Su-34 Tactical Bomber: News #2

The Su-34 can also carry quite a heavy load at 12400kg, which is even heavier than the F-15E at 10400kg - it's closest competitor.
The Rafale comes in at 9500kg. Not that it matters much but it does demonstrate the Su-34's main role as a bomber/strike fighter.
It also sports some terrific defensive armament in that all 12 hardpoints can be equipped with AAM's!

Even in its damaged state Ukrainian air defences are probably still better than HATO air defences would be, so saying the Su-34 is rubbish is basically saying all western aircraft are rubbish too... when was the last time any western aircraft penetrated properly defended airspace?

Look at Israel not even wanting to fly into Syrian airspace any more... even though they have F-35s...

Mir wrote:The Su-34 can also carry quite a heavy load at 12400kg, which is even heavier than the F-15E at 10400kg - it's closest competitor.
The Rafale comes in at 9500kg. Not that it matters much but it does demonstrate the Su-34's main role as a bomber/strike fighter.
It also sports some terrific defensive armament in that all 12 hardpoints can be equipped with AAM's!

If the Rafale carries 9500kg it has barely enough fuel on board to fly one time around her own airfield.

Mir wrote:Funny thing is when the Su-34 (Su27IB) was first spotted in the west they quickly came to the conclusion that the shape of the nose could not possibly allow for a radar. Little did they know!

The PESA radar fitted is actually quite powerful with a range of 250 km against large surface targets and 120 km against a fighter sized target. Not exactly the less than 100 kms as claimed by our resident Rafale lover.  

Maybe you should try to make some more research.

120km against fighter type jet is 120 against a 4 gen fighter like a su-27 or f-15.

The Rafale has a 0.5 m2 rcs. This radar will see the Rafale far bellow 100km.

GarryB wrote:when was the last time any western aircraft penetrated properly defended airspace?

In Vietnam, where they have lost 10 000 aircraft in 7 years.
But you know, math is for racists

Hole wrote:

Mir wrote:The Su-34 can also carry quite a heavy load at 12400kg, which is even heavier than the F-15E at 10400kg - it's closest competitor.
The Rafale comes in at 9500kg. Not that it matters much but it does demonstrate the Su-34's main role as a bomber/strike fighter.
It also sports some terrific defensive armament in that all 12 hardpoints can be equipped with AAM's!

If the Rafale carries 9500kg it has barely enough fuel on board to fly one time around her own airfield.

Yes that is just the thing - any strike fighter with anything near max loads will be like a tram on a rail - not much maneuverability there!
That's why I say all that stats about max load is a bit misleading and doesn't mean much. But still the Su-34 has demonstrated many times that it can carry quite a meaningful load and it can still pull some impressive G's.

Isos wrote:
Maybe you should try to make some more research.

120km against fighter type jet is 120 against a 4 gen fighter like a su-27 or f-15.

The Rafale has a 0.5 m2 rcs. This radar will see the Rafale far bellow 100km.

I have made plenty of research on these aircraft - esp the Sukhoi family!

Anyway your Rafale is a great fighter no doubt BUT even with all the reduced RCS (S duct etc) it is still only a 4 gen fighter. It is definitely not a full spectrum 5th gen stealth fighter. It will certainly have a better RCS than the F-15 but the RCS figures you give for the Rafale is in squicky clean format with no weapons. In that format it will be totally useless against any opponent - never mind the Su-34!

Like the Rafale the Su-34 is also designed with a reduced RCS in mind - that includes RAM coatings etc, but unfortunately despite what Thales etc claims, the IR signature on any aircraft with a hot engine is...enormous!

Sukhoi claims that the RCS of the Su-34 at low level is equal to a cruise missile like the Tomahawk. Now if true that is pretty impressive!

Su 34 isn't developed with reduced RCS. Only su-35 is in the flanker family.

French air to air missiles are well integrated onto the airframe of the rafale.

Russian r-77 has metal parts that highly increase the rcs and their weapon pylons are way to big. Especially the two under the engines that greatly increase frontal rcs.

You saying su-34 has the same radar signature as a tomahawk tells me everything I need to know. Your claims are just dumb. No point of arguing anymore.

Isos wrote:Su 34 isn't developed with reduced RCS. Only su-35 is in the flanker family.

French air to air missiles are well integrated onto the airframe of the rafale.

Russian r-77 has metal parts that highly increase the rcs and their weapon pylons are way to big. Especially the two under the engines that greatly increase frontal rcs.

You saying su-34 has the same radar signature as a tomahawk tells me everything I need to know. Your claims are just dumb. No point of arguing anymore.

