Russian Air Force numbers and procurement plans

How about moving the Ukraine stuff to Ukrainian thread ?

Amazed and stunned by some members here. That people can sink so low and support Russia and Putin at a time like this.

Thank god that the West seems ta had enough and will put an end to this. Russia will go bankrupt within 6-12 months.

Ukraine's main production was food (of which the EU has so much it needs to pay farmers to bury it), and heavy mechanical products like turbine engines. Which the French and British would never allow to compete with them. So their future in the EU would be quite grim.

Amazed and stunned by some members here. That people can sink so low and support Russia and Putin at a time like this.

Thank god that the West seems ta had enough and will put an end to this. Russia will go bankrupt within 6-12 months.

What has he done that the US and UK and the French and EU have not done or supported in the last 30 years.

Take a week to think about it...

GarryB wrote:

Amazed and stunned by some members here. That people can sink so low and support Russia and Putin at a time like this.

Thank god that the West seems ta had enough and will put an end to this. Russia will go bankrupt within 6-12 months.

What has he done that the US and UK and the French and EU have not done or supported in the last 30 years.

Take a week to think about it...

A week is too little. I got a month for far less said in mp.net

The Checkmate will never be a cheap bomb truck. For that you would need a Frogfoot replacement.
They had a fair bit of Frogfoot losses however. It needs more resistance against ground based missile defenses.
Funny thing is against the US this would have little impact. Since they don't have much in the way of ground based missile defenses.

lancelot wrote:The Checkmate will never be a cheap bomb truck. For that you would need a Frogfoot replacement.
They had a fair bit of Frogfoot losses however. It needs more resistance against ground based missile defenses.
Funny thing is against the US this would have little impact. Since they don't have much in the way of ground based missile defenses.

The Okhotnik-B will be the bomb truck, not cheap per se , in the sense it has good equipments but it is both expendable and possible to produce in good numbers the Checkmate would instead be the light A2A fighter.

Isos wrote:The war in Ukraine shows that having a small amount of expensive jets restricts your operations.

They afraid of loosing them so they use expebsive missiles when a 500kg bomb would be better.

It was a huge mistake to not create a modern and cheap successor to mig-23/27 available in huge numbers and for which you wouldn't care about.

They need to speed up the work on checkmate and reduce its price.

They do have enough Su-24s and can bring more into operation

It's not the hardware you care about though, but the pilots. Low-level penetration bombing is always viable, but risky business

Indeed something like the Checkmate is needed, and with gliding bombs rather than having to go over the target

Or just a UCAV which can do the job. That they're working on.

The Su-34 is more a multi-role strike aircraft. It can do the job of a tactical bomber, or conduct reconnaissance with various pods, or use all sorts of guided munitions, be used in the SEAD role with anti-radar missiles, or be equipped with EW pods, or even be used as a fighter if needed. An all in one essentially.
They're valuable and you don't want to risk them dropping bombs over any airspace that has operational air defenses.

Oh shut the hell up.

So you are reading my posts again... still listening to western media though clearly.

Putin just invaded a free democratic nation for no reason what so ever.

Free and democratic while having opposition leaders in jail and actually banning languages from being spoken, and no reason what so ever including openly nazi military units that call Ukrainian residents in the Donbass and Lugansk regions Russian invaders to justify shelling them daily for the last 8 years, not to mention 50 plus bio weapons labs in the Ukraine, and of course the leader of the country and various other politicians openly discussing the acquisition of nuclear weapons...

Yeah, maybe he just flipped a coin and decided to invade.

Now his paying for it, with lives of young russians soldiers and a sinking russian economy.

Hahaha... like you care about the lives of Russian soldiers... next you will be calling them all war criminals... the separation of the Russian economy from the west will not be painless... but it will be worth it.

If there are three buttons you could push to piss off Putin they would be nukes, bio weapons and nazis and the US is pushing all three.

