@hellas / kingdom of serbian lands / imperial martyr all holly russija. this plane @SU34 is in 4++ and 5. class with su37/5+generation thats what are on guitars dr.yngwie.j.malmsteen and dr. steve vai indeed @belgorod rojal @servia byzantine keep / continue to developing su34 noble / splendid.,wonderful russ engineerings begs you oneblooded of @russija yours @SERBIJA+++++++ 888888 GO!!!!!!!! @SU34
@hellas / kingdom of serbian lands / imperial martyr all holly russija. this plane is in 4++ and 5. class with su37/5+generation thats what are on guitars dr.yngwie.j.malmsteen and dr. steve vai indeed @belgorod rojal @servia byzantine keep / continue to developing su34 noble / splendid.,wonderful russ engineerings begs you oneblooded of @russija yours @SERBIJA+++++++ 888888 GO!!!!!!!! @SU34
Back to reality. Who won the cold war? USSR or USA? Who always backed down when we came to the brink of the war going hot? Study history and see how far behind USSR alway was. They always use propaganda to pretend to be stronger and more sophisticated then they really are. They relied on their spies to steal our technology because they weren't smart enough to invent it themselves.
COLD war was the term widely used to hide the COWARDICE OF AMERICANS to stop the Soviet Unions in a real HOT war. Who won what? in Cowardice? And you tell me Americans Won... that is American propaganda. If you were so superior why didn't you stop the Russians in a real war, if you didn't, then stop saying you won something. The same thing for space race, you can't win a space race because universe is infinite. The winner is the one who go first, then you can win specific races.
All the countries of NATO united because of fear to the russians, you can ask the strategists of all countries, and scientists about what is MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION... and they will inform you that its the fact, that you can't attack Russia without dying in the process. Since you don't have enough defences against russian arsenal, what you just said is a dream. If you want to say that then you would have to demonstrate that the Mutual Assured Destruction doesnt apply anymore.
Your first said that Russia would have been annihilated by ALL the countries of NATO.. that means they all would survive. Then you said that SOME countries of NATO would survive. But thats very difficult... the chernobyl explosion gave some very big problems that are still visible... An Soviet Arsenal had, and still has, weapons capable of making 200 times the same damage as chernobyl with just 1 of their missiles...so
So with more than 30.000 nuclear warheads at its peak.. and still with thousands of nuclear warheads, the chances of nato countries surviving this war are very low... and even if they survive... to do what? just to have an slower and more painful death because of the contamination... The Russian population on the other side, is less concentrated .. and they have about 200 underground bases.. at least one of them is as big as washington DC
Besides the 200 underground secret bases... Russia has more than 60 secret cities, called closed cities, are scientific and military cities... that means, ten of thousand of people working in whole cities for the military doing what? and Now only for moscow they will build more than 5000 new underground bunkers...
Only Switzerland population could have the same level of protection in their country so.. they would survive too
@Starscream2040 Dont be ridiculous Who would want to live after their country above has been oblitorated? Some of the NATO countries would survive unscathed, have you seen how big NATO is on a world map compared to Russia, and a large portion of Russia is still like a third world country - I've been there.
Unscathed? you don't consider radiation? Radiatio = death. with a long lasting effect. So, in what NATO country would you feel more optimistic the day of the nuclear war?
Besides a big part of russian weapons are tactical weapons just for europe. We also can guess that they have not eliminated totally theirmid range missiles. German armies are not exactly going to be in germany... they could be in romania, so the NATO targets are everywhere.
Russia alone represents 70% of NATO territories. NATO is only bigger when you add Canada, Russia is bigger than all other NATO countries together. Canada is an small military treat and an easy target, besides not always do what the USA wants. And we could also add China and Kazakhstan on Russian side considering a global conflict like that... then the NATO territory will be smaller. And the worst part... most of NATO population is in a very densely populated area.
It's true, part of Russia is like a third world country, but that's irrelevant when they have the means to destroy all NATO, and have more, bigger and better underground bases than their NATO counterparts.
@Starscream2040 This is a silly discussion anyway - dont you agree? Russia and NATO will never go to war or launch nukes at each other. If nukes are launched it will be some crazy religious fanatic country such as Iran or some brainwashed population such as North Korea. Most NATO countries and Russia are more Allies now than enemies. It just shows - if you dont believe a load of religious cr*p then we can acheieve so much more by working together.
@Xiolablu3 you seem to have fell prey to anti-Iran brainwashing. The world's enemy is human greed and hate, highly concentrated in a subset of jewish population... and they consider us all to be "too much" hence the wars and propaganda against both Islam and Orthodoxy.
You might find Aaron Russo's films interesting for that matter -- he knew what he talked about, and he paid with his life for that.
@VVUULDTUURRM Thanks for adding this comment, it gave me faith in the human race! You are correct of course, Russia and NATO will never go to nuclear war, they are more Allies now than ever. If anyone starts a nuclear war it will be these stupid religious fanatics who think its is great to die while destroying the 'indifel'. And have not worked it out yet that we can all get on and work togther, whatever we believe. Brainwashed idiots...:)
@LaicoDC USSR Steal technology from USA? You must be kidding. Who send first Sputnik satellites? You can hear military experts from USA saying early 1980 USA was far behind of USSR. USSR was richer than any country. And still Russia possess more than 45% of all mineral resources of the world. Stealth technology was also stolen by USA from USSR. Anything USSR invented was first and never had analogy anywhere in the world. I suggest you do your research and read deeply before saying something
If I had a pile of dough, I'd have one of these as my private jet.
It's essentially a Russian F-15E, but much nicer for those really deep strikes, thanks to the whole "get up to go take a shit" instead of the more mundane "shit your pants or hold it, sucker."
@JohnnyWishbone85 did u know that f-15 is an immitation of a mig? a russian betrayed his country and landed that mig in japan.later boeing made a copy of that mig and named it f-15.
@itachiitachi1946 I didn't, because it's not. The F-15 was created in response to the wildly exaggerated claims about what the MiG-25 could do, but the F-15 prototype first flew more than four years before Victor Belenko took his MiG to Japan, which was the first time the West saw it, other than press photos. Except for top speed and climb rate, the F-15 beats the MiG-25 in every respect.
@JohnnyWishbone85 f-15 is an immitation of mig.only americans say that its not.r u form usa? if yes then i understand why u speak like that.if not then ur still form us claiming that ur not to justify ur point of view.stop writing what ever u want and just write the truth.the truth is that f-15 is an immitation of a mig.u just dont like that thats why u speak like that.i know turht hurts but we must never hide truth or twisting events cause of our own benefit.im done with u.
