SU-57 deployed to Syria

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post22 Apr 2018, 03:17

This is an interesting article from TheAviationist

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/21/c ... ia-strike/

what sparked my interest was the mentioning of ground units and the F-22.

New information also reveals that USAF F-22 Raptors were part of the game, ready to repel interception from aircraft and from surface-to-air missiles.
Another interesting part of today’s announcement is that, “F-22s were indeed flying in the area, ready to strike Syrian or Russian air defense systems and other assets if they threatened either coalition aircraft or US ground forces in the region.” This comment is of particular interest since it acknowledges that the U.S. had some type of ground forces in the area during the strikes.

While no specific information is available about the use of U.S. ground forces in this specific instance, it is common doctrine for special operations teams to provide target designation, search and rescue and bomb damage assessment in connection with air operations.

Tirpak and Everstine also quoted Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart in a Military.com report published on Monday, April 16, 2018, that the F-22, “was available, but wasn’t required for the operation as planned.” Lt. Col. Pickart added, “That said, the F-22 is well-suited for the defensive counterair mission it continues to conduct over Syria, protecting coalition forces on the ground and in the air.” Today’s reveal confirms that the F-22 was indeed used in the raid over Syria on April 14.

AFCENT spokesman Capt. Mark Graff also told reporters that, “Fifth generation platforms like the F-22 and the F-35 will continue to serve as the primary platforms capable of operating in the lethal threat rings of Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) environments like those found in Syria,” in his remarks about the April 14 strikes. Capt. Graff’s remarks hint at the possible future first use of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in combat, although no F-35s from the U.S. are known to be in the region at this time. There have been rumors of the Israelis using F-35s, but these theories have been effectively debunked as inaccurate.

Graff went on to acknowledge that the 19 cruise missiles employed against the targets in Barzeh, Syria “were, in fact, not JASSM Extended Range (JASSM-ER) munitions” as reported by the Pentagon immediately following the attack. The cruise missiles employed in the strikes were actually, “JASSM-A, or the standard, non-extended range versions of the munition,” Graff said. Graff did confirm the April 14 strikes were the first use “of any variant of the JASSM.”


I would guess the F-22s are in the area not just in case Syrian or Russian units decided to get uppity but also provide additional target information. No doubt the passive sensors on the F-22 collected plenty of electronic data. Also were SOF units acting as forward observers for strike packages?
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 523
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post22 Apr 2018, 12:32

charlielima223 wrote:This is an interesting article from TheAviationist

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/21/c ... ia-strike/

what sparked my interest was the mentioning of ground units and the F-22.

... Article...


I would guess the F-22s are in the area not just in case Syrian or Russian units decided to get uppity but also provide additional target information. No doubt the passive sensors on the F-22 collected plenty of electronic data. Also were SOF units acting as forward observers for strike packages?


First of all "ground units in the region" could be anywhere in Syria, US does not make a secret of its presence "in the region" (i.e. Israel put its ground forces in Golan on alert too). Second, even if those ground assets were in the immediate vicinity then hardly 'twas SOF because they would need to be infil/exfiled, which is quite hard to do in downtown Damascus. How were they going to "spot" for TLAMs and JASSMs anyhow? Ground level BDA, if any, most likely came from a couple of well-wishers or "our men in Damascus".
Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post22 Apr 2018, 20:34

True, the United States doesn't keep its presence of ground forces a secret. However I doubt anyone outside of some secret and highly restricted SOCOM/JSOC/CIA/DIA TOC know where those people are. No one on the outside can say with absolute certainty how many ground units there are in Syria and exactly where. The most I know and can say with a degree of certainty is that there are some premo badasses in Syria. Also not all targets were in downtown Damascus. It could be that elements of SAD are already operating in various parts of Syria including parts of Damascus.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3192
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post23 Apr 2018, 17:44

Interesting in that they flew DCA and SEAD. I'd imagine that means carrying SDBII?

When I saw the pics of Eagles and Vipers landing back at Aviano with AMRAAM's, I questioned why the F-22 wasn't present. It's likely that those F-15's and 16's could have done the job easily enough, but why not have your primo air superiority platform there - just in case? The SU-35 is a serious threat to the F-15 and 16, far less so to the F-22.

