VVS Russian Airforce Force: News #2

Article is complete of Russia's aviation capabilities, https://defenceforumindia.com/threads/russia-future-air-space-capabilities-part-2.83650/ feel free to add more info that could have been missed.

Su-75;
The first prototype has been built and it remains to be seen what the plans of the Russian MOD will be regarding the rearmament of this type of aircraft in the Russian Air Force. I have no doubt that this aircraft would be excellent in Kaliningrad Oblast, Crimea, Kamchatka, Primorsky Krai, Murmansk Oblast, Central Military District, and all border areas in Western Russia.

I think this will start flying relatively quickly. All the major development has been done. There is a question of how well the airframe and fly-by-wire system will perform and the only way to answer that is to build the prototype as soon as possible. Given the need to possibly fight against NATO countries armed with the single engine F-35 an all Su-57 equipped air force will be overly expensive. So the Su-75 will have to be produced in large numbers. As is the Su-75 will have much better specs than the F-35.

PAK-DP;
The replacement for the MiG-31 is still the ENIGMA.
We only know that there is information that the project of that plane is being worked on and that's all. The development of this aircraft will require a lot of money and it is very likely that this type of aircraft will not be offered for export either.
I think the biggest problem with the MiG-31 is just the age of the fleet and nothing more, so new interceptors need to be built. Even as it is, the MiG-31 is excellent and all that is needed is to build new planes with improved characteristics; AFAR radar, reduced radar reflection (although I think the RCS story of a certain aircraft is one big myth), higher flight speed, as well as greater range and altitude.

I think they could try changing the design and make it a combination interceptor/bomber. Instead of using a modified Izd. 30, just make an afterburning version of the Izd. RF for the PAK-DA, and make a replacement for both the MiG-31 and the Tu-22M3 with that. The point in making such an aircraft would be that it would have enough range to go from one side of Russia to the other without refueling, have a massive radar and sensor suite, and be able to carry massive long range weapons. They could try resurrecting the idea of putting the Novator KS-172 air to air missile into it.

S-70 "Okhotnik";
Anything can happen here, especially after the SMO. This aircraft is quite large and I would not be surprised if Russia decides to mass produce strike drones smaller in size than the S-70.

There are designs for smaller drones. I think they will have to make something with either a single Al-222 or AL-55.

High Lights:

according to available data, 29 combat and combat training aircraft were delivered: four Su-30SM2, ten Su-34M, seven Su-35S, six Su-57 and two Yak-130s. Five newly built Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft were also delivered

Regarding losses, it is estimated that during the hostilities in Ukraine in 2022, the Russian Armed Forces lost at least 30 new types of combat aircraft (Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35) from all causes.

From 2008-2022, 619 combat aircraft delivered

It is estimated (2023) that seven Su-57 aircraft, up to 12 Su-35S, up to 12 Su-34, up to 10 Su-30SM2 and up to 12 Yak-130, can be delivered, as well as one or two strategic bombers Tu-160M ​​of new production ( already built boards 8-05 and 9-01). In military transport aviation, up to four Il-76MD-90A aircraft and the first serial tanker aircraft Il-78M-90A can be handed over.

caveat emptor Today at 3:49 pm
@franco
Will Su-30SM2 be fully upgraded version with Irbis E and AL-41F1S? Not yet but that was the plan.
I presume that Su-34 will be of NVO version. They are calling it the M version but I believe they would be NVO.

What long-range aviation does the country need

Commander of the Long-Range Aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces, Lieutenant General Sergei Kobylash, at the end of last year, spoke about the tasks of this type of force for 2023. According to him, these tasks will be solved during the participation of Long-Range Aviation in a special military operation in Ukraine. This is the main feature of their implementation in the coming year.

As emphasized in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the main tasks for Long-Range Aviation for 2023 remain maintaining a high level of combat readiness, combat training, serviceability of aviation equipment and weapons, as well as the development of new and modernized military equipment.

Currently, Long-Range Aviation in the structure of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Aerospace Forces of the Russian Federation is represented as a separate command of Long-Range Aviation. But it was not always so. At different periods in the history of this type of force, Long-Range Aviation (in particular, in 1988) included three air armies of the Supreme High Command for Strategic Purposes - the 30th, 37th and 46th.

Currently, long-range aviation is a component of Russia's strategic nuclear forces. But, unfortunately, the fewest.

Let's see how the combat and numerical strength, the organizational and staffing structure of Long-Range Aviation, as well as the aviation weapons that are on its equipment, meet the requirements of the time.

BATTLE AND MANNER

At present, the combat composition of Long-Range Aviation is as follows.

22nd heavy bomber division (22nd tbad, permanent base airfield - Engels, Saratov region) consisting of two regiments - 121st heavy bomber aviation regiment (121st tbap, permanent base airfield - Engels) and 184th heavy bomber aviation regiment (184th tbap, permanent base airfield - Engels). The combat strength of the 121st tbap is seven Tu-160M ​​and nine Tu-160, the combat strength of the 184th tbap is 18 Tu-95MS.

