lyle6 wrote:Its only excellent? The Su-34 is single-handedly rewriting the book on ground support.
Forget light fighter bombers and stealth jets tossing extremely expensive small bombs because that is all their puny airframes can handle. The future belongs to heavy fighter bombers that can chuck very heavy glide bombs to destroy any kind of fortifications and do that shit round the clock from austere bases close to the frontlines to maximize the available sorties.
Let us see what conclusions VKS takes out of this conflict in what regards to future force composition. I still do not see any big issue with adding "light" and "stealth" into the mix, when done the Russian way (means, like intended with the LTS)
- Airframe-wise, such "light" tactical fighter is able to carry 7.4 tons of ordnance, range ca 3k km. That is a payload x range performance rivalling with that of a Su-30. Considering internal carriage of the payloads which are normally used per sortie, it is probably better due to much lower drag.
- Operational cost should be clearly better in terms of propulsion for a lighter, single engine platform, with high commonality re. Su-57 helping in other economic and operational aspects. What impacts coatings and other new technologies have on frontline availability and costs, we only know from the Western, totally dysfunctional approach, and I would not take them as a reliable indication of how this will work for the VKS
- The external carriage of heaviest ordnance is probably not fully at the level of the Su-34. Actually it was new for me that the suspension points along the centerline would allow for such heavy weight, apart from some early mentions to Kinzhal being carried by Su-34 and mock-ups of heavy AShMs on Flankers, in principle this is not the standard station design of the plane I remember from old (KAB-1500 was the maximum), so maybe reinforcements were implemented afterwards? Su-57 and LTS on the other hand would rely on the same inner wing stations rated 1.5 tonnes each at least (I think the EFTs seen hanged there were the PTB-2000), that is a VERY significant punch in any case and I would submit that delivering bigger ordnance, though definitely useful and occasionally required, is not daily business, and could be performed in the future by the very Su-34, which will remain many years in operation, or by a new generation of low RCS, high persistence, low operational cost bombers, be it Okhotnik (doubtful) or more possibly PAK-DA
- Other requirements of the Su-34, like high levels of armour, preparation for very long endurance missions etc. are certainly way beyond the possibilities of lighter platforms, but still they have a high cost and a level of usefulness that needs to be continually re-assessed. The very builders of the su-34 say that heavy twin engine platforms are overkill for the daily work, and the penetration of precision weapons is increasing steadily also in the Russian armed forces, the increase of combat efficiency, reduction of logistic footprint etc. make it logical and expedient to proceed that way despite higher cost per unit of ordnance. That makes the need for such brutal payloads more occasional, and normally reduced to theaters like Eastern Ukraine, where absurdly reinforced Soviet era fortifications are widespread
- One cannot forget how long did it take for the VKS to start delivering air power to the frontline in a decisive way, from the need to painstakingly degrade the AD in 404 for months and years, to the need to create cheap effective weapons able to be used without exposing the carriers to being shot down regularly. For this most extended war period, where the IADS is heavily degraded but isolated AD sites are still operational, low RCS carriers are the right approach, combined with EW the AD footprint on them becomes really small and that makes their operation much safer than that of conventional platforms, which translates in a higher and more persistent level of support to the forces on the ground.
Not saying anything new to you I know, but in conclusion I think that the force composition proposed by Sukhoi still makes sense after the experience of the SMO. I am though curious to see, what adjustments do VKS and UAC themselves will agree for manned platforms. What I think is a given is that unmanned fleet will take the lion's share in newer developments.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
stuff moved to 
Time to SQUEEZE mercilessly until they both POP. Ignore their squeals and crys for mercy. Blast a crater so deep into their social/racial/instituitional group memory that they won't dare to even look sourly in Russias direction for a millenia.
Another enemy crossing met with another Kh-38ML, guided by Orlan-30.
lancelot
not the Lego builder that was being made in the west. 
