By: TR1
- 31st December 2012 at 19:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Griffon he's got flight controls,stick,gas and pedals.Berkut posted a vid where u could see that.Seems around 2008 they were given priority and ranks were filled with young pilots,straight from L-39 and flying quite some hours.Russian guys here say fighters fly smhow 80-100 hours a year depending on type i recall reading
More now- pilots @ Kursk (MiG-29SMT) recorded 150 hours through November 2012 - and numbers keep steadily creeping up.
Izvestia caught making **** up, yet again
Recently they had an article that made its rounds in Russian media, that NAPO's work on Su-34s left a lot to be desired, and the plane had many deficiencies. They quoted a member of a MOD commission investigating the issue.
The MOD was contacted, and they made an official response - by a NAMED, existing polkovnik, Vladimir Drik: " Such a commission is made up, as are the "findings" ". He also stated that much of the facts presented in the Izvestia article were false.
Take Izvestia articles with an An-124 load of salt from now on. I suspect they will be @ an-225 levels soon though.
By: blackwood
- 31st December 2012 at 23:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL, lots of great news to come. Growing pains are always going to happen with any plane put into production. Be those pains exaggerated or not, somewhere in the middle is the truth. Lets hope Su-35, Su-34, PAK-FA and others continue to strengthen in numbers and quality.
By: blackwood
- 31st December 2012 at 23:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Moscow - The Novosibirsk aircraft plant of the Sukhoi Holding (NAPO) will increase the output of Sukhoi Su-34 multirole bombers in 2013, a source in the defense sector told Interfax-AVN on Saturday.
"In 2013 the Su-34 production at NAPO will be larger than in 2012," the source said.
"While setting off batch production of Su-34, NAPO is constantly enlarging their output," he said.
NAPO made two Su-34 aircraft in 2009, four in 2010, six in 2011 and ten in 2012, the source said.
NATO is executing two state contracts: one to make 32 aircraft before 2013 and the other to make 92 aircraft before 2020. "The total order is 124 aircraft," the source said.
"The introduction of new cost saving technologies and equipment, the so-called smart manufacturing, is a token of a larger output of Su-34," he noted.
Izvestia caught making **** up, yet again
Recently they had an article that made its rounds in Russian media, that NAPO's work on Su-34s left a lot to be desired, and the plane had many deficiencies. They quoted a member of a MOD commission investigating the issue.
The MOD was contacted, and they made an official response - by a NAMED, existing polkovnik, Vladimir Drik: " Such a commission is made up, as are the "findings" ". He also stated that much of the facts presented in the Izvestia article were false.
Take Izvestia articles with an An-124 load of salt from now on. I suspect they will be @ an-225 levels soon though.
Ah, just like Soviet days, when they used to say "There's no pravda in Izvestia, & no izvestia in Pravda". :diablo:
Early this month, Izvestiya’s Aleksey Mikhaylov and Dmitriy Balburov published on “growing pains” in Russia’s procurement of the Su-34 strike fighter. The aircraft is ”not combat capable” according to them.
A few English-language sites mentioned their story, but didn’t render it completely or accurately.
According Izvestiya, the Defense Minister may soon sign out a report on defects in the Su-34 that interfere with its “full combat employment.” Each of the 16 Su-34s received over six years reportedly has its own “individual problems.”
The authors say the Defense Ministry already won an 80-million-ruble suit against the Novosibirsk Aviation Plant named for Chkalov over undelivered aircraft. They insinuate this Defense Ministry report could be the basis for more litigation against the airplane’s manufacturer.
A Su-34 pilot told Izvestiya radar and targeting-navigation system problems interfere with flight training in the aircraft. Malfunctions, he says, are the result of both programming problems and technical flaws. A maintenance officer said each aircraft has “its own characteristics,” for example, an auxiliary motor located in different places on different borts.
