Nov 28, 2023·edited Nov 28, 2023Liked by Sarcastosaurus
Thank you for this article! A minor nitpick re UMPK: I'm fairly certain that "planirovanie" should be translated as "gliding" (and not as "planning") in this context — see definition 2 here: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/планировать
I understand that, but: the last 3-4 weeks, I've been so busy with my usual 'job', that I've 'only superficially' followed developments in Ukraine. I can't 'put together the big picture' without first understanding what is this consisting of.
If you can imagine: this process is resembling assembling a set of puzzle. You first have to find the 'right' pieces and then their place, before you can start putting the 'big picture' together.
And I don't want to feed nonsense to the people, or repeat the same stuff reported everywhere else.
Interesting and very informative. I wonder what those Ukrainian enterprises that built those guidance systems are working on now. I hope they're being pivoted to produce weapons that can hit Crimea. I dont think it makes any sense that Russia still has airbases in Crimea and we're not actively helping Ukraine solve that problem.
A good analysis of the capabilities of the Russian Air Force in terms of bombs, but what I want to mention is that the Sudanese also produced locally guided bombs equipped with upper wings and other mobile rear ones, as they equipped them with systems in the back of the bomb to increase accuracy through television guidance systems for the SU-24 bombers that they developed, as well as the MIG. -29 which was developed along with the SU-25 with the Republic of Belarus....
I know that, but I see what the Russians have done as a fairly good solution at a low and cheap cost. In addition, there is currently cooperation between the Russians and the Iranians, who, according to some news, have begun to establish facilities for manufacturing drones inside Russia of various types, some of which are for reconnaissance, others for suicide, and others for carrying out bombing operations, in addition. For facilities to manufacture guided and winged bombs, as well as short- and medium-range missiles from 100 km to 500 km. This is if we do not count North Korea, which officially entered and transferred thousands of missiles and possesses huge stocks of missiles from 300 km to 1,300 km that it may give to the Russians because North Koreans are not like... The Iranians have nothing to lose as a country besieged by the West in everything.....
Nov 28, 2023·edited Nov 28, 2023Liked by Sarcastosaurus
Hi from Bandon, Oregon USA. I am 82 yrs old and read your posts. One thing I struggle with are all of the abbreviatons used for things such as ZSU, VKS, PCU, SBU, ZRKs, MLRS, HUR, AFU and on and on. Today you have more about bombs! I try to keep a list with meanings but can't always make a match. Consider creating a listing of all the abbreviations you use and add it to your daily posts, maybe at the bottom. PS--I don't think "abbreviations" is the correct word, sorry.
I understand the problem, be sure of that! I used to start every of my blog-posts with a list of abbreviation. Then have abandoned this practice when the number of readers 'stabilised'. I'll re-introduce it in the Part 2 of this feature.
This means that the Russians use GLONASS- and/or GPS- guided MPK in Ukraine. Originally there were 4 flavors of MPK: unguided, inertial module guidance, GPS/GLONASS guidance, GPS/GLONASS guidance + jet engine
Thanks for report. It would be interesting to listen about tactics of JDam using. Do planes throws then from low altitudes or like Russians? And what amount of bombs. I've seen somewhere information about dozens in day
First of all Tom, I love your great and frank analyses which I have been reading since almost the first days of this war. Thank you so much.
In one of your analyses many moons ago I remember you writing that Russian/Soviet design philosophy for military aircraft was to make them last for 150 sorties or so, and then they are toast. If I remember your post back then correctly, should not the Russian Air Force be running out of airworthy air frames pretty soon if it keeps dropping bombs at this rate?
Airframes can be airworthy for decades if operated and stored properly but hugging the ground and dashing at exteremly low altitudes is really stressful on airframes thats why glidebombs is much more ideal solution to increase the operational usage of the Russian Sokhois.
I think Tom means time before major factory overhaul, Russian jet engines are cheap due to inferior materials yet provide a high thrust rate which mains low operational life span especially when pushed to the limmits during battle conditions for extended periods and thus necessitate a core replacement and major overhaul and calibration of other systems which can not be made in the field and must be done at a suitable aircraft plant .
