Su-34 Tactical Bomber: News #2

George1 wrote:i didnt expect that Su-34 would create so much conflict in the forum

It's just one guy hating and lying to convince himself by his own lies.

Isos wrote:
Dassault official statements, sukhoi official statemebt, satellites pictures, pro russian telegram accounts with links with people on the front, ...

Official statements of 0.5m² RCS? And that is not marketing? They have no interest to sell their product?
RCS figures are 90% marketing and wouldn't be disclosed so easily. You are just refuting that this RCS figures are worthless for argumentation as they are not achievable against ground based radars and from all angles. You are like abortion supporters bringing up always "What if the women was impregnated by rape", ignoring that this makes less than 1% of all abortion reasons.
This RCS figure is worthless, but you would never admit that.

Sukhoi statements of what exactly?
Source, link and direct source only and not the stuff you made up in your head.

Satellite pictures?
Who made them?
Who claimed those were Iskanders? Where is the proof those were Iskanders? You lack brain if you believe Russia wastes half a dozen Iskanders on one airfield in 404 while all the other targets were always ammo depots, railways, power plants, bunkers, radars, SAMs, command centers, SBU HQs, training centers and so on. Not a single time they fired Iskanders on a fucking paved runway. Not once! You are just believing what you or people like you made up in a full blown propaganda war against everyone living in the West.

Post me the source who claimed those were iskanders!

Saying "Pro-russian TG channels"...do you speak Russian?
Do you have the slightest idea how many Ukrops are pretending to be Russian and Pro-Russian to spread disinformation?

We have One here on this very forum under the name of Arky, the Doomer, who outed himself because he started talking about Soloviev, Skabeeva and used phrases only Ukrops use. Anyone who is Russian and active on Social Media has seen or experienced such people. This propaganda war has absolutely no examples through out history. Even Nazi Germany had less Propaganda spewed than the Kokainum and the Empire of Lies.

Isos wrote:...
video of su-34 flying low only on the front, pictures of su-34...
hey mostly fly above russian forces and russian controled areas at very low altitude. Find at least one video of it above Lviv where all the nato equipement is comming or Kiev where there are plenty of targets.

Ha ha ha.
First your sorry ass said it's garbage because it only throws ODAB/OFAB bombs and get's shot down. Now your sorry ass is complaining they are not at the frontline. They are shooting STAND-OFF ASMs all the fucking time. What is your qualification to judge or declare what is the most effective way to use a weapons system in an unprecedented level of conflict?

I called you out first time a few pages back and I can happily do it again. You are the type of person who would use aircrafts in a manner like the Ukrops do for a few Twatter propaganda footages. How does this garbage tactic works out for Ukropia? Suicide missions. Congrats and now sit down Arms Chair General No. 36599

Unless you bring links and sources for my requested questions I am not willing to waste my time any more on your Ukropian infested propaganda wishes.

Those could have very well been Iskandars as Russia had bought  Iskandars without the optical head.   Original Iskandar was just Inertial guidance with may or may not had option for optical head.  Later variant of Iskandar had  Inertial guidance with  sat guidance's and or optional optical or radar head.

Robert.V wrote:Those could have very well been Iskandars as Russia had bought  Iskandars without the optical head.   Original Iskandar was just Inertial guidance with may or may not had option for optical head.  Later variant  of Iskandar had  Inertial guidance with  sat guidance's and or optional optical or radar head.

Not too sure about that as even the Iskander E was offered with both inertial and optical guidance way back in early 2000?

Mir wrote:

Not too sure about that as even the Iskander E was offered with both inertial and optical guidance way back in early 2000?

Inertial is standard.(Obviously).  Optical head was optional.  And it's not clear if Optical head was  even the option in case for original Iskandar's at least not in Russian service as I have never seen ones in service.

It's obviously though newer Iskandar-M's in Russian services have optical or radar head as they have been obviously used in Ukraine taking out moving targets. How many those Russia has is anyone's guess.

Robert.V wrote:
Inertial is standard.(Obviously).    Optical head was optional.  And it's not clear if Optical head   was  even the option in case for original Iskandar's at least not in Russian service as I have never seen ones in service.

It's obviously though newer Iskandar-M's in Russian services have optical or radar head as they have been obviously used in Ukraine taking out moving targets. How many those Russia has is anyone's guess.

The Iskander was developed during Soviet times but the program was heavily effected by the demise of the USSR and only entered Russian service in 2005 as the Iskander-M which is a much improved version of the Iskander-E. Iskander-E was offered on the export market well before 2005 and that version had optical guidance. Btw so did the Tochka and Oca missile systems.

Again, there is no indication that original  Iskander had a optical head. Certainly I've yet to see one with a optical head in Russian service, even whatever it was an option or not. Its quite obvious it was never purchased.

Mir wrote:
I Btw so did the Tochka and Oca missile systems.

