters seems less clear by now, I expected more activity with the MiG-35 but who knows. From the background noise and the lack of more orders of the -35, I would say they are discussing now whether to buy the MiG-35 or to wait for a new plane. Possibly they will opt for buying some quantities of MiG-35 but not many hundreds of them, to bridge the gap until a new plane arrives with a strategy similar to that of Su-35/57. So a plane like LMFS should be more abundant than the Sukhois, but I seriously doubt they will buy as many MiG-35, maybe 100 or so during this decade? Another relevant issue is to buy in order to support export sales, the India deal would be important for the Russian industry and for the further military cooperation between both countries.

See here for your comfort:

That doesn't prove it can't carry it on the other hardpoints. F-15 wasn't able to carrya lot too but last version comes with 24 AMRAAM. Pylons are not hard to integrate. They could even design a 4 rail launcher like the US.

please point out how many more big missiles the Su-35 can carry compared to Su-57?

I pointed that out. Su-57 carries 4 r-77 and 2 r-73 in stealth mode.

I have already shown evidence that there is room for improvement on the Su-57

So when I say su-35 can carry twin launchers on pylons that they didn't advertized on their official pictures it's wrong.

But when you say su-57 can carry more than 2 r-77 per bays because you think it's possible then it's good and true.

while in terms of big missiles the Su-57 has a big advantage with 4 missiles being carried in the tunnel by 1 or max 2 in the Su-35, depending on the weapon of choice.

Su-35 has the harpoints under the engines and the firsts on the wings for the big missiles.

See your picture.

It can carry 6 kh-31/29 or 5 kh-59. And still have some for air to air missiles.

Why would it matter for the Su-57 to be non-stealthy because of the external stations while it is OK for the Su-35? If the conditions are such that RCS is not a problem, both planes can be used with external storages, if they matter, then Su-57 can be used but Su-35 can NOT

Su-57 was designed to be stealthy. Su-35 wasn't. If you plan to use it with external weapons then just buy su-35 with Byelka radar.

I'm pretty sure if I look at your posts about the f-35 I will found some critics at how its stealth is impacted when carrying external loads because there is no enough room in the bays.

Do you think they didn't make these calculations and took the Flanker as a baseline when they designed the external stations in the Su-57, so it would offer basically the same weapons carrying capabilities?

I understand what you means. Sure if you use the external hardpoint it would be the same as su-35 but that's not the idea of stealth design.

Isos wrote:That doesn't prove it can't carry it on the other hardpoints. F-15 wasn't able to carrya lot too but last version comes with 24 AMRAAM. Pylons are not hard to integrate. They could even design a 4 rail launcher like the US.

Yeah sorry for oppressing you with reality. That booklet comes from KnAAZ and is as official as it gets. We can talk about the future octuple launchers for every station in the Su-35, but then we can talk about the ones for Su-57 too can't we?

I pointed that out.

You didn't.

So when I say su-35 can carry twin launchers on pylons that they didn't advertized on their official pictures it's wrong.

But when you say su-57 can carry more than 2 r-77 per bays because you think it's possible then it's good and true.

I have no problem separating proven facts from speculation, which even when it is well supported, it is ultimately unproven.

Su-35 has the harpoints under the engines and the firsts on the wings for the big missiles.

The Su-57 also has them, plus four positions in the bays!

Su-57 was designed to be stealthy. Su-35 wasn't. If you plan to use it with external weapons then just buy su-35 with Byelka radar.

If you think all that Sukhoi did in the last twenty years was to create a more or less stealthy Flanker for a way higher price, then you are right...

I'm pretty sure if I look at your posts about the f-35 I will found some critics at how its stealth is impacted when carrying external loads because there is no enough room in the bays.

Not specially, rather critical of the STOVL requirement ruining the bays and the overall layout of the plane. Internal carriage is very good for aerodynamics.

I understand what you means. Sure if you use the external hardpoint it would be the same as su-35 but that's not the idea of stealth design.