And indeed Novosibirsk Chkalov Aviation Plant is clogged with 20 Su-34s just in 2023 which is described by Director of NAZ Sergey Panasenko "to have exhausted their service life in the course of operation." And in need of an overhaul which includes upgrading those airframes to the Su-34M standard
And indeed the VKS are running out of operational airframes according to RAND
an August report by RAND revealed the extent to which the hours flown are beginning to take their toll on the VKS fleets. The RAND findings are:
The VKS is still transitioning from Soviet-era aircraft to more-modern platforms. The current rate of new aircraft coming online is so low that almost half of the fleet are upgraded Soviet-era airframes.
Modern Russian aircraft are designed for a 3,500 and 4,500 flight hour service life, and some for as many as 6,000. But the Soviet-era platforms were designed for 2,000 to 3,500 hours. Some models, such as the MiG-31, have been upgraded to extend service life, but most of the older models are nearing the end of their service lives with only 500 to 1,000 hours remaining.
In the first few months of the war in Ukraine, the VKS was flying 150 to 300 sorties per day — compared to peacetime rates of 60 per day. This has since fallen to 100 sorties a day, but this is still nearly double the peacetime number of hours.
The high flight hours being flown by older aircraft is “equivalent to losing roughly 34 aircraft since the start of the invasion. However, this only captures the losses relative to the life span of newer airframes. Because the older airframes have so few remaining hours, it’s actually equivalent to losing about 57 VKS airframes…This results in total true losses closer to 187 VKS airframes. Extrapolating this, the VKS will continue to lose 30 to 60 airframes a year from combat, accident, and imputed losses.”
By the summer of 2024, combat losses and imputed flight hour losses may put the VKS below 75 percent of its prewar strength.
Also according to Shoigu Su-34s flies on 4 to 5 sorties per day which is really bad considering they have +100 airframes which mean they forced to lower the attrition rate in order to conserve airframes for years to come as overhaul and replacement rate can not keep up with the tempo of early war operations
“This machine is the main workhorse, they have four to five sorties every day, so we need to step up, hurry up. We have enterprises that are on the 2024 programme this year – they are ahead of schedule. So we need to organise work here as well,” Sergey Shoigu stressed.
The head of the Russian military department noted that this year, thanks to the joint efforts of the industry and the Ministry of Defence, the delivery of new Su-34 aircraft and upgrading of those already in service with the troops are being carried out in accordance with the schedules. “Besides, we have the 2024 contract here finalised. There are no issues requiring our attention for 2024,” Sergei Shoigu said
Thank you for this article. However is it correct to assume the F16's will be still very vulnerable near and over the Russian line of contact? and therefore should Ukraine ultimately be supplied or have flown for them, F35's against these long range Russian air to air missiles and the Russian superior range fighter radars. Would Saab F39's have been a better investment for Ukraine at this stage in terms of radar signature ?
Hello Tom, While appreciate your work seems your understanding of UMPK is grossly wrong. It contains not just an extendable wings, but also extendable flight correction surfaces at the rear part of the module. Therefore your description of the bomb with add on screwed in fins under the wing of Su-34 as a proof of unguidance is incorrect. It is guided weapon using satellite module Komet-M or similar for correction. Do you seriously believe that RuAF so stupid to launch unguided bombs from 60 km? What would be the accuracy, plus-minus 5-10 km? Look, entire detached modules were found in Ukraine, photos and descriprions of components are easy enough to find.
I think an unguided glide bomb would be well-within 1 km, if launched from 60 km, and that might be just fine with VKS. But they can also be used from shorter distances. The link which Denys posted mentions an unguided UMPK version to be used from 6...8 km distance and only 50...100 m height, per Russian 2009 specs, which would still be better than using plain FABs.
I do remember seeing pics of UMPK kits lacking control surfaces, and I also remember one post speaking of a kit with control surfaces, but apparently lacking any kind of guidance system - might simply be due to supply shortages.
The bottom line is that pretty clearly both guided and unguided kits exist and have been used, the question is - in what ratio.
Hi, yes in 2009 there was a low alt short range unguided gliding bomb project. Likely just a project. Plus minus 1 km or betterwould be possible to launge smth in ballistic mode, not a bomb with somehow extended surfaces, IMO. If any recent photo evidence can be produced about these randomly gliding unguided objects, then I'm wrong. I can only see pics of normal guided upmk bombs. E.g. https://vk.com/wall-31371206_2055963
The reason why ukrainian sources call this bombs "FAB" and "KAB" is because it's easier to civilians to undertstand what the hell this new bombs is, and to not overwhelm people with specific information. Also Yuriy Ignat, the speaker of ukrainian airforces, said about this bombs that russians simply take FABs, put wings and GPS on it and in that way transform FABs into KABs to cover their shortage on missiles. As result, this his statement also mixed "FAB" and "KAB" in ukrainian media and official/unofficial sources. Also FAB and KAB abbreviations also exists in ukrainian language and means the same as in russian.
