Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy has claimed to have captured a US MQM-170 drone in the Strait of Hormuz. IRGC-N claimed in a statement that its electronic warfare unit took control of the drone’s guidance and control systems and brought it down.

“Fighters of the IRGC Navy’s electronic warfare unit carried out an offensive electronic warfare operation. They detected and identified an MQM-170 reconnaissance and decoy drone belonging to the ‘terrorist U.S. army’ west of the Strait of Hormuz, took control of its guidance and control systems, and brought it down intact.

The drone’s mission was to locate the Islamic Republic of Iran’s air defense systems along the Persian Gulf coastline and the Strait of Hormuz. IRGC Navy specialists recovered data from the aircraft and determined that it had taken off from the coast of one of the countries on the southern shore of the Persian Gulf.”

CENTCOM spokesman Tim Hawkins rejected the claim outright: “In the past weeks and months, the IRGC has repeatedly lied out of desperation, and today is no different.”

The MQM-170 is a low-cost, recoverable aerial target drone used by the U.S. Army and Navy for air-defense training.

It is not a high-end reconnaissance UAV comparable to systems such as the MQ-9 or RQ-170. Some variants can carry sensors, but its main role is to simulate threats. An intact capture of a target/decoy drone would still offer limited technical intelligence value compared with more advanced platforms.

Earlier, Iran claimed to have seized American drones.

“Through a coordinated, complex operation involving intelligence oversight and electronic warfare, IRGC naval forces’ personnel successfully captured an advanced unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) belonging to the terrorist US military,” the IRGC naval forces said in a statement on the 8th September, according to state TV.

The IRGC said that the drone was “operating in the Strait of Hormuz for espionage purposes”, identifying the model as a Remus 600 autonomous underwater vehicle that was “now in the hands of the force’s specialists for data recovery”.

Earlier, as EurAsian Times reported, the IRGC, on September 8, said that they had recovered a US drone submarine at the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz.

“One of the US military’s most advanced unmanned underwater vehicles was seized by Iranian armed forces at the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz during a complex intelligence and field operation and brought into Iran, IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) said in a post on X.

Iran’s state media later officially identified the captured vessel as an Anduril Dive-LD UUV.

US Navy Captain Tim Hawkins, the spokesperson for US CENTCOM, said, “An underwater drone operated by US forces malfunctioned more than a day ago. It was surveying regional waters in support of ongoing operations. The defective drone was an older model that neither collected sensitive data nor carried any classified sonar or radar equipment. US operations in area waters continue.”

Tankers on Fire

Meanwhile, at least four tankers have caught fire after hