I've always wondered what the successor to the Su-25 will be for the VKS and if they have nothing in the works, will they restart production of the plane in Russia?
I guess it comes down to how far advanced the replacement is and whether the design choices they made for the new aircraft make sense with experience from Syria and this conflict.
They can't restart production in Russia, as originally, plane was built in Georgia. I believe that building a new model would be better, unless they plan on going with drones instead.
The two seaters were made in Russia AFAIK.
They could simply opt for a single seat by filling second seat with avionics.
Which they did with the Su-25T and Su-25TM.
But the attempt was technically Yak-130 but that failed due to high costs and general lack of protection.
That was Yak trying to justify the high cost of the Yak-130 by claiming it could be multirole and used in combat too...
There are no "sacred" causes and quickly lose interest as if it were a commercial product.
People in the west today require constant stimulation and excitement like the Informercial like news reports on Robocop or Max Headroom... they get bored very quickly.
Various sources say Russia has up to 250 SU-25. Not sure if there is a need to do more then upgrade them, and the heavy drone will probably be its successor.
They often operate in pairs with the front plane flying low and fast and attacking targets, while the wingman sits further back looking for missile launches and muzzle flashes... I would say it would be interesting to use a drone in either role, but the sensors would need to be pretty good...
Sure but that is why patsir is idea, as it has the gun option. I think you will see more autocannons on tactical air defence as they would be ideal for drone swarms
I don't think we will see actual drone swarms for quite some time, but I do agree that airburst 30mm and 57mm rounds would be an efficient way of dealing with large numbers of targets at once.
In fact shot for shot perhaps a 152mm artillery shell that could be delivered to a coordinate and detonated creating a large shockwave and fragmentation zone in the middle of a swarm from a distance away could be rather interesting... maybe a custom designed model with a rear HE charge and a front mounted box with tens of thousands of bbs that are showered over a large cone area as the round descends...
Could also be used against larger drones too.
Already there. These are the Su-30 and Su-34. The Su-34 is generally a replacement for the Su-24, Su-25 and partially the Tu-22M3.
Can't agree with that... the Su-34 is no CAS.
Su-25 again proved its extreme potency in both surviving and effectiveness.
Ukros are flying them because those are so hard to kill, not because they have the privilege of making choices.
Hard to kill but also able to operate from anywhere... which means they can operate well forward which means they arrive on target quicker than a heavier aircraft coming from much further away.
But against an enemy with r-77 or amraam or meteors su-25 would be following from the skies daily. It's a pretty easy target with slow speed and big rcs. Against such enemies they will use drones with stealthy design to drop bombs undetected.
Are you talking about Ukrainian Su-25s or Russian ones... because Russian ones have self defence pods for AAM defence... drones would be even easier targets and much less effective. Bombs being dropped against targets could be Iskander or Onyx.
CAS is about low flying aircraft delivering direct fire on targets... now including lofted unguided rockets and bombs...
HATO fighters will be dealing with Russian fighters and Russian air defence and honestly likely struggling... I doubt they will hang around the air much especially after all their AWACS and JSTARs and inflight refuelling planes are down.
A modern su-25SM3 is not as cheap to produce a su-25.
Modern optics and AESA radar are becoming more affordable as their production volumes increase.... existing equipment developed for helicopters could be used to save development costs too... Even ships and armoured vehicles are sprouting EO pods and radar mounts to extend the range they can spot targets from and the new range of weapons for drones should allow a new CAS aircraft to carry enormous numbers of ordinance that can be small if delivered accurately... if the weapon is a guided top attack munition that hits the target every time then you can carry clusters of it on each weapon pylon at 40-50kgs per weapon, compared with dumb bombs of 250kgs or 500kgs each. Equally guided rockets in rocket pods expands its capabilities too.
Drones are good for recon, but CAS is more than just recon, it is attack, so CAS will be replaced by drones when Attack Helicopters are... and they are now working on high speed replacements for those it seems.