@JohnnyWishbone85 i speak 3 languages and u say to me im illiterate? i bet u speak only english.so ur point before just failed.u have no idea about air crafts.
THE WEST HAS NO PLANE THAT HAS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE FULLBACK TRULY ONE OF THE BEST FIGHTER BOMBER'S EVER DESIGNED. THIS IS WHAT THE A-6 INTRUDER SHOULD HAVE BEEN OR THE A-10IF THEY COULD SOMEHOW SHOEHORNA GUM LIKE THE GAU 23 IT WOULD BE THE PERFECT INFANTRY SUPPORT MACHINE. GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE RUSSIANS AND AMERICANS ARE ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE FENCEIN REGARDS TO THE IRANIAN URANIUM QUESTION IWOULD SERIOUSLY RECONSIDER MY POLICIES IF I WERE ACHMADINIJIAD,
Lol I heard the Su-32 and Su-34 have a kitchen and toilet inside of them, and no that's not an insult, it's just what would happen if they tilted the plane upside down...
Hilarious...~~ that reminds me of Hotshot movie when Chalie's father was chasing an aircraft and was upside down...then whole bunch of junks fell out.
The Raptor is cancelled its production will stop soon but theres still 180 of them so its possible that Su-35BM would in near future be Engaged by F-22 Raptor
Su-34 is an Awesome Aircraft an all around aircraft some Stealthyness,Good avionics,a True Fighter Bomber good at both of its task and a A high Tech Flying Tank
In case of important crisis Su-34 could take off from Kola Peninsula, fly over northern atlantic at low altitude, and land in Algeria (a Putin's strong allied). European NATO has got no F-22 (the only fighter able to shoot doown surely Su-34 ),and su-34 is an impressive machine, only paragonable to F-15 strike eagle
As long as the West doesn't give Russia a reason to initiate hostilies, you shouldn't worry. However, I would think that in an actual combat mission against a credible adversary, the SU-34 will probably be escorted by air superiority fighters like the SU-35BM to provide cover against air borne threats. The SU-35BM would have been able to engage the F-22 but that will never happen since the Raptor was cancelled.
"F-22 is not cancelled. Never was." This remark just shows how much in denial you really are. Non only is the production being stopped (or capped at 183 units), there will be no more maintenance done on those Raptors. The funds have dried up for the F-22. And to answer your other reply to me, the technology behind the current AMRAAMs is still the same from 20 years ago. If you truly understand DRFM, you'll see why against it, no radar can maintain a lock on target through mid course correction.
As I said, the F-22 has not been cancelled. Production is stopping yes but no maintenance is absurd and illogical. There would be no reason to keep planes without maintaining them. Funds drying up? The F-22 is being upgraded and refined even now. DRFM might work on the AMRAAM (though the D is not "20 years old" and its ECCM capability isn't known yet) but it's not effective again the F-22's radar. Go ahead and explain why the F-22 can't beat DRFM if you can.
Here, straight from the "horse's mouth", The Online Defense and Acquisition Journal, November 20, 2008. Some excerpts:
"Young piled on, saying the plane still does not meet most of its KPPs (Key Performance Parameters). But its not just pure operational shortcomings that have Young worried. The airplane is proving very expensive to operate.. and it is complex to maintain.
Of the $8 billion to upgrade the planes, Young said $6.3 billion would be research and development for a plane that is already in production.
While he did not expand on the issue, Young also raised one potentially very troubling factor, noting that the F-22 program is struggling with its low observable capabilities and other issues. Young may have been referring to corrosion problems that reportedly affect the planes stealthiness."
"A congressional aide who supports buying more F-22s reacted to Youngs comments with a certain understatement: Yep, the F-22 is the only DoD program weve ever had problems with in NOT MEETING EXPECTATIONS
Now back to my comments. That 8 Billion dollars mentioned earlier, was "killed" by the Obama administration on the behest of Robert Gates, and other defense experts. That's it...no more money for the Raptor! It is being "quietly retired"...
...hoping that the attention of Congress ,and the taxpaying public doesn't notice it too much.
Addressing your question about DRFM effectiveness lies in part to it's capability of being able to reproduce, or mimic ANY frequency in the x band, and do so in nano seconds. Another way is by "harvesting frequencies". Hint. Do you think those Bear TU-95 fly overs were just to sight see and stare at intercepting fighter jets?
Those "Bears" are flying laboratories used to analyze your potential adversary's electronic capabilities, such as their tracking radars, communications, electronic emissions, etc. Back in December a TU-95 was intercepted by two F-22 Raptors dispatched from Alaska (Can't remember the base or Flight wing's name), and the results of that encounter made the captain of that bomber remark that the F-22 is nothing to worry about. End of story.
Since youtube is terrible on text space, I'll clarify here:
F-22 budget is undecided until 2010.
DRFM can reproduce individual F-22 radar frequencies, but cannot predict the overall signal, by the time it tries to jam one frequency (assuming the F-22's radar is even detected), the F-22 is using another.
The USAF would realize what the Bears could be up to and prepare in advance, also I'd bet Russia would need to do more than a couple of fly overs before making a conclusion.
Let me be a bit blunt with you, and mark the end of this discussion. The F-22 just doesn't work like promised. It never did and never will no matter how much money they dump into the project. This is what the experts are saying, and you as a layman with no real military flying experience or aerospace education is saying it does. HMMM! Something is amiss here. Maybe you then you should offer your "expertise" to the DOD on how to make an overrated, and overpriced...
I just provided sources saying the opposite of this, ie the F-22 works fine. You also have no idea what my education or knowledge of the subject is besides wild guesses based on what I've said. Your attempt at "being blunt" does not counter my defense of the AN/APG-77 vs DRFM, prove the reliability of this claimed Russian F-22 analysis, nor provide anything to back its claims of the F-22 as "overrated, and overpriced".
piece of equipment into a viable stealth fighter jet, you might become a national hero. In the meantime get used to the idea that the Raptor's alleged capabilities are nothing but a myth. If the project is ever revived, it will be because of political reasons, not because there is a military advantage of doing so. As much as I like Obama, he is after all a politician, and if his approval rating is not to his liking, bringing back the F-22 to create jobs could be an answer.
