 |
|
Topic started on 22-3-2008 @ 01:05 PM by Darkpr0
|
 Russian Air Force commander has suspended all Su-25 strike aircraft flights after a fatal crash caused the lost of aircraft and pilot's dead, in
the country's Far East, Primorye Territory near the Chernigovka airbase, about 143 kilometers from Vladivostok, during a training flight with live
firing exercises. According to Russian Air Force spokesman, the aircraft has been reported to had a series of accidents caused by system failures attributed to the
salvo firing of weapons.
So it seems that Russia has grounded the Su-25 for now, which doesn't leave many attack aircraft in its place. The reason for the crash is still a
little bit ambiguous as we don't know exactly what failed or why it would fail due to salvo firing. Still, this might be one to watch in case it's a
widespread flaw in the craft.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-3-2008 @ 02:25 PM by Daedalus3
|
These include the carrier borne ones as well? Or are those Su-24s?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-3-2008 @ 02:42 PM by Harlequin
|
The SU-25 has been flying for nearly 33 years - its not a new aircraft 
en.wikipedia.org...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-3-2008 @ 04:13 PM by Darkpr0
|
True, but it's a pretty integral one. I'm not entirely sure what else the Russians have that would directly fit the role of Su-25.
Of course, it's not like we've had troubles with some aircraft that have been around anyway that caused a major problem in the system, right? *Does
not look at the F-15* It'll be interesting to see what they do about this since they consider it important enough to halt flights.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-3-2008 @ 04:29 PM by Harlequin
|
The US did do the same when the F15`s started falling from the sky - might be some time-life failure in the wing
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-3-2008 @ 10:30 AM by tomcat ha
|
SU25 is a pretty awesome aircraft and unlike the US, russia/the soviets have been smart enough to continue development on it while the US barely have
improved the A10.
Untill they can make stealth planes as sturdy as these planes they will always have a role on the battlefield.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-3-2008 @ 09:35 PM by Canada_EH
|
reply to post by tomcat ha
I've heard rumor from just around the mags and web that the 25 is suffering from airframe fatigue and may have heard mentioned in one of those that
it may be the wings/spars etc. Really sad about the pilot. Its a sad day when any aviator pass on and our thoughts our with his family of course.
I do have to say though that I fail to see how the person stating that the A-10s haven't been updated is correct? I know of a number of system
changes and upgrades of the years though it may not be as much as some would like the planes have been well looked after from what I've heard. Anyone
have any experience with the planes?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-3-2008 @ 09:38 PM by Zaphod58
|
They're in the process of rewinging them, and upgrading systems on them again. I don't remember exactly what systems, and I've got too much going
on right now to dig into it, but I'll post an update tomorrow on the upgrades.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-3-2008 @ 11:03 PM by FredT
|
 Originally posted by tomcat ha
SU25 is a pretty awesome aircraft and unlike the US, russia/the soviets have been smart enough to continue development on it while the US barely have
improved the A10. 
RIP to the pilot.
Hmmm perhaps the A-10 did not need all that much in the way of improvment eh? While the Su-25 needed alot of help once the Afgans got thier stingers
so perhaps alot of the improvements were needed ones. Also the Russians love to tinker with thier a/c so you end up with a lot of variants.
Aside from the A-10 bashing, the Su-25 is a very rugged a/c but its flight profile also tends to be hard on the airframe etc.
Anyway to know the number of hours on that airframe?
Also, as a side note the aircraft that lost the competiton to the A-10 looked alot like the Su-25 for the AX competiton and was designated the
Northrop YA-9
en.wikipedia.org...
[edit on 3/23/08 by FredT]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 03:44 AM by Harlequin
|
star for you fred - nice totally forgot about the A-9
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 10:44 AM by tomcat ha
|
Im not bashing at all. Its just when i compare the devolpment of the A10 with the Su25 i think the Su25 got the love it deserved and the A10 didnt.
Ofcourse recently that has been improved but originally they planned to put it out of service shortly after GW1.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 04:40 PM by Daedalus3
|
Many neutral parties (IAF) regard the A-10 as a must-have for CAS. I'm sure that is in comparison with the Su-24/25.
We, the IAF, are stuck with MiG-27MLs for that role; hey they aren't bad, esp with the avionics upgrades, but there is a hog fan-following here, big
time.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-3-2008 @ 04:52 PM by Zaphod58
|
Originally posted by Canada_EH
I do have to say though that I fail to see how the person stating that the A-10s haven't been updated is correct? I know of a number of system
changes and upgrades of the years though it may not be as much as some would like the planes have been well looked after from what I've heard. Anyone
have any experience with the planes?