For the most part I had believed the nazi shit was just a ruse... something they knew would upset the Russians but it seems that after capturing lots of places where they were based the posters and books and symbology... these are real nazis, so killing them makes sense... even if they take a few innocents with them like they do.

Keep this up and Putin wont afford a single new submarine , Su-57 or Armata for the next 10 years. Its back to the 90s again.

That would only make sense if he was importing submarines and aircraft and tanks and paying in US dollars or Euros for them.

They will likely shift focus and increase development and funding for their navy with older ships being replaced by newer ships at a higher tempo because their navy will give them unrestricted access to the rest of the world... trading with the rest of the world with the west as the middle man just hands money and power to the west who have proven to misuse and abuse such power. Russia will start trading directly with the rest of the world and the rest of the world is going to be amazed at the difference between trading with Russia directly compared with trading with Russia via the west.

The Russian president can take his so called red lines and shove it up his ass.

Seems to be shoving those red lines up the EUs ass... the US seems fine... in fact it will be able to sell all the gas it has to Europe when Europe bans Russian gas so the US will be fine, though it likely will demand US dollars for the gas it sells to the EU... Euros wont be accepted.

And then when other resources from Russia suddenly become more expensive too then the EU is going to become much less competitive on international markets... will the EU grow up and realise the US hates them as much as Victoria Nuland does and is using them to keep Europe and Russia forming an economic block they don't control?

China and Russia have spent lots of money and time creating a silk route from Asia to Europe... but the US does not benefit from cheaper and faster trade between the EU and Asia so it is trying to destroy it by poisoning relations between the EU and Russia and the EU and China.... and if they got the chance between Russia and China.

What they don't understand is that trade routes from Asia to the EU can just as easily go to Africa instead and all the countries on that trade route benefit...

Look at any country... road and rail links from one side to another and towns develop and grow at intercections along the rail and road routes.... now expand that to countries... rail and road routes from Asia to Africa also means trade and business so at any point along that network you can send and receive goods quickly and relatively cheaply... that is good for business.

Pretty soon the third world will be first world, but what will all this do to the first world... who is going to use US dollars or Euros knowing they can be frozen and stolen for mythical made up crimes... Africa knows all about European courts of justice... not many whities in those jail cells.

Nato will now build up its forces in the east and Russia will have even more to worrie about then it had before.

Russia was only ever going to deal with HATO with nukes... now that it is clear they are a threat but of no value in any other regard that can be set in stone... why send tanks when you can nuke any force HATO tries to use against Russian territory.

BTW, Russia is swimming in money and still exporting to your shit lands. Once they stop, you can freeze for all I care while India, China, Vietnam and others get Russian resources. While they continue to get money.

The amusing thing is that Americas wealth, which is what the west really talks about is printed and has nothing to back it up. Russian wealth is in the ground and when it is accessed the money for it goes into everyones pockets instead of the 1% that own the mining companies in the west. It means Russia and Russians benefit from the wealth of Russia... which is why the west hates them so much... imagine if people in the west suddenly realised all the wealth extracted from the ground... oil, coal, minerals, etc etc... all that money went in to the pockets of a few very wealthy families in the west and the people in those countries whether in the west or the third world which they are also strip mining got nothing... except often cancer and a clean up bill.

That is the future the west promises... dumbed down drones to work and make things nice for the few who can afford it.

I completely agree that the invasion is criminal.

The invasion was more self defence than anything the west has perpetrated in the last 100 years or more.

Listen to Kiev... if they are to be believed they have been fighting Putin for the last 8 years... how can they possibly complain now after murdering that many of their own citizens and claiming they were Russians about a new Russian invasion?

I guess you have not heard of or do not know Victoria Nuland? Well in the 2014 Maidan

A foreign power overthrew their democratically elected leader and put a puppet in power via elections that excluded half the population... would be a bit like engineering a fake election to remove trump and put in an old idiot who does what they tell him.

I realise that is what the west thinks democracy is... the appearance of choice, but it really is not.