I am done discussing DRFM tech with you which is already years ahead of any "fire and forget" air to air missile system. There must be a reason why the USAF refuses to partake in mock air combat exercises against the RuAF, whether in WVR or BVR scenarios, but hey, you can believe what ever makes you happy. It's a free country after all. As for me, I'm outta here!
Wait, there is a problem, youtube deleted one of my messages since I put links in it, I had hoped I'd typed it in such a way as to avoid being deleted, but I was not successful. If you want them, I'll message them to you.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Nonsense, don't be stupid. The Raptor is very capable. Why do you think russia and China are copying it (pretty much) in the pak fa and chinese equivalent?
"and the results of that encounter [intercept by F22s] made the captain of that bomber [Tu-95 Bear] remark that the F-22 is nothing to worry about. End of story."
F117 was operated with passive radar retro-reflectors, hiding it's real stealth capabilities.
I think, the same is in place for current F22 flights on Far East.
UHm that would be very clever, using that old bombers as flying labs, knowing oin advance that they are going to be intercepted... then you can examine enemy fighters very closely.
@edwong3 No training result of COPE, just like Red Flag exercise, was ever officially documented to media - this is due to security purpose. Only military journals were allowed to be printed for both USAF/IAF sides and other participants. Media or other think-tank sources such as Janes, Brookfields, and others were basing their articles on the military journals only.
"The US Senate and House each passed 2010 budget bill versions WITHOUT F-22 production funding in July 2009.[11] Congress worked to combine these versions into one bill,[12] and President Obama signed the national defense authorization act for fiscal 2010 in October 2009, WITHOUT funding for F-22 production.
I purposely underlined "without" to stress that the F-22 has no future, at least for the time being. If revived, it will be for political reasons only.
@edwong3 This doesn't mean that we won't up the inventory to 220 airframes. It simply means that there is no plan in the future to build any more than the 220 already ordered.
For the millionth time, congress disapproved the move to build any more F-22 Raptors beyond the current 187 units. In fact, funding for maintaining the current jets is up in the air. There are plenty of spare parts for now, but given the F-22's high maintenance schedule, those will be depleted one day. High cost is not the plane's only downfall. Rain, and harsh elements degrade the jet's RAM coating (stealth), and avionics really fast. They want to spend the money on the F-35, and more drones.
Well, I guess 187 is plenty of aircraft to do some serious damage. And it's definitely more than 48 Su-35's, 58 Su-34's, and 12 Su-30's combined... It would be highly irresponsible to cut future funding to the F-22, as we've spent billions of dollars on it--I simply don't see it happening.
@TheTomyossarian instead of spending some money for hospitals or science we rely to stupid moron russians in head to head challenge to win what??..this russians afford this because they are 300 million and are aggressive by nature..but you??..
Yeah... The Russians are all in GREAT health... They may spend less on defense, but that does NOT mean they are healthier.
...And half the country appears to be on fire--a fire the government has said "you're on your own" to its municipalities about.
Point being--despite their frugal appearance, the Russians are still as far in the shit as the Americans are. The Russian disadvantage lies in the fact they own FAR more land than anyone else on the planet.
@TheTomyossarian the fact is that they don't give a shit on human life!..this is first difference..medium salary in russia is 200 USD..and 1 petrol liter cost 1 usd..Me in my person I give a big shit in all means russia..maybe they have a lot of land..what usefull??..soon , indians , muslims and chineses will eat them at breakfast....what I hate more to this shit brainwashed brain russians is that they are proud with number ppl starving yearly and promoting how big nation are they!..shit
@ff5x2 medium salary..lol...in Moscow medium salary is 1600 USD..so in the rest of county sure is 200-300 USD...and 1 liter benzine is 1 USD...dont shit anymore...
@GRATZIANI2002 repeat. I live in Russia, and though I do not buy gasoline (using a bike) I see every day the price tag at a gas station. print this nonsense is your duty? you're a journalist, Washington Post?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i worry su-34 because of a rather big number of them could impose Russian air superiority upon the Northern Atlantic. We all know that one of strategic Russian kilitary's aim- in cse of crisis- is splitting NATO into 2 by sinking ships full of refurbishments from USA to Europe . Western navies are now quite weak
Most times they use different colors so pilots to understand who is who . Well with todays radars this is irrelevent. It's some kind of "Stealth" technics. Different colors are put depending the place each plane is expected to fly.
Well, if anything it sure does look good. I like the paint scheme. There needs to be a battlefield test in the real world otherwise it's just a pretty jet.
The su-34 is a very capable fighter-bomber. However, it is one of the best bombers. Not because of its size,not because of its payload, but simply because of its innovation. A rear looking radar,rear fire missiles,advanced cockpit,impessive array of munitions, powerful radar, powerful engines, good ecm equipment,and amazing combat performance makes it a bunker busting beast. But, what really takes the cake is the massage chairs.
Yes it can. The su-34 is armed with the rear-fire r-73r missile. Once launched, it makes a 180 degree turn before engaging its target. Some people also say the r-73rdm2, the latest archer, can perform the rear-fire function as well, but I am not so convinced about that.
It would require a decent sacrifice on performs though. You would have to extend the tail and enlarge it to make room for the radar. Not to mention that it would require additional information for the pilot to take in, which would increase stress on the pilot(s) of the aircraft.
Bluhound, do you believe that the new AIM-9X has a 90 degree (3 oclock) off bore locking capabilities? I know that Archer, introduced in 1985, has a 60 degree locking capability, relative to the front-back axis of aircraft, but I am somewhat sceptical about US claims.
AIM-9X became fully operational in January of 2008, and US claims great results. I wanted to ask: Have Russians made any effort lately to improve R-73 and R-77, or add anything new to their arsenal?
I do believe the aim-9x has a 90 degree off bore sight capability. The air force produced a video showing that this is possible. Not so sure about it being operational. It has gone through several delays and isn't necessarily found on many aircraft. The Russians already have a direct competitor to the AIM-9x. Its called r-73rdm2. It already is in srevice with the su-27sm Flankers of the Russian airforce. Actually, its been in service for a while. It has a 90 degree off bore sight capability..
Continued: it also has a fully reprogramable digital software interface. In short, the r-73rdm2 is AT LEAST as good as the AIM-9X, while being produced long before. The r-77 is being modified to the r-77m with ramjet technology and you can expect to see it in new fighters like su-35 and PAK FA along with the r-73rdm2. AA missiles is definetly an area where the Russians succeed. I recall reading about when the first r-73 came out and how it shocked all other major airforces.The legacy continues
I thought that the R-73rdm2 is the missile compatible with Russian backwards scaning/tracking radar, found in SU-34 (maybe Su 35, byt I am not sure). If it locks on at 90 degrees, it would have to be pointed backwards. Locking on a target on your tail is at a 180 degree vicinity. HOw does it work?