The A-10C upgrade includes Litening AT and Sniper XR pods, JDAM, WCMD, new MFDs in the cockpit, new sensors, a datalink, integrated cockpit controls,
and a new central interface unit with three new processors to control stores management and overall avionics integration. It includes other "minor"
things such as a new throttle for improved HOTAS, and an improved power supply.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 25-3-2008 @ 06:53 AM by tomcat ha
|
Originally posted by Zaphod58
The A-10C upgrade includes Litening AT and Sniper XR pods, JDAM, WCMD, new MFDs in the cockpit, new sensors, a datalink, integrated cockpit controls,
and a new central interface unit with three new processors to control stores management and overall avionics integration. It includes other "minor"
things such as a new throttle for improved HOTAS, and an improved power supply.
and its about the only major upgrade for the A10 so far.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 25-3-2008 @ 04:54 PM by Zaphod58
|
No, actually it's not. The A-10 has received multiple upgrades over the years. Usually not to this many systems at once, but they've gotten pretty
significant upgrades through their life.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 02:34 AM by Harlequin
|
i think what he means is that whilst there might have a number of imporvements to the allready onboard systems -the aircaft now is still the same
A-10A as when it was inducted - its only with teh introduction of all those new systems at once , and a letter change to A-10C to reflect this , thats
its the only major upgrade;
there isn`t the same as the F-16 block 5/10/15/20/30/40 etc etc etc
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 04:55 AM by Zaphod58
|
The A-10 was never meant to be created in large numbers, which is why they don't have the block numbers like the F-16. However, there have been a
few significant new upgrades. They never changed the designation to A-10B after the previous upgrades, was because they weren't large upgrades like
the Precision Enhacement is. I don't have a list of all the upgrades handy right now, but there were things like the Maverick upgrade. Initially
the A-10 couldn't shoot the Maverick missile. They upgraded it to be able to and gave it a very limited guided capability.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 06:01 AM by Harlequin
|
well the YA-10B was the protype for a 2 seat night attack varient which was unbuilt
but i do concur - it was recieved upgrades over the years (as i said )
The A-10 has received many upgrades over the years. Aircraft were upgraded with inertial navigation and a Pave Penny laser sensor (marked target
seeker) pod that allowed the pilot to detect laser energy for PID (Positive Identification) of an illuminated target. The Pave Penny is a passive
seeker and cannot self-designate a target for a Laser Guided Bomb (LGB). Later, the Low-Altitude Safety and Targeting Enhancement (LASTE) upgrade
provided computerized weapon-aiming equipment, an autopilot, and ground-collision warning system. The A-10 is now compatible with night-vision goggles
for low-light operation. In 1999, aircraft began to be given Global Positioning System navigation systems.
The A-10 is scheduled to stay in service with the USAF until 2028.[8] Beginning in 2005, the entire A-10 fleet is being upgraded to the "C" model
that will include improved fire control system (FCS), electronic countermeasures (ECM), and the ability to carry smart bombs. The A-10 will be part of
a service life extension program (SLEP) with many receiving new wings.[8] A contract to build 242 new A-10 wing sets was awarded to Boeing on 29 June
2007.[9] Modifications to provide precision weapons capability are well underway. Hill AFB has completed work on its 100th A-10 precision engagement
upgrade in January 2008
i do disagree about it not to be built in large numbers; after vietnam there was a need for a good and modern CAS aircraft - it was found the old
Skyraider was far better than the then new F-4`s for that role , so a slower and more heavily armoured aircraft was wanted , as the Attack helo`s
invisioned for the role simply wernt good enough - the iar force for many years hated it and wanted it offloaded to the army or marines ; but its
massively impressive record in 1991 put paid to that idea once and for all.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 07:23 AM by solidshot
|
A Russian fighter jet that crashed last week during a training exercise was shot down by a rocket from an accompanying jet, it has
emerged.
Looks like it was a pretty serious case of pilot error that caused this aircraft to crash? Do Russia still use the Siberian gulags?  
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-3-2008 @ 10:43 AM by waynos
|
The 2 seat A-10 was built and flown circa 1980, I remember it distinctly, but it wasn't called the YA-10B, as I recall it was called the N/AWA-10
(for 'Night/Adverse Weather A-10) I used to have some photos of it but I think they may be lost now.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
