S-70 "Okhotnik" UCAV

marcellogo wrote:


May I disagree there?
One cannot put on the same perspective a mature model like the Su-34, already in service in more than an hundred of  plane with a prototype that have performed its first flight just few days ago.
Even postulating a tighter development schedule for the S-70 compared to a normal plane (as the need to enforce security of pilot is not just existent here) there would need a lot of time before serial production of the final product would be possible.
Above all, however its the same idea of developing not just one but two different platform (given that SKAT has been revamped also) to cover just the production of 80 items just doesn't make sense to me.
Maybe the substitution of Su-24MR with Okhotnik could happen anyway but together with the one of complete Su-25 fleet as a minimum.

I would be even more ambitious and stretch the performances of it into reaching the 1.5-1.7 M ballpark: a 5 gen Su-22 available in big numbers (as you didn't need active and physically fit pilots for them) to put F-35 into big troubles.  

 
Well, the Su-34 concept os a late cold war concept, but the older Su-34 was handed over in december of 2010 and the first complete regiment entered n combat duty by 2014


In addition, the current Su-34s are in bomber regiments, they will not be the Su-34s that will presumably receive the newly created composite regiments (SAP)

These squadrons for these new regiments will receive the new Su-34M or whatever they want to call the next version of the Su-34, so they will be totally new, with new equipment that will allows interacting with the S-70, which in fact will can interact with the entire range of Sukhois that are designed to work together.



About the S-70, welll, you know one are flying in Akhtubinsk range, but you dont know how many time the project os running.
In this stage, be sure S-70 started to walk some years ago.
Usually, when one airplane goes to Akhtubinsk , means the project is advanced, probably S-70 Project started many years ago.
Russians show only what they want to show, when they want to show


Today there are one S-70 testing on Akhtubinsk and there are zero Su-34M, so S-70 has a lot of time of advantage over Su-34M


The air force says when opened the first SAP regiment years ago, that Su-24M and Su-24MR will remain in service some more years instead withdraw them about 2020, so this means the replacement for both is still not ready.


The issue is not that the S-70 is the replacement for the Su-24MR, the issue is that the Su-24MR is obsolete and will be removed anyway.
In the West, airplanes for reconnaissance like the Phantom F-4RC withdrew in the 90s.
Then, the tasks that 24MR did, and new ones , will be performed by another aircraft, and a UAV seems more reasonable in the 21st century for that task and new tasks that were not previously contemplated

In addition, that the S-70 is stationed on the same base as the Su-34 does not presuppose anything, a regiment is an administrative unit.
The mixed regiments have squadronss of different nature, such as: fighters and bombers, bombers and reconnaissance, transportation and anti-submarine, airplanes and helicopters, etc ...
It is simply a regiment where two or more different squadrons meet for logistical reasons


S-70 doest not need supersonic speed. U-2 only had 0,75M.
Being able to overcome the sound barrier does not mean that it need to do it or that it will do it

In the West, airplanes for reconnaissance like the Phantom F-4RC withdrew in the 90s.

the EF-111A Ravens, Su-24 direct counterparts, soldiered on till May 1998: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics%E2%80%93Grumman_EF-111A_Raven

Some of the Su-24s could be converted to MPs for un/manned EW missions- it can fly very low & penetrate ADs; others into CMs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-24#Variants

Combat range: 615 km (382 mi; 332 nmi) lo-lo-lo attack mission with 3,000 kg (6,614 lb) of ordnance and external tanks
Ferry range: 2,775 km (1,724 mi; 1,498 nmi)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-24#Specifications_(Su-24MK)

I suspect the S-70 is not intended to operate with Su-34s, I think they are intended to act like jammer Su-34s with Su-57s except with the advantage of being semi expendable and much more stealthy and therefore able to fly high when needed to set off defence systems without exposing people to being shot down.

When they set off an air defence the information they can gather can be used to help defeat that air defence system... being able to fly at supersonic speeds at low altitude means achieving supersonic speeds at high altitude should be easy and not need a lot of energy... ie supercruise capability... which is good on all counts... flying high means much higher range and speed performance, but also better sensor range and kinetic performance from any missiles launched, and of course commanding the high ground means all missiles fired at you need to climb to get to you which shortens their range and reduces their performance.