No, Tochka never had a optical head.    Oka never had it either.     Oka-M would have had one. But that never saw the light of day since it was cancelled along with Oka.[/quote]

Arkanghelsk wrote:Su34 has demonstrated its role, and did much better than F15 or F18 losing several tens in Iraq wars

Only 2 F-15s were shot down, both by by Iraqi AAA/SAM, & 1 F-18 by a MiG-25.
On 28 February 2022, footage emerged reportedly showing Su-34s overflying the Kharkiv region of Ukraine.
Footage of at least one of the jets overflying the Kharkiv region was posted online, with the person taking the footage noting that at least seven such aircraft had already flown overhead by the time he began filming.

In various regions of Ukraine, downed Su-34 aircraft were mostly shot down by Ukrainian forces but some crashed for other reasons. Another was a modernized variant Su-34M and was reportedly shot down by Russian forces. ..
As of 18 July 2022, Russia had lost 11 Su-34 aircraft over Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion 5 months earlier. That was nearly 10% of all that had been built... As of 30 September, the total number of Russian Su-34s lost in Ukraine had grown to 14.

Tsavo Lion wrote:As of 18 July 2022, Russia had lost 11 Su-34 aircraft over Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion 5 months earlier. That was nearly 10% of all that had been built...

So what. They are losing less Su-34 aircraft in a year than they can build in a year if they want to.

I think the possible loss of pilots is more important than the loss of these aircraft.

And aircraft with MAWS like the Su-35 seems to be having much less losses.

Robert.V wrote:Again, there is no indication that original  Iskander had a optical head. Certainly I've yet to see one with a optical head in Russian service, even whatever it was an option or not. Its quite obvious it was never purchased.

If the Iskander didn't have an optical head, then how to explain its commonly cited capabilities of being able to match contrasts and even shapes to correct course to its programmed target during the terminal stage of its trajectory?

Robert.V wrote:
No, Tochka never had a optical head.    Oka never had it either.     Oka-M would have had one. But that never saw the light of day since it was cancelled along with Oka.

Suffered a bit of a power outage here before I could properly answer you...Anyway you're quite right about the Tochka - only inertial guidance. The Oka also had TERCOM.

As Alamo pointed out the Iskander was a development from the Oka-U which already featured optical guidance and as I've also as mentioned the Iskander-E was offered on the export market long before the Iskander-M entered service with the Russians which also featured optical guidance.

flamming_python wrote:

If the Iskander didn't have an optical head, then how to explain its commonly cited capabilities of being able to match contrasts and even shapes to correct course to its programmed target during the terminal stage of its trajectory?

Cited for the optical optional head   ...which we know  Iskandar-M can have along with optional radar head.   Whatever original Iskandars for Russian service had that capability to have it as a option is another question altogether. Artjomh (Whom i'm sure you remember)   from MP.net days doubted it my own source also.  But even if it did. It's never been seen in service.    Actually not even  Iskandar-M was ever seen in service with an optical head.

Radar head however been rumored to have been purchased.  So my bet is it's probably the radar head is what we have seen.  The CEP would indicate that also judging some of the precision and catching targets on the move.   Though I wouldn't rule out the optical head one either  or  use of mix of both.


But that airfield attack it looked to  accurate for Tochka and to inaccurate for later Iskandar-M's let alone for  ones equipped with radar or optical heads.    I take it they used the older variants   ..assuming of course it was impacts of ballistic missiles.  Which to me they look like it.

Mir wrote:
As Alamo pointed out the Iskander was a development from the Oka-U which already featured optical guidance and as I've also as mentioned the Iskander-E was offered on the export market long before the Iskander-M entered service with the Russians which also featured optical guidance.

Iskandar has its lineage from 9k716 Volga. It's radar head is derived from that work. Volga itself though draws it's lineage from Oka. So in a way he's right.

I know about Iskander-E. And that's certainly a fair and good point.

Dassault official statements, sukhoi official statemebt, satellites pictures,

For all we know that satellite picture could have been of Libya and showing the bombing precision of the Rafale.

pro russian telegram accounts with links with people on the front,

People on the front line would have no idea what is flying around the place most of the time. Plenty of people pretending to be pro Russian likely getting paid by the west... deep pockets you know.

video of su-34 flying low only on the front,

Video of high altitude launches of weapons proves they are not only flying low... by the way the low altitude launch range of the laser homing Kh-29 is rather less than 10km.

pictures of su-34...

Photos of Su-34s loaded up with weapons with hand written notes to specific relevant people based on events that are happening in Ukraine so not from an airshow.

Those are sources. It's just they don't suit your opinion so you choose to ignore them and say they are fake.

Those sources are not relevant because they only pertain to RCS which is meaningless...

