How to Use Leased SU-35S with Eurofighter?

The recent unjust and wrong decisions taken by the United States and the trigger-happy efforts of our overseas neighbor have made us almost experts in reinforcing our air power, especially in the next 10-15 years. Of course, the relevant organs of our state have determined multiple measures in this regard and these measures will be put into practice gradually. However, we can also see the fact that our neighbor across the water has begun to grow significantly in terms of air power, and we are trying to generate ideas on measures in line with our own knowledge and experience.

First of all, it must be emphasized that we are the undisputed leader in terms of land power, and even if those who are hostile to us were to double their current air power, they would not even dream of stepping east of Alexandroupolis. Our sea power is also incomparable. Unfortunately, our air power is comparable. In fact, everything was planned with the balance in mind. The procurement and installation of our air defense missile shield was deliberately delayed by the US for many years, and when we were forced to procure the S-400 missile system, we were removed from the F-35 program, of which we were a producing partner. We said that we would at least buy a certain number of the latest block of F-16Cs (Block 70 or Viper as it is commonly known) in return for the money we invested in it, and that we would also upgrade the appropriate versions of our F-16 fleet to the Block 70 level with the modernization kits we will receive, but even this issue is being stalled, no clear answer is given. Frankly, it is being dragged out.

Unfortunately, our logistics infrastructure has been completely transformed into the American system in the last 70 years, which has provided us with many conveniences and advantages in many areas, but we have seen that it has also created a serious dependency.

We have to accept the fact that even if the US gives us the option of the F-16V, we need to relieve the mission power of our F-16 fleet, which is the backbone of our air power, for 10-15 years from now, until the Hürjet and MMU are ready for combat and a certain number of aircraft from serial production enter the inventory of the Turkish Air Force. In many respects, the most appropriate choice among the alternatives is the Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 4, and many experts agree on this, as does the author of these lines (see Ref.-1). Although the Eurofighter Typhoon is an overly expensive system and not economically viable at all, it will take over some of the F-16's tactical and strategic missions, and will to some extent alleviate the excessive logistical dependence on the United States.

Of course, our ground-to-air, air-to-air, surface-to-air, ground-to-ground attack and defense missile systems, UAVs and UCAVs, which we are proud of, will also contribute to our air power, but they will not be able to replace the current jet fighter aircraft.

Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen and SU-35 are among the alternatives that will relieve the F-16. The smooth course of political and economic relations with the UK in recent years and the fact that both the aircraft and the engine belong to a consortium of European countries, which we believe will not cause us any problems, bring the Eurofighter Typhoon to the forefront. The fact that the aircraft and its engines are French, and the capacity of the aircraft, also give Rafale a good chance, but the political distrust of France also blunts the chances of this alternative. While the Gripen is economically viable as a reasonable single-engine aircraft, the fact that its engine is made in the US, and therefore logistically dependent on the US, and the political relations with Sweden, which have not been going well in recent years, also rule out this alternative. The SU-35, whose airplane and engine performance is appreciated, whose avionic capacity is not, and which is not compatible with the western logistics system, is also much talked about, especially due to the intense commercial and political relations with Russia. In this article, we wanted to evaluate the SU-35, which normally does not stand out in terms of its systems and the maintenance of these systems, not with the option of purchasing it, but with the option of leasing it.

The SU-35 is a continuation of the SU-27 jet fighter family and the SU-35S is the latest version of this family. The SU-27 family is the US equivalent of the high-mix concept and should be compared to the F-15 and F-22 families, but in recent years, Russian defense technology has lagged far behind Western defense technology, especially in avionics, which has negatively affected the image and foreign market share of even the last members of this family, the SU-35 aircraft.

China bought a batch of SU-35S, but did not place any additional orders after the introduction of the J-20. China has stated that the SU-35S was the last aircraft it purchased from abroad.

Egypt received a batch of SU-35S, but was at risk of facing US sanctions and rumors circulated that it was not satisfied with the electronic performance of the aircraft. Egypt canceled the order agreement. Iran is likely to receive the SU-^%S it ordered.

Indonesia placed an order but suspended it due to American pressure.

Potential customers; 

United Arab Emirates, India, Algeria, Vietnam, Kazakhstan, North Korea, Pakistan, Sudan, United Arab Emirates

Advantages of Leasing the SU-35S instead of Buying it:

Buying the SU-35S would bring up the logistical and system maintenance problems we have tried to summarize above. The incompatibility of the systems, the fact that the systems do not meet the specified specifications, and the fact that the SU-35S has not yet achieved significant commercial success will make the purchase option even more risky.