OK OK, it wasn't likely the Russians would put up a fight. But it was a possibility, however remote. Man I can't wait for the first Flanker to fall, either at the hands of an F-15 or 22. If nothing else to shut sputnick up about how the SU-35 is a "stealth killer"...
Offline

charlielima223

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 977
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post24 Apr 2018, 02:50

mixelflick wrote: I questioned why the F-22 wasn't present. It's likely that those F-15's and 16's could have done the job easily enough, but why not have your primo air superiority platform there - just in case? The SU-35 is a serious threat to the F-15 and 16, far less so to the F-22.

OK OK, it wasn't likely the Russians would put up a fight. But it was a possibility, however remote. Man I can't wait for the first Flanker to fall, either at the hands of an F-15 or 22. If nothing else to shut sputnick up about how the SU-35 is a "stealth killer"...


Yet F-22 Raptors were present during the event.

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/21/c ... ia-strike/

http://airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2 ... ASSMs.aspx

while not directly embedded within the strike packages (flying directly along side Bones, Vipers, Eagles or other French and UK aircraft), they were in the region. Their exact role is a bit fuzzy but they were in the region doing what they do best.

Also I 50/50 agree with your sentiments about the Su-35. It would definitely shut up a lot of doubters about the capabilities of 5th gen aircraft. Personally I wouldn't want to see one get shot down by the F-22 (even though it is very very likely it can be) because that would be a complete political and media sh*t storm. Also everyone in the right mind here at F-16.net knows that Russian state controlled media will just twist narrative and out right lie about the events... much like many Russian trolls all over the comment sections of various defense and military websites. Much like that event involving frogfoots and raptors. Russian state/government controlled media played it like the Raptor saw the Flankers coming and got scared then bugged out. Anyone who pays attention to how the Raptors operate knows that is complete bullocks/male bovine excrement. Russian media is very good at distorting things to fit their agenda. They have a pretty bad case of a dissociative disorder.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3192
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post24 Apr 2018, 16:37

If a Raptor did wax an SU-35, I wonder how that would (or if it would) change things..

The thinking now is to produce SU-35's, while work on the SU-57 continues (albeit slowly). If they were faced with irrefutable proof the SU-35 is no match (either to F-22 or F-35 - or both), I wonder if more rubles would be re-directed to the SU-57. It may also be a matter of something more than just rubles. By all accounts, it sounds like they've run up against significant difficulties in engines, stealth, weapons and avionics/SA. Maybe throwing more rubles at it won't help things, maybe it will. Tough to say since so little is really known...

In a perfect world, I think they get the SU-57 to super-cruise, get the avionics/SA right, get the weapons to work and reduce the RCS somewhere slightly below that of a SH. Even with all that, it's going to have an uphill climb vs. a Raptor, maybe even the F-35. In hindsight, they made a mistake developing such a heavy fighter. They would have been much better served to develop and F-35 sized aircraft, optimized for export. The Chinese F-31 and American F-35 are going to eat the export market alive, and Russia will have nothing comparable to offer.

That ship has sailed, and there's no going back now...
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5402
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post25 Apr 2018, 05:33

mixelflick wrote:If a Raptor did wax an SU-35, I wonder how that would (or if it would) change things..

The thinking now is to produce SU-35's, while work on the SU-57 continues (albeit slowly). If they were faced with irrefutable proof the SU-35 is no match (either to F-22 or F-35 - or both), I wonder if more rubles would be re-directed to the SU-57. It may also be a matter of something more than just rubles. By all accounts, it sounds like they've run up against significant difficulties in engines, stealth, weapons and avionics/SA. Maybe throwing more rubles at it won't help things, maybe it will. Tough to say since so little is really known...

In a perfect world, I think they get the SU-57 to super-cruise, get the avionics/SA right, get the weapons to work and reduce the RCS somewhere slightly below that of a SH. Even with all that, it's going to have an uphill climb vs. a Raptor, maybe even the F-35. In hindsight, they made a mistake developing such a heavy fighter. They would have been much better served to develop and F-35 sized aircraft, optimized for export. The Chinese F-31 and American F-35 are going to eat the export market alive, and Russia will have nothing comparable to offer.