Im pretty sure that the r-73r is the backwards missile. I know the r-73rdm2 can do at least a 90 degree off bore sight. But, I know norhing of the su-34 being armed with that specific missile, just the r-73r. By the way, the missile is mounted forwards in case of a target in front of the aircraft. If it must be fired backwards, the missile is first ejected and external explosions "flip" the missile which allows it to engage the hostile aircraft.
SU-34 rear-looking radar is installed in the tail boom which otherwise houses the breaking parachute. Defense systems are automatic. The plane employs sophisticated AI which is capable of detecting and defeating incoming AIMs and SAMs while the crew concentrates on mission objectives.
The way it does that is a mini-booster is put on its tail and missile is facing back so when fired, the booster stops it dead mid-air, gets jettisoned and then main engine fires and missile is on its way so it doesnt even have to turn 180 to engage target.
I am not so sure about that. i have seen a sequence of photos depicting the missile being fired in such a way that it must reorient itself 180 degrees by external booster.
Why doesn't it fire R-77 ?
KRaikkonenSF 1 month ago
I WANT TO SEE THE TOILET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Amar7605 2 months ago
@Amar7605 He is there, do not worry ...
CommyNiST94 2 months ago
@hellas / kingdom of serbian lands / imperial martyr all holly russija. this plane @SU34 is in 4++ and 5. class with su37/5+generation thats what are on guitars dr.yngwie.j.malmsteen and dr. steve vai indeed @belgorod rojal @servia byzantine keep / continue to developing su34 noble / splendid.,wonderful russ engineerings begs you oneblooded of @russija yours @SERBIJA+++++++ 888888 GO!!!!!!!! @SU34
Tihomir7777 8 months ago
@hellas / kingdom of serbian lands / imperial martyr all holly russija. this plane is in 4++ and 5. class with su37/5+generation thats what are on guitars dr.yngwie.j.malmsteen and dr. steve vai indeed @belgorod rojal @servia byzantine keep / continue to developing su34 noble / splendid.,wonderful russ engineerings begs you oneblooded of @russija yours @SERBIJA+++++++ 888888 GO!!!!!!!! @SU34
Tihomir7777 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some of the most beautiful aircraft:
F-14, Mig35, Su-35, F-15, su-39, B1, TU-160, A-10, EA6B Prowler, Eurofighter, and the SU-34 showed in this video too.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
Comment removed
Starscream2040 10 months ago
this plane is so hawt, wish i could fly 1
emospadez 1 year ago
Back to reality. Who won the cold war? USSR or USA? Who always backed down when we came to the brink of the war going hot? Study history and see how far behind USSR alway was. They always use propaganda to pretend to be stronger and more sophisticated then they really are. They relied on their spies to steal our technology because they weren't smart enough to invent it themselves.
LaicoDC 1 year ago
@LaicoDC
COLD war was the term widely used to hide the COWARDICE OF AMERICANS to stop the Soviet Unions in a real HOT war. Who won what? in Cowardice? And you tell me Americans Won... that is American propaganda. If you were so superior why didn't you stop the Russians in a real war, if you didn't, then stop saying you won something. The same thing for space race, you can't win a space race because universe is infinite. The winner is the one who go first, then you can win specific races.
Starscream2040 1 year ago
@Starscream2040 Russia would have been annilated by all the countries of NATO if it had gone to war
Xiolablu3 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
All the countries of NATO united because of fear to the russians, you can ask the strategists of all countries, and scientists about what is MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION... and they will inform you that its the fact, that you can't attack Russia without dying in the process. Since you don't have enough defences against russian arsenal, what you just said is a dream. If you want to say that then you would have to demonstrate that the Mutual Assured Destruction doesnt apply anymore.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Starscream2040 Russia could never destroy all the countries of NATO before being destroyed herself. Some of NATO would survive
Xiolablu3 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
Your first said that Russia would have been annihilated by ALL the countries of NATO.. that means they all would survive. Then you said that SOME countries of NATO would survive. But thats very difficult... the chernobyl explosion gave some very big problems that are still visible... An Soviet Arsenal had, and still has, weapons capable of making 200 times the same damage as chernobyl with just 1 of their missiles...so
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
So with more than 30.000 nuclear warheads at its peak.. and still with thousands of nuclear warheads, the chances of nato countries surviving this war are very low... and even if they survive... to do what? just to have an slower and more painful death because of the contamination... The Russian population on the other side, is less concentrated .. and they have about 200 underground bases.. at least one of them is as big as washington DC
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
So western europeans can expect that russians are hidding more weapons there, and that they have better underground infraestructure to survive a war.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
Besides the 200 underground secret bases... Russia has more than 60 secret cities, called closed cities, are scientific and military cities... that means, ten of thousand of people working in whole cities for the military doing what? and Now only for moscow they will build more than 5000 new underground bunkers...
Only Switzerland population could have the same level of protection in their country so.. they would survive too
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Starscream2040 Dont be ridiculous Who would want to live after their country above has been oblitorated? Some of the NATO countries would survive unscathed, have you seen how big NATO is on a world map compared to Russia, and a large portion of Russia is still like a third world country - I've been there.
Xiolablu3 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
Unscathed? you don't consider radiation? Radiatio = death. with a long lasting effect. So, in what NATO country would you feel more optimistic the day of the nuclear war?
Besides a big part of russian weapons are tactical weapons just for europe. We also can guess that they have not eliminated totally theirmid range missiles. German armies are not exactly going to be in germany... they could be in romania, so the NATO targets are everywhere.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
Russia alone represents 70% of NATO territories. NATO is only bigger when you add Canada, Russia is bigger than all other NATO countries together. Canada is an small military treat and an easy target, besides not always do what the USA wants. And we could also add China and Kazakhstan on Russian side considering a global conflict like that... then the NATO territory will be smaller. And the worst part... most of NATO population is in a very densely populated area.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
It's true, part of Russia is like a third world country, but that's irrelevant when they have the means to destroy all NATO, and have more, bigger and better underground bases than their NATO counterparts.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Starscream2040 Russia could never destroy all the nato countries - not a chance.