52nd heavy bomber aviation regiment (52nd tbap, permanent base airfield - Shaykovka, Kaluga region). The combat strength of the 52nd tbap is 23 Tu-22M3 vehicles.

326th heavy bomber aviation division (326th tbad, permanent base airfield - Ukrainka, Amur region) as part of two regiments - 79th heavy bomber aviation regiment (79th tbap, permanent base airfield - Ukrainka) and 182nd heavy bomber aviation regiment (182nd tbap, permanent base airfield - Ukrainka). The combat strength of the 79th tbap is 14 Tu-95MS vehicles. The combat strength of the 182nd tbap is 16 Tu-95MS vehicles.

200th heavy bomber aviation regiment (200th tbap, permanent base airfield - Belaya, Irkutsk region). The combat strength of the 200th tbap is 15 Tu-22M3 vehicles.

444th heavy bomber aviation regiment (444th tbap, permanent base airfield - Belaya, Irkutsk region). The combat strength of the 444th tbap is 14 Tu-22M3 vehicles.

203rd separate aviation regiment of tanker aircraft (203rd OAPZ, permanent base airfield - Dyagilevo, Ryazan Region). The composition of the 203rd OAPZ is 12 Il-78M aircraft and six Il-78 aircraft.

According to some open data, in total, the Long-Range Aviation currently has 17 Tu-160 aircraft, 60 Tu-95MS aircraft, and about 60 Tu-22M3 aircraft. At the same time, it should be noted that data in open sources on the number of strategic and long-range bombers in long-range aviation are very contradictory. And how many of these aircraft are serviceable and fully ready for combat use is far from clear. For example, according to other open data, today there are only 58 serviceable vehicles in the combat composition of the DA - 30 Tu-95MS units, 16 Tu-160 units, 12 Tu-22M3 units.

Let's be honest and frank, it's quite sparse. The combat strength of many heavy bomber aviation regiments does not reach the established authorized strength - 18-20 vehicles. Naturally, in such a composition, Long-Range Aviation does not in any way pull on an operational association (the air army of the Supreme Strategic High Command). And for these reasons, it cannot conduct air operations characteristic of Long-Range Aviation.

For example, the US Air Force currently has 20 Northrop B-2A Spirit strategic bombers, 61 Rockwell B-1B Lancer strategic bombers, and 70 Boeing B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers, for a total of 151 aircraft. It is planned to replace them with about a hundred promising B-21 Raider strategic bombers.

PERSPECTIVE ORGANIZATIONAL AND STAFF STRUCTURE

In order to bring the Long-Range Aviation Command to the operational level, reorganize it into the air army of the Supreme High Command (VGK) for strategic purposes and give it the ability to conduct air operations of Long-Range Aviation, the combat strength must be increased at least several times.

Most importantly, it is advisable to do this only on the basis of modernized Tu-95MSM, Tu-160M ​​and Tu-22M3 vehicles. And at the same time, to form at least one regiment equipped with PAK DA (a promising aviation complex for Long-Range Aviation).

In this case, the strategic air army of the Supreme High Command will be able to fully solve the following tasks using only conventional weapons:

- hit enemy aircraft at airfields, destroy its fuel and ammunition depots;

- carry out the destruction of objects of the military industry, systems of state and military administration;

- to defeat the operational and strategic reserves, as well as enemy air defense systems.

To do this, at least the following units and formations must be included in the strategic air army of the Supreme High Command:

- one heavy bomber aviation regiment on new generation strategic bombers (PAK DA);

- one heavy bomber aviation division equipped with Tu-160M ​​strategic bombers (two regiments of 20 aircraft each, 40 vehicles in total);

- two heavy bomber aviation divisions (two regiments each, more than 80 Tu-22M3M long-range bombers in total);

- 22nd heavy bomber aviation division (with bringing the combat strength of the regiments to at least 18 vehicles);

- 326th heavy bomber aviation division (with bringing the combat strength of the regiments to 18 vehicles);

- three heavy bomber aviation regiments (52nd tbap, 200th tbap, 444th tbap) on Tu-22M3 aircraft (with the number of aircraft in each regiment brought up to the established state);

- 203rd separate aviation regiment of tanker aircraft (in addition to it, form at least three more aviation regiments of tanker aircraft (each with 20 aircraft), and in total have at least 80 Il-78 aircraft).

That is, in the future, the combat strength of Long-Range Aviation should include at least 260 combat aircraft and at least 80 tanker aircraft.

In addition, long-range aviation cannot be fully combat-ready if it does not include specialized electronic warfare aircraft. And you need to have about one such aircraft per squadron, that is, about 20–25 aircraft in total.

If such figures seem clearly unrealistic to someone, an alternative should be indicated here: either we have Long-Range Aviation with appropriate operational and strategic capabilities, or we only indicate its presence.

