Russian Air Force Su-25 Frogfoot attack aircraft dropped 6,000 (mostly unguided) bombs over Syria

The Russian Air Force Su-25 Frogfoots were pretty busy during their Syrian deployment.

On Mar. 16, the Russian Aerospace Forces (RuAF) welcomed the return of their Sukhoi Su-25 attack aircraft from Hmeymim airfield, in Syria, to their home base in the Krasnodar region.

As reported by the Tass News Agency, during the ceremony, Alexander Galkin, the Russia’s Southern Military District commander, said the Frogfoots flew more than 1,600 sorties and dropped around 6,000 bombs since when Russian aircraft began missions against terrorists in Syria on Sep. 15, 2015.

After a prolonged assignment away from home we are welcoming back our best pilots. They have coped with all of their tasks. Over the past six months they flew 1,600 sorties in adverse conditions spending more than 1,000 hours in the sky over Syria to have dropped about 6,000 bombs on the terrorists,” Galkin said.

Noteworthy, the Sukhoi Su-34 bombers have been the first RuAF aircraft to leave Hmeymim airbase on Mar. 15, followed by the Su-24 and Su-25 attack jets which left the airfield later on the same day.

A we have already explained, unlike the U.S. led coalition combat planes which rely on accurate precision guided munitions (PGMs), the Russian aircraft made an extensive use of unguided bombs, such as the OFAB-250 which along with S-13 rockets represented the main weapon used by the Frogfoots against terrorists targets in Syria.

Nevertheless also the RuAF attack jets used several kinds of PGMs. These weapons, which belong to the KAB-500 guided bomb series, include the KAB-500KR TV guided bomb, the KAB-500L laser guided bomb and the GLONASS-guided KAB-500S-E that like the American JDAM depends on a GPS guidance system.

These smart weapons can arm the Su-24, the Su-25, the Su-30 and the Su-34: all the fighter bomber types that took part in the Russian air campaign in Syria.

Image credit: Russian MoD

12 Comments

  1. The entire operation did cost approximately 425 million Euros. And the SVP-24 helped to hit the targets with the unguided bombs.

  2. Yeah, the Russians ACTUALLY claimed a “100% hit rate.” One analyst suggested that if the Russians were aiming for the ground, then yeah, they hit their targets 100% of the time.

    • Smart or dumb bombs , Russia has been able to change the course of the war in favor of Asadd.

    • Actually hit the foreign backed, Islamist “opposition” and stopped their advances, unlike the American “coalition”.

  3. Can anyone comment to compare the capabilities of Su-25 and A-10 in the ISIS fighting role?

  4. *facepalm*
    Yep, human lives are indeed, very cheap for the Russians, and they seem not to care much if they hit hospitals either.

    • not a single piece of proof has been provided about hospitals hit by russians. Very much different than the Kunduz hospital destroyed by the USAF, where an AC-130 gunned the building not once, but repeatedly, and among the desperate calls of the medical personnel inside to the US command. Of course after Kunduz somebody had to assert that if the USAF bombs an hospital, the RuAF bombs five.

      • Of course, let’s ignore the evidence available. Because hey, it is the “russian thing to do”.

        And hitting multiple hospitals in Aleppo too, no less!

    • After almost half a year the yanks issued a half-assed apology for the
      Kunduz hospital destruction, and murdering of its staff, and patients.
      The perpetrators barely got a slap on the wrist – but that’s only for
      the essential, exceptional, and indispensable nation. The russians are
      demonized, without any proof, day in – day out, for fictional misdoings.
      In your place I would be ashamed – not that I would really expect anything from your alikes…

      • What did the Russians do instead? They denied, and people like you keep spreading their propaganda.

        It is NATO that gets demonized, day-in and day-out. It seems that everything NATO does is wrong on your eyes, and in the commie eyes, even if it refuses to do something, it is wrong.

        I would be completely ashamed for supporting a nation that bombs multiple hospitals and then refuses to admit it, or a nation that perpetrated a genocide of millions, like Soviet Russia.

      • True, su34. The Nato supporters have no problem with Nato bombing civilians. They accuse Russia, without proof, in order to distract attention away from Nato.

Comments are closed.