Xiolablu3 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3
Radiation could
Starscream2040 10 months ago
@Starscream2040 This is a silly discussion anyway - dont you agree? Russia and NATO will never go to war or launch nukes at each other. If nukes are launched it will be some crazy religious fanatic country such as Iran or some brainwashed population such as North Korea. Most NATO countries and Russia are more Allies now than enemies. It just shows - if you dont believe a load of religious cr*p then we can acheieve so much more by working together.
Xiolablu3 10 months ago
@Xiolablu3 you seem to have fell prey to anti-Iran brainwashing. The world's enemy is human greed and hate, highly concentrated in a subset of jewish population... and they consider us all to be "too much" hence the wars and propaganda against both Islam and Orthodoxy.
You might find Aaron Russo's films interesting for that matter -- he knew what he talked about, and he paid with his life for that.
mshigorin 1 month ago
@Xiolablu3 10 Satan missles will clear Norh America of human population.
VVUULDTUURRM 9 months ago
@VVUULDTUURRM And then any of the other nuclear NATO countries will destroy Russia,
Xiolablu3 9 months ago
@Xiolablu3 so no point to speak on this sine this has no logic.
VVUULDTUURRM 9 months ago
@VVUULDTUURRM Thanks for adding this comment, it gave me faith in the human race! You are correct of course, Russia and NATO will never go to nuclear war, they are more Allies now than ever. If anyone starts a nuclear war it will be these stupid religious fanatics who think its is great to die while destroying the 'indifel'. And have not worked it out yet that we can all get on and work togther, whatever we believe. Brainwashed idiots...:)
Xiolablu3 9 months ago
@LaicoDC
it seems your propaganda machine and indoctrination won the cold war... and your ability of free thinking lost it.
Suyamu 1 year ago
@LaicoDC USSR Steal technology from USA? You must be kidding. Who send first Sputnik satellites? You can hear military experts from USA saying early 1980 USA was far behind of USSR. USSR was richer than any country. And still Russia possess more than 45% of all mineral resources of the world. Stealth technology was also stolen by USA from USSR. Anything USSR invented was first and never had analogy anywhere in the world. I suggest you do your research and read deeply before saying something
TrueNYC 3 weeks ago
@TrueNYC
I'm reading deeply.
I'm using the internet to do it.
We are talking to each other because of the internet.....an American defence project in it's early days.
Perhaps I'm reading too deeply?
Bra23we12 1 week ago
If I had a pile of dough, I'd have one of these as my private jet.
It's essentially a Russian F-15E, but much nicer for those really deep strikes, thanks to the whole "get up to go take a shit" instead of the more mundane "shit your pants or hold it, sucker."
JohnnyWishbone85 1 year ago
@JohnnyWishbone85 did u know that f-15 is an immitation of a mig? a russian betrayed his country and landed that mig in japan.later boeing made a copy of that mig and named it f-15.
itachiitachi1946 1 year ago
@itachiitachi1946 I didn't, because it's not. The F-15 was created in response to the wildly exaggerated claims about what the MiG-25 could do, but the F-15 prototype first flew more than four years before Victor Belenko took his MiG to Japan, which was the first time the West saw it, other than press photos. Except for top speed and climb rate, the F-15 beats the MiG-25 in every respect.
JohnnyWishbone85 1 year ago
@JohnnyWishbone85 f-15 is an immitation of mig.only americans say that its not.r u form usa? if yes then i understand why u speak like that.if not then ur still form us claiming that ur not to justify ur point of view.stop writing what ever u want and just write the truth.the truth is that f-15 is an immitation of a mig.u just dont like that thats why u speak like that.i know turht hurts but we must never hide truth or twisting events cause of our own benefit.im done with u.
itachiitachi1946 1 year ago
@JohnnyWishbone85 i just saw that ur form usa and f-15 is made in usa.that proves everything why u tlak like that.period
itachiitachi1946 1 year ago
@itachiitachi1946
I'm form USA and I tlak, eh? You're illiterate, how would you know anything about aircraft?
JohnnyWishbone85 11 months ago
@JohnnyWishbone85 i speak 3 languages and u say to me im illiterate? i bet u speak only english.so ur point before just failed.u have no idea about air crafts.
itachiitachi1946 11 months ago
super duck!
i love Russia.
tranggunbound 1 year ago
Incredible aircraft, best in its class anywhere! And such a great aerodynamic design.
eliskander 1 year ago
It looks like Donald Duck....!!
abc15800 1 year ago
Порулить бы
Vitalij673 1 year ago
Everything is bigger in Russia!
hh1n 1 year ago 2
i want to fly this and to have a hot female Copilot in there!!!
everyonetookmynick 1 year ago
Got to love the part when the cockpit armor is tested. Shells fired at point blank leave a little dent....
SukhoiSu47 1 year ago
@Mig29tvc it could be a plasma stealth
eretuev 1 year ago
@Mig29tvc ABSOLUTELY RIGHT
TheSubzerogr 1 year ago
@SmileOfFallenAngel to bad it shows up on radar
forrestc3 1 year ago
F-15E Strike Eagle is way better.
forrestc3 1 year ago
@forrestc3 troll
GOTROL 1 year ago
if this was stealth, this can beat all the american ground attack aircraft
KIBProductionz 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Кароче самолёт которому всё похуй...
Andzej1981 1 year ago
Кароче самолёт которому всё похуй
Andzej1981 1 year ago 2
bus fighter!..
GRATZIANI2002 1 year ago
i wish it would be for sale to the civilians just like the su 27 , i would rather have this baby than a hundred Ferrari
another505 1 year ago
THE WEST HAS NO PLANE THAT HAS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE FULLBACK TRULY ONE OF THE BEST FIGHTER BOMBER'S EVER DESIGNED. THIS IS WHAT THE A-6 INTRUDER SHOULD HAVE BEEN OR THE A-10IF THEY COULD SOMEHOW SHOEHORNA GUM LIKE THE GAU 23 IT WOULD BE THE PERFECT INFANTRY SUPPORT MACHINE. GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE RUSSIANS AND AMERICANS ARE ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE FENCEIN REGARDS TO THE IRANIAN URANIUM QUESTION IWOULD SERIOUSLY RECONSIDER MY POLICIES IF I WERE ACHMADINIJIAD,
killbambi87 1 year ago
@killbambi87 I thought Russia was biased more towards Iran??
asg631 1 year ago
@killbambi87 Wrong.
Boberrosini 1 year ago
nice
messershit109 1 year ago
@vendetta007mike sure it has ..and a small kitchen as well like your B-2 ^^
pR05t0 1 year ago
"хорошая" машина для убийства!