The Su-57 is not only a stealth plane but the successor of the Su-27 and it needs to carry a hefty payload if needed too. What is clear is that the weapons will be optimized for internal carriage so not everything of what is available now will be advantageous in the Su-57. But the moment you realise the Su-57 will be in the short term an aircraft capable of stealthily carrying 4x hypersonic AGM/AShM + 2x SRAAM at high supercruising speeds with a very small range reduction compared to being unloaded, you understand what a fearsome platform and how much ahead of the Flanker it is.

Isos wrote:Su-57 is limited by its bay and will have only 4 medium range missiles internally and 2 short range.

Fist, they sacrificed all-aspect stealth in favor of greater aerodynamic and kinematic performance because the Su 57 was meant to be a hunter killer that would detect and defeat its stealthy (and non stealthy) opponents in BVR combat.

But with just 4 medium ranged air to air missiles it is going to struggle against western aircraft like the F-22 and the F-35. Plus, the PAK-FA falls well short of the F-22 in the shaping design of the lower fuselage and side fuselage, where the general configuration, wing/fuselage join angles, and inlet/engine nacelle join angles introduce similar intractable specular return problems as observed with the F-35.

RTN wrote:Fist, they sacrificed all-aspect stealth in favor of greater aerodynamic and kinematic performance because the Su 57 was meant to be a hunter killer that would detect and defeat its stealthy (and non stealthy) opponents in BVR combat.

That kind of makes sense for a country capable of seeing US all aspect VLO planes from the moment they are in the runway  

But with just 4 medium ranged air to air missiles it is going to struggle against western aircraft like the F-22 and the F-35.

First, among those 4 AAM are long range missiles capable of being used way before the US ones can. Second, both US planes were commissioned with the same number of MRAAMs (no SRAAM in the case of the F-35) but were improved later. I would not take it for granted that something similar cannot happen on the Su-57, that has way bigger bays with a much better form factor. We will see, if the VKS wants to let us know what they are up to. Not to talk about kinematics where the F-35 is massively overmatched.

Plus, the PAK-FA falls well short of the F-22  in the shaping design of the lower fuselage and side fuselage, where the general configuration, wing/fuselage join angles, and inlet/engine nacelle join angles introduce similar intractable specular return problems as observed with the F-35.

Given the Western RCS values for those planes are certified BS (-40 dBsm is the RCS of a pitot tube or similar "weak radiation sources" of which every of those very planes has aplenty), I would not be so sure such discussion makes sense at all. There are aspects in which the Su-57 seems superior in terms of stealth, others where it is probably inferior and others (probably most of them) where we simply have no clue. Publicised detection ranges for Western planes are BS as well, so the tactical picture is not so clear as to who detects who and how / at what distance. Playing in home turf VKS can remain passive and rely on their IADS guiding them, while USAF in that theater would be hard pressed to activate their radars because AWACS and other assets would be under huge risk. Just a token of the kind of reasoning that can make almost everything discussed about modes of employment of Western stealth planes simply irrelevant. Other scenarios of confrontation with US are probably uninteresting to Russia as of now.

Isos wrote:

Su-35 was a stop-gap for Su-57

With Su-57 being delivered Su-35 acquisition can be wound down

Their target is some hundreds of sukhoi in service. I doubt they can produce only su-57 even if that would be the best option....

Only producing Su-57 was never the plan, idea​ is to have combination of Flankers and Felons

Su-57 will be used as air superiority platform, everything else will be handled by Su-30SM which will be purchased in large quantities

Su-35s already in service will of course serve out their full service life but new ones will not be purchased anymore by VKS in favor of Su-57

GarryB wrote:Can already carry four R-37Ms with 350km + range, and the new long range air to air missile described as having a range of between 1.6 and 9 times greater range to be operational very soon.

What does the supply chain for R-37M or for that matter any air to air missile look like? I mean from sourcing raw materials right up to the end user? Thanks.