Hello everyone, welcome back to Military Channel. In today’s session
we will discuss How Does the Russian Su-25 Compare to the A-10 Warthog?
If you are curious about this topic, stay tuned only at this channel.
The Su-25 is one of the most visible signs of the Russian Air Force’s might. Since its debut during
the Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s, the Su-25 has seen service in every conflict involving Soviet or
Russian forces, from Chechnya to Georgia to Syria. Observers have often compared it to the A-10,
but that comparison misses some of the nuances of how they are employed.
Regardless, the Russian defense ministry plans to keep the Su-25 around in the foreseeable future.
But how does it plan on accomplishing that goal? The development of the Su-25 roughly mirrors
that of the A-10. The Soviet Air Force saw the need for a survivable low-level attack
aircraft to supplement its current attack fleet. Enter the Su-25, an aircraft built from the ground
up to conduct ground attacks at low altitudes and speeds. It featured significant armor on the
bottom and the front of the aircraft and had two heavy duty engines for increased survivability.
The design featured straighter wings than those used on fast jets, allowing for better
maneuverability and increased lift at the lower speeds the Su-25 was expected to operate at.
The Su-25T a dedicated antitank version, which has been combat-tested with notable success in
Chechnya. The Su-25T could also fit a much wider fit of weapons, including the Vikhr anti-tank
missile that could be carried in two six-packs on each wing and the advanced R-73 anti-air missile.
These systems were controlled through a monitor in the cockpit,
mirroring the ground attack MFDs in the A-10C. The Su-25SM was conceived as a way to
modernize the Su-25 without being as complex as the earlier attempts.
The key feature was the integration of an onboard radar and a vastly improved avionics fit. The
onboard radar, while not nearly as powerful as those on dedicated fighters, allows the Su-25SM
to shoot the R-77 and R-27 air-to-air missiles. But the greatest improvement was the “Bars”
navigation system that includes a digital moving map and a satellite navigation receiver.
With these features, the Su-25SM is able to get to the target, get off the tarmac faster, and
generally just perform better and more efficiently as the workload of the pilot is reduced.
Other upgrades included an anti-surge system for the engines,
which expanded the envelope in which the pilot could safely employ various weapon systems without
worrying about the gasses affecting the engine and a new radar warning station (L-150 Pastel).
As Su-25SMs are being produced, Russia is looking to the future with the Su-25SM3
upgrade. This can be seen as a further iteration on the same improvements featured on the Su-25SM.
Survivability and anti-missile countermeasures are improved by the addition of UV missile launch
detectors in the Vitebsk-25 SEAD/ECM set and an updated version of the L-150 Pastel.
The targeting package in the nose is further improved in the SOLT-25 module
which adds thermal imaging and improved zoom. Also added is the new SVP-24 “Gefest” precision
dumb-bombing system. The Gefest uses precise information about the flight characteristics
and position of the aircraft to set a computer calculated release point (CCRP) for a bomb,
which can allow it to deliver a bomb onto a specific grid with good accuracy.
With the Su-25SM3 upgrade, the Russian Air Force finally has a solid kit
that could upgrade their fleet of vintage Su-25s to a modern standard. Compared to the A-10C,
the Su-25SM3 is faster and has the advantage of having its targeting system being stuffed into
the nose, as opposed to relying on an external pod. However this also means that the targeting
system has a more limited range of motion as its looking out of a small window in the nose.
The level of integration of electro-optical PGMs is probably less mature as well as the
A-10C has been using similar systems for almost twenty years now and was originally
built to utilize the electro-optical Maverick missile. Conversely, the Su-25 always focused
more on laser-guided munitions. EO munitions have the advantage of being fire and forget,
once the electro-optical seeker is locked on the target,
the missile will guide regardless of the motion of the plane. With a laser, the plane must guide
the missile in with a laser designator and keep flying towards the target until it hits.
Overall, while the planes are broadly similar, one can see how the strengths
of each plane diverge when looking into which subsystems are more developed.
The A-10, which focuses on the gun and delivery of electro-optical PGMs, versus the Su-25,
which focuses on accuracy of “dumb” bombs and rockets from the wings and laser-guided weaponry.
If you find this video interesting, don’t forget to like, share, comment and the
most important one is to hit the subscribe button for more updates on awesome videos.
That’s all for today, thanks for watching and see you next time.