The rather large wing area... being a flying wing would lead to some pretty rough low altitude flights through turbulence for example.

The EF-111 was a EW plane, the Su-24MR is a recon plane.

^^^That is a new video with su-30^^^

I thought it was the same, and didn't open, but saw on Russia media.

dino00 wrote:^^^That is a new video with su-30^^^

I thought it was the same, and didn't open, but saw on Russia media.

Of course. I never post outdated stuff.

ult wrote:

dino00 wrote:^^^That is a new video with su-30^^^

I thought it was the same, and didn't open, but saw on Russia media.

Of course. I never post outdated stuff.

But the "new" footage is all relative. Its new to our eyes, but for all we know the flight footage could be 2-3 years old and only now its being released to the public. I personally wouldn't reveal anything until it was near the end of its development cycle.

ult wrote:

dino00 wrote:^^^That is a new video with su-30^^^

I thought it was the same, and didn't open, but saw on Russia media.

Of course. I never post outdated stuff.

Sorry for doubting

Officials have mentioned roles for the S-70 including operating with Su-57s to defeat enemy attacks, and to help penetrate enemy air defences... it is always easier to send an unmanned aircraft into enemy territory to get them to turn on their radars and use their communication systems to coordinate an intercept... it generates targets and communication centres and radars and SAM sites and aircraft in the air that can all be engaged by the S-70 with onboard AAMs and ARMs and other weapons like glide bombs etc, but also the Su-57 aircraft they are supporting.

I would suspect some high flying S-70s could be useful to fly top cover for a low level Su-34 strike on targets... low altitude flight is the Su-34s stealth, while the high flying but more stealthy S-70 can detect incoming aircraft or threats to avoid like SAM sites etc, plus all the information about enemy strength and location can be sent back to HQ to get a better picture of enemy force strength and position.

If you think about a UCAV as being flown already by an AI as a mobile system with weapons and sensors that can be delivered as requested then its operation with single seat platforms is interesting...

Imagine a Ka-52 manouvering through mountains looking for targets with long range optical sensors and radar and it gets to a position where it can detect some enemy forces moving through a valley... launch 4-5 S-70s which can climb and accelerate to supersonic speed to get to the location pretty fast and drop bombs or launch missiles at the targets while the Ka-52 monitors the attack and determines if a follow up attack is needed... they can be used as sensors or weapon trucks so other platforms can continue their missions without risking running out of weapons or ammo... or exposing themselves to enemy arms.

In that scenario there could be plenty of small arms and MANPADS that could put a helo at risk, but would be no threat at all to a high flying armed drone.

In comparison the Ka-52 could have taken out the targets itself with these new guided missiles shown on the Mi-28NM, but likely would have had to return to base to rearm afterwards which means search and destroy mission over till rearmed, whereas with the S-70 it can get to the target area fairly quickly... certainly much faster than a helo, and can do the damage with minimal risk against ISIS level opponents, but after the attack the Ka-52 can evaluate the performance of the attack and extra S-70s could loiter in the area and monitor enemy activity too while the helo carries on its mission to find targets and destroy them.

In this situation the helicopter is the finder and the S-70 is the destroyer, but they cans swap roles even during a mission... such UCAVs would be useful in combination with a wide range of platforms... including MPAs... it could carry APR-3E air dropped torpedoes or depth charges or anti ship missiles....

ult wrote:

What is that rear orifice to the right of the engine nozzle? I do not think it serves any purpose to control the exhaust IR signature.
Anyone have any ideas?

I'm assuming its APU exhaust.
Large but maybe they just used a stock one thats bigger than strictly necessary?