Official statements of 0.5m² RCS? And that is not marketing? They have no interest to sell their product?
RCS figures are 90% marketing and wouldn't be disclosed so easily.

The obvious other factor is RCS in X band and Ku band frequencies, but not L band frequencies as used on the Su-57 and Su-35.

Those could have very well been Iskandars as Russia had bought Iskandars without the optical head. Original Iskandar was just Inertial guidance with may or may not had option for optical head. Later variant of Iskandar had Inertial guidance with sat guidance's and or optional optical or radar head.

There is no version of Iskander with just an inertial guidance system, Iskander is for hitting a range of targets but target coordinates have never been a target as such.

The early Iskander has an optical seeker, but later they did add radar seeker versions that detects buildings and bridges and other significant structures near a set of coordinates, because they can be used day and night and in all weather conditions. The optically guided missile is day night capable and can hit optically visible targets but can also be directed at hidden targets if there are visible things around the hidden target.
ie It can hit targets located in relation to other things that are clearly visible.

The official CEP for the radar version is less than 20m and the official CEP for the optical guidance model is about 7m, but in practise those numbers are two to three times too big.

From an export catalog from 2002 the export model of Iskander lists the following targets as standard:

Hostile Fire weapons (Missile Systems, MLRS, long range artillery pieces)

Air and anti missile defence systems

Fixed and rotary wing aircraft at airfields

Command posts and communication nodes

Critical Civilian infrastructure facilities

Other vital small and area targets.

Which suggests if that image is real that each of those impact points was a fighter aircraft or helicopter that has been obliterated by the 650kg payload of the Iskander.

Again, there is no indication that original Iskander had a optical head. Certainly I've yet to see one with a optical head in Russian service, even whatever it was an option or not. Its quite obvious it was never purchased.

I would be bloody impressed if you could identify an Iskander with or without an optical head because the optical head is covered with a protective cap during handling and launch and is not released till the missile is approaching the target area where the cover is ejected to protect the optics from insects and dirt... they all look the same.

No, Tochka never had a optical head. Oka never had it either. Oka-M would have had one. But that never saw the light of day since it was cancelled along with Oka.

The radar and optical seeker options were used for Iskander in Russian service... depending on the target and weather conditions near the target.

As of 18 July 2022, Russia had lost 11 Su-34 aircraft over Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion 5 months earlier. That was nearly 10% of all that had been built... As of 30 September, the total number of Russian Su-34s lost in Ukraine had grown to 14.

Divide by 10 for Wiki propaganda bullshit.

Perhaps if they did a US-style no-fly zone campaign for a few weeks BEFORE the ground invasion, their losses would be a fraction of what we see now.

That would just give the Orcs more time to prepare. The fact that the US didn't even try a no fly zone over Syria suggests it does not make sense against better equipped enemies.

Suffered a bit of a power outage here before I could properly answer you...Anyway you're quite right about the Tochka - only inertial guidance. The Oka also had TERCOM.

I have a Russian arms catalog that shows the optical guidance system and it is not described as the Iskanders seeker... it is described as an optical seeker for ballistic and tactical theatre missiles.... it is not specifically for the Iskander.

Cited for the optical optional head ...which we know Iskandar-M can have along with optional radar head. Whatever original Iskandars for Russian service had that capability to have it as a option is another question altogether. Artjomh (Whom i'm sure you remember) from MP.net days doubted it my own source also. But even if it did. It's never been seen in service. Actually not even Iskandar-M was ever seen in service with an optical head.

There is no option for Iskander that does not have a radar or an optical seeker.... they all use Inertial navigation and shaped flight paths (ie not ballistic) but it needs terminal guidance to hit a target and AFAIK they only use optical or radar seekers.

But that airfield attack it looked to accurate for Tochka and to inaccurate for later Iskandar-M's let alone for ones equipped with radar or optical heads. I take it they used the older variants ..assuming of course it was impacts of ballistic missiles. Which to me they look like it.

To determine how accurate it was you need to know what was being targeted...

In the conflict in Georgia the enemy released footage of fragments and blood stains in a town square reportedly from a Tochka attack... it was later revealed that it was not civilians there... it was soldiers... the warhead used was a submunition warhead.

Arkanghelsk wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Only 2 F-15s were shot down, both by by Iraqi AAA/SAM

Don't forget 4 F18 lost to mid air collisions , 1 F18 lost to s125, at least 5 , F16 lost to crashes or fire in 2003 alone, 1 F14, 1 F15, 1 Tornado, and assorted fixed wing and many helicopter losses

Iraq did not have Tor, Buk, S300, OSA, Starstreak, NASAMS, Gepard , or any of that combined with E2 AWACS to give updates , extensive radar network , and replenishment by NATO

Let us not dig into Yugoslav losses - again without any of the air defense that Ukraine possesses

The closest to fighting an S300 they came was at red flag

Iraq didn't even have Osa's??