However, if the aircraft and the desired type and quantity of ammunition are leased; 

1. If the aircraft fails to perform as desired, the lease contract will be canceled.

2. It would be a source of prestige for Russia if an effective air force such as the Turkish Air Force uses the SU-35S. It will also increase the export capacity of the SU-35S. Therefore, I believe that Russia will also look favorably on the leasing option.

3. The SU-35 will relieve the F-16 especially in air superiority missions.

4. Our logistical dependence on the US for the maintenance of our jet fighters will be reduced to some extent.

Conclusion:

The SU-35S is also being considered or mentioned among the aircraft that are being considered to lighten the burden of our F-16 fleet. However, the fact that it does not conform to Western or, in other words, NATO standards is a concern in terms of logistic support and maintenance, and pushes this option to the back burner. Considering the lease option instead of the purchase option would eliminate some serious hesitations on this alternative. 

Note: Additional technical information on the SU-35S is summarized below.

SU-35S Technical Information

The Su-35 is superior to the F-16 in almost every respect. The Flanker is a faster aircraft; it can carry more ammunition, has a longer range; has more powerful avionics and better avionics, and can carry a wide range of high-speed, stand-alone munitions. Since the 1960s, fighter aircraft have been broadly divided into two classes: large fighters, such as the F-15 and SU-27 Flanker series, and small fighters, such as the F-16, F/A-18, Rafale and Gripen.

Large jet fighters have longer ranges, larger fuel tanks, larger engines, more powerful radars and carry more bombs and missiles than smaller jet fighters. If a large fighter encounters a smaller fighter, it is likely to see it earlier and send more, larger, long-range missiles first. As a result, on a level playing field, one large fighter should probably be capable of keeping three smaller fighters at bay. If nothing else, the larger fighters can always fire their BVR (Beyond Visual Range) missiles and turn around and leave.

Another distinct advantage of large airframes is that they have longer radii. They can carry a lot of ammunition for air-to-surface missions. The Su-35 can carry a more significant payload much farther than the F-16. 

The Su-35 is the newest version of the Flanker. It is a large and heavy twin-engine fighter weighing 17 tons empty. Its design is that of an air superiority fighter (meaning it carries a powerful radar and expensive sophisticated weapons optimized to hit other fighters). The large size means that its range is longer than other fighters (operating radius - 1500km). The closest fighter in the US inventory to the SU-352e is actually the F-15.

The Su-35S is the newest version of the "Flanker". It is a large and heavy 2-engine fighter weighing 17 tons empty. Its design is that of an air superiority fighter (meaning it carries a powerful radar and expensive weapons optimized to shoot down other fighters). The large size means that its range is longer than other fighters (combat radius - 1500km). The closest fighter in the US inventory is actually the F-15.

The F-16 is a much smaller fighter. It has one engine and weighs 8 tons, half the weight of the Su-35S. It started life as a light, highly maneuverable fighter, but over time it has evolved into a slightly heavier, multi-role fighter. The smaller size means it is not designed for long-range missions (operating radius 500km). 

Few meaningful comparisons can be made between these fighters. If an Air Force is considering buying Flankers, F-16s will probably not fit the bill. Su-35s, for example, can carry extremely long-range missiles designed to attack AWACS and air tankers. The Americans don't make such missiles, but even if a country that flies F-16s did develop such a missile, it would probably be too big for the F-16.

On the other hand, an air force looking to procure an F-16 or similar fighter aircraft would consider other shorter-range multirole aircraft (perhaps the Gripen). This class of aircraft is generally much cheaper and easier to maintain. There is no information on whether the Su-35 has been used for air-to-ground attacks. The F-16s have become one of the best air-to-ground attack aircraft, with capabilities added over time.