Alexander25C 2 years ago
nato и сша просто хотел добавить братан
75SVS 2 years ago
Кpacивый cyxoгo 34
hermoso el sukhoi 34
beutiful the sukhoi 34
ivanmiguel1010 2 years ago
Lol I heard the Su-32 and Su-34 have a kitchen and toilet inside of them, and no that's not an insult, it's just what would happen if they tilted the plane upside down...
munruthel1 2 years ago
Hilarious...~~ that reminds me of Hotshot movie when Chalie's father was chasing an aircraft and was upside down...then whole bunch of junks fell out.
looxgood 2 years ago
Beautifull!
TalosIIII 2 years ago 2
ruusia has great scientists!!!
sixameleon 2 years ago
This is probably my favorite aircraft.
CaptN0ob 2 years ago 11
The Raptor is cancelled its production will stop soon but theres still 180 of them so its possible that Su-35BM would in near future be Engaged by F-22 Raptor
Su-34 is an Awesome Aircraft an all around aircraft some Stealthyness,Good avionics,a True Fighter Bomber good at both of its task and a A high Tech Flying Tank
omnadrener 2 years ago
In case of important crisis Su-34 could take off from Kola Peninsula, fly over northern atlantic at low altitude, and land in Algeria (a Putin's strong allied). European NATO has got no F-22 (the only fighter able to shoot doown surely Su-34 ),and su-34 is an impressive machine, only paragonable to F-15 strike eagle
anisocoro 2 years ago
As long as the West doesn't give Russia a reason to initiate hostilies, you shouldn't worry. However, I would think that in an actual combat mission against a credible adversary, the SU-34 will probably be escorted by air superiority fighters like the SU-35BM to provide cover against air borne threats. The SU-35BM would have been able to engage the F-22 but that will never happen since the Raptor was cancelled.
edwong3 2 years ago
F-22 is not cancelled. Never was.
KARASAWA40 2 years ago
"F-22 is not cancelled. Never was." This remark just shows how much in denial you really are. Non only is the production being stopped (or capped at 183 units), there will be no more maintenance done on those Raptors. The funds have dried up for the F-22. And to answer your other reply to me, the technology behind the current AMRAAMs is still the same from 20 years ago. If you truly understand DRFM, you'll see why against it, no radar can maintain a lock on target through mid course correction.
edwong3 2 years ago
As I said, the F-22 has not been cancelled. Production is stopping yes but no maintenance is absurd and illogical. There would be no reason to keep planes without maintaining them. Funds drying up? The F-22 is being upgraded and refined even now. DRFM might work on the AMRAAM (though the D is not "20 years old" and its ECCM capability isn't known yet) but it's not effective again the F-22's radar. Go ahead and explain why the F-22 can't beat DRFM if you can.
KARASAWA40 2 years ago
Here, straight from the "horse's mouth", The Online Defense and Acquisition Journal, November 20, 2008. Some excerpts:
"Young piled on, saying the plane still does not meet most of its KPPs (Key Performance Parameters). But its not just pure operational shortcomings that have Young worried. The airplane is proving very expensive to operate.. and it is complex to maintain.
Continued
edwong3 2 years ago
Continued...
Of the $8 billion to upgrade the planes, Young said $6.3 billion would be research and development for a plane that is already in production.
While he did not expand on the issue, Young also raised one potentially very troubling factor, noting that the F-22 program is struggling with its low observable capabilities and other issues. Young may have been referring to corrosion problems that reportedly affect the planes stealthiness."
Continued...
edwong3 2 years ago
Continued...
"A congressional aide who supports buying more F-22s reacted to Youngs comments with a certain understatement: Yep, the F-22 is the only DoD program weve ever had problems with in NOT MEETING EXPECTATIONS
Now back to my comments. That 8 Billion dollars mentioned earlier, was "killed" by the Obama administration on the behest of Robert Gates, and other defense experts. That's it...no more money for the Raptor! It is being "quietly retired"...
Continued...
edwong3 2 years ago
Continued...
...hoping that the attention of Congress ,and the taxpaying public doesn't notice it too much.
Addressing your question about DRFM effectiveness lies in part to it's capability of being able to reproduce, or mimic ANY frequency in the x band, and do so in nano seconds. Another way is by "harvesting frequencies". Hint. Do you think those Bear TU-95 fly overs were just to sight see and stare at intercepting fighter jets?
Continued...
edwong3 2 years ago
Continued...
Those "Bears" are flying laboratories used to analyze your potential adversary's electronic capabilities, such as their tracking radars, communications, electronic emissions, etc. Back in December a TU-95 was intercepted by two F-22 Raptors dispatched from Alaska (Can't remember the base or Flight wing's name), and the results of that encounter made the captain of that bomber remark that the F-22 is nothing to worry about. End of story.
edwong3 2 years ago 9
Since youtube is terrible on text space, I'll clarify here:
F-22 budget is undecided until 2010.
DRFM can reproduce individual F-22 radar frequencies, but cannot predict the overall signal, by the time it tries to jam one frequency (assuming the F-22's radar is even detected), the F-22 is using another.
The USAF would realize what the Bears could be up to and prepare in advance, also I'd bet Russia would need to do more than a couple of fly overs before making a conclusion.
KARASAWA40 2 years ago
Let me be a bit blunt with you, and mark the end of this discussion. The F-22 just doesn't work like promised. It never did and never will no matter how much money they dump into the project. This is what the experts are saying, and you as a layman with no real military flying experience or aerospace education is saying it does. HMMM! Something is amiss here. Maybe you then you should offer your "expertise" to the DOD on how to make an overrated, and overpriced...
Continued...
edwong3 2 years ago
I just provided sources saying the opposite of this, ie the F-22 works fine. You also have no idea what my education or knowledge of the subject is besides wild guesses based on what I've said. Your attempt at "being blunt" does not counter my defense of the AN/APG-77 vs DRFM, prove the reliability of this claimed Russian F-22 analysis, nor provide anything to back its claims of the F-22 as "overrated, and overpriced".
KARASAWA40 2 years ago
Continued...
piece of equipment into a viable stealth fighter jet, you might become a national hero. In the meantime get used to the idea that the Raptor's alleged capabilities are nothing but a myth. If the project is ever revived, it will be because of political reasons, not because there is a military advantage of doing so. As much as I like Obama, he is after all a politician, and if his approval rating is not to his liking, bringing back the F-22 to create jobs could be an answer.
Continued
edwong3 2 years ago
Continued...