The Russian Ministry of Defense now says that the primary missions for the S-70 will be intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, using both electro-optical and infrared sensors and signals intelligence systems, as well as electronic warfare. However, its general size would allow it to accommodate weapons internally.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29311/behold-the-first-flight-of-russias-hunter-unmanned-combat-air-vehicle

It could be very useful in patrolling/monitoring/reconnoitng the Arctic/the NSR/EEZs & land border areas- fly at supersonic speed to get to a remote area faster & then loiter there:
https://topwar.ru/153982-novejshij-udarnyj-bespilotnik-s-70-ohotnik-okazalsja-sverhzvukovym.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_S-70_Okhotnik#Specifications_(Sukhoi_S-70)

AMCXXL wrote:

marcellogo wrote:


May I disagree there?
One cannot put on the same perspective a mature model like the Su-34, already in service in more than an hundred of  plane with a prototype that have performed its first flight just few days ago.
Even postulating a tighter development schedule for the S-70 compared to a normal plane (as the need to enforce security of pilot is not just existent here) there would need a lot of time before serial production of the final product would be possible.
Above all, however its the same idea of developing not just one but two different platform (given that SKAT has been revamped also) to cover just the production of 80 items just doesn't make sense to me.
Maybe the substitution of Su-24MR with Okhotnik could happen anyway but together with the one of complete Su-25 fleet as a minimum.

I would be even more ambitious and stretch the performances of it into reaching the 1.5-1.7 M ballpark: a 5 gen Su-22 available in big numbers (as you didn't need active and physically fit pilots for them) to put F-35 into big troubles.  

 
Well, the Su-34 concept os a late cold war concept, but the older Su-34 was handed over in december of 2010 and the first complete regiment entered n combat duty by 2014


In addition, the current Su-34s are in bomber regiments, they will not be the Su-34s that will presumably receive the newly created composite regiments (SAP)

These squadrons for these new regiments will receive the new Su-34M or whatever they want to call the next version of the Su-34, so they will be totally new, with new equipment that will allows interacting with the S-70, which in fact will can interact with the entire range of Sukhois that are designed to work together.



About the S-70, welll, you know one are flying in Akhtubinsk range, but you dont know how many time the project os running.
In this stage, be sure S-70 started to walk some years ago.
Usually, when one airplane goes to Akhtubinsk , means the project is advanced, probably S-70 Project started many years ago.
Russians show only what they want to show, when they want to show


Today there are one S-70 testing on Akhtubinsk and there are zero Su-34M, so S-70 has a lot of time of advantage over Su-34M


The air force says when opened the first SAP regiment years ago, that Su-24M and Su-24MR will remain in service some more years instead withdraw them about 2020, so this means the replacement for both is still not ready.


The issue is not that the S-70 is the replacement for the Su-24MR, the issue is that the Su-24MR is obsolete and will be removed anyway.
In the West, airplanes for reconnaissance like the Phantom F-4RC withdrew in the 90s.
Then, the tasks that 24MR did, and new ones , will be performed by another aircraft, and a UAV seems more reasonable in the 21st century for that task and new tasks that were not previously contemplated

In addition, that the S-70 is stationed on the same base as the Su-34 does not presuppose anything, a regiment is an administrative unit.
The mixed regiments have squadronss of different nature, such as: fighters and bombers, bombers and reconnaissance, transportation and anti-submarine, airplanes and helicopters, etc ...
It is simply a regiment where two or more different squadrons meet for logistical reasons


S-70 doest not need supersonic speed. U-2 only had 0,75M.
Being able to overcome the sound barrier does not mean that it need to do it or that it will do it

You are treating the Su-34M as it would be a completely different plane from the Su-34 there.
It absolutely probable that it would be instead the same that will happen with the passage from
Su-30SM to Su-30SM1: they modify a serial production plane to test the new components, once done they wait for the end of current production batch, modify assembly line and start with serial production of the new model.
A gap of an year between the production of said two different batches would suffice to perform the needed modifications.
In any case you seems not to get the main point: if the S-70 would be intended just as a substitute of Su-24MR, it would not be worth the wait, the money and the intellectual resources spent on it.

They have mentioned before that they are developing podded elint gear for the Su-34 so it can be adapted in the field for the elint and jammer type role depending upon the pods fitted... suggesting that instead of a dedicated elint or jammer aircraft they will develop kit suites that can be used on Su-34s when needed... the electronics in the Su-34 should be sophisticated enough that with the right equipment plugged in it should be able to do the job of a jammer or an elint aircraft.

It is like the Platan system gives it basic capability, but for specialist work it can carry custom designed targeting pods for specific missions too.