That ship has sailed, and there's no going back now...



Yes, this is what I've been saying for sometime now. First, the Russia missed the boat by developing the PAK-FA/Su-57(Heavy Fighter) instead of the cheaper and far more exportable LMFS. (Lightweight Fighter) Second, she won't be able to afford the Su-57 is vast numbers. ($100 Million +) Third, she only has two options that I can see. Either accept a small number of Su-57's (~ 200-250) and become a minor Regional Military Power. That or acquire a Russianized J-31 from China.....

Many are critical of that view. Yet, I haven't heard of any real viable alternatives.....
Offline

icemaverick

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 428
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2012, 23:05
  • Location: New York

Unread post25 Apr 2018, 17:10

For national pride alone, Russia will never buy a Chinese jet. The Su-57 is something of a prestige project. Axing it now would look terrible. They will continue to buy it in tiny batches and make incremental improvements just as they have done with the Flanker series. They might even give them different numbers e.g. Su-60 etc.

Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA. It will be interesting to see how the Su-57 fares against the J-20 and J-31 on the export market. They might be able to secure a few sales but certainly the Chinese will make a move into their turf.
Online

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1152
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post25 Apr 2018, 19:31

Russia claims to have retrieved an intact TLAM and ALCM from the recent strike as well as displaying fragments from alleged shot down ones. Those sites look pretty destroyed to me but I suppose this is as much a sales pitch for their SAMs as anything else now.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5402
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 Apr 2018, 00:52

icemaverick wrote:For national pride alone, Russia will never buy a Chinese jet. The Su-57 is something of a prestige project. Axing it now would look terrible. They will continue to buy it in tiny batches and make incremental improvements just as they have done with the Flanker series. They might even give them different numbers e.g. Su-60 etc.

Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA. It will be interesting to see how the Su-57 fares against the J-20 and J-31 on the export market. They might be able to secure a few sales but certainly the Chinese will make a move into their turf.



First, Russia has few options as she just doesn't have deep pockets anymore. As a matter of fact much of her Military is made up of either old ex-Soviet Equipment or Upgraded Versions of it. So, how is Russia going to replace all of it??? When it has a GDP about the size of Australia/Canada!

Also, while Russians have considerable pride. That didn't stop them from ordering two large Mistral Class "Amphibious Assault Ships (LHD's) from France.... :wink:

ENS_Gamal_Abdel_Nasser_(L1010)_Helicopter_Carrier.jpg




So, honestly this talk that Russia would "never" consider buying Chinese Military Equipment falls flat in my opinion. Also, I never suggested or said they should cancel the Su-57. I just stated they couldn't afford to produce it in large numbers and the design had a number of flaws.
Last edited by Corsair1963 on 26 Apr 2018, 04:15, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

citanon

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 422
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2015, 21:42

Unread post26 Apr 2018, 02:04

In another decade or so who knows what Russia's relationship with China will be. As a part of the Belt and Road, China is getting deeply involved with central Asian countries such as Kazahkstan. It's possible that this will result in even closer relations between Russia and China, a complete rupture in relations, or a combination of cooperation and competition.

Is it really a good idea for Russia to be buying Chinese planes? Perhaps in 10-20 years, Russia might be asking to buy the F-35. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5402
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 Apr 2018, 04:14

citanon wrote:In another decade or so who knows what Russia's relationship with China will be. As a part of the Belt and Road, China is getting deeply involved with central Asian countries such as Kazahkstan. It's possible that this will result in even closer relations between Russia and China, a complete rupture in relations, or a combination of cooperation and competition.

Is it really a good idea for Russia to be buying Chinese planes? Perhaps in 10-20 years, Russia might be asking to buy the F-35. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:



Well, regardless what happen the current "status quo" will be long gone!
Offline
User avatar

durahawk

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 528
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 20:35

Unread post26 Apr 2018, 04:39

icemaverick wrote: Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA.


I'm not sure I would agree to calling any country with a stockpile of strategic nuclear weapons a "regional power" no matter how decrepit their conventional forces may become.

