Recently, the "VO" published an interesting article by Roman Skomorokhov "Why does the Aerospace Forces need another plane?" creative fantasy).
The fact is that recently in the media there was information about the start of work on the creation of a light multipurpose front-line aircraft (LFMS). The money for the initial aerodynamic calculations in this area in the amount of as much as 4 million rubles. RSK "MiG" was allocated. And so, dear R. Skomorokhov asked the question: why do we need this plane?
The argument against the LFMS is perfectly sound. Today, 12 types of operational-tactical aviation aircraft are in service in the Russian Aerospace Forces and the Russian Navy: MiG-29, MiG-29K, MiG-35, MiG-31, Su-24, Su-25, Su-27, Su-30, Su-33, Su-34, Su-35, Su-57. Yes, the MiG-29, Su-24, Su-27 are serving their deadlines, but even after that we will have 9 types of operational-tactical aviation! Isn't it a bit too much?
Well, let's try to compare the "typology" of the operational-tactical aviation of our Aerospace Forces with those of the United States.
Interceptors
Everything is simple here. In the United States, there are no such aircraft either in the Air Force or in development projects. We have a MiG-31 in service and a MiG-41 in development. Why it is needed is rather difficult to say, but, fortunately, this is not the topic of this article: we only note that this interceptor must be able to "work" not only in the air, but also in near space, and also have an unmanned version. From this point of view, the development of such a machine, at least as a concept, probably has the right to life. Or maybe not only as a concept - after all, someone must "clean" the near space from spy satellites, and even from hypersonic drones. In addition, the MiG-41 will not be useless in more "mundane" conflicts. Indeed, along with the ability to conduct long-range aerial combat, it should also receive the latest stealth technologies, which, in combination with a speed of 4M or higher, as well as a large combat radius, if used correctly, will give it certain tactical advantages.
High-altitude scouts
We have no such aircraft either in service or in development. The Americans are a different matter. True, the Americans have already written off the famous SR-71 "Blackbird", but they are developing the unmanned SR-72 with might and main. Moreover, according to available data, we are talking about a high-altitude and hypersonic aircraft - it was stated that the speed of the SR-72 could reach 6M.
Thus, it turns out that the Russian Federation retains the MiG-31, inherited from the USSR, as part of the VKS, and this looks quite reasonable and rational - not to abandon dozens of fully capable combat units with the existing infrastructure just for the sake of unifying the composition! And we and the Americans are also designing a high-altitude and high-speed aircraft, only we are in the form of an interceptor, they are in the form of a reconnaissance aircraft. In other words, we do not have much difference in this area with the United States.
Air supremacy fighters
The top of the "food pyramid" for the Americans is the F-22 - a heavy fighter that turned out to be too expensive even for the Americans, which is why it was produced in a very limited batch.
Its analogue we have is the Su-57 - this is the best that we have today, even with engines of the 1st stage. But, apparently, the plane also turned out to be prohibitively expensive for mass construction.
Alas, no matter how good a fighter is, it cannot be in two or three places at the same time. In real conflicts, the number of combat vehicles is of great importance. That is why, with the advent of the F-22, the Americans were in no hurry to abandon the gradually aging F-15C, which is still taking the place of the "workhorse" in the US Air Force. The Su-27 should be considered an analogue of this aircraft in the Russian Federation. At the same time, the Su-27 is serving its deadlines, and even in its modernized version, it clearly falls short of the American Eagles, since the modernization was of a very budgetary nature.
But the Americans are not doing well either. No matter how good the F-15C was for its time, it is corny physically aging, and it is time for aircraft of this type to "go to the dustbin of history." As a result, the United States found itself in a very unimportant situation - soon it will have to write off slightly more than half of the air superiority fighters at its disposal. Of course, this is unacceptable for the United States, new planes are needed, but where to get them? It is too expensive to revive the production of the F-22; the United States has no projects for the latest heavy multi-functional fighters. As a result, the Americans, oddly enough, took the path of saturating their Air Force with heavy fighters of the 4 ++ generation: we are talking, of course, about the F-15СX. The analogue of this aircraft in the Russian Federation is the Su-35. As for the Americans, the F-15СX is the pinnacle of the development of the F-15 family, so our Su-35 is the pinnacle of the Su-27 family, while both of these aircraft have gone very far from their "progenitors" and are, to a large extent, new cars.
As for naval aviation, the situation is like this: the Americans at one time saved on the development of a carrier-based air superiority fighter, deciding that "it will do it anyway," and that the Hornets and Super Hornets will successfully cope with any, the enemy who remained after the collapse of the USSR. We have only a few Su-33s left - perhaps physically they are not as worn out as the Su-27s, but their avionics are categorically outdated today, and it makes no sense to start an expensive modernization for the sake of fifteen planes. The presence of such aircraft still gives certain tactical advantages to the only TAVKR "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov", and indeed, today the sailors are happy with any aircraft, but still the Su-33 will also go on a well-deserved rest, and soon enough.