I am done discussing DRFM tech with you which is already years ahead of any "fire and forget" air to air missile system. There must be a reason why the USAF refuses to partake in mock air combat exercises against the RuAF, whether in WVR or BVR scenarios, but hey, you can believe what ever makes you happy. It's a free country after all. As for me, I'm outta here!
edwong3 2 years ago
Wait, there is a problem, youtube deleted one of my messages since I put links in it, I had hoped I'd typed it in such a way as to avoid being deleted, but I was not successful. If you want them, I'll message them to you.
KARASAWA40 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nonsense, don't be stupid. The Raptor is very capable. Why do you think russia and China are copying it (pretty much) in the pak fa and chinese equivalent?
gosciu555 2 years ago
it wasnt a f22 it was a canadian air force f18
ichhabkp 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@edwong3
"and the results of that encounter [intercept by F22s] made the captain of that bomber [Tu-95 Bear] remark that the F-22 is nothing to worry about. End of story."
F117 was operated with passive radar retro-reflectors, hiding it's real stealth capabilities.
I think, the same is in place for current F22 flights on Far East.
thelittlebigoneru 1 year ago
@edwong3
UHm that would be very clever, using that old bombers as flying labs, knowing oin advance that they are going to be intercepted... then you can examine enemy fighters very closely.
Starscream2040 10 months ago
Actually F-22 funding was cut, but still there will be 220 made already. Funding is already approved and is on production already.
looxgood 2 years ago
Where did you get your information? There is no way this would have not made it to the mainstream media.
edwong3 2 years ago
@edwong3 No training result of COPE, just like Red Flag exercise, was ever officially documented to media - this is due to security purpose. Only military journals were allowed to be printed for both USAF/IAF sides and other participants. Media or other think-tank sources such as Janes, Brookfields, and others were basing their articles on the military journals only.
looxgood 2 years ago
@edwong3 Refer to Congressional Budget Committee Summary of 2008 November House.
looxgood 2 years ago
Here is what I found,
"The US Senate and House each passed 2010 budget bill versions WITHOUT F-22 production funding in July 2009.[11] Congress worked to combine these versions into one bill,[12] and President Obama signed the national defense authorization act for fiscal 2010 in October 2009, WITHOUT funding for F-22 production.
I purposely underlined "without" to stress that the F-22 has no future, at least for the time being. If revived, it will be for political reasons only.
edwong3 2 years ago
Opps, I meant to say that I purposely BOLDED "without", not underlined.
edwong3 2 years ago
@edwong3 This doesn't mean that we won't up the inventory to 220 airframes. It simply means that there is no plan in the future to build any more than the 220 already ordered.
TheTomyossarian 2 years ago
For the millionth time, congress disapproved the move to build any more F-22 Raptors beyond the current 187 units. In fact, funding for maintaining the current jets is up in the air. There are plenty of spare parts for now, but given the F-22's high maintenance schedule, those will be depleted one day. High cost is not the plane's only downfall. Rain, and harsh elements degrade the jet's RAM coating (stealth), and avionics really fast. They want to spend the money on the F-35, and more drones.
edwong3 2 years ago
Well, I guess 187 is plenty of aircraft to do some serious damage. And it's definitely more than 48 Su-35's, 58 Su-34's, and 12 Su-30's combined... It would be highly irresponsible to cut future funding to the F-22, as we've spent billions of dollars on it--I simply don't see it happening.
TheTomyossarian 2 years ago
@TheTomyossarian instead of spending some money for hospitals or science we rely to stupid moron russians in head to head challenge to win what??..this russians afford this because they are 300 million and are aggressive by nature..but you??..
GRATZIANI2002 1 year ago
Yeah... The Russians are all in GREAT health... They may spend less on defense, but that does NOT mean they are healthier.
...And half the country appears to be on fire--a fire the government has said "you're on your own" to its municipalities about.
Point being--despite their frugal appearance, the Russians are still as far in the shit as the Americans are. The Russian disadvantage lies in the fact they own FAR more land than anyone else on the planet.
TheTomyossarian 1 year ago
@TheTomyossarian the fact is that they don't give a shit on human life!..this is first difference..medium salary in russia is 200 USD..and 1 petrol liter cost 1 usd..Me in my person I give a big shit in all means russia..maybe they have a lot of land..what usefull??..soon , indians , muslims and chineses will eat them at breakfast....what I hate more to this shit brainwashed brain russians is that they are proud with number ppl starving yearly and promoting how big nation are they!..shit
GRATZIANI2002 1 year ago
@GRATZIANI2002 Ehh, I was never bragging on Russian demeanor.
TheTomyossarian 1 year ago
@GRATZIANI2002 lie. 1 petrol liter cost 0,72-0,83 usd. i live in russia and know. medium salary in russia is 350 USD (500, some regions). what next ?
ff5x2 1 year ago
@ff5x2 medium salary..lol...in Moscow medium salary is 1600 USD..so in the rest of county sure is 200-300 USD...and 1 liter benzine is 1 USD...dont shit anymore...
GRATZIANI2002 1 year ago
@GRATZIANI2002 repeat. I live in Russia, and though I do not buy gasoline (using a bike) I see every day the price tag at a gas station. print this nonsense is your duty? you're a journalist, Washington Post?
ff5x2 1 year ago
170-180 were built....not 220....production stopped...they now wait for F35....probably F22 wont be in production anymore...probably...
nedeljko031 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i worry su-34 because of a rather big number of them could impose Russian air superiority upon the Northern Atlantic. We all know that one of strategic Russian kilitary's aim- in cse of crisis- is splitting NATO into 2 by sinking ships full of refurbishments from USA to Europe . Western navies are now quite weak
anisocoro 2 years ago
Класс
anrita1985 2 years ago 2
how can we find a Translated edition in english or in Greek!???
orfan9ma 2 years ago
I have a video with theme of SU-32, SU-34 translated in Greek and in English. Not this video, but from other show.
BitnikGr 2 years ago
Cabin in the form of a uniform titanic armored capsule. Strongly. Besides, for it plan installation of engines with an thrust vectoring of draught.
shadowname1 2 years ago
you may also cook there.. :D
some kitchen equipment.. probably similar as Tu-160's are fitted
Sheilfalkyr 2 years ago
hahaha i would have never thought of that
AFlYiNtAcO 2 years ago
wow whats teh cost in US dollars for this plane?
killerkohyar 2 years ago
$36.000.000
Krishna0666 2 years ago
What is the point of that long rod portraying in between the two engines?
poppingcherries1 2 years ago
It's for additional rear view radar station.