The reason you use drones is they are far cheaper than an Su-25 or a hyper-sonic missile.
You can have more drones deployed, for the same cost.
PC gamers to pilot them
The argument for laser guided unguided rockets is that when you are launching a rocket at a truck or car or other point target like a sandbagged firing position with unguided rockets you might need to launch half a dozen rockets to be sure of hitting the target, but with a guided rocket you should hit it with one or two shots... and it makes sense because simple laser guidance packages and manouver kits might make the rockets 5 times more expensive but you end up spending about the same because you use less rockets.
The problem with drones replacing the Su-25 is that it doesn't matter if they are 1/10th the price if you lose 20 in an attack where you wouldn't lose an Su-25 because it is better armoured and has better avionics.
If you give the drone the same armour and avionics the price jumps up to 1/2 the price and it still might no be as effective in combat.
I would say a wingman type drone that either flys in and takes out the target or sits back and forms an overwatch type role looking for anyone trying to engage the aircraft operating in front of it.
57mm cannon with guided rounds and airburst HE is a better option, ie 2S38 Derivitsiya.
The 57mm grenade launchers should be very useful with airburst rounds too as the rounds would have rather more explosive content as the projectile is most of the length of the round.
I'd like to see a missile SHORAAD with a pair of 2S38 guns in side sponsons, but it would probably be prohibitively large and a tad expensive.
It makes sense with a 30mm cannon because rate of fire is important, but with the much heavier 57mm calibre rounds the precision of the guided rounds and the weight of each shell and how close you can get them to the target is rather more important than rate of fire whcih is why the 2S38 has one gun and no two.
The ZSU-57-2 had two guns because it fired unguided dumb rounds so doubling the rate of fire improved performance.
With guided airburst shells rate of fire is not important...
Maybe on an Armata chassis as SHORAAD for Armata-based elite heavy units. Ok, so I'm a dreamer..
There will likely be 2S38s based on Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang and Typhoon vehicles as well as the DT series snow models too... but I doubt they will add extra barrels... for the weight and space of an extra barrel and the autoloader and ammo feed you could probably fit a dozen SOSNA missiles and perhaps have a similar number of missiles in the hull.
Over kill. 30mm prox fuse is already overkill.
Not at all... the 30mm rounds are command detonated but not guided so you need to track the target and launch rounds at the target to bracket the area where it might be when the rounds arrive and detonate them in that bracket to do damage.
The chance of a direct hit on a small drone is unlikely which is why they are moving to 57mm calibre rounds.
The advantage of airburst rounds is that you don't need a direct hit so a guided 57mm round does not need to be able to loop the loop like a fighter plane... most of the time it will be fired in a lead intercept course but might need to turn a fraction of a degree in flight to follow the target that is manouvering so that when it flys past it is not very far away... the command detonation ensuring the target is destroyed.
The size of a 57mm shell means plenty of HE and plenty of shrapnel to shred the target and take it down.
A 30mm does not have the same weight of HE and fragments and would need to get rather closer, but as far as I am aware they are not making a guided 30mm shell... just a command detonating one.
This means the 30mm round will be lethal if it gets within a metre or two of the target, but for targets that need solid direct hits then 57mm guided rounds makes more sense and could reach beyond the 4km range of the 30mm to perhaps 12-16km for 57mm ammo.
Probab 20mm will do the job nicely but go with 30mm just for more versatility and potential anti vehicle and self defense use as well.
They don't use a 20mm... the closest would be 23mm cannon or 14.5mm HMG. The 23mm could work but the 14.5mm is too light in terms of HE.
You will always have missiles for those. Maybe they can develop a combo sam/atgm.
Guided rounds are just warheads and control surfaces with command guidance... it is easier to make them cheaper than missiles even though they will be more expensive than standard shells they will also be more cost effective.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Isos
Russian EW landed an interesting bird: UAV APU "Spectator-M1"