Thus, the United States currently has three types of air superiority aircraft, of which, in the next decade, most likely, two will remain - F-22 and F-15СХ. We have four such aircraft, of which two will also remain in the near future - the Su-57 and the Su-35. Thus, we do not observe any special disastrous "diversity" in combat aircraft of this designation.
Attack aircraft
Here everything is much more interesting. Today, the Americans have one aircraft of this type - the F-15E. This aircraft is essentially a two-seat variation of the F-15C, optimized for striking ground targets. And, despite the known differences, the F-15C and F-15E are modifications of the same aircraft, which greatly simplifies the maintenance and service of these machines.
Of course, the F-15E is also aging, just like the F-15C, and the day is not far off when this type of aircraft will not be able to take off simply due to physical wear and tear. Therefore, the Americans are preparing to replace him with might and main. The functionality of the F-15E will be inherited by the F-15EX, which will be a strike modification of the F-15СX air superiority fighter. Simply put, due to physical aging, the F-15E / F-15C pair will be replaced by the F-15EX / F-15CX.
Everything is much more complicated with us. The analogue of the F-15E is the Su-30SM.
But, in addition to the "Su-thirtieth", at the disposal of our Aerospace Forces and the fleet there are also Su-24 and Su-34, which are also "sharpened" for strike functionality! And if with the Su-24, in general, everything is clear, since its unmodified version has already been removed from service, and the modified version, whatever one may say, is surviving the last years, then the presence of both the Su-30 and the Su-34 is obviously irrational.
There are two ways to build an operational-tactical strike aviation. You can make attack aircraft based on multifunctional fighters, or you can make a separate project. Each of these approaches has its own pros and cons. A specialized aircraft will be more successful in its primary function, but it will be significantly more expensive to build and operate than converting an existing fighter into a strike aircraft. We, alas, went all the way at once.
The Su-30SM, due to its not the most modern design and avionics, cannot be considered as a promising aircraft for gaining air supremacy, although today it is still capable of effectively fighting 4th generation fighters. As a strike aircraft, it is not bad, but still, most likely, it will be inferior to the newest American F-15EX. An analogue of the latter could be a shock two-seat version of the Su-35, but nothing has been heard about the development of such.
The Su-34 is still a pure "striker" of a separate project, which in its main function, and if equipped with the latest avionics, is quite capable of surpassing the F-15EX. Thus, we can say that we had to either make a strike version of the Su-35, abandoning the Su-30SM and Su-34, or not doing this, and replenishing the Su-34 troops, but abandoning the Su-30SM. Or, as an option, abandon the Su-34 and the strike version of the Su-35, pull up the Su-30SM avionics and "designate" it as the main strike aircraft.
Alas, for a number of objective reasons this was not done, and where the Americans will soon have only one F-15EX, the Su-30SM and Su-34 will be part of the Aerospace Forces. Two attack aircraft against one. Moreover, the "American" will be unified with the F-15СX air superiority fighter, while the Su-30SM and Su-34 will have nothing of the kind with the Su-35. As a result, where the United States will manage, in fact, with one aircraft (F-15EX / CX), we will have as many as three - Su-35, Su-30SM and Su-34. Not good.
Light fighters
The name “light” here is rather arbitrary: the author simply “brought” into this category all multifunctional fighters that are not heavy. The USA has such planes … it's hard to even count. Let's say three, that is, the F-35 of all modifications, the F / A-18E / F and, of course, the F-16. Although you can count four, if you single out the variant of the F-35D VTOL aircraft. Or even five, if we count separately a modification of the "Hornet" - the electronic warfare aircraft "Growler", although this is not a fighter. But let's dwell on three.
At the same time, the F-35, in some reasonable perspective, should replace the F-16, but with the F / A-18E / F everything is not so simple. The latter were in full swing after 2010, so, apparently, the fleet is not at all ready to abandon the "Supercats" in favor of the F-35C. Mariners are going to use both types of aircraft for at least another two decades.