Of course, such a combat and numerical strength of Long-Range Aviation, at best, can be achieved - and this is with the most optimistic forecasts - no earlier than 2030. But at least such plans should be included in the corresponding plans for the development of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and in state armament programs.

AIRCRAFT WEAPONS

The range of aviation weapons for strategic and long-range bombers must be substantially increased. First of all, this concerns large-caliber free-fall aviation bombs (3-9 tons and more).

These include, for example, the three-ton FAB-3000M-54 and the five-ton FAB-5000M-54. The only carrier of the FAB-3000M-54 and FAB-5000M-54 is currently the Tu-22M3 long-range bomber.

Russia is also developing a high-powered aviation vacuum bomb (AVBPM). According to official data, the total mass of the AVBPM product exceeds 7.5–8 tons. The explosive mass of this ammunition is 7100 kg, the TNT equivalent is 44 tons.

Among other things, a significant part of the Long-Range Aviation fleet is intended only for the combat use of cruise missiles. At the same time, strategic bombers are not equipped for bombing with conventional free-fall bombs. There is reason to believe that this shortcoming of Long-Range Aviation must be decisively eliminated, and this will significantly increase its combat capabilities in a war using only conventional weapons.

First of all, it is necessary to revise upwards the means of destruction for Tu-22M3M type bombers - from guided and gliding free-fall bombs (JDAM type) to long-range cruise missiles. One Kh-32 air-to-surface cruise missile for the Tu-22M3M will obviously not be enough.

As for the number of air-launched cruise missiles for Long-Range Aviation in the arsenals, it is necessary to reach such a quantitative level that this branch of the Aerospace Forces could reach an operational-strategic result in its first air operation.

Long-range aviation has been and remains the most important component of the Aerospace Forces of the RF Armed Forces, both in terms of their tasks and their special capabilities. It seems that for its development it is necessary to make qualitatively different efforts than at present. One can only hope that the plans for the modernization of DA fully meet today's realities.

https://nvo-ng-ru.translate.goog/realty/2023-01-26/1_1222_aviation.html?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en

I understood the 22 TBAD also had the 40th (O)SAP with MiG-31, Tu-22 and some transport aircraft and helicopters and the 52 TBAP

If not, to which TBADs are these subordinated? That is my understanding too.

Same for the 200 and 444 TBAPs, which TBAD or are they directly under Long Range Aviation command? My understanding is the 326th TBAD.

There also is no mention in the article of the new Mig-31K regiment which to my understanding belongs to LRA and since in the West would fall under the 22nd TBAD.

Is there any chance Russia might bring back high payload subsonic medium bombers?

As Hole points out that role is currently filled by the Tu-22M3, but moving forward the PAK DA is going to be a dual purpose aircraft with strategic payload and strategic range, while with a heavy conventional payload it will have a theatre bombers range... so essentially it will replace the Tu-95 with standoff cruise missiles and the Tu-22M3 with bombs and likely anti ship missiles, but also other guided weapons and heavy bombs.

If the target is in Afghanistan and the enemy forces are deeply buried in tunnels then you need powerful bombs to reach them... accuracy is useful but on its own wont get the job done... a cluster of FAB-9000 bombs dropped around the place should collapse tunnels near the surface.

The new thermobaric bomb might enter the tunnels via the ventilation shafts and suffocate those inside without penetration of the ground... Russian thermobaric bombs tend to burn as they expand so the would burn into tunnels consuming the oxygen as they go creating carbon monoxide which in those sort of concentrations would be poisonous and would kill.

Russian President Vladimir Putin assigned the name of Guards to two formations of the Russian Armed Forces.

The honorary name was given to the 71st anti-aircraft missile brigade, which can be read on the legal information portal.

The 266th Separate Attack Aviation Regiment also became Guards, which also has a corresponding entry on the portal.

As stated in the text of the presidential decrees, the honorary name of the guards units was given for mass heroism, courage, fortitude and courage shown by personnel in combat operations to protect the Fatherland and state interests in armed conflicts.

https://tvzvezda-ru.translate.goog/news/2023391325-Zwod5.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=nui

I seem to remember a while back the Russian Army bought some Ka-31s for testing airborne radar operating low over the battlefield... I seem to remember them talking about a modified version with shorter range (ie not 250km) but better resolution for spotting smaller targets like drones... they mentioned Ka-35 as a designation.

But then if the new Minoga Kamov is nearing completion perhaps putting it on that newer aircraft or even using the new Ka-226 with Russian engines and a specialist radar pod/module...

This change for air defence will be interesting... they would have to keep air defence forces operating with army forces, I would just assume a chain of command change and better integration of communication between the services so the Army will be more aware of the air situation and the Air Force will be more aware of the ground situation... perhaps battle management mapping systems will be merged for air and ground targets and shared.

Going to be complex but should be interesting too.