A Coup is a coup... and not even nearly democratic... especially when popular parties are banned, media are murdered, but it suits the wests interests so carry on like nothing has happened while they create bio weapon labs next door to Russia and shell innocent Ukrainian civilians whose main crime was speaking Russian instead of some made up language no one was using 100 years ago.

Amazed and stunned by some members here. That people can sink so low and support Russia and Putin at a time like this.

Yes, the west won the cold war... how dare Russia think it has any rights at all to its own resources or the future of its people... do they not understand the concept of the EU... subservience to the US no questions asked?

Thank god that the West seems ta had enough and will put an end to this.

Turns out the west was the paper tiger... the west can't even decide to stop buying Russian gas or oil...

Russia will go bankrupt within 6-12 months.

Yeah, not the first time I have heard such a prediction, unlikely to be the last either... but they produce their own food and energy... are they going to run out of hedge fund managers?

The war in Ukraine shows that having a small amount of expensive jets restricts your operations.

More a lesson for HATO really, but the Russians will likely take this on board too... potential future plans for the RuAF seem to have included boosting aircraft numbers either with MiG-35s with their low operational costs allowing them to be bought and operated in large numbers, or something like the Su-75 or a future MiG equivalent of this aircraft also as a cheap to buy and cheap to operate light numbers aircraft.

Together with drones that should allow force numbers to massively increase to increase their capacity to deal with hidden threats on the ground and in the air.

It clearly shows that modern first tier air forces need to change their structures when fighting enemies with access to modern mobile air defence systems in enormous numbers and supply chains that cannot be completely blocked off or dealt with.

Modern SAM systems are very capable and very powerful and in the past the Russians have been super lucky that western air defence is based on their air power which actually makes it easier to deal with... it is much harder to deal with ground vehicles launching weapons than aircraft launching weapons.

They already have an army that expects to defend itself from air delivered weapons, but the air force probably does lack disposable assets for recon and spotting threats and enemy forces that can destroy those threats when they spot them.

Of course having said this, this conflict is unusual in that it consists of essentially recon forces without the bulk of the ground forces which means they lack a significant amount of heavy armour but also a lot of ground based long range heavy air defence systems too.

Their supply convoys would benefit from the new vehicles they are introducing in terms of reducing the variety of parts and spares being carried to support mobile forces, but also added vehicles to the convoy of support vehicles that can defend the convoy itself as well... both on the ground like a few Terminator type vehicles but also self defence suicide type drones that can protect the convoy on the move as well.

Free roaming helicopters and aircraft seems to be a good solution to isolated consealed enemy units like artillery vehicles and anti tank units operating on their own in small groups.

Fortunately the west is blind and will ignore the lessons of this conflict which shows the value of even obsolete air defence vehicles being widely deployed like OSA and Strela-10... as well as longer ranged systems like Buk et al.

It was a huge mistake to not create a modern and cheap successor to mig-23/27 available in huge numbers and for which you wouldn't care about.

They will care about it as long as there are men in them, but cheaper support aircraft are on the way and of course they continue to use Su-25s and attack helicopters which seem to be very effective.

In terms of penetrating enemy airspace they have a range of new weapons like Grom and Grom 2 which are standoff bombs, Grom is rocket powered and Grom 2 replaces the rocket motor with 300kg of extra warhead... both have wings and are based on the Kh-38 missile and are intended to allow stand off attacks against protected targets.

My opinion on the future of the Russian Air Force.



