Su-25 The Russian Warthog

[@МескалитоПейот]

Soviet Su-25 and “american” A-10 - both is product of Russian engineering school, if somebody don’t know

[@m_zbrv3967]

can you explain how does the A-10 relate to Russia?

[@МескалитоПейот]

@ Certainly. Chief designer of the “Republic” company and leading aircraft designer of A-10 is Kartveli Alexander Michailovich. Also he is creator of P-47 Thunderbolt, F-84 Thunderjet, F-84F Thunderstreak and F-105 Thunderchief. He is Russian

[@m_zbrv3967]

@@МескалитоПейот Russian is a flying man by soul..

[@Nero-Caesar]

Love this aircraft and channel

[@infantryski11b64]

@@Nero-Caesar agreed 👍🏻

[@kaana8421]

Azerbaijan actually modernised its Su-25s with different guided bombs, electronics, and a freaking cruise missile

[@Tigr_Rus]

Су-25 - летающий танк и я сомневаюсь, что А-10 выдержит то, что выдерживал Су-25.

[@janeyarnold5483]

Yes su-25 is probably better even though it’s less well known a-10 overrated

[@kosher4418]

It is unlikely that the warthog will have time to turn around after the attack and get away from the stinger as frogfoot does

[@bobbressi5414]

Maybe not, but it is one of the few planes that can take a missile strike and fly back to base. During the balkans conflict an A10 was hit by a SAM that punched a hole in the wing so big a man could climb through it. The pilot said one of the engines ate a chunk of metal the size of a lawn chair. The engine stalled but he was able to re start it. The A10 is a flying tank. It also has an absurd amount of flares. The frogfoot is faster and more nimble for sure, and it is pretty rugged. I would still give the survivability edge to the A10.

[@radityabudimansyah1240]

@@bobbressi5414 same thing has happened to frogfoot during russia-ukraine war. several has returned to airbase after losing an engine due to SAM. Both aircraft eats bullets and SAM for breakfast

[@infantryski11b64]

Well, now I'm off to play DCS

[@beryanbeyaan8047]

well done..well done, Ace groundpounder

[@gracewnell6464]

just downloaded it last week! So hard to learn by yourself :(

[@StephaneP-p8h]

I really need to get a good setup to play that game... joystick throttle and pedal.. maybe after Christmas...

[@christianjung3310]

@@gracewnell6464 yes, but it's worth it.

[@dogmeat7582]

I dream to be able to afford a VR headset one day. Cannot properly play any flight sim without good head tracking.

[@平教經]

Though Frogfoot has higher top speed, stall speed for it and A-10 is same around 110 knots, so the point about loitering performance does not hold up.

[@gershonbass6004]

There is a combat training Yak 130, I read that work is underway to upgrade it to a full-fledged attack aircraft to replace the outdated and long-out of production SU25, but I'm not sure if it is necessary, modern combat helicopters do the same job and are not that different in performance characteristics, the KA52 is generally excellent, and the role of a frontline bomber is successfully performed by SU34.

[@alispeed5095]

My country also flies these beasts

[@craig4867]

We make the most beautiful, capable and deadliest aircraft in the world 🌍 🇷🇺

[@Skrenja]

Most capable? Hell no.

[@МескалитоПейот]

@@Skrenja Which 4++ heavy fighter in the world is better than the Su-35(27)? F-14? F-15? Nope, everyone knows this. Which interceptor in the world is better than the Mig-31? There's nothing to even compare it to. What is the best 5th generation fighter in the world today? F-22? Only on paper, no one has ever seen him in battle. F-35? It's not even funny... Su-57 - few units have been produced so far, yes, but at the current time it is the best, and it was tested in a combat situation, not only on paper. As for attack aircraft, the Su-25 and A-10 are each good in their own way. And by the way, both of them came from the Russian engineering school - the creator of the “American” A-10 is Russian, by the name of Kartvelli, in case you didn’t know😉 On this, yes, I agree with the commentator - the most beautiful, capable and deadliest aircraft in the world is Russian

[@tannermurphree8247]

Simmer down 😂

[@craig4867]

@tannermurphree8247 . Fighter Pilots never simmer down! 🇷🇺

[@craig4867]

@@МескалитоПейот . You're 100% correct!

[@deeizm1]

By the way, in Russia army they usually called "Грач" - "The Rook"

[@csk4j]

Good question if the future is drones, missle trucks....choppers, or new attack aircraft..

[@MrRodionis1]

Rook is good, even I, an American aviation fan, can’t tell if I like the A-10 more. In general, I am not very close to the assault aircraft, as my favorite is the F-16. The video is as beautiful as ever!

[@TheCrapOnYourStrapOn]

Subbed my friend

[@omanhaddadtbh]

IIRC, the F-35A was pushed through various military funding bills many years ago to increase production of the ‘A’ model in order to increase the replacement rate of the A-10. However in the last 4-6 years, that idea was struck down as elements in congress and the DoD made the successful case to keep the A-10 online.

