Su35-su34 and su30sm are all compatible with kh69
5 Likes
the kh69 was developed and originally a modernization to the kh59, the kh59 is compatible with 90% of russia’s modern and semi modern airframes, you will never see a source dispute this(as the missile was not designed to fire only by su57 but simply to have the possibility of doing so).
like this is such a stupid argument in the first place, you realize how dumb it would be to limit the only low observable weapon you operate to be launched from an extremely limited number of expensive aircraft? all of this for no real reason? every single low observable cruise missile around the word is capable to be launched from a broad range of platforms, most of which happen to not be stealth or 5th gen.
there is no proof the su57 saw combat, its highly unlikely for it to have launched the few kh69’s utilized in this conflict, and there is no proof besides articles from bad sites drawing a conclusion from the weapon being utilized, and even more important, there is a 0% chance the kh69 is exclusive to su57, like its not even a possibility, its completely and utterly nonsensical as an assumption, and that isnt even going into the fact of its lineage as a kh59 modernization.
Why do you think they would chose a su34 or su35 to launch a kh69 from frontline ? Kinda stupid dont you think.
Its stupid that you send a su35 with huge rcs to launch the kh69, dont you think the reason to launch kh69 is stealth ?
Even so no su57 was used, its kinda lame and stupid to think its a su35 who launch kh69 while they have the smart choice to launch kh101 far from the air defense system and in a safe zone deep inside russia.
its like saying that its better to do sead with kh58 in a flanker while they have a better/bigger kh31
Also no proof provided
1 Like
Why would you choose one of your extremely valuable little available aircraft instead. Stop the nonsense.
There is no proof needed, the proof is on you to provide sources for the su57 doing any combat, I replied to your “kh69 argument” and explained why it was a pretty terrible one it’s on you to provide sources as you are the one making the statement that su57 did combat.
Here are some some source / proof of the su57 production or prototype variant used in combat.
1/ October 2024, su57 shoot down its wingman S-70 10 miles from ukraine border.
2/ su57 was seen in Akhtubinsk base 500km frome ukraine. Later satellite prove active sorties on su57.
3/ the use of kh69 only the su57 can use it, other also use it but it is wrong to think the russian air force would use new stock of expensive stealth missile compare to the fab500umpk or kh101.
4/ destroyed su57 by ukraine strike at air force base
5/there is no proof that the su35 or 34 can use launch kh69, if so i would love to see it.
6/ su35 and su30 are used for both air combat / surveillance and sead. They can use the umpk bombs but not on the basis.
7/ the su34 is mainly used to strike close using umpk and kh38, yes they can use kh59mk2 kh69, but sadly there is no proof.
Lets keep it civil and cool instead of eating each other.
1 Like
What’s going on in this guy’s head? Why would you need stealth to launch a cruise missile from behind the lines?
Do you even realize how much a strategic cruise missile costs?
1 Like
Oh geez idk, maybe bcz the kh69 got low range than the kh101.
Kh69 and kh101 is no big difference in cost, one is at 1.7 other at 2.2. But yet the 101 is better at anything, tnt kg/range/cms/speed.
Idk why you think sending a plane with huge rcs to launch cruise missile mission inside air defense range when you have a better option with such low rcs to the su35/34.
Can they use it ? Yes
Is it a good idea to use it and risk a loss ? No
Do we have proof on the flanker ? No sadly
Do the russian benefit from experience in war for the 57 program ? Yes
1 Like
Do you ever stop to think about what you’re saying? Su-34s and Su-35s fly multiple times a day with glide bombs whose range is far shorter than that of the Kh-69. So why would the Kh-69 suddenly require stealth? And what does the Kh-101 have to do with any of this, considering it’s only launched by strategic bombers?
Using a stealth aircraft as a cruise-missile carrier in the rear instead of employing it against air defenses and enemy aircraft? What kind of nonsense is that?
1 Like
there a big differense of startegic target and city economy target. who are, a reminder, protected by patriot system and irst.
why would you need to send su57 while your army does all for you, detect, call, iskander on the way.
plus only the su30sm2 and su35 are doing sead mission, you can see it every time that a flanker go on a mission it got at least r77-1/m and kh31 sead missile.
i dont think nor i hope you think that you way thinking / judgement is better than a country air force
1 Like
nonsensical as i already explained.
nonsense again an aircraft being destroyed whilst stationary in base is not proof of anything.
thats not how this works, its on you to prove that the kh69 is only usable by the su57, thats statement is NONSENSE and is disregarding ALL EVIDENCE on the matter, youre the one that is trying to prove something not me.
nonsense, kh38 is a fairly rare weapon in ukraine, umpk is by far the most common together with the x101 cruise missile, again the kh69 is just a kh59 redesign, kh59 is carried by everything from mig29 to su35s, the assumption that kh69 usage somehow proves the su57 saw conflict is plain illogical.
Explain what exactly this difference is.
Enemy aviation has existed and been functioning successfully for four years already, and so has air defense. Who is doing what, and where?
Are these the same Air Force guys who were firing unguided rockets somewhere toward the horizon? Well, those regularly published fields full of bodies speak quite clearly about their effectiveness.
one is primily use for deep strike inside the coutry for high-value target and infrastructure.
while the umpk is used to target Tactical frontline asset such like brige to cut supply/bunkers/troops. they may be the use of other type of bomb such at the fab T and cluster varinat
the air force has been successfully on both side, air defense i am not so sure about it
su35/su30sm2 are doing sead / air control mission
su34 droping bomb to support the army close to the front line
tu22m3 is doing anti ship / rarely strike land
tu95msm/t160m launch kh101 far from the combat zone deep inside russia
mig31k strike hight value threat detected by army or intelligence gathering
i think your in the wrong topic, i think your reffering to the su25sm3 who we know didnt had any succes,
are we talking about plane or you just wanna mix things up and saying anything. you can say that but dont expect a reaction from me as i dont care at all. its all about tech war and big fan of weapons.
again and again saying that it can use the newer model because it can use the old model is pure illogical. yes they can fit, but did they recieve upgrade software for this exact weapons ? do we have proof that exemple a mig29 can use it. nope, so you can say what you think.
you said it yourself lol
its was redesign just for the purpose to fit inside the su57 weapon bay. there is no solid proof but there minor one that can be enough, we are talking about high classified technologies and plane who we will have just little bit of proof to not at all.
lmao, why would you deploy your best fighter, who is in low number to a base who is 300-400 km from the front line,
2 Likes
I guess that’s enough, this guy is living in an alternate reality.
oh ok so kh101 on troops and tank, nice
1 Like
What are you talking about?
ill ask you the same thing
2 Likes
Well, it’s you who has a stealth fighter using its 400-km-range cruise missile for ‘deep strikes’, the actual depth of which is just 150 km from the border.
One side has stealth fighters and several hundred 4++ generation multirole jets, while the other side has a few dozen rusty buckets. If those rusty buckets are still flying, it means the first side has failed on a fundamental level.
We’re talking about the effectiveness of airpower. Do you know why coalition and Iraqi losses in 1991 differed by two orders of magnitude?
There was only advertising of kh69 with su-57s. I dont see how any other airframe can carry those missiles if not advertised to carry it?
Osint or ukranian radar also continue to state Su-57s going airborne in large scale attacks,
or spotted taking off from airfields from other civilians reporting on ground when there is an attack taking place over Ukraine. Is all that false?
1 Like