Tactical aviation;
1. PAK-DP; This plane would be the most expensive aircraft of the Russian tactical aviation and the "crown" of Russian VVS, just like the current MiG-31 in the time of the USSR. The Russians have already stated that they are working on the development of the aircraft under the code name of the PAK-DP project. The designation "MiG-41" on the other hand has not been confirmed anywhere.
2. Su-57; we all already know that, that is, that this combat platform is the successor to the Su-27 aircraft. Since the work on the development of the successor to the Su-27 began first, I have no doubt that the Su-57 is the priority of the Air Force.
3. Su-75; single-engine aircraft excellent for Russia's border areas; Kaliningrad region, Crimea and what remains of Ukraine, the extreme south of Russia, Sakhalin region, Kamchatka, Primorsky Krai.
4. Sukhoi S-70 Hunter; A replacement for the Su-25, which I have already written once. Plans have already been announced that this unmanned combat aircraft, which has a long range and a large lethal arsenal, is planned to perform in tandem with the Su-57.
5. Su-34M; I am of the opinion that of all the planes created from the Su-27 family, the Su-34 will stay on the production lines for the longest time. The Su-30SM2 and Su-35S will get off the production lines earlier, because the Su-57 is coming.
6. Two-seater Su-57; And that has already been announced, so that it would lead to the direct successor of the Su-27UB aircraft and later Su-30s.
7. Su-75 and aircraft carriers; If Russia already decides to build aircraft carriers, I believe that the Su-75 will be on the deck of those future carriers. I don't believe that it is economically viable to build another model of a fighter plane, such as the one from the MiG.

* Strategic aviation;
I am sure that all existing strategic bombers will remain in use until the 2040s. It is possible that the Russians will reduce the operational numbers of Tu-95MS and Tu-22M3 in the next decade, because there will be more Tu-160s, but those planes will remain in use until the end of the next decade. The Tu-95MS is quite cheap to maintain but does the job, as it is still very effective, especially in the MSM variant.
8. Tu-160M; This plane is in production again and its role is to be the future most massive bomber of the Russian Air Force.
9. PAK-DA; This plane is coming, even before the PAK-DP, and initially smaller quantities can be expected. Massive rearmament on this type of aircraft can be expected over the next decade.
10. Il-78MD-90A; this aircraft will be given priority to Russian strategic aviation, although I expect that Russia will build at least 40 to 50 of these tankers, so one part would be used by tactical aviation.
11. A-100 "Premier"; here everything is also clear and this type of aircraft will soon enter service.
12. Il-96; future airborne command post will be built on the Il-96 platform.

* Helicopters;
Russian helicopters are great and there is no need for some new platforms, the Russians have everything. In the future, we will see a larger number of Ka-52M, Mi-28NM helicopters, some new variants of Mi-8 and Mi-38, Mi-26, etc.

* Transport aviation;
This is the only sore point of the Russian Air Force. Although the basic platform and workhorse  Il-76MD-90A is in production, which is not yet at the desired level of production, problems remain with transport planes such as "light transport plane Il-112" and "medium transport plane Il-276".
* Il-112; replacement for An-26,
* Il-276; replacement for An-12 and An-72.
* PAK-TA; We will see if the replacement for the An-124 will be realized, because there is far less talk about that than about PAK-DP or PAK-DA.

Transport aircraft are mostly the oldest planes in any air force. The only sore point of the VKS are the ELINT and ECM aircraft. Only 3 new Il-22PP, 2 Tu-214R and a handful of modernised Il-20M.

Hole wrote:Transport aircraft are mostly the oldest planes in any air force. The only sore point of the VKS are the ELINT and ECM aircraft. Only 3 new Il-22PP, 2 Tu-214R and a handful of modernised Il-20M.

It's not just about the age of the plane. And while the Soviet built IL-76 still has resources, the An-26 and An-12 are realistically nearing the end of their operational life. Yes, new electronic warfare planes and new anti-submarine planes are needed.

Normal transport planes can serve for decades without any issues - provided they are serviced properly and on a regular basis. The same goes for transport helicopters.

The fuselage does not suffer the enormous stress that is associated with strike aircraft. But even then - one of the longest serving aircraft today are in fact the B-52 bombers and you can actually see the stress marks on the fuselage but they keep on going.

Another great example is the C-47's that still serves in the SANDF to this day. They did receive a turbo prop upgrade in the late 80's but the fuselage dates back to 1943!

2. Su-57; we all already know that, that is, that this combat platform is the successor to the Su-27 aircraft. Since the work on the development of the successor to the Su-27 began first, I have no doubt that the Su-57 is the priority of the Air Force.