Two Su-34s delivered to Lipetsk in 2006 are allegedly non-operational, and sit at the airfield for show. However, the best airframes are the last three borts sent to Baltimor / Voronezh last summer, a VVS Glavkomat officer told the authors.
OPK representatives expressed surprise at the military’s complaints, noting that the early production run of any aircraft entails problems. Some blamed a low level of training among VVS pilots and technicians for difficulties with the Su-34.
The Izvestiya report seems at odds with the recent announcement that delivery of a second Su-34 squadron is beginning. In fact, the media reports five more aircraft arrived at Voronezh from Novosibirsk just days ago. Practically the same day, Defense Minister Shoygu visited the city, airfield, and other VVS institutions. It may be that his predecessor Serdyukov was inclined to criticize the OPK and the Su-34′s quality. So maybe Shoygu won’t approve the Su-34 report. But that doesn’t necessarily mean there aren’t real problems with the aircraft.
By: wilhelm
- 1st January 2013 at 13:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Blackjack is certainly an impressive aircraft.
What is the stautus of the Blackjack?
I recall there was an announcement that some more Blackjacks were being procured.
Is this the case?
If so, was it ever discovered if these were new builds, or previous incomplete examples that were to be finished?
Wiki says that a new build Tu-160 was delivered in 2008, and that a new Blackjack is to be built every 1 or 2 years until the fleet reaches about 30 or more aircraft in the 2025-2030 timeframe.
I know wiki is not the best source, but is this happening? it seems this was based on a 2008 report, so has anything along these lines transpired in the last 5 years?
New
Posts: 2,171
By: Berkut
- 1st January 2013 at 13:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
By: TR1
- 1st January 2013 at 16:20Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think the first priority is to ensure the Tu-160s (which have a potential to serve many years) do not find themselves grounded when the current engines inevitably reach an end to their service lives.
KAPO is gone as an aircraft manufacturer within a short time (after they finish last several Il-114s) so thats not happening.
New
Posts: 281
By: Tigershark
- 1st January 2013 at 20:35Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
thank you for the link friend. it confirm my suspicions.
New
By: Anonymous
- 1st January 2013 at 20:59Permalink- Edited 22nd October 2019 at 22:31
KAPO is gone as an aircraft manufacturer within a short time (after they finish last several Il-114s) so thats not happening.
What's the Il-114 (*T*APO) got to do with KAPO and the Tu-160? KAPO will be around for a long time, what with Tu-22M/Tu-160 upgrades, military Tu-214 derivatives and SSJ components - IIRC they are also tentatively planned to build the PAK-DA, when and if it happens.
By: Sheogorath
- 2nd January 2013 at 01:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm not sure if this question has been asked before, but was there any particular reason for not keeping the single piece windscreen seen in a MiG-31M for the MiG-31BM program?.
New
By: Anonymous
- 2nd January 2013 at 02:02Permalink- Edited 22nd October 2019 at 22:31
Been drinking ok, mixed up the names :p.
Thought something sounded off...
Yes, I expected there had to be an explanation ;)
This contract only concerns 105 new built "people movers." Additional contracts for specialized aircraft like refuelers and ELINT jets for the MoD are planned.
The MoD will get -- 39 An-148's, 2 Tu-214's, 11 Tu-204SM's.
The Presidential administration, which is charged with ferrying about VIP's will get -- 6 An-148's, 6 Tu-214's, 8 Il-96-300's, and 1 Tu-204-300.
The FSB will get -- 4 An-148's, 2 Tu-214's, 1 Il-476, and 2 Tu-204-300's.
The MVD will get -- 6 An-148's 2 Tu-204SM's, and 2 SSJ's.
The Ministry of Emergencies (commie FEMA) will get -- 2 An-148's, 4 Il-476's and 1 Tu-204-300.
Roscosmos will get -- 3 Tu-214's, and 3 SSJ's.
100 airliners with at least 75 seats each - what the hell do they think they need that for?! Anyone want to work out how many people they'd have to fly annually for that fleet to make sense? I have a strong premonition the result is not going to be reconcilable with any conceivable level of demand from the agencies that are supposed to need these aircraft...