I would assume the S-70 would be the same with weapon bays likely similar to the MiG Skate, it could carry long range AAMs or ARMs or bombs or other munitions internally... or it could carry electronic pods and/or extra fuel in those internal bays.

It might even operate at high altitude and drop small disposable UAVs like that new MiG one to be released from high altitude and fall down and then power up its little engine and fly around for a bit transmitting information up to the S-70 which could pass it back to HQ via satellite link and if it finds a target it can fly directly in to it and destroy it... or just self destruct.

Later, they could scale it up 1.75-2.5x to double its range, & make it optionally manned. Intercontinental unrefueled range of up to 12K km or more will make it a strategic bomber.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Later, they could scale it up 1.75-2.5x to double its range, & make it optionally manned. Intercontinental unrefueled range of up to 12K km or more will make it a strategic bomber.

There's no point in having Sukhoi design bureau develop a manned strategic bomber version if there's a PAK-DA program being funded and tasked by Tupolev design bureau.

magnumcromagnon wrote:There's no point in having Sukhoi design bureau develop a manned strategic bomber version if there's a PAK-DA program being funded and tasked by Tupolev design bureau.

That may have delays/problems. Also, they may need a bigger UAV comparable to the Global Hawk:
https://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/GlobalHawk/Pages/default.aspx

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_RQ-4_Global_Hawk#Specifications_(RQ-4B_Block_30/40)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_MQ-4C_Triton#Specifications

Isos wrote:We talk a lot about su-57/S-70 but su-30 is the more likely to control the drone since it has a copilot. Su-57 has an AI but I doubt it is mature to fully control a drone flying by its side. There will also be much more su-30 than 57.

That could happen during modernization to SM1 standard.

AI (I wouldn't call it AI by todays standards) controlling the drone doesn't sound like a problem if pilot would be the one issuing commands with hotkeys. Yet, second pilot or ground control can do it more efficiently without needing simplified commands and it wouldn't overburden the pilot.
I have tried flying multiple comsumer drones using various commercially available softwares and the speed of automatisation is mindboggling. You can create flight paths on the go, tap to fly, circle, eclipse and program missions in seconds. If a simple civilian consumer can get drawn swarms running with few arduino chips then I imagine military is much more advanced when it comes to software solutions that would help control the drones to their maximum efficiency.

Later, they could scale it up 1.75-2.5x to double its range, & make it optionally manned. Intercontinental unrefueled range of up to 12K km or more will make it a strategic bomber.

Not really... a strategic bomber doesn't need high speed, the focus will be in different areas.

I do think that Sukhoi and Tupolev probably shared data and information as they are both working on flying wing designs, but the designs are different enough that they likely wouldn't waste time trying to merge designs.

If they need bigger UCAV designs then I am sure they will make them... I don't think it would be cost effective to make a PAK DA into a UCAV, or vice versa.

Some moron in another thread was laughing it up that the Altius-U supposedly needs an accompanying helicopter to operate. I guess the S-70 must
be similar Russian non-tech that makes NATO ubermenschen laugh and laugh. But being morons they don't understand the purpose of localized
control. Having some clown control the drone 2,000 km away introduces response lag due something called the speed of light. Also, no
ground controller will have the information that local actors do. So there must have been a rather substantial innovation in allowing drones
to be controlled by pilots without the need for a monkey with a joy-stick who thinks he is playing a video game. So easily amused imbeciles
can laugh, but Russian drones must be operating autonomously with critical command updates. And the cherry on top of the laugh cake is
that encoded quantum transmissions are much easier with local line-of-sight contact than from remote locations.

The thing about drones is that the higher duration/endurance rely on long range communications that could be hijacked by OPFOR 3rd parties (ex. RQ-170). MALE/HALE drones having the ability for to have a direct line of communication/control from a manned aerial vehicle flying near by as a back up, which isn't necessarily a bad thing in the scenarios of ECM interference by hostile 3rd parties. In fact the A-50/100 airborne radar is said to already have this ability. Unless your drone relies on inertial guidance (which is usually a one way trip for a drone), than long range communication is a vulnerability that can be exploited by hostile 3rd party ELINT/SIGINT/ECM.

It can't be a coincidence that prospective Armata UGV's are limited 6km range, because they know all to well about the vulnerabilities of drones.