The plan seems to have been to make a few batches... 76 odd and then test them in service to see what their performance is like and how well it goes and how much it costs.

This will then be evaluated in comparison with the Su-35/30 in the heavy interceptor fighter roles and also including the use of drones etc to determine whether to keep using both stealthy and non stealthy types in use or to go for more of one or the other.

I think in terms of lighter aircraft they will make a batch of MiG-35s and then look at Checkmates when they are ready and also the new MiG- fifth gen light fighter too to determine what to introduce as a sort of numbers aircraft for frontal aviation to replace the MiG-21/23/27 and Su-17/22 types in the swing fighter bomber roles.

I still think the Su-25 needs to be replaced by something custom designed to operate over the front lines which is obviously a seriously difficult design task... but it seems to be considered worth it.

It is also important to keep in mind the wide variety of missions the RuAF will need to step up for moving forward so having different aircraft with different capabilities for different situations is a good thing.

4. Sukhoi S-70 Hunter; A replacement for the Su-25, which I have already written once. Plans have already been announced that this unmanned combat aircraft, which has a long range and a large lethal arsenal, is planned to perform in tandem with the Su-57.

It is in no position to replace the Su-25 at all... maybe you meant replace the Su-35, but even then the Su-35 with its large numbers of external weapons hardpoints is going to be cost effective on its own.

7. Su-75 and aircraft carriers; If Russia already decides to build aircraft carriers, I believe that the Su-75 will be on the deck of those future carriers. I don't believe that it is economically viable to build another model of a fighter plane, such as the one from the MiG.

By definition a carrier aircraft means not a lot of planes so if you can base it off of a ground based aircraft then that makes all the sense in the world.

Having two carrier types makes sense... right now that is the MiG-29KR which is a good modern fighter but not with enormous range or amazing payload, but also the Su-33 which is physically bigger but has better range and a decent air to air load out for endurance and persistance... having only one costs you numbers or range and persistance... having both means more planes and better range but not all of your planes are going to be operating at max range from your carrier group... having shorter ranged aircraft makes sense so they defend your ships.

Personally I would go with a naval version of the Su-57 as a heavy long range carrier based plane which will justify a two seat version too, and that twin engined MiG light carrier fighter they showed a model of at the last MAKS airshow. A land based version would be interesting too.

10. Il-78MD-90A; this aircraft will be given priority to Russian strategic aviation, although I expect that Russia will build at least 40 to 50 of these tankers, so one part would be used by tactical aviation.

Honestly, I would like to see all the Il-78s transferred to the Russian Air Force for the PVO and frontal aviation use for strike aircraft and to extend the range of fighters. Their design allows them to operate from rougher airstrips and they are ready to refuel... lots of new aircraft have inflight refuelling probes but no tankers to refuel them.

In strategic and long range aviation I would introduce a tanker version of the Il-96... especially with twin PD-35 engines if possible.... it can fly faster and higher than the Il78 and burns less fuel doing it... the faster longer ranged Il-96 tanker could take off with PAK DAs and Bears and Blackjacks and fly to the north pole topping them off as they go and then return to Russian airfields... the higher speeds of the Il-96 means less faffing about with slower Il-78s topping up after takeoff.

The Il-96 will carry more fuel further and faster and will be fine to operate on the same runways the strategic aircraft they refuel operate from, plus it will free up Il-78s to refuel tactical aircraft which its design would be better suited to.

I would also build a lighter aircraft as an inflight refuelling plane... perhaps an Il-276 or maybe a Tu-330 because of its extra payload potential of 35 tons.

For trips around the world an Il-96 would be faster and be able to top up in countries along the way allowing your bombers to go places they normally couldn't go.

Russian helicopters are great and there is no need for some new platforms, the Russians have everything. In the future, we will see a larger number of Ka-52M, Mi-28NM helicopters, some new variants of Mi-8 and Mi-38, Mi-26, etc.

