Su-34. Deadliest tactical strike planes in the world.

[PradoTLC]

try to give this machine to IAF pilot and you'll see the ranking.

lol

 

[LKJ86]

SU-34 is a strike fighter quasi-variant of the fighter jet SU-27.

The replacement of Su-24.

 

[zectech]

The replacement of Su-24.

True, still this is derived from the SU-27s, which are jet fighters. The SU-34 has capability to engage in air to air combat, though the main role is as a strike fighter. This is a fighter aircraft, a strike one, and is powered by jets, so this variant of an SU-27 is still a jet fighter in appearance and maneuverability. Some list this as a fighter-bomber, but true fighter bombers are not as maneuverable as the SU-34s. This is a strike fighter that can serve as a fighter bomber or engage enemy aircraft as a fighter aircraft. But the main role is as a strike fighter, and as I stated, Erdogan was not willing to purchase these because they lacked air superiority, he wants the SU-34s updated to be more like SU-35s, and then he can use these as replacements for the F-35s that are not shipping anytime soon. These newer SU-34s would be multi-role.

If Sukhoi put money into these SU-34s, these would be already multi-role, the decision to cut costs and save the Russian treasury made these mainly strike fighters.

 

[LKJ86]

True, still this is derived from the SU-27s, which are jet fighters. The SU-34 has capability to engage in air to air combat, though the main role is as a strike fighter. This is a fighter aircraft, a strike one, and is powered by jets, so this variant of an SU-27 is still a jet fighter in appearance and maneuverability. Some list this as a fighter-bomber, but true fighter bombers are not as maneuverable as the SU-34s. This is a strike fighter that can serve as a fighter bomber or engage enemy aircraft as a fighter aircraft. But the main role is as a strike fighter, and as I stated, Erdogan was not willing to purchase these because they lacked air superiority, he wants the SU-34s updated to be more like SU-35s, and then he can use these as replacements for the F-35s that are not shipping anytime soon. These newer SU-34s would be multi-role.

If Sukhoi put money into these SU-34s, these would be already multi-role, the decision to cut costs and save the Russian treasury made these mainly strike fighters.

I think you have forgotten Su-30.

 

[zectech]

I think you have forgotten Su-30.

Based on the Su-27 fighter, the Su-34 is a 4++ generation jet, which can accelerate to a maximum speed of 1,200 mph (1,931 km) and can fly 2,500 miles (4,023 km) without refueling.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/su-34.htm

What Sukhoi did was take the SU-27 and redesign the fighter to a strike role, with some multirole capacities for air to air combat.

The SU-30 was another on the go cheap for air to air combat to save the Russian military budget, with additional strike capabilities. SU-34 was on the go cheap strike fighter, with air to air combat capabilities. The Turks raised this issue, or else I would be completely correct in calling the SU-34 a jet fighter, that is what I thought it was according to the perceived abilities touted by the Russians. Neither the SU-30 and SU-34 are great in terms of air superiority. Until later variants of these. SU-34 only has proposed later variants from the Turkish military who want a multirole strike fighter like the F-35 Strike fighter, which also serves as a jet fighter.

The SU-35 is the best of the fighter jet variants of the SU-27s. And for this reason, the SU-35 cost 100 million per unit.

The fact that SU-34s were still designed to shoot jet fighters out of the sky, I still consider the SU-34 to be both a strike fighter and a fighter jet. Although this ability was challenged by Turkish reports. And SU-34 is the best looking one, proportionately is best looking and well put together.

This was listed as a 4++ gen, which would indicate you can call this a multirole air superiority jet fighter. Fighter bombers who are not designed to engage aircraft are generally not listed as 4++ or 4.5 gen, these are reserved for fighter jets. I was under the impression that they could defend Russian skies, and so for years considered them to be muilti-role. I doubt with these new Turkish claims, the SU-34 is even a 4+. The Russian claim on the SU-34 would indicate this can serve as a fighter jet, in reality the Turks revealed otherwise. And for that SU-34 may be the best looking strike fighter, but there are better ones that can do multirole. Maybe the Turks are incorrect and these are 4++ gen fighter jets in addition to strike fighters.

 

[James David]

The best tactical strike plane!!! @gambit stop drinking that beer and explain to this dudes why is that!!!

 

[vostok]

Based on the Su-27 fighter, the Su-34 is a 4++ generation jet, which can accelerate to a maximum speed of 1,200 mph (1,931 km) and can fly 2,500 miles (4,023 km) without refueling.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/su-34.htm

What Sukhoi did was take the SU-27 and redesign the fighter to a strike role, with some multirole capacities for air to air combat.

