Su-30MK=SU-30SM
LOL (and WTF?!)
I shared all the sources and they are solid.
Let’s see if you have any source that says otherwise …
You guys must be really high up in military intel or something and know things that us peasants don’t … Because UAC’s website in 2017 says the aircraft performance specs are classified.
And older documents (2005 & 2012) specify the same fake 1900 / 1400 speed for both the export and domestic variants …
Three official Russian websites that are specifically related to this aircraft (Rosoboronexport in charge of exporting the aircraft, FSVTS in charge of cooperation with other countries regarding the aircraft, and UAC in charge of the manufacturing of the aircraft) list 1100kph in 2023-2025.
Some people tried to make different reports using Su-30MK data. Answer: It is different planes.
Well that’s not how it works
1- Su-34/32 was in development for a long time and suffered from lack of funding and pause in development like many other projects after the collapse of the USSR.
2- Why make B-21 if F-35 already faster?
That’s just not how it works …
Su-34 is a fundamentally different aircraft than Su-35
Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35 are manufactured on different plants.
in terms of design and flight characteristics, they are no different.
3 Likes
Su-30MK(I,A,M), SM, SME have 1 planer with 0.5 differents
What bothers me is that some of these flankers with weapons loaded on them would be much faster than a naked su-34… What could make this plane go so slow considering they are based on the same airframe?
Not for Gaijin
just funny, because it must be just above envelope(due of engine trim), while in game it worser…
Su-34 has a VERY different air-frame …
Just because it somewhat looks like a flanker from some angle doesn’t mean it aerodynamically behaves like a flanker …
The planes have different shapes … Different sizes …
Su-34 is supposed to be a bit more comfy with a side by side two crew arrangement and for long missions … (It supposedly has a resting area behind the cabin where the crew can stand up and eat etc and the brochures even mention this)
1 Like
Source?
But damn that’s a huge difference, few aircraft will have a 1100 kph sealevel topspeed with afterburner on while UNLOADED, that’s just absurd…
I’m excited to see what the devs will say cuz if that’s really true then this completely changes the plane.
Same
Not sure why people get salty at me …
I like the aircraft
But it seems that the reality is different from expectation …
Again, 3 solid & recent primary sources agree on the 1100 kph figure.
As for high alt speed, UAC specifies in kph (1500) and ROE says 1.45 and FSVTS says 1.5 (which could just be rounding of 1.45, or semi-old info, since the listing is for Su-32 instead of Su-34E).
But it is clear to me that the 1900 / 1400 figure has no basis in reality.
Because it wouldn’t make sense for them to give the real speed for decades then retroactively classify it and humble themselves and say it only goes 1100 :)
The other possibility could be due to safety concerns that were found out later but I doubt that because UAC’s website in 2017 says that the performance specifications are classified and it’s literally the same page that later in 2023 gives the 1100 figure.
This makes it clear that the older 1400 figures are fake … Because if they were real and present in the publicly and internationally available 2005 ROE brochure, there would be no reason for UAC to say “sorry we can’t tell you, it’s classified” in 2017 …
Forum Army 2018
1 Like
I digged through the archived versions a bit more.
Until Jan 2023 the UAC website listed it as “Classified”:
Since around Mar 2023 it started giving figures (1500 high alt / 1100 deck):
https://web.archive.org/web/20230308023818/https://uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/lineup/military/su-34/
IMO he is making a buss over nothing. He don’t know why the Su-34 has these value now. It could be that the maximum take off weight have increase with new stuff like 3tons bomb… etc etc.
More funny its that a Su-34 clean with just fuel should weight about the same that a Su-30sm with full load.
Also i would never trust a Russian “brochure” over anything They are just bad at marketing. Example the old Knaapo brochure for the Su-35s Take the Khibiny pods into account for weight and the Wingspan (15.3m). That its why some people are under the impression that the Su-35 has bigger wings over other Su-27. But IRL the wingspan its the same 14.7m just like any other flanker.
LOL
1450 kph vs 1100kph on the deck is a fair bit more than “nothing”
It doesn’t have those values “now”
It always had those values.
They were just not given to the public because they were “classified” (as stated by the manufacturer’s website until around March 2023)
And of course drag doesn’t matter and weight is the only thing that determines your speed …
Also the reason for lower speed (might or) might not be that the aircraft doesn’t have enough thrust to reach those speeds.
But rather it might be that it can’t go above the specified max speeds due to buffeting etc
Either way, when the manufacturer says it goes max 1100 kph on the deck, then it goes max 1100 kph on the deck … Whatever the reason is …
(If we assume it’s due to buffeting and structural limit, it would make it only worse … Since the Vne and Mne would have to be adjusted and lowered as well)
Then you provide us with a source.
All these sources (both the 1900/1400 figures and the 1500/1100 figures) are brochures …
Let us know what makes you think that the aircraft is faster than what my report says …