OMG then you are the one that should be doing some more studying!

Do you think the nose job on the Su-34 was for cosmetic reasons?

Isos wrote:You saying su-34 has the same radar signature as a tomahawk tells me everything I need to know. Your claims are just dumb. No point of arguing anymore.

It's not me - it is Sukhoi who made that claim. Maybe you should start reading more slowly?

And now you try and pull a Seig and run away when your dumb claims gets ripped to pieces. Very childish. How old are you?

Sorry that I broke your bubble on the Rafale - it is really only a 4th gen fighter!  

Isos wrote:
French air to air missiles are well integrated onto the airframe of the rafale.
Russian r-77 has metal parts that highly increase the rcs and their weapon pylons are way to big.

Yes I can see that the Rafale's weapons are well integrated with no metal parts at all

Mir wrote:

Isos wrote:
French air to air missiles are well integrated onto the airframe of the rafale.
Russian r-77 has metal parts that highly increase the rcs and their weapon pylons are way to big.

Yes I can see that the Rafale's weapons are well integrated with no metal parts at all

ROTFL

ALAMO wrote:

GarryB wrote:when was the last time any western aircraft penetrated properly defended airspace?

In Vietnam, where they have lost 10 000 aircraft in 7 years.
But you know, math is for racists

Don´t forget sexist. 

You saying su-34 has the same radar signature as a tomahawk tells me everything I need to know. Your claims are just dumb. No point of arguing anymore.

Implies hidden from ground based radar by terrain and airborne radar would not see weapon pylons and weapons....

BTW metal parts do not increase RCS... the F-117 is actually made mainly out of aluminium... its faceted shape redirecting radar returns away from the source.

Imagine an open field at night in near total darkness... one person has a torch and is trying to find another person standing in the field holding a full length mirror.

If you hold the mirror flat and reflecting the torch light directly back at the person shining the torch they can immediately see where you are because they can see their own torch reflected in the mirror.

If they turn the mirror 45 degrees the torch light is redirected away from the person shining the torch and the person in the middle of the field disappears... ironically if it is in a built up area and 45 degrees to one side where the mirror is pointing might be the lights from a farm house so you see the person anyway because they are reflecting other noise towards you... but that is a different problem.

The best description I read of stealth is the difference between a helicopter like a Hughes 500 with a bubble canopy and an Apache with flat window panes. In bright sunlight the Hughes 500 can be seen at any angle because the sun reflects in every direction so it does not matter which direction the helicopter is facing you still see the sun reflected in the curved canopy. With the Apache at specific angles you get a big bright view of the sun but then it disappears and can only be seen at certain specific angles.

Launch an old model IR guided missile and it will hit the Hughes 500 because as it flys towards the helicopter it wont break lock, but with the Apache if the Apache turns even just a little the sun will disappear and the missile will miss.

With stealth coatings are used to reduce the reflection but on the stealthy design the reduced reflections are only a problem at certain angles too.

Hole wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

GarryB wrote:when was the last time any western aircraft penetrated properly defended airspace?

In Vietnam, where they have lost 10 000 aircraft in 7 years.
But you know, math is for racists

Don´t forget sexist. 

Shit, how it is that I am not a mathematician!?!

Mir wrote:

And now you try and pull a Seig and run away when your dumb claims gets ripped to pieces. Very childish. How old are you?

Just let him fly high!
Nobody would believe if you would try to persuade that he has some serious issues with keeping his sanity.
But here he comes, to prove that!
More Froggy ego wanking!
We can stand that, not like the reactor in Chernobyl!

I don't know what to answer.

Su-34 are falling against ukrainian 80s tech as soon as they enter ukraine and you try to convince me it's a wonderful aircraft.

I mean get real. This plane entering an airspace protected by Rafale, typhoons or even j-10 is a dead meat. It can't jamm a old Osa system, aesa radar + meteor will destroy it anytime.

It can't do deep strike in Ukraine abd you think it will be a good plateform agaibst a pear adversary ?

Implies hidden from ground based radar by terrain and airborne radar would not see weapon pylons and weapons....

Rafale does it to. Its specially design to do such attacks for nuclear strikes...

The more you talk, the more fun it is
Oh please, please do!
We have a weekend, folks deserve some good entertainment!
Do you have a live stream somewhere, where we can watch your stand-up?
I can support you!
Good comedy is a rare species lately

Isos wrote:I don't know what to answer.

Su-34 are falling against ukrainian 80s tech as soon as they enter ukraine and you try to convince me it's a wonderful aircraft.