Clue: in total, these government departments have about 3 million employees. With a fleet 60% the size of the above by standard one-class seating capacity, S7 moves about 6 million passengers annually.
Sure, certain high-ranking officials and their staff are going to fly very frequently indeed, and seating would be reduced for some aircraft due to VIP interiors, but chances are this still represents a ridiculous capacity oversupply. Especially bearing in mind that at least part of the current Rossiya fleet will continue to be utilised and has not been counted in yet - neither have the 60 An-140s recently ordered!
This order could easily be slashed by 70% and still leave the various agencies very well-equipped, with the savings spent on acquiring aircraft Russia actually needs - like tankers, AWACS and MPAs based on the Il-96/Tu-204. I mean, there is nothing wrong with a make-work programme if it results in something that is of real use, but just throwing money away for no gain is just wasteful. There is a fair chance this contract will never be fully implemented because it would be plainly unsustainable, so I would not hold my breath.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 31st December 2012 at 19:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
More now- pilots @ Kursk (MiG-29SMT) recorded 150 hours through November 2012 - and numbers keep steadily creeping up.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 31st December 2012 at 20:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/27200/
Izvestia caught making **** up, yet again
Recently they had an article that made its rounds in Russian media, that NAPO's work on Su-34s left a lot to be desired, and the plane had many deficiencies. They quoted a member of a MOD commission investigating the issue.
The MOD was contacted, and they made an official response - by a NAMED, existing polkovnik, Vladimir Drik: " Such a commission is made up, as are the "findings" ". He also stated that much of the facts presented in the Izvestia article were false.
Take Izvestia articles with an An-124 load of salt from now on. I suspect they will be @ an-225 levels soon though.
Posts: 2,114
By: mack8 - 31st December 2012 at 20:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why the heck do they do that ?:confused:
Posts: 307
By: blackwood - 31st December 2012 at 23:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL, lots of great news to come. Growing pains are always going to happen with any plane put into production. Be those pains exaggerated or not, somewhere in the middle is the truth. Lets hope Su-35, Su-34, PAK-FA and others continue to strengthen in numbers and quality.
Posts: 307
By: blackwood - 31st December 2012 at 23:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Moscow - The Novosibirsk aircraft plant of the Sukhoi Holding (NAPO) will increase the output of Sukhoi Su-34 multirole bombers in 2013, a source in the defense sector told Interfax-AVN on Saturday.
"In 2013 the Su-34 production at NAPO will be larger than in 2012," the source said.
"While setting off batch production of Su-34, NAPO is constantly enlarging their output," he said.
NAPO made two Su-34 aircraft in 2009, four in 2010, six in 2011 and ten in 2012, the source said.
NATO is executing two state contracts: one to make 32 aircraft before 2013 and the other to make 92 aircraft before 2020. "The total order is 124 aircraft," the source said.
"The introduction of new cost saving technologies and equipment, the so-called smart manufacturing, is a token of a larger output of Su-34," he noted.
Article on Su-34, sorry if already posted
Posts: 13,432
By: swerve - 1st January 2013 at 00:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah, just like Soviet days, when they used to say "There's no pravda in Izvestia, & no izvestia in Pravda". :diablo:
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 1st January 2013 at 00:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ok, some news thats very real.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BjLpTYOHxlU
Kaan AB(Far East) has fully replentish its rank with upgraded Mig-31BM.
And Happy new year all :)
Posts: 4,082
By: Deino - 1st January 2013 at 09:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
:confused::confused::confused:
https://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/su-34-growing-pains/
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 1st January 2013 at 10:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
See above regarding Izvestya Deino.
http://russianplanes.net/images/to95000/094228.jpg
MiG-31 HUD
Posts: 4,082
By: Deino - 1st January 2013 at 10:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
o.k ... THANKs !