It all reminds me my arguing with some western "missiles engineer" about russian hypersonic missle "Kinjal", after ukrainians shot down the first one and claimed it as "the first interception of hypersonic missile in history". While this western "missiles engineer" insisted on that Kinjal is not a hypersonic missile, because Kinjal not corresponds by characterictic to western definition of "hyperconic missile" (it can't maneuver in air like western missiles), for me, as for civilian, this specific information is useless. It's missile? Yes. It's break hypersonic speed? Yup. Then, it's hypersonic missile. For me, as for civillian, it's the same with FAB/KAB. Tho, it's still interesting to read about actual diffeeence between them.
Thank you for this article! A minor nitpick re UMPK: I'm fairly certain that "planirovanie" should be translated as "gliding" (and not as "planning") in this context — see definition 2 here: https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/планировать
You are quite right, because Russian "planirovanie" originates from "plane" and not from "plan".
You're right: was too quick with that one! I'll correct that, of course.
Thank you for a lot of valuable information. But we are still eager to know your opinion about the situation on the battlefield.
I understand that, but: the last 3-4 weeks, I've been so busy with my usual 'job', that I've 'only superficially' followed developments in Ukraine. I can't 'put together the big picture' without first understanding what is this consisting of.
If you can imagine: this process is resembling assembling a set of puzzle. You first have to find the 'right' pieces and then their place, before you can start putting the 'big picture' together.
And I don't want to feed nonsense to the people, or repeat the same stuff reported everywhere else.
That's something that's taking its 2-3 weeks.
Nevertheless your opinion will be of extreme importance when you have time to publish it.
Interesting and very informative. I wonder what those Ukrainian enterprises that built those guidance systems are working on now. I hope they're being pivoted to produce weapons that can hit Crimea. I dont think it makes any sense that Russia still has airbases in Crimea and we're not actively helping Ukraine solve that problem.
A good analysis of the capabilities of the Russian Air Force in terms of bombs, but what I want to mention is that the Sudanese also produced locally guided bombs equipped with upper wings and other mobile rear ones, as they equipped them with systems in the back of the bomb to increase accuracy through television guidance systems for the SU-24 bombers that they developed, as well as the MIG. -29 which was developed along with the SU-25 with the Republic of Belarus....
Yes, that's 1000% right. 'But': can't go 'into the Sudanese' while trying to discuss the Russians. Hope, you can understand.
I know that, but I see what the Russians have done as a fairly good solution at a low and cheap cost. In addition, there is currently cooperation between the Russians and the Iranians, who, according to some news, have begun to establish facilities for manufacturing drones inside Russia of various types, some of which are for reconnaissance, others for suicide, and others for carrying out bombing operations, in addition. For facilities to manufacture guided and winged bombs, as well as short- and medium-range missiles from 100 km to 500 km. This is if we do not count North Korea, which officially entered and transferred thousands of missiles and possesses huge stocks of missiles from 300 km to 1,300 km that it may give to the Russians because North Koreans are not like... The Iranians have nothing to lose as a country besieged by the West in everything.....
When I came to the point "all the FABs remained unguided", my first though was: "it's a typical Russian solution" :D
Hi from Bandon, Oregon USA. I am 82 yrs old and read your posts. One thing I struggle with are all of the abbreviatons used for things such as ZSU, VKS, PCU, SBU, ZRKs, MLRS, HUR, AFU and on and on. Today you have more about bombs! I try to keep a list with meanings but can't always make a match. Consider creating a listing of all the abbreviations you use and add it to your daily posts, maybe at the bottom. PS--I don't think "abbreviations" is the correct word, sorry.
I understand the problem, be sure of that! I used to start every of my blog-posts with a list of abbreviation. Then have abandoned this practice when the number of readers 'stabilised'. I'll re-introduce it in the Part 2 of this feature.
FAB-ulous, baby, FAB-U-lous! Someone pour him a glass of KAB-ernet.
