Your Nation's Air Force Mark II:

[Bratislavskaya]

Should I still be using Su-24's and Su-17/20/22's?

[Bratislavskaya]

Should I still be using Su-24's and Su-17/20/22's?

I don't see why not. The Su-24 is a quite good Ariel Recon platform, as well as I'd assume you could use them as a EW bird too. The Su-22s, though getting long in the tooth, still remain a rather good platform if you couldn't afford a replacement.

I was thinking of keeping Su-22's mainly for reserve groups, and paramilitary's. Su-39 is the main ground attack aircraft.

[Bratislavskaya]

I don't suppose any of you know how the Soviet aircraft serial numbers work? Because they are all numbered like so: 01, 40, 50, 54, 304. What does the number mean? Is it specific to that aircraft, or to that aircraft of that type, or specific to that unit or what?

[Bratislavskaya]

I don't suppose any of you know how the Soviet aircraft serial numbers work? Because they are all numbered like so: 01, 40, 50, 54, 304. What does the number mean? Is it specific to that aircraft, or to that aircraft of that type, or specific to that unit or what?

IIRC, odd numbers are for fighters, even numbers for bombers/interdictors, transports and helos. There may be a few exceptions to that (Su-30 for fighters and Su-25/39 for attackers) off the top of my head), but as far as I know that's the schema for in-service or soon-to-be in service aircraft. In house designations (Sukhoi T-50 example) are all over the place

I mean, not as in the designations of the design, I mean the actual numbers painted on the plane.

This has a "36" painted on. These numbers are what I don't get. (Yes I know this is a picture of a model, I couldn't find a NS sized photo of a Su-27 showing off the number very well)

[Bratislavskaya]

Most likely unit numbers. Heavy bombers may have been painted with individual production numbers, judging from the controversy of the Bomber Gap.

So every aircraft has a unit number on it. Ok, thanks that was very helpful.

[Bratislavskaya]

It's just a number. Doesn't mean anything.

It must mean something or they wouldn't have it on there. They didn't just paint random numbers on there.

[Bratislavskaya]

Well if it means something your opponent might figure out what it means and then gain valuable intelligence from those numbers in the future. If it is a random number you enemy gains confusion and no tactical or strategic information.

Apparently when the first of the Kievs sailed out into the Mediterranean, the crew would regularly take the planes below between sorties and repaint their numbers, briefly giving puzzled Western intelligence groups the impression that close to a hundred Yak-38s were carried.

I doubt they did that with most aircraft though, or at least that often.

[Bratislavskaya]

The Irvadi Revolutionary Air Force is reliant on older Soviet-era aircraft. The Air Force until recently suffered from dire levels of serviceability following the collapse of military aid in the early 90's. By the late 90's and early 2000's Military aid was again received from Koyro restoring most aircraft to a flyable condition. However new designs of aircraft have not been delivered due to the unstable political climate of Irvadistan. as of 2014 the Government was in negotiation with Koyro to acquire 16 MiG-29B Fighters and 2 MiG-29UB Fighter trainers, as well as 10 SU-25 attack aircraft to improve the Air Force's capabilities. However so far no agreement has been reached

Total Aircraft: 711

Fighter: 256
Attack: 60
Light Bomber: 42
Helicopter: 150
Transports: 40
Trainers: 163

Fighters

100x MiG-17 (MiG-17F and MiG-17PF)
36x MiG-19S
120x MiG-21 (an assortment of MiG-21PFM, MiG-21MF and MiG-21bis)

Attack and bomber

48x Su-7 (Su-7BMK)
12x Su-17 (Su-20 export model)
42x Il-28

Helicopters

150 total helicopters incluing Mi-6, Mi-8 and Mi-25 (Mi-24D export model)

Transport

28x An-2
6x An-24
6x An-26

Training aircraft (some trainers, most notably the L-29 and L-39 are pushed into a light-attack and counter-insurgency role

26x Yak-18
24x Yak-52
24x L-29
26x L-39
38x MiG-15UTI
12x MiG-21UM
10x Su-7U
3x Il-28U

In addition, the 2nd Airborne Regiment is part of the Air Force. with 1 Paratrooper Battalion and 2 Helicopter infantry battalions subordinate to it. There are also 2 Air Defence Missile Regiments, equipped with S-75 and S-125 missile launchers, and 1 Air Defence Artillery Regiment, equipped with 57mm and 100mm anti-aircraft guns.

Sounds like the North Korean air force. That's a bad thing.

[Bratislavskaya]

Should I be using An-2's as utility aircraft?

[Bratislavskaya]

Should I be using An-2's as utility aircraft?

Shameless repost.

[Bratislavskaya]

Shameless repost.

Padnak and North Korea use it.

So is that a no then, for a nation that's air force is firmly in the 21st century.

[Bratislavskaya]

So is that a no then, for a nation that's air force is firmly in the 21st century.

It is not as outdated as you think, though I'd keep it more in the Civilian world...

I was thinking of using it on a two per division level. That still worth it?

[Bratislavskaya]

What should I be using as a carrier aircraft: the Su-33 or the MiG-29K? I need it to be more multirole, due to the lack of navalised ground attack aircraft (Yak-38 and possibly say I completed Yak-41 is all I could think of).