Entering service from 2014, the Su-35 heavyweight fighter is currently the most capable fighter in the Russian inventory and represents the latest in a series of intensively developed derivatives of the Su-27 Flanker, the ultimate Soviet air superiority fighter. Originally developed for export, the cancellation of the MiG 1.42 fifth-generation fighter program in 1999 and delays to the more ambitious Su-57 program forced the Russian military to rely on '4++ generation' aircraft with close to 100 Su-35s. They were purchased in the 2010s, with more ordered in the 2020s. The Su-35's primary sensor, the Irbis-E AESA radar, is known to be relatively the most advanced nose-mounted radar. The radar uses both electronic and mechanical scanning with a passive phased antenna array mounted on a two-stage hydraulic drive unit. The drive unit mechanically rotates the antenna to 60° in azimuth and 120° in roll, while the antenna scans in azimuth and elevation using an electronically controlled beam. The use of electronic control and additional mechanical rotation of the antenna allows the maximum deflection angle of the radar beam to reach a very wide 120°. The radar can scan not only a large area, but also distances more than four times greater than the original Su-27's N001 radar, which is capable of tracking aircraft with a radar cross-section of three square meters up to 400 km.

The impressive SU-35S is the latest incarnation of the SU-27 fighter jet family. It can be accurately described as the pinnacle of current conventional fighter design, blending an excellent basic aerodynamic design with advanced engine, flight control and avionics technology.

The SU-35 designation has been applied to two basic Flanker configurations since 1991. The first aircraft to carry the Su-35 label was the digital T-31M/Su-31M Flanker E, powered and fitted with the Al-10FM engine in the early 1990s. It was equipped with the Tikhomirov NIIP N011 planar array radar. Export configurations were designated as Su-35. This aircraft was used as the basis for the Su-37 Flanker F advanced technology demonstrator, often labeled the Super Flanker. The Su-37 was used as a platform to demonstrate a modern glass cockpit, N011M BARS PESA radar, thrust vector control engines and a quad digital flight control system with electric side stick controller. Much of the technology proven on the Su-37 was carried over to the Su-30MKI/MKM Flanker H, which was exported to Asia.

Ordered in 2009 for the Russian Air Force, the current Su-35S was the result of a series of design studies for a deep modernization of the Su-27M design. This was in fact a deep restructuring of the basic design in the style of the F-15E versus the F-15C carried out in the 1980s. The new Su-35BM retained the basic aerodynamic design and much of the structural design of the outgoing Flanker, but the aircraft also received significant aerodynamic enhancements and all-new engines and digital systems.

Notable changes include the removal of the rear speed brake, additional internal fuel and plumbing for AAR and external drop tanks. A quadruplex digital flight control system is used. The SU-35S uses Item 41S engines, which utilize key components of the Al-41F supercruising core. The SU-35S is the first non-US fighter with significant sustained supersonic cruise capability, giving it a tremendous energy advantage over conventional opponents in most air combat regimes.

The avionics suite is fully digital. The centerpiece is the Tikhomirov NIIP N035 Irbis E (Snow Leopard) 20 kiloWatt class steerable hybrid EASA radar. It uses a new glass cockpit with large area displays. The Khibiny electronic warfare suite is used in conjunction with new wingtip DRFM technology jamming pods.

The aircraft was intended to carry the full spectrum of Russian air-to-air and air-to-ground guided weapons.

Given the wide performance margin in the Su-35S design, it has significant long-term growth potential. In addition to the first Russian-made wide-aperture AESA radars, the R-172 was designed as a platform for very long-range AAM.

Irbis-E was also mounted on the modernized variants of the Su-27, Su-27SM2 and SM3, and on the new SU-27SM2, also derived from the Su-27. But what distinguishes the Su-35's sensor suite from these aircraft is the deployment of additional forward-facing radars that complement the main nose-mounted radar to maximize situational awareness. Unlike the Irbis-E, which uses both electronic and mechanical scanning, these two sensors deployed on the leading edge of its wings are Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars. The twin N036B-1-01 L-band radars provide increased angular coverage and are ideal for covert target tracking and electronic warfare. AESA radars are not only more powerful than passively scanned array designs, they are also much more difficult to jam. L-band operates in the 1.0 Ghz to 2.0 Ghz region of the radio spectrum with wavelengths of 15-30 cm, much longer than X-band radars with frequencies of 8-12 Ghz. Since most stealth fighters are optimized to avoid X-band radar waves, these long-wave radars are considered to be much more capable of detecting stealth aircraft. 

Strategically, the Su-35S is a game changer as it strongly outclasses all rival western fighter jets except the F-22A Raptor. When deployed in significant numbers, it has the ability to change the balance of power in any region where it is deployed. This fact does not seem to be widely understood in most western air forces or defense ministry bureaucracies.