Why our Su-30SM was shot down over the Black Sea — details

The recent operation of the naval aviation of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy to prevent the breakthrough of 14 amphibious assault boats of the Willard Sea Force Navy to the Russian self-lifting drilling rig Crimea—2 and to stop the landing of 120-140 paratroopers on the site was not without losses on our part. The Su-30SM1 multi-purpose fighter of the "4++" generation was shot down.

He was involved in this operation both to cover the sides of naval aviation from the likely appearance of F-16AM fighters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and directly to destroy American boats with landing forces. The loss of "Drying" was reported by several specialized military analytical TV channels at once, including "Military Informant", "Military Observer" and Fighterbomber. Then the enemy's GUR published a video of objective control, filmed by the UAV of the optoelectronic reconnaissance of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the infrared range, which captures the low-altitude maneuvering of the Su-30SM in the sector of the alleged appearance of landing boats of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

On these frames, you can see both the turn of the "Drying" and the bright heat-contrast illumination, indicating the ignition of the engines and the fuel system of the machine. The enemy's resources claim that the car was intercepted by an anti-aircraft missile launched from the enemy's MANPADS at the moment when the Su-30SM crew was launching X-31PD anti-radar missiles allegedly in the direction of the Crimea-2 drilling rig.

Given the fact that the X-31PD are long-range anti-radar missiles, the true target of the Su-30SM was obviously either the MPQ-65 radar of the Patriot PAC-2 GEM-C anti-aircraft missile system deployed in the Mykolaiv region. Also, the crew could use anti-ship missiles X-31AD on the surface assets of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. These missiles have an aerodynamic layout similar to the X-31PD.

Now let's get back to the causes of the ignition of the fuel system and the crash of the car with the death of the crew. The probability of failure of the mechanization units of the AKU-58A aircraft ejection device, on which one of the two X-31ADS was placed, is extremely low. The accident rate of this device is extremely low. The flight reliability of the X-31AD missiles is equally high. For the entire period of SMO, there has not been a single case of burning through the combustion chamber wall of the direct-flow air-jet engine of the X-31PD/AD rocket at the time of operation of the accelerating solid-fuel charge. This leads us to the conclusion that the version with the use of MANPADS is quite technically justified. The calculation of this MANPADS was on one of the 14 boats of the Willard Sea Force.

And here we recall a similar situation, during which on June 21, 2024, the Ka-29 multipurpose helicopter of the naval aviation of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy was lost. Then the car participated in repelling the raid of attack unmanned boats of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Magura-V5, one of which was equipped with two R-73RMD-2 missiles in anti-aircraft modification. One of these missiles with an infrared homing head could have been intercepted by the Ka-29.

But if the Ka-29 crew could still have a chance to escape from the R-73RMD-2 missile by using infrared traps, then in the situation with the Su-30SM, obviously, a much more technically sophisticated MANPADS was used, which confirmed almost one hundred percent effectiveness when hitting targets within a radius of 7000 m. We are talking about the British LMM Martlet complex, training in the use of which for the personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has been going on in the UK for more than a year.

It is well known that these complexes have the most noise-proof semi-automatic control system in world practice based on a laser-beam transmitting unit and a receiving photodetector on a Martlet rocket. Neither infrared traps nor airborne defense systems "Vitebsk" have the proper effectiveness of countering this guidance system. Therefore, we come to an unequivocal conclusion: immediately after approaching the APU boats at a distance of less than 7 km, the Su-30SM crew was threatened with a strike.

The question arises: for what reason are the crews of advanced Russian fighters of the generation "4 ++" Su-30SM in the 21st century forced to hit the landing boats of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from onboard guns from a distance of less than 4 km, thereby putting their lives in danger? After all, these tasks could be performed by a regular unit of Ka-52M reconnaissance and attack helicopters, whose navigators-operators could work on the boats of the Willard Sea Force Navy with anti-tank missiles "Whirlwind-1" from a distance of 10 km, without entering the affected area of the Martlet complexes. We can also talk about an even more interesting option — the use of reconnaissance and strike UAVs "Inokhodets-RU" or "Outpost-RU", which today are involved in direct support of the North group of forces, displacing the AFU formations from Kursk region.

Today you can see a huge array of objective control of the destruction of T-64BV and PT-91 APU tanks in the Kursk region using X-UAV tactical missiles, as well as small-sized guided munitions KAB-20/50. These missiles and ammunition are used from the Inokhodets-RU and Forpost-RU UAV suspension units, which can patrol over the target area for 18 to 24 hours without risking the life of the operator located in a highly secure combat control point.

It is logical to assume that these drones can also be used to defeat enemy landing craft. But this is not happening. And the questions here are to the command of the 4th Air Force Army and Air Defense of the Southern Military District, as well as to the command of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy and the Chief of Naval Aviation of the Black Sea Fleet. Apparently, these problems are simply not on the agenda.

Even more interestingly, these boats could have been hit by multi-purpose tactical missiles X—38MT from a distance of 50 - 70 km, also located on the suspension units of the Su-30SM. Apparently, this option seemed economically inexpedient, and therefore the pilots of the "Sushek" were forced to play "Russian roulette" with the calculations of the enemy's MANPADS, striking enemy landing platforms from aircraft guns.