Ukrainian engineers said that they found a EW-proof satellite navigation module Комета-М in a wreckage of MPK.
https://mil.in.ua/uk/articles/kometa-problema-dlya-reb-ukrayiny/
https://mil.in.ua/uk/news/rosiyany-vykorystovuyut-systemy-protydiyi-reb-na-bombah/
This means that the Russians use GLONASS- and/or GPS- guided MPK in Ukraine. Originally there were 4 flavors of MPK: unguided, inertial module guidance, GPS/GLONASS guidance, GPS/GLONASS guidance + jet engine
https://defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/rosijani_uzhe_v_2009_rotsi_mali_chotiri_varianti_krilatih_bomb_z_moduljami_umpk_ale_todi_tsi_virobi_v_seriju_ne_pishli-11528.html
Now, that is really news. Thanks a lot!
Unfortunately to us (I'm from Ukraine) bombs equipped with UMPK (UMGC - unified module for gliding and correction) are guided.
Denys already pointed you to the Cometa navigation module.
Also we could see that the UMPK's horizontal stabilizer is split into two parts, their angle of attack is driven by servos independently. That allows to rotate the bomb in two axes during the flight to adjust heading (track) and pitch (distance). https://www.thedrive.com/uploads/2023/07/19/7-13-July-2023cMilinfolive-TG-channel.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1920
is taken from the https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/the-truth-about-russias-mysterious-winged-glide-bombs article.
Thanks for report. It would be interesting to listen about tactics of JDam using. Do planes throws then from low altitudes or like Russians? And what amount of bombs. I've seen somewhere information about dozens in day
First of all Tom, I love your great and frank analyses which I have been reading since almost the first days of this war. Thank you so much.
In one of your analyses many moons ago I remember you writing that Russian/Soviet design philosophy for military aircraft was to make them last for 150 sorties or so, and then they are toast. If I remember your post back then correctly, should not the Russian Air Force be running out of airworthy air frames pretty soon if it keeps dropping bombs at this rate?
I've been wondering the same.
Airframes can be airworthy for decades if operated and stored properly but hugging the ground and dashing at exteremly low altitudes is really stressful on airframes thats why glidebombs is much more ideal solution to increase the operational usage of the Russian Sokhois.
I think Tom means time before major factory overhaul, Russian jet engines are cheap due to inferior materials yet provide a high thrust rate which mains low operational life span especially when pushed to the limmits during battle conditions for extended periods and thus necessitate a core replacement and major overhaul and calibration of other systems which can not be made in the field and must be done at a suitable aircraft plant .
And indeed Novosibirsk Chkalov Aviation Plant is clogged with 20 Su-34s just in 2023 which is described by Director of NAZ Sergey Panasenko "to have exhausted their service life in the course of operation." And in need of an overhaul which includes upgrading those airframes to the Su-34M standard
And indeed the VKS are running out of operational airframes according to RAND
an August report by RAND revealed the extent to which the hours flown are beginning to take their toll on the VKS fleets. The RAND findings are:
The VKS is still transitioning from Soviet-era aircraft to more-modern platforms. The current rate of new aircraft coming online is so low that almost half of the fleet are upgraded Soviet-era airframes.
Modern Russian aircraft are designed for a 3,500 and 4,500 flight hour service life, and some for as many as 6,000. But the Soviet-era platforms were designed for 2,000 to 3,500 hours. Some models, such as the MiG-31, have been upgraded to extend service life, but most of the older models are nearing the end of their service lives with only 500 to 1,000 hours remaining.
In the first few months of the war in Ukraine, the VKS was flying 150 to 300 sorties per day — compared to peacetime rates of 60 per day. This has since fallen to 100 sorties a day, but this is still nearly double the peacetime number of hours.
The high flight hours being flown by older aircraft is “equivalent to losing roughly 34 aircraft since the start of the invasion. However, this only captures the losses relative to the life span of newer airframes. Because the older airframes have so few remaining hours, it’s actually equivalent to losing about 57 VKS airframes…This results in total true losses closer to 187 VKS airframes. Extrapolating this, the VKS will continue to lose 30 to 60 airframes a year from combat, accident, and imputed losses.”