The SU-30 was another on the go cheap for air to air combat to save the Russian military budget, with additional strike capabilities. SU-34 was on the go cheap strike fighter, with air to air combat capabilities. The Turks raised this issue, or else I would be completely correct in calling the SU-34 a jet fighter, that is what I thought it was according to the perceived abilities touted by the Russians. Neither the SU-30 and SU-34 are great in terms of air superiority. Until later variants of these. SU-34 only has proposed later variants from the Turkish military who want a multirole strike fighter like the F-35 Strike fighter, which also serves as a jet fighter.

The SU-35 is the best of the fighter jet variants of the SU-27s. And for this reason, the SU-35 cost 100 million per unit.

The fact that SU-34s were still designed to shoot jet fighters out of the sky, I still consider the SU-34 to be both a strike fighter and a fighter jet. Although this ability was challenged by Turkish reports. And SU-34 is the best looking one, proportionately is best looking and well put together.

This was listed as a 4++ gen, which would indicate you can call this a multirole air superiority jet fighter. Fighter bombers who are not designed to engage aircraft are generally not listed as 4++ or 4.5 gen, these are reserved for fighter jets. I was under the impression that they could defend Russian skies, and so for years considered them to be muilti-role. I doubt with these new Turkish claims, the SU-34 is even a 4+. The Russian claim on the SU-34 would indicate this can serve as a fighter jet, in reality the Turks revealed otherwise. And for that SU-34 may be the best looking strike fighter, but there are better ones that can do multirole. Maybe the Turks are incorrect and these are 4++ gen fighter jets in addition to strike fighters.

Turks shoot down Su-24, and old aircraft, not Su-34.

 

[war&peace]

I don't comment on the merits of this aircraft but I think if money is right, Russia will definitely sell Su-34. It does not have some super secret technology in it although it is a capable deep strike fighter-bomber aircraft. It is a twin seat like Su24

Algeria has them....

No, Algeria has SU-24... predecessor of SU-34
In fact no other country has Su-34 as of now and it entered service in 2014 with Russian Airforce so it is relatively a new platform.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

The best tactical strike plane!!! @gambit stop drinking that beer and explain to this dudes why is that!!!

F-111 retired years ago.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

I don't comment on the merits of this aircraft but I think if money is right, Russia will definitely sell Su-34. It does not have some super secret technology in it although it is a capable deep strike fighter-bomber aircraft. It is a twin seat like Su24


No, Algeria has SU-24... predecessor of SU-34
In fact no other country has Su-34 as of now and it entered service in 2014 with Russian Airforce so it is relatively a new platform.

Oh, ok thanks.

 

[zectech]

Since this is about the SU-34s.... how is the SU-30 better than SU-34, other than range. They have similar radar (PESA), and have similar air to Air missiles. Both are highly maneuverable. These are among the top list for jet fighters. If the SU-34 is not much different than SU-30 in air to air combat, both are made capable of defending Russian skies, how are nearly two identical aircraft in air to air combat be one multirole and the other is not, early Russian reporting on the SU-34 as a 4++ gen fighter would indicate a multirole fighter jet. The SU-34 may be equal to the SU-30 in air to air combat. How is that a fighter-bomber, but not a multirole. Which leads to my guess that the SU-34 is not only a strike fighter, but also a jet fighter. SU-34s definitely looks like a fighter jet. And SU-34s are equal to the earlier models of the SU-30, which are fighter jets.

Both the SU-34 and the SU-30 carry missiles that are 70-80+km in range for air combat missions. If the goal is to shoot the other before the other shoots you, these are nearly identical. And if both are on the cheap for avionics, how is the SU-30 better than the SU-34 in air combat. I would think they are about equal.

SU-30 is SU-27 with long range. Later variants add additional features. S-34 is a heavier larger SU-27 for strike missions. But these are from the same flanker jet fighter family.

Turks shoot down Su-24, and old aircraft, not Su-34.

I am well aware of that, I am addressing the point that the SU-34s are of the flanker family of jet fighters, made to be a strike fighter. This is not a fighter bomber of the same mold as SU-24s.

If you believe the early models of the SU-30s are multirole, then SU-34s are not far behind in multirole.

My guess is SU-34 is capable to be a multirole but only used as a strike fighter, in an emergency, they can be used as multirole jet fighters.