What do we have? There are old versions of the MiG-29, which are already quite "pensioners", there is a small number of "remakes" of the MiG-29SMT, which will still serve, and there is also the new MiG-29K - the ship version, which is also the most perfect. At the same time, the MiG-29K is the backbone of the carrier-based aviation of the Russian Federation and will remain so for a long time. As a matter of fact, the differences between the MiG-29SMT and the MiG-29K are quite many, but hardly more than those of the F-35A and F-35D, so perhaps our armed forces can credit the MiG-29SMT and K for modifications of one and the same the same plane. In addition, formally, we also have the MiG-35. Why - formally? There are two reasons for this. Firstly, the MiG-35 is a land-based version of the MiG-29K, and the author is not sure that they should be considered as two different aircraft. And secondly, because, alas, no one is going to replenish the MiG-35 Aerospace Forces on a massive scale. In essence, the supply of MiG-35s to the Aerospace Forces look like a "show-off" action, which helps keep RSK MiG afloat, on the one hand, and increases the export potential of the MiG-35, on the other. For, as you know, the best selling are those aircraft that the manufacturing country has put into service. And there are no other light fighters in the Aerospace Forces and the Russian Navy.
Thus, in the near future, the Russian Federation will have three modifications of the MiG-29 (SMT, K and "thirty-fifth"), and the United States - three modifications of the F-35 and "Superhornet". We can say that we will have one type of light fighter, while the Americans will have two. At the same time, what is most sad, the MiG-29 in its current form is inferior to American aircraft in terms of avionics capabilities.
Stormtroopers
The Americans have an old A-10, and we have a no less elderly Su-25. These aircraft are very different, but they belong to the same class, and neither we nor the United States are pushing for the development of new attack aircraft. Apparently, in the foreseeable future, both we and the Americans will finally lose this class of combat aircraft.
What about other countries?
Yes, Germany, England, France, etc. get by with fewer types of combat aircraft. But you need to understand that their Air Force, in general, is not self-sufficient. They are suitable for "educating" third world countries that do not have any serious air force and air defense, or to support the "Big Brother", that is, the US Air Force in a global conflict.
And now, twenty years later …
The last remaining MiG-31BMs by this time, of course, will have already retired, so the Russian Aerospace Forces will not have interceptors. The Americans will be left with two heavy air superiority fighters, the F-22 and F-15СX - and we will have the same, the Su-57 and Su-35. The United States will have the strike F-15EX, we will have the Su-30SM and the Su-34. In terms of light fighters, the Americans have the F-35 of three modifications and, possibly, the latest F / A-18, we have a handful of completely outdated MiGs of three modifications. Stormtroopers will remain neither with us nor with them.
And, oddly enough, but in terms of heavy fighters, we may be in the black, since the American Raptors by 2040 will be on the verge of complete physical wear and tear. On the other hand, we will be in the red in terms of attack aircraft and light fighters. In the case of attack aircraft, this will happen because the United States will begin a massive re-equipment of its Air Force with new aircraft after 2020, but we have a large number of Su-30SM and Su-34 entered service in 2010-2020, and the first of they will have to be written off due to physical wear and tear.
A modern combat aircraft of operational-tactical aviation is capable of serving for about 30 years. Approximately so much is planned for the F-35, for example. Strategic bombers / missile carriers, of course, are capable of more, but we are not talking about them. And we must understand that twenty years later, the first aircraft received by the Russian Aerospace Forces under the GPV 2011-2020 program will need to be decommissioned. That is, by about 2040, the question of renewing the fleet of military aircraft of the Aerospace Forces and the Russian Navy will arise in full growth.
Creation of a combat aircraft
This is not only costly, but also very time-consuming. Take, for example, the same American Raptor. The competition for this aircraft was announced in 1986, and began operating in 2005, that is, 19 years after the competition. And even if we count from the moment the first serial aircraft entered the troops, which happened in January 2003, it still turns out to be almost 17 years. The creation of the Su-57 started in 2001, that is, we can say that the cycle of its creation will take about 20 years.
And finally LFMS
What can you expect from this program? Alas, there is little information about her, and indeed, news from afar is rarely true. We are talking about a relatively light twin-engine aircraft that can be built in the variants of the air supremacy fighter, strike and, possibly, assault. At the same time, it is obvious that work on this aircraft is at the earliest, preliminary stage.
Thus, it can be assumed that the LFMS will be ready for deliveries to the Aerospace Forces in 20 years, just when the Su-30SM, Su-34, MiG-29 of all modifications begin to retire. And if our designers succeed, then with the help of the LFMS we will just get rid of the different types of operational-tactical aviation aircraft.
By the time the rearmament is completed, the Russian Aerospace Forces will include heavy air supremacy fighters (Su-57) and more massive ones, based on the LFMS, as well as shock and maybe even assault ones based on the same LFMS. It is also possible that a MiG-41 interceptor will appear and … in fact, that's all. By the way, based on this, it can be assumed that the LFMS will not be too light, rather, it will be a medium multifunctional fighter.
If everything is so, then the decision to create the LFMS should be considered absolutely correct and timely. But if under the abbreviation "LFMS" we get another variation of the MiG-35 in 3-5 years, then we should unconditionally agree with the position of the respected R. Skomorokhov.