[Bratislavskaya]

What should I be using as a carrier aircraft: the Su-33 or the MiG-29K? I need it to be more multirole, due to the lack of navalised ground attack aircraft (Yak-38 and possibly say I completed Yak-41 is all I could think of).

MiG-29K has a lower payload and combat radius than the Su-33, but also has better ground-attack avionics and a wider range of munition options, making it more of a multirole vice the air-superiority-oriented Su-33. MiG-29K is also shorter (lengthwise) than the enormous Su-33, which apparently allows more to be stored on a carrier, though it's also worth noting that when both have their wings folded the Su-33 is slightly narrower. Yak-41 never entered service, and Yak-38 was - despite my love of Soviet technology - failure on wings. Poor speed, poor range, poor payload, poor reliability, the list goes on and on.

Personally, I chose a third-way solution and introduced a Su-33 variant with better ground-attack electronics, as well as a dedicated twin-seater strike version; but if you're just taking them straight from the factory, MiG-29K is a better fit for your requirements.

If I were to have completed the Yak-41 would that be useful? What was it even for, was it ground attack or was it fleet defense?

[Bratislavskaya]

Just a curious question, but could a typical WW1 plane ever hope to shoot down an F-22 in a dogfight?
I just figured since this thread is filled with air cadets and whatnot, a detailed take on it would easy enough.

Well I guess it would be difficult for the F-22 to hit the thing (using cannons), because the WW1 aircraft would be travelling slower then the F-22s stall speed (I don't know what it is but I guess it would be). If the F-22 for the chance to fire on it I'm pretty sure it would get turbo shreked.

[Bratislavskaya]

I just thought, should I have all Su-27s (and variants) as my fighter fleet, or should I mix MiG-29s (and variants) in there?

[Bratislavskaya]

The Su-27s and MiG-29s were operated alongside each other for a reason.
Couldn't tell you if this was cost related.

If it was just cost, I'll only have Su-27s. Cost is not an issue over here.

[Bratislavskaya]

Speaking of old soviet aircraft
(Image)

IL-28 is stronk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T--ZIm0 ... page#t=464

Combine IL-28 documentary footage with stock music and Russian narration for maximum stronkness

Coincidentally I was watching that exact video earlier. Same channel and everything. He has a lot of those on his channel, they're quite interesting.

[Bratislavskaya]

Coincidentally I was watching that exact video earlier. Same channel and everything. He has a lot of those on his channel, they're quite interesting.

I love his channel too. Many of the documentaries have their share of inaccuracies/exaggerations, but that is also true of plenty of militainment shows on English-language channels. Just gotta take everything with a grain of salt.

True. I remember them saying the Makarov PM is more powerful than a Tokarev TT-33

[Bratislavskaya]

Would the Yak-38 still be useful as a kind of ground attack aircraft? I might say I completed the Yak 141 and use that if it would be better.

[Bratislavskaya]

Would the Yak-38 still be useful as a kind of ground attack aircraft? I might say I completed the Yak 141 and use that if it would be better.

Yak-38s are meh imo.

However yes the Yak-141 is sex.

Yak-43 is even better.

Well I only intend on using the 38s untill I find a replacement. So yes to that? I may lineart the 43 so I can use it.

[Bratislavskaya]

(Image)

Lockheed L-133

for page 133

You got Ninja'ed

[Bratislavskaya]

Well I only intend on using the 38s untill I find a replacement. So yes to that? I may lineart the 43 so I can use it.

Yak-38 was in many ways failure on wings - and that's coming from a person who loves most Soviet gear. It succeeded in the sense that it was physically capable of STOVL/VTOL operations, and compared to the Harrier it actually had pretty good speed and range, but that's about it. Its only weapons were heat-seeking AAMs and unguided rockets/bombs, with two of each carried at maximum. In theory it could manage a 1,000-kilo payload, but in practice that figure was typically much lower, especially in hot weather where the plane struggled to take off even when unburdened.

Yak-43 is harder to assess, since the project hasn't gone very far. Two functioning Yak-41s were built, and they performed impressively in flight tests, managing Mach 1.4 or thereabouts. Even so, it appears they were intended for fleet air defense rather than ground attack, and were only capable of carrying air-to-air missiles AFAICT.

True. I need a replacement that serves the role well. I mean the only reason I have a few Kiev Aircraft Carriers in service is so that they can have some Yak-38s on them to support ground troops. I need a replacement for them. Luckily I have a very cold nation so the heat thing doesn't apply.

[Bratislavskaya]

The LDF Air Division is equipped with these
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=lithuania-latvia/detail=factbook/id=278780

And can you tell me how good each one is? If you can it would be greatly appreciated

Too many ground attack aircraft types. One or two types is usually all you need.

[Bratislavskaya]

How does one perform what I would call "Air Guerilla Warfare"? My neighbor to the North is Russia, and just by the numbers alone the bear has got me beat for air superiority. How in the hell do I combat something like that especially if I only have so many airports in the North Caucasus?

You don't. You be Russia's bitch or they will crush you. Unless a pro EU far right and Neo-Nazi government takes over, in which case the West is your BFF.