[@gort8203]

You have it backwards. The F35A was 'pushed through' because it is the airplane the USAF needs. The A-10 retirements are needed to make more room for it. And you have not kept up with events. The A-10 is scheduled for retirement. The pork barrel politicians in Congress finally had to give way to common sense.

[@Nikolay_Grigoryev]

I would say the Ju-87 and the Il-2 would be the most iconic CAS aircraft...

[@bojandjekic1]

il-2 Sturmovik or even Ju J-1 {but not historically significant as Sturmovik} are predecessors of all mighty Su-25.

[@JohnSmith-jj2yd]

So soon after introduction to service the Soviet Union exported the Su-25 to Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine and Turkmenistan? 🧐

[@JohnSmith-jj2yd]

And they apparently operated over Afghanistan from bases in Azerbaijan? 🤨

[@SergeyAnatolich]

Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and other republics were parts of the USSR, what kind of exports are you talking about??? Most of the men of these republics served in the Soviet Army))

[@JohnSmith-jj2yd]

@@SergeyAnatolich I know that, you know that, but apparently this KZbin channel doesn't know that...

[@SergeyAnatolich]

@@JohnSmith-jj2yd 😁🖐

[@boocomban]

Because it was cheaper than Su27/30. Better than ground attack bombing fighter like Su17/22. More simplicity and robust than ground attack bombers like Su-24... So it makes sense that the Soviets were exported to its satellite states

[@prosto_potomuwto]

Fighter-bomber.

[@Игорьсуздальский]

No

[@prosto_potomuwto]

@@Игорьсуздальский Kyrillic username opinions are not taken seriously dude.

[@Игорьсуздальский]

@@prosto_potomuwto you're westerner, you can't afford education and nice internet connection. That's why you didn't Google this plane

[@janlindtner305]

☝👍👍

[@DISTINGUISHED.GENTLEMAN.]

GREAT VIDEO MATE, CAN YOU PLEASE MAKE A VIDEO ON THE CHINESE JL9 AND THE RUSSIAN YAK 130 ?

[@misterbig9025]

I wonder why Australia never buys Soviet and Russian weapons

[@SilverforceX]

Vassal states have to funnel their wealth to their masters.

[@Nero-Caesar]

Americas lapdog

[@AntRielly]

@@Nero-Caesar Russia is Chinas lap dog.

[@MuhammadAli-255]

Australia is too reliant on American and overall western weapons. They developed their entire military doctrine and supply chain on western equipment and switching over to Russian arms would be very costly and unneeded.

[@tanthaman]

They want to but scared of daddy USA

[@thelandofnod123]

The Su-25's best trick is to not look too much like the YA-9...........

[@Levon_RnD]

And it does this trick flawlessly since it looks nothing like YA-9😂

[@thelandofnod123]

@@Levon_RnD “nothing like the YA-9” is a bit of a stretch.

[@Levon_RnD]

@@thelandofnod123 It's simpler to mention what's similar - they are subsonic(but their max and cruise speeds are different) and they both have engines by the sides of the fuselage(so unique, only like more than a half of all jets ever made have this very special feature). Practically, anything else is different both in their interior and exterior.

[@thelandofnod123]

@@Levon_RnD Has engines and is subsonic, that’s how they are similar? 😒

[@imrekalman9044]

The design of the Su-25 happened in 1968. Two years before the USAF request for proposals was made to create the YA-9/10.

[@marsmotion]

missile tech and long range isr has outstripped the need for these aircrafts. unless they become invisible on all frequency bands forget about it. thats in contested space. because of cheap man pads all space can be now contested constantly. ground strike is now relegated to long range missile truck launches if using aircrafts peer to peer.

[@kilmetyev]

Русские своё возьмут

[@elestromusicgamesfun1101]

Close air-support by planes like this is an outdated concept, thanks to the cheap advanced MAN-PAD systems now out there. These planes only really work against an enemy without any real AA-assets. New close-airsupport will be by drones.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

*lol* Tell that to the thousands of troops dealt with by RF Su-25s during the Kherson offensive 2022. RF lost ONE Su-25 in return for wiping out over 300 troops per day for over a week with just a dozen Su-25s. That's the low count BTW. Do you know how many Stingers UA has used up? THOUSANDS. With probably around half fired at Su-25s. You know how many Su-25 they've shot down? ZERO. All tools have their time and place. Dismissing CAS as outdated concept just shows a lack of understanding.

[@elestromusicgamesfun1101]

@@DIREWOLFx75 I'm not dismissing CAS, I'm dismissing the platforms. Fun that you don't even understand what I wrote. There's no AF that will keep using CAS platforms like SU-25 in the future. USAF are retiring the A-10 just because of this reason. It's not cost effective and MAN-PADS are too effective and cheap.

[@DIREWOLFx75]

@@elestromusicgamesfun1101 "USAF are retiring the A-10 just because of this reason." Last i heard, that decision was reversed. "It's not cost effective and MAN-PADS are too effective and cheap." In UA, over 8 thousand MANPADS have been used. Mostly Stingers. And the result is 1 confirmed aircraft shot down by an Igla. MANPADS have shown themselves to be extremely ineffective.

