Swing-wing Fitters

[Slater]

Regarding the Su-17/20/22 series, my impression was that they were rugged and reliable, but somewhat range- and payload limited. Are they judged to be an overall successful design?

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello

Difficult to tell. Soviets and later Russians seem to be happy enough with the type. Egypt air force was critical to its fixed-wing predecessor Su-7's lack of range (especially as Soviets sold them two drop tanks per aircraft only, hardly sufficient for late 60'/early 70' Middle East wars), but its swing-wing replacement Su-20 came too late for proper combat evaluation. Syria still uses the type on daily basis, while most of former Warsaw Pact countries have long since phased her out. It is significant, though, that Poland, which has always been quick to replace Cold war era armament with western equipment, not only intends to keep a squadron or two of Fitters until at least 2020, but also updates and upgrades the type regularly. Cheers
Jure

[Muzz]

Would say it has to be classed as a successful design due to fairly successful export sales and it still being in use today as far afield as Peru and Vietnam some 30 odd years after its introduction.

[exdraken]

I'd rather say yes as well!

Still used on Syria, Iran, Angola, Vietnam and Poland, probably Yemen as well if not based in the wrong part of the war tornn country...

Peru has tetired ťheirs afaik, Libya has none left.

Egpecially the M3/4 was a rather versatile plane! Recce, precicion attack, anti radar etc! Hardly anything comparable back in the 80ies that was awailable to Eastern or afiliated countries! Also ťhe smaller Nato forces did not nevessarily have more versatile planes!

[XV107]

As Jure says, the fact that the Poles appeared to have 'The best replacement for a Fitter is another Fitter' as their version of 'The best replacement for a Buccaneer is another Buccaneer' is probably instructive.

Some years ago, I ended up working with a Polish AF exchange officer for a few months, and when someone asked him whether he was looking forward to the prospect of flying F-16s rather than the Fitter (this was before the F-16 entered Polish service), he expressed the view that he would be quite content to fly the Fitter for a few more yet. The question, I gathered, was one of when the Fitter would reach the point where no further upgrades were going to work in keeping it as a viable combat aircraft, at least against near-peer competitors.

 

That said, that's context specific - if your opponent has a very limited or no air-to-air capability, or if you're part of a coalition where the leading partner(s) has (have) jumped up and down on the enemy air defence system, and then jumped up and down on it again to make sure, or if you're being supported by a partner nation whose very presence will bring a degree of protection from advanced threats from another party who might otherwise intervene against you, then the relative obsolence doesn't matter. Nor does it matter if you can't integrate it into a networked system if you have no network; the lack of variety (if at all) of PGMs doesn't matter if your rules of engagement don't need PGMs to be used, etc, etc.

 

But overall, it seems to be a very decent aircraft even now, although I have a feeling that when it leaves service, it will do so to a mixture of lamentations from its pilots and quiet contentment that something more modern is replacing it.

[bentwaters81tfw]

Allegedly, Fitters are man hour and cash hungry. The crew at Scampton who own the airworthy Buccaneer also have an airworthy Fitter.

It's never been used in the UK as a training facility due to the high flight hour costs. It's only the non - Soviet block export operators who still use them.

Under some disarmament accord when the USSR broke up, they were withdrawn along similar lines as the F-4s.

I tried for some time to get pictures of Fitters in Uzbek markings. They have 36 in store, but they have never flown since independence in 1991. They are all up for sale via a US based arms dealership on a State sponsored basis.