The same as with trainers and light attack aircraft. If war comes, like the nazis did with their trainers, they were used in light attack roles because they are dual purpose. SU-34s is unlike the SU-24s, in that they are dual purpose. But not enough to the liking of the Turkish military which want the SU-34 to be updated to a full multirole, if they are to purchase them to replace the F-35s that are not shipping anytime soon.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Since this is about the SU-34s.... how is the SU-30 better than SU-34, other than range. They have similar radar (PESA), and have similar air to Air missiles. Both are highly maneuverable. These are among the top list for jet fighters. If the SU-34 is not much different than SU-30 in air to air combat, both are made capable of defending Russian skies, how are nearly two identical aircraft in air to air combat be one multirole and the other is not, early Russian reporting on the SU-34 as a 4++ gen fighter would indicate a multirole fighter jet. The SU-34 may be equal to the SU-30 in air to air combat. How is that a fighter-bomber, but not a multirole. Which leads to my guess that the SU-34 is not only a strike fighter, but also a jet fighter. SU-34s definitely looks like a fighter jet. And SU-34s are equal to the earlier models of the SU-30, which are fighter jets.

Both the SU-34 and the SU-30 carry missiles that are 70-80+km in range for air combat missions. If the goal is to shoot the other before the other shoots you, these are nearly identical. And if both are on the cheap for avionics, how is the SU-30 better than the SU-34 in air combat. I would think they are about equal.

SU-30 is SU-27 with long range. Later variants add additional features. S-34 is a heavier larger SU-27 for strike missions. But these are from the same flanker jet fighter family.



I am well aware of that, I am addressing the point that the SU-34s are of the flanker family of jet fighters, made to be a strike fighter. This is not a fighter bomber of the same mold as SU-24s.

If you believe the early models of the SU-30s are multirole, then SU-34s are not far behind in multirole.

My guess is SU-34 is capable to be a multirole but only used as a strike fighter, in an emergency, they can be used as multirole jet fighters.

The same as with trainers and light attack aircraft. If war comes, like the nazis did with their trainers, they were used in light attack roles because they are dual purpose. SU-34s is unlike the SU-24s, in that they are dual purpose. But not enough to the liking of the Turkish military which want the SU-34 to be updated to a full multirole, if they are to purchase them to replace the F-35s that are not shipping anytime soon.

Su-34 is better than Su-30 at strike. 12 tons of payload compared to 8 tons. Side to side seating is better for strike. Su-34's PESA is built for strike, not for air to air.

 

[zectech]

Su-34 is better than Su-30 at strike. 12 tons of payload compared to 8 tons. Side to side seating is better for strike. Su-34's PESA is built for strike, not for air to air.

SU-30 also has PESA.

Also a quote from a Russian site translated into English:

Su-34 is designed to destroy both ground and air targets of the enemy day and night under any weather conditions. The aircraft uses guided air-to-surface and air-to-air weapons.

This is the same role as the multirole SU-30, destroying both air and ground targets. I would take SU-34 over SU-30 in multirole. Maybe the later variants of the SU-30 are better at defeating air targets, but SU-34 is fully capable as a fighter jet, and was designed that way.

Even the first designs of the Mig 35 have PESA. Only when nations started to ask for AESA, did the Russian say of course the Mig 35s can have AESA. Same with Turks and SU-34s wanting a more multirole SU-34.

SU-34 is partly a multirole and multiroles are fighter jets. SU-34 is of the flanker family and the other flankers are jet fighters.

 

[Imran Khan]

Why russia did not design something new

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

SU-30 also has PESA.

Also a quote from a Russian site translated into English:

Su-34 is designed to destroy both ground and air targets of the enemy day and night under any weather conditions. The aircraft uses guided air-to-surface and air-to-air weapons.

This is the same role as the multirole SU-30, destroying both air and ground targets. I would take SU-34 over SU-30 in multirole. Maybe the later variants of the SU-30 are better at defeating air targets, but SU-34 is fully capable as a fighter jet, and was designed that way.

Even the first designs of the Mig 35 have PESA. Only when nations started to ask for AESA, did the Russian say of course the Mig 35s can have AESA. Same with Turks and SU-34s wanting a more multirole SU-34.

SU-34 is partly a multirole and multiroles are fighter jets. SU-34 is of the flanker family and the other flankers are jet fighters.

Su-30 is basically Russia counterpart of F-15E. Su-34 is basically Russia counterpart of F-111.