In navy version of plane submarine seeking equipment is located there
nikomo37 2 years ago 2
thanks
poppingcherries1 2 years ago
Why the color scheme of Russian fighters is totally different from American counterparts?
I noticed from many video clips(Not only the Su34 showing here), that Russian likes Blue/Green-ish color scheme on their fighters.
American fighters usually deploy a gray color schemes?
Why is this? Any pros/cons of each scheme? Hope some gurus can answer.
cloudyskyhere 2 years ago
no fcn idea :DDDD
CivfcNeuro 2 years ago
Most times they use different colors so pilots to understand who is who . Well with todays radars this is irrelevent. It's some kind of "Stealth" technics. Different colors are put depending the place each plane is expected to fly.
ANimouz 2 years ago
because it's comfortable to eyes and reduce fatigue..and hopefully would contribute to pilot's morale and self confidence during mission
Sheilfalkyr 2 years ago
really ? thx i didnt know that but i still think it would be better with pilot view any way its the best of the best
mercedes450SEL 3 years ago
te only bad thing is this su-34 is the rear view to the pilot
mercedes450SEL 3 years ago
it has radar of back view and it can shoot targets by AA-missiles from tail))))) it's not joke ))))
kibabiba 2 years ago 3
Well, if anything it sure does look good. I like the paint scheme. There needs to be a battlefield test in the real world otherwise it's just a pretty jet.
MikeofWyoming 3 years ago
does it have coffee bar behind those seats??
chimoy1 3 years ago 10
And disco club with russian girls too :)
Mig29tvc 3 years ago 12
lol XD
chimoy1 3 years ago
@Mig29tvc some mexican tacos? (from México) I love Sukhoi!!!
kikearmenta 1 year ago
This is a good beast, GOD BLESS RUSSIA
vikruss 3 years ago 5
GOOD! Plane
vagant12345 3 years ago 5
It starts to piss me off, that I don't understand Russian, Arabic and Chinese. I know 7 languages, but none of those 3.
mik1984 3 years ago
so how stupid doyou feel now XD lol
bittemeinrammstein 3 years ago
The su-34 is a very capable fighter-bomber. However, it is one of the best bombers. Not because of its size,not because of its payload, but simply because of its innovation. A rear looking radar,rear fire missiles,advanced cockpit,impessive array of munitions, powerful radar, powerful engines, good ecm equipment,and amazing combat performance makes it a bunker busting beast. But, what really takes the cake is the massage chairs.
bluehound35 3 years ago 5
A rear looking radar?! Does that mean it can launch missiles at targets behind it?
CroComm 3 years ago
Yes it can. The su-34 is armed with the rear-fire r-73r missile. Once launched, it makes a 180 degree turn before engaging its target. Some people also say the r-73rdm2, the latest archer, can perform the rear-fire function as well, but I am not so convinced about that.
bluehound35 3 years ago
Awesome, i didnt know that. The Russians should put those radars on all their fighters!
CroComm 3 years ago
It would require a decent sacrifice on performs though. You would have to extend the tail and enlarge it to make room for the radar. Not to mention that it would require additional information for the pilot to take in, which would increase stress on the pilot(s) of the aircraft.
bluehound35 3 years ago
Bluhound, do you believe that the new AIM-9X has a 90 degree (3 oclock) off bore locking capabilities? I know that Archer, introduced in 1985, has a 60 degree locking capability, relative to the front-back axis of aircraft, but I am somewhat sceptical about US claims.
AIM-9X became fully operational in January of 2008, and US claims great results. I wanted to ask: Have Russians made any effort lately to improve R-73 and R-77, or add anything new to their arsenal?
tropickman 3 years ago
I do believe the aim-9x has a 90 degree off bore sight capability. The air force produced a video showing that this is possible. Not so sure about it being operational. It has gone through several delays and isn't necessarily found on many aircraft. The Russians already have a direct competitor to the AIM-9x. Its called r-73rdm2. It already is in srevice with the su-27sm Flankers of the Russian airforce. Actually, its been in service for a while. It has a 90 degree off bore sight capability..
bluehound35 3 years ago
Continued: it also has a fully reprogramable digital software interface. In short, the r-73rdm2 is AT LEAST as good as the AIM-9X, while being produced long before. The r-77 is being modified to the r-77m with ramjet technology and you can expect to see it in new fighters like su-35 and PAK FA along with the r-73rdm2. AA missiles is definetly an area where the Russians succeed. I recall reading about when the first r-73 came out and how it shocked all other major airforces.The legacy continues
bluehound35 3 years ago
I thought that the R-73rdm2 is the missile compatible with Russian backwards scaning/tracking radar, found in SU-34 (maybe Su 35, byt I am not sure). If it locks on at 90 degrees, it would have to be pointed backwards. Locking on a target on your tail is at a 180 degree vicinity. HOw does it work?
tropickman 3 years ago
Im pretty sure that the r-73r is the backwards missile. I know the r-73rdm2 can do at least a 90 degree off bore sight. But, I know norhing of the su-34 being armed with that specific missile, just the r-73r. By the way, the missile is mounted forwards in case of a target in front of the aircraft. If it must be fired backwards, the missile is first ejected and external explosions "flip" the missile which allows it to engage the hostile aircraft.
bluehound35 3 years ago
SU-34 rear-looking radar is installed in the tail boom which otherwise houses the breaking parachute. Defense systems are automatic. The plane employs sophisticated AI which is capable of detecting and defeating incoming AIMs and SAMs while the crew concentrates on mission objectives.
Papa718thTFW 3 years ago 2
The way it does that is a mini-booster is put on its tail and missile is facing back so when fired, the booster stops it dead mid-air, gets jettisoned and then main engine fires and missile is on its way so it doesnt even have to turn 180 to engage target.
Spetsnazovets 2 years ago
I am not so sure about that. i have seen a sequence of photos depicting the missile being fired in such a way that it must reorient itself 180 degrees by external booster.
bluehound35 2 years ago
Fair enough. I've read this in a couple of articles so yeah. There are ways to do it.
Spetsnazovets 2 years ago
fantastick -awesom video !!!
su27forserbia 3 years ago 6
Nice!
sukhoi235 3 years ago 4
Those planes are awesome! Those are some of the best attack planes in the world!
segregator236 3 years ago 5
best plains are russian plains! MiG has bigger production, su is better, but i like MiG MORE!
Delija47 3 years ago 5