By the summer of 2024, combat losses and imputed flight hour losses may put the VKS below 75 percent of its prewar strength.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/08/the-uncounted-losses-to-russias-air-force.html
Also according to Shoigu Su-34s flies on 4 to 5 sorties per day which is really bad considering they have +100 airframes which mean they forced to lower the attrition rate in order to conserve airframes for years to come as overhaul and replacement rate can not keep up with the tempo of early war operations
“This machine is the main workhorse, they have four to five sorties every day, so we need to step up, hurry up. We have enterprises that are on the 2024 programme this year – they are ahead of schedule. So we need to organise work here as well,” Sergey Shoigu stressed.
The head of the Russian military department noted that this year, thanks to the joint efforts of the industry and the Ministry of Defence, the delivery of new Su-34 aircraft and upgrading of those already in service with the troops are being carried out in accordance with the schedules. “Besides, we have the 2024 contract here finalised. There are no issues requiring our attention for 2024,” Sergei Shoigu said
KAB used in Ukranian as Kerovana Avia Bomba - Guided Aerial Bomb
Could be also translated as Controllled
Thank you for this article. However is it correct to assume the F16's will be still very vulnerable near and over the Russian line of contact? and therefore should Ukraine ultimately be supplied or have flown for them, F35's against these long range Russian air to air missiles and the Russian superior range fighter radars. Would Saab F39's have been a better investment for Ukraine at this stage in terms of radar signature ?
Hello Tom, While appreciate your work seems your understanding of UMPK is grossly wrong. It contains not just an extendable wings, but also extendable flight correction surfaces at the rear part of the module. Therefore your description of the bomb with add on screwed in fins under the wing of Su-34 as a proof of unguidance is incorrect. It is guided weapon using satellite module Komet-M or similar for correction. Do you seriously believe that RuAF so stupid to launch unguided bombs from 60 km? What would be the accuracy, plus-minus 5-10 km? Look, entire detached modules were found in Ukraine, photos and descriprions of components are easy enough to find.
I think an unguided glide bomb would be well-within 1 km, if launched from 60 km, and that might be just fine with VKS. But they can also be used from shorter distances. The link which Denys posted mentions an unguided UMPK version to be used from 6...8 km distance and only 50...100 m height, per Russian 2009 specs, which would still be better than using plain FABs.
I do remember seeing pics of UMPK kits lacking control surfaces, and I also remember one post speaking of a kit with control surfaces, but apparently lacking any kind of guidance system - might simply be due to supply shortages.
The bottom line is that pretty clearly both guided and unguided kits exist and have been used, the question is - in what ratio.
Hi, yes in 2009 there was a low alt short range unguided gliding bomb project. Likely just a project. Plus minus 1 km or betterwould be possible to launge smth in ballistic mode, not a bomb with somehow extended surfaces, IMO. If any recent photo evidence can be produced about these randomly gliding unguided objects, then I'm wrong. I can only see pics of normal guided upmk bombs. E.g. https://vk.com/wall-31371206_2055963
Yes, see the chapter in Satellite guidance: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/the-truth-about-russias-mysterious-winged-glide-bombs
Maybe the guidance system (both electronics and/or mechanics) is not able to do precise guidance well.
Hi, Tom. Thanks for this article.
The reason why ukrainian sources call this bombs "FAB" and "KAB" is because it's easier to civilians to undertstand what the hell this new bombs is, and to not overwhelm people with specific information. Also Yuriy Ignat, the speaker of ukrainian airforces, said about this bombs that russians simply take FABs, put wings and GPS on it and in that way transform FABs into KABs to cover their shortage on missiles. As result, this his statement also mixed "FAB" and "KAB" in ukrainian media and official/unofficial sources. Also FAB and KAB abbreviations also exists in ukrainian language and means the same as in russian.
It all reminds me my arguing with some western "missiles engineer" about russian hypersonic missle "Kinjal", after ukrainians shot down the first one and claimed it as "the first interception of hypersonic missile in history". While this western "missiles engineer" insisted on that Kinjal is not a hypersonic missile, because Kinjal not corresponds by characterictic to western definition of "hyperconic missile" (it can't maneuver in air like western missiles), for me, as for civilian, this specific information is useless. It's missile? Yes. It's break hypersonic speed? Yup. Then, it's hypersonic missile. For me, as for civillian, it's the same with FAB/KAB. Tho, it's still interesting to read about actual diffeeence between them.
This is from your Don's weekly :
30 km from the river to the north, a Ukrainian air surveillance radar is destroyed by a glide bomb…
https://twitter.com/WarVehicle/status/1728134777897906209
This hit is very precise.
quite impressive, I have to say