Su-34 bombers use FAB-500SHN bombs with a parachute braking system against the Armed Forces of Ukraine

During the NMD, Russian Su-34 fighter-bombers use a large range of their aviation weapons against the Armed Forces of Ukraine. On November 2, the Russian Ministry of Defense presented another video to the public, which shows the combat work of the involved aircraft.

It should be noted that the crews of the Su-34 are on round-the-clock duty at home airfields. In addition, in any weather conditions, day and night, they patrol the airspace, cover the actions of the Ground Forces of the RF Armed Forces, and suppress enemy air defense, artillery and fortified areas. One of the ASPs shown in the footage is the FAB-500SHN 500-kilogram unguided high-explosive assault bombs with a parachute braking system for dropping at low and extremely low altitudes (100-200 m).

It should be noted that with the increase in the effectiveness of air defense, the idea of ​​delivering aerial bombs to the target at the above-mentioned heights was widely recognized throughout the world in the late 50s of the twentieth century. But the use of powerful air bombs at such heights is associated with the danger of hitting one's own aircraft with exploding fragments. So, in 1961, the FAB-250Sh and FAB-1500ShA assault bombs appeared, and later, in 1969, GNPP Bazalt (now JSC NPO Bazalt, Moscow, part of Rostec) created the FAB-500Sh.

These munitions are designed to overcome air defense zones by aviation and destroy military-industrial facilities, railway junctions, lightly armored equipment, manpower and military field installations. Air bombs are equipped with a built-in braking device and a fuse, which is an integral part of the design. Slowing down the fall of an aerial bomb allows the aircraft to leave the zone of dispersion of its fragments. Some time after the drop, the parachute fires back, after which the ammunition rushes to the ground with increasing speed. In 1976, the GNPP "Basalt" developed an improved model - the low-altitude FAB-500ShN, and in 1986 - an assault munition with a predictive leader FAB-500SHL.
  • Photos used: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. zuuukoo Offline zuuukoo
    zuuukoo (Sergei) 3 November 2022 15: 18
    It remains to understand why it was necessary to build an expensive and relatively modern aircraft (although its prototypes were created in the late USSR) if, as a result, it is used in the same way and with essentially the same ammunition as the IL-2 (well, or su-25).

    Not to mention that in 2022 it would be cheaper and more efficient to tie a glider and an engine from a moped with a propeller to the bomb.
    They are used anyway against static targets on the front line, so it’s not far to fly, and minimal adjustments could be made from reconnaissance UAVs.

    Z. Y. : Of course, it is necessary to dispose of old ammunition, but with this approach, they will be disposed of together with the pilots (I believe they are already being disposed of).
    Moreover, unlike the su-25 (with some kind of armor), the su-34 is just foil.
    1. Gadley Offline Gadley
      Gadley 3 November 2022 15: 23
      old ammunition must also be disposed of. Shelf life is limited.
      1. 1_2 Offline 1_2
        1_2 (Ducks are flying) 3 November 2022 18: 59
        necessary, but without risking the lives of pilots and without the risk of losing an expensive aircraft, they could have come up with a parachute-wing for a bomb or a plywood mini glider
  2. Dmitry Volkov Offline Dmitry Volkov
    Dmitry Volkov (Dmitry Volkov) 3 November 2022 15: 43
    The MiG-27 and Il-102 solved these problems with greater efficiency, the first multi-mode, second real attack aircraft, and not the Su-25.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Muscool Offline Muscool
    Muscool (Glory) 3 November 2022 16: 59
    We operate with modern aircraft tactically as in the Second World War, with cast-iron bombs. And for example, Iran, makes a blotch with wings on old bombs and shoots them at 22 km from the ancient Su 50. A disgrace to our deputy hucksters
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. 1_2 Offline 1_2
    1_2 (Ducks are flying) 3 November 2022 18: 54
    a bomb is, of course, cheaper than a MLRS rocket ... until an expensive plane is shot down
  6. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 3 November 2022 19: 07
    If there are old bombs designed for parachute, then so as not to drop them on the heads of neighbors.
    A plane with a bomb is better than a plane without a bomb.
  7. Alex Samoletov Offline Alex Samoletov
    Alex Samoletov 3 November 2022 19: 46
    The United States has long been converting ordinary fab into planning JDAM systems. and the leadership of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is not capable of thinking up to this ??? to expose the expensive Su 34 under the fire of MANPADS and DShK - cretenism and this is putting it mildly ...
  8. Viktor fm Offline Viktor fm
    Viktor fm (Victor) 4 November 2022 15: 08
    It's time to make a sharaga to the state
  9. vlad127490 Offline vlad127490
    vlad127490 (Vlad Gor) 4 November 2022 20: 17
    Su-34, Su-35. Throw adjustable bombs from heights of 15 km and above, flew in for 10 minutes, bombed it to a depth of more than 250 km and went back at a speed of 1900 km / h, this is 8 minutes, it will be 2-3 minutes in the air defense zone. 5-10 tons of bombs will drop one Su. If KAB-500 is not enough, then KAB-1500 will definitely break through all the fortifications of the Armed Forces of Ukraine near Avdiivka.
  10. Pilot Offline Pilot
    Pilot (Pilot) 5 November 2022 07: 15
    Great. And in Kherson where the type of plain and Ukrainians gather in heaps. What is loosely carpeted to hold? BUT? Or again, damn brotherly people ....
    1. svit55 Offline svit55
      svit55 (Sergey Valentinovich) 5 November 2022 19: 44
      Modern generals do not know how to use aviation.