As for the SU-57, the lack of Indian money will certainly slowdown the program (even further) but I don't forsee it's cancelation. Like others have said, there is too much pride wrapped up in it. Compensate for lack of capability with bravado and propaganda.

Tis the Russian way.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5402
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 Apr 2018, 05:20

durahawk wrote:
icemaverick wrote: Despite Russia’s posturing, everyone knows that they are already a regional power. They simply don’t have the economic might to compete with China, nevermind the USA.


I'm not sure I would agree to calling any country with a stockpile of strategic nuclear weapons a "regional power" no matter how decrepit their conventional forces may become.

As for the SU-57, the lack of Indian money will certainly slowdown the program (even further) but I don't forsee it's cancelation. Like others have said, there is too much pride wrapped up in it. Compensate for lack of capability with bravado and propaganda.

Tis the Russian way.



Russia has a vast fleet of Soviet Era Weapons. Yet, little in the way of resources to replace them.....

QUOTE:

In 1989, when the Soviet Union collapsed, its population was roughly 286 million. The U.S., by comparison, had a population of about 249 million. Since then, the U.S. population has grown to about 325 million, while that of Russia has fallen to about 143 million.

Comparisons of industrial production are difficult since they involve a large number of state-controlled enterprises that operated inefficiently. Between 50 percent and 60 percent of the industrial base of the USSR was retained by Russia. This does not include industry in the Communist bloc that the USSR could avail itself of.

A comparison of automobile production between the two countries can serve as a rough index of industrial capacity. In 2016, Russia produced about 1.3 million vehicles. The U.S. in comparison produced around 12.2 million vehicles.

In terms of GDP, in 1989 the Gross Domestic Product of the U.S. was $4.862 trillion, while that of the Soviet Union was $2.5 trillion. Per capita GDP was $19,800 versus $8,700.

By comparison, in 2016 Russia's GDP was $1.283 trillion, while that of the U.S. had grown to $18.62 trillion. Russian per capita GDP was roughly the same at $8,946, while that of the United States had increased to $57,608. Adjustments for purchasing power parity, however, would reduce the gap between the two countries.

At $1.283 trillion, Russia's GDP is smaller than Turkey's and just barely larger than the Philippines. Alternatively, it is slightly larger than the state of New York and slightly smaller than that of Texas. Russia may have inherited the military arsenal of a super power, but it is an economic dwarf on the world stage.


Moreover, its economy is heavily dependent on the extraction of raw materials, principally hydrocarbons. Roughly 70 percent of the Russian government's budget comes from the proceeds of its oil exports. Moscow needs oil prices to be between $65 and $75 a barrel in order to balance its budget, and it needs oil prices in excess of $100 per barrel in order to generate sufficient government revenues to fully fund its military expansion and modernization. Neither price threshold is likely in the short term.

The Kremlin's dilemma is that Russia's military aspirations are simply too big for its wallet. It may have a formidable military force, but that force requires maintenance to keep it effective and its technology has a life span. Most of it will be obsolete within one generation, all of it in less than two.

Legacy weapons systems can prove formidable against a tenacious but technologically unsophisticated adversary as Russia found out in Syria or the U.S. did in Afghanistan. But against a near-power rival, generation-old technology will quickly become obsolete.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... power.html
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3192
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post26 Apr 2018, 15:08

In other words, the Russian have champaigne taste on a beer budget.

I admire their airframes, but not so much their weapons, avionics, engines and stealth. The airframes though impressive in concept lack refinement, and that spells big trouble for stealth. As sustained supersonic speeds are realized they can no longer count on monster engines pushing crude airframes for short periods - they need to go longer.

I don't know where this all ends for them. It isn't looking good. They've got one horse to ride and the SU-57 will likely have a much greater bark than bite. The move to stealth in the west was more than just gaining an invisibility/VLO advantage - it highlighted their inability to manufacture to fine tolerances. At this rate, the European jets circa 2040 are going to out-class anything Russia has to offer.

Quite literally before our eyes, they are slipping behind China in conventional military hardware and only her nuclear forces save her from being overtaken by their neighbor to the South. Russian SU-57's and Flankers will have all they can handle from China's J-20 and J-31, the latter probably rolling off production lines by the 1,000's...
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: esq, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 17 guests