I mean get real. This plane entering an airspace protected by Rafale, typhoons or even j-10 is a dead meat. It can't jamm a old Osa system, aesa radar + meteor will destroy it anytime.

It can't do deep strike in Ukraine abd you think it will be a good plateform agaibst a pear adversary ?

Implies hidden from ground based radar by terrain and airborne radar would not see weapon pylons and weapons....

Rafale does it to. Its specially design to do such attacks for nuclear strikes...

Isos, France can hardly boast of military successes in the last 80+ years; Wehrmacht (sorry but it's true), Algeria and Vietnam. France gives tens of billions of dollars and what is there of weapons ? A few hundred tanks, 10 submarines, barely 100 howitzers if we count the towed howitzers. And you call that an army ?
And how many precisely guided aerial bombs do you think the French Air Force has and how many would last in a conflict of this intensity ?
If France were on the border with Ukraine, the Ukroshitstan flag would be flying in Paris.

France, assisted by the Brits, run out of ordnance after 2 weeks of bombing fuckin Libya, and had to ask the big fat owner for help
How sad is the reality of a once proud nation!

ALAMO wrote:France, assisted by the Brits, run out of ordnance after 2 weeks of bombing fuckin Libya, and had to ask the big fat owner for help
How sad is the reality of a once proud nation!

I think that Isos knows that this is the only truth, but the Rafale is a kind of consolation for him - albeit a weak one.

He spoils a quite fine aircraft by his delusions.
Objectively, Rafale is a huge achievement.
No need to pump it over the limits, as it backfires.
But that is what hurt ego does ...

ALAMO wrote:The more you talk, the more fun it is
Oh please, please do!
We have a weekend, folks deserve some good entertainment!
Do you have a live stream somewhere, where we can watch your stand-up?
I can support you!
Good comedy is a rare species lately

Have you ever provided something interesting in this forum. Trolling and saying "russian weapons are the best because they say it so "isn't interesting. Keep it for you.

Su-34 are falling like shit. And those genius don't even think about burning them on the ground.

Now NATO has a full set of Khabiniy jammers to study. Sukhois will be even less dangerous now.

Isos wrote:
Have you ever provided something interesting in this forum.

Never!
I cal all the witnesses to close my case!
Now go to your room, wipe your smashed nose, the blood from the floor, and grow up.
If you want to talk with adults.

Podlodka77 wrote:

Isos wrote:I don't know what to answer.

Su-34 are falling against ukrainian 80s tech as soon as they enter ukraine and you try to convince me it's a wonderful aircraft.

I mean get real. This plane entering an airspace protected by Rafale, typhoons or even j-10 is a dead meat. It can't jamm a old Osa system, aesa radar + meteor will destroy it anytime.

It can't do deep strike in Ukraine abd you think it will be a good plateform agaibst a pear adversary ?

Implies hidden from ground based radar by terrain and airborne radar would not see weapon pylons and weapons....

Rafale does it to. Its specially design to do such attacks for nuclear strikes...

Isos, France can hardly boast of military successes in the last 80+ years; Wehrmacht (sorry but it's true), Algeria and Vietnam. France gives tens of billions of dollars and what is there of weapons ? A few hundred tanks, 10 submarines, barely 100 howitzers if we count the towed howitzers. And you call that an army ?
And how many precisely guided aerial bombs do you think the French Air Force has and how many would last in a conflict of this intensity ?
If France were on the border with Ukraine, the Ukroshitstan flag would be flying in Paris.

It's not a secret for anyone. The model of the army now is to be strong against guerillas or low intensity conflicts and for nuclear strikes.

Anyway that's not the point here. It's just that su-34 proved to be a shitty aircraft and need a replacement.

Isos, the area of ​​France is large, and with 200 tanks and 100 howitzers, I don't think that's enough even for a guerrilla.
Helicopters ? Sadness.. If there was no US pressure on Russian aircraft exports, that Rafale would not have experienced the sales success it has experienced in the last few years.
Rafale is just a plane, not a space shuttle..

Podlodka77 wrote:Isos, the area of ​​France is large, and with 200 tanks and 100 howitzers, I don't think that's enough even for a guerrilla.
Helicopters ? Sadness.. If there was no US pressure on Russian aircraft exports, that Rafale would not have experienced the sales success it has experienced in the last few years.
Rafale is just a plane, not a space shuttle..

Considering that they used to be third in Europe after Ukropia, but it is not valid anymore ...
Ukropia had some 2500 tanks in line.
Do the math
I do admire your attitude to explain things to someone who does not want to be explained