There have been serious hints about new high speed models that will be revealed soon and I think talk about their flying IFV with armour protection might get a lot more attention after the current operation proved there is still room for using air borne forces and ship transported landing forces... as if laying down two 40K ton helicopter carriers didn't spell it out already.

This is the only sore point of the Russian Air Force. Although the basic platform and workhorse Il-76MD-90A is in production, which is not yet at the desired level of production, problems remain with transport planes such as "light transport plane Il-112" and "medium transport plane Il-276".
* Il-112; replacement for An-26,
* Il-276; replacement for An-12 and An-72.
* PAK-TA; We will see if the replacement for the An-124 will be realized, because there is far less talk about that than about PAK-DP or PAK-DA.

I have to agree it needs attention but it is mostly hamstrung because of engines.

Production of the Il-476 should be massively increased not just for domestic use but the Il-76 was popular and useful world wide and in need of replacing.

All the more so because the An-12 is in urgent need of replacement too for which the Il-276 would be ideal and could be made on the same lines as the Il-476 when needed.

The Tu-204/214 are in production too which suggests to me that the opportunity of putting the Tu-330 into production makes sense because it has 70% commonality with those airliners too so when the current urgent need for airliners subsides existing and newly made Tupolevs can be moved to cargo duties and presumably the two new aircraft that will have stepped up to replace them... superjet and MS-21 will by then be all Russian and in serial mass production the Tu-204 factory could shift to building Tu-330s for the Russian Air Force to help replace the An-12s, while the Tu-214 factory could continue making Tu-214s for the roles of Elint and other older airliner types now obsolete... so Il-20/22 Elint types and Il-38 MPAs could be replaced by the rather more modern Tu-214 which, with new engines should be very capable aircraft.

The LMF-901 and the LET-610 modification and other types like the Il-112 and Il-114 small aircraft can replace the An-2 and An-24/5/6/ and An-32, while the Il-276 can replace the An-12... the Tu-330 can replace many early model Il-76s, and of course the Il-476 and Il-106 can be produced in large numbers to replace the An-22 and An-124 in lighter roles. Eventually when PD-35s are ready two can power the Il-106 and four the Slon in the 180 ton payload range... but that might not be till the 2030s.

Another great example is the C-47's that still serves in the SANDF to this day. They did receive a turbo prop upgrade in the late 80's but the fuselage dates back to 1943!

Aerodynamics have not changed a lot over the years... the critical thing is usually a decent engine which can make an unprofitable plane profitable again.

With its original engines the Tu-144 was not a great plane. Fit the engines from the Tu-160 bomber and all of a sudden it becomes profitable if you have the right customer and the right routes... further development for the new build Blackjack and it will be even more interesting...

They should just accelerate the Il-276. Even if they need to make an early version with PS-90 engines instead of PD-14M. Should have more than enough power.
I expect the Su-57 order to be increased. Hopefully Su-57M development will be complete soon.

I am convinced that in the long-term Russian plans, the Su-57 is not the number one aircraft of the Russian Air Force.
Given that it is already clear that the Russians are increasing the capacity of the military industrial complex (if only to solve the issue of the production of surface warships), I think that there will be absolutely no problems with the Su-57.
If we already have a known contract for 76 Su-57 aircraft with a delivery deadline of December 31, 2027, then it is clear that in 2028 and 2029, at least 24 more Su-57 aircraft will be delivered. This means at least 100 Su-57 aircraft by the year 2030. And that's if we don't take into account that the production capacity could be increased, which is more or less certain, so that following the example of the Su-34 (delivered ahead of schedule), we could expect delivery ahead of schedule. My assumption is that by the time Russia enters the year 2030, it could have around 112 Su-57 aircraft.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Russians start producing one and a half squadrons a year, that is 18 aircraft each year (Su-34 is an example), although they could go with 20+ aircraft, which was the case with the Su-30SM. And that leads me to think that Russia will reduce the number of aircraft types in production.