[@АсланСултаналиев-т6ж]

@@elestromusicgamesfun1101 it is used as artillery. It shoots rockets by pointing its nose upwards and dumping flares. Rockets lands by mounted trajectory. This and by flying low planes can be used without a high risk of losing aircraft.

[@elestromusicgamesfun1101]

@@АсланСултаналиев-т6ж I know of the old soviet doctrine. This is however not a cost effective, and the payload is small and it's not to my knowledge used on a regular basis by the Russians anymore. Future of CAS is drones.

[@pimpompoom93726]

Su-25 and A-10 are not really comparable in their primary mission. The A-10 is a close air support aircraft with loiter capability. Su-25 is a ground attack aircraft with good armor protection. Two different missions. A problem for Russian Air Force is they started the Ukrainian conflict with only 190 Su-25's in inventory and more than a few have been lost to date. The tools for manufacturing this aircraft were long ago destroyed, It would be very difficult if not impossible to replace them with the same model today.

[@marsmotion]

close air support and ground attack are literally the same thing. both a10 and frog are armored. in the a10 the pilot sits in a titanium box with bullet proof glass in front. both are made robust against small arms and missiles with modular redundant design aspects. watch the video again.

[@boocomban]

A-10 was designed as an Anti armoured ground attack. Its armory focuses on anti armoured with AGM and 30mm to be punched through Soviet armoured columns in Europe. Only during Iraq/Afghanistan war it got retrofit as a CAS fighter, which it was not a good one as it have huge friendly fire casualty. Su-25 designed as a CAS fire support fighter. With it focus on gun run and rocket strike in Afghanistan valey and mountainous region where helicopter is at risk of anti air and AA cannon. Both are ground attacks, but both got designed for different doctrines and tactics.

[@HeidiKernstad]

SU-25 was designed by the Soviets as a close air support aircraft. “In early 1968, the Soviet Ministry of Defence decided to develop a specialised shturmovik armoured assault aircraft in order to provide close air support for the Soviet Ground Forces. The idea of creating a ground-support aircraft came about after analysing the experience of ground-attack (shturmovaya) aviation during the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. The Soviet fighter-bombers in service or under development at the time (Su-7, Su-17, MiG-21 and MiG-23) did not meet the requirements for close air support of the army. They lacked essential armour plating to protect the pilot and vital equipment from ground fire and missile hits, and their high flight speeds made it difficult for the pilot to maintain visual contact with a target.“ And thus the heavily armored subsonic SU-25 was born, designed to fly low and slow, and fire rocket barrages at enemy positions, convoys, and structures.

[@gort8203]

It's true that CAS is only one of many ground attack missions, and that the SU-25 design is suitable for more of them, which is why it is faster and has greater range than the A-10.

[@pimpompoom93726]

@@gort8203 But it doesn't have the loiter capability or Ground Control communication capability of the A-10.

[@tomonabudget]

Regularly shot down at Ukrainian front lines. 34 at time of writing. Which proves why that type of plane is losing its use in the modern battlefield where Manpads are everywhere.

[@mickvonbornemann3824]

You shouldn’t believe anything that comes out of Kiev. Elensky can’t open his mouth without lying.

[@Baraxes]

@@tomonabudget the shot down number is highly exaggerated because there are only a few confirmation

[@tomonabudget]

@@Baraxes the numbers are from Oryx which only list visually confirmed losses...

[@Baraxes]

@@tomonabudget oryx 😂😂 even worse, oryx is not a trusted source mate

[@George_5050]

Only 34? In the largest most intense war in recent human history. The US lost dozens of aircraft in the 1.5 months of the Gulf War, and >10,000 aircraft in the Vietnam war. So 34 Su-25 losses is nothing.

[@ChinaDragon-te2vk]

Thunderbird clone .

[@ChipMIK]

Memorable design? Please LOL! Like almost any other Russian thing produced the SU-25 is a copy too. This time it of the YA-9 that lost in competition to the A-10 Warthog en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YA-9

[@crevis12]

⁠@@ChipMIK lets see how long the A-10 lasts in the exact same environment of Ukrane

[@ChipMIK]

@@crevis12 You know you hit the nail spot on when you get Putlerjugend comments like this LOL

[@imrekalman9044]

The design of the Su-25 happened in 1968. Two years before the USAF request for proposals was made to create the YA-9/10. Northrop obviously did not get info about the Sukhoi T-8...

[@МескалитоПейот]

@ChipMIK Who created the A-10? You're our smart guy😂

[@imrekalman9044]

@@МескалитоПейот It was chosen to keep the once-great Fairchild afloat.

[@Subutai2024]

It has been proven in Ukraine that the SU-25 is not the same as the A-10. Hundreds of them have been shot down by stingers easily, which is a very old technology.

[@MohamedSiad-cm9zn]

But has the A-10 ever participated in a high intensity war like the Ukrainian war? Only then can we draw a comparison between the two birds.

[@drewski5730]

Ukraine is contested airspace. Whenever A-10’s have been in combat operations they’ve enjoyed full air superiority ->and they’ve still been shot down or heavily damaged. If the A-10 were operating in Ukraine, they’d also suffer heavy losses.