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 1st January 2013 at 10:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think they got new ownership a while ago, and decided sensational yellow press would be a good way to get viewership up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I3pF376-3Zs#!
Great 1080p footage of Long Range Aviation.
Posts: 1,620
By: wilhelm - 1st January 2013 at 13:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Blackjack is certainly an impressive aircraft.
What is the stautus of the Blackjack?
I recall there was an announcement that some more Blackjacks were being procured.
Is this the case?
If so, was it ever discovered if these were new builds, or previous incomplete examples that were to be finished?
Wiki says that a new build Tu-160 was delivered in 2008, and that a new Blackjack is to be built every 1 or 2 years until the fleet reaches about 30 or more aircraft in the 2025-2030 timeframe.
I know wiki is not the best source, but is this happening? it seems this was based on a 2008 report, so has anything along these lines transpired in the last 5 years?
Posts: 2,171
By: Berkut - 1st January 2013 at 13:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Only shame that those news are not real. ;)
No, more Blackjacks won't be bought. Atleast 10 of them will undergo modernization where they will get Irbis radar and other stuff.
Posts: 1,620
By: wilhelm - 1st January 2013 at 14:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Okay.
I've had a look and apparently the NK engines for the Tu-160 are to go back into production, in upgraded form.
There are apparently incomplete airframes from when Yeltsin stopped production, that could concievably be completed.
So definitely no further Tu-160's?
Will the upgraded new production engines be for the new bomber being developed?
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 1st January 2013 at 16:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think the first priority is to ensure the Tu-160s (which have a potential to serve many years) do not find themselves grounded when the current engines inevitably reach an end to their service lives.
KAPO is gone as an aircraft manufacturer within a short time (after they finish last several Il-114s) so thats not happening.
Posts: 281
By: Tigershark - 1st January 2013 at 20:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
thank you for the link friend. it confirm my suspicions.
By: Anonymous - 1st January 2013 at 20:59 Permalink - Edited 22nd October 2019 at 22:31
What's the Il-114 (*T*APO) got to do with KAPO and the Tu-160? KAPO will be around for a long time, what with Tu-22M/Tu-160 upgrades, military Tu-214 derivatives and SSJ components - IIRC they are also tentatively planned to build the PAK-DA, when and if it happens.
Posts: 9,579
By: TR1 - 1st January 2013 at 21:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Been drinking ok, mixed up the names :p.
Thought something sounded off...
Posts: 176
By: Sheogorath - 2nd January 2013 at 01:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'm not sure if this question has been asked before, but was there any particular reason for not keeping the single piece windscreen seen in a MiG-31M for the MiG-31BM program?.
By: Anonymous - 2nd January 2013 at 02:02 Permalink - Edited 22nd October 2019 at 22:31
Yes, I expected there had to be an explanation ;)
100 airliners with at least 75 seats each - what the hell do they think they need that for?! Anyone want to work out how many people they'd have to fly annually for that fleet to make sense? I have a strong premonition the result is not going to be reconcilable with any conceivable level of demand from the agencies that are supposed to need these aircraft...
Clue: in total, these government departments have about 3 million employees. With a fleet 60% the size of the above by standard one-class seating capacity, S7 moves about 6 million passengers annually.
Sure, certain high-ranking officials and their staff are going to fly very frequently indeed, and seating would be reduced for some aircraft due to VIP interiors, but chances are this still represents a ridiculous capacity oversupply. Especially bearing in mind that at least part of the current Rossiya fleet will continue to be utilised and has not been counted in yet - neither have the 60 An-140s recently ordered!
This order could easily be slashed by 70% and still leave the various agencies very well-equipped, with the savings spent on acquiring aircraft Russia actually needs - like tankers, AWACS and MPAs based on the Il-96/Tu-204. I mean, there is nothing wrong with a make-work programme if it results in something that is of real use, but just throwing money away for no gain is just wasteful. There is a fair chance this contract will never be fully implemented because it would be plainly unsustainable, so I would not hold my breath.