The Su-57 will be the third and probably the most important "knight" of the Russian Air Force.
My opinion is that it is clear that of the existing Russian aircraft, the most important to the Russian Air Force are the other two other "knights", that is, the MiG-31, as well as the Su-35S. This was assumed before, and now it is completely certain that it is so. An exception could be the Su-30SM2. My opinion is that Russia should decide on two platforms based on the Su-27 fighter, while we currently have three; Su-34, Su-30SM and Su-35S. In fact, Russia now only produces the Su-30SM2, Su-34M and Su-35S.
If the S-70 Okhotnik turns out to be good, then Russia could give up the Su-25 aircraft. My opinion is that the Su-35S and Su-34M should remain in the game. In any case, the future of Russian tactical aviation will be significantly strengthened this decade with Su-57 aircraft, while by the end of this decade I expect the completion of the "light" multipurpose Su-75. My guess is that in 10 to 13 years, the Russian Air Force will have at least 50% of its aircraft made up of Su-57 and Su-75, and then it's time for the "jewel in the VVS crown" - the MiG-41. My personal opinion is that the Su-57 is not planned to be the "number 1" aircraft of the Russian Air Force, but rather it will be the successor to the MiG-31. That same MiG-31 is one of the few aircraft that the West did not have the opportunity to "evaluate", that is, in real terms STOLEN, as it is by far the most important tactical aircraft designed in the USSR. Neither the MiG-29 nor the Su-27 because the MiG-31 was the number one beast.

The S-70 and the Su-25 got nothing in common. Totally different jobs.

Hole wrote:The S-70 and the Su-25 got nothing in common. Totally different jobs.

The same job with a significant difference compared to the Soviet Su-25 - strike from a distance.
I'm not really sure about that and I think the S-70 will be an unmanned attack aircraft that will carry out airstrikes from a distance unlike the Su-25 which was not primarily designed for that. The Su-57 is the successor of the Su-27 family, and everything is clear about that. The Su-75 is intended to be a cheaper single-engine variant of a "light" multi-purpose aircraft and thus is the successor to the MiG-29. In this way, the fighter component of the Russian VVS was solved. There is also a plan for an unmanned version of the Su-75 aircraft. On the other hand, it is clear that the S-70 will certainly not be a fighter and will be an unmanned strike platform, which leads to a direct replacement of the Su-25 aircraft. The Russians certainly did not plan to replace the Su-34 with the S-70, but a new and enlarged variant of the Su-57 aircraft (perhaps the Su-64) could be used for such a thing.
Although, I am convinced that the number of future platforms in production will be reduced; Su-75, Su-57, S-70 and MiG-41. Those 4 platforms are enough for all needs.

That same MiG-31 is one of the few aircraft that the West did not have the opportunity to "evaluate", that is, in real terms STOLEN, as it is by far the most important tactical aircraft designed in the USSR. Neither the MiG-29 nor the Su-27 because the MiG-31 was the number one beast.

Suggest you look up the history of a Russian spy called Donald and the compromise of the MiG-31B aircraft design.

Of course it could be argued that it might have been an FSB trick to force an upgrade of the MiG-31 to MiG-31BM level at a time when there was no money for the upgrade... who can say...

If the S-70 Okhotnik turns out to be good, then Russia could give up the Su-25 aircraft.

S-70 is a fighter escort drone that operates with fighters as a sort of wing man... in the west equivalent drones are called wingman drones.

They would be no more a replacement for an Su-25 than an Su-35 or MiG-35... totally different jobs.

The Su-25 is a ground support aircraft... when ground forces are being attacked by large masses of enemy infantry they call up an Su-25 and it comes in and launches rockets and cannon fire at the enemy troops... if there is a bunker or firing position the ground troops can't break an Su-25 comes in with a couple of 250kg bombs and blows the shit out of it... on its way in or its way out if it spots enemy vehicles like trucks it will hit them with bursts of cannon fire. Other specific targets it will hit with Kh-25 laser guided missiles or bombs or rockets.

The S-70 would not be able to do any of that.

The same job with a significant difference compared to the Soviet Su-25 - strike from a distance.

Yeah, they already thought the Yak-130 could use standoff missiles to replace the Su-25 and it failed. In the US they thought a ground attack version of the F-16 called the A-16 could replace the A-10 and it failed too.

Rather nice looking plane too... an F-16 with the horizontal tail removed and the wing replaced with a huge delta wing and covered in weapon pylons... I seem to remember it had about 17 hard points for missiles and bombs plus its 20mm cannon... it failed too.

The Su-57 is the successor of the Su-27 family, and everything is clear about that.

I have not seen any evidence of Russia wanting an all stealth fleet, the Su-35 is good enough for most roles, while the Su-57 might be better for some roles having both makes sense.

The S-70 is a cheap support platform that boosts numbers and adds extra missiles in each Su-57 or Su-35 or MiG-35 flight of aircraft to add options and capabilities.

The Su-25 has roughly the same engine power as a MiG-29 basically. There is no way something like the Yak-130 can replace it.
The Yak-130 has twin 25 kN engines, the Su-25 has twin 44 kN engines, the MiG-29 has twin 49 kN engines (dry thrust).

It makes no sense for a ground combat aircraft to use afterburners because it will make it more visible on the IR spectrum. Plus good luck flying at high speeds close to the ground while trying to hit ground targets.

Because the Yak-130 has way less engine power it can neither be as well armored nor can it carry the same amount of payload as the Su-25. It is just how things are.

Garry, I'm bad with copying texts so I have to this way...
I didn't even think that Russia would completely remove the upgraded fourth generation aircraft, but I think that there will be big changes. It is evident that many countries are working on the development of fifth-generation aircraft, and some are even planning to skip the fifth generation and start immediately with the sixth generation.

It is my opinion that it is unnecessary to build three planes; Irkut, which produces the Su-30SM2, NAPO, which produces the Su-34M, as well as KNAAZ, which works on the Su-35S and Su-57.

Times change and things move forward. I don't think the Su-35S or Su-30SM/SM2 will be phased out in the next decade, but I'm not sure they will be produced in the next decade. Honestly, it is my opinion that the Su-34M will last the longest on production lines.
It is my opinion that perhaps all fourth generation aircraft could roll off the production lines by the end of this decade. Moreover, I am somehow convinced that it will be so.

Su-57; It is already known that serial production of the Su-57 aircraft has started, and the speed of production will definitely be increased. I won't make predictions, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Russians build an entire squadron of those planes already next year.

Su-75; Then comes the Su-75, which will probably not only be produced for export, but will also be produced for the needs of the Russian Air Force. It is cheaper and will take many of the components already developed for the Su-57. Its radar system probably won't be on par with the N036 Belka, nor will its flight performance, but it will be enough to fry any 4th + generation western aircraft and be competitive with the F-35.

S-70 Okhotnik; the production of this aircraft requires additional costs and the Russians are already announcing the operational status, at least the initial one, starting from 2024. Production of other strike drones like Inokhodec (Orion for export), Grom and those yet to come that we don't know about yet requires additional funding.
PAK-DP; the work on this aircraft is not known to the general public and it is evident that the PAK-DA has advanced further in development because the first prototypes of these aircraft are already being built.

PAK-DA; large funds will be required for the construction and introduction of this aircraft into serial production.

Il-112, Il-276; additional funds will be needed first for the development and then for the testing and production of these aircraft. The same applies to the future PAK-TA.
Anti-submarine aviation; definitely the Russians certainly have plans to replace the Il-38 and Tu-142 aircraft. Additional funds are also needed for these planes.
Continuation of production of Tu-160, increase of production capacity for Il-76MD-90, and therefore also for Il-78M-90A and A-100.

And at the end of the day, some new platforms that we don't know about yet will appear during this decade

All of the above means that Russia will divert money to new platforms while only aircraft such as the Tu-160 and Il-76MD-90A from the "older" platforms will remain on the production lines in 2030's..
In order to produce all that I have written, it is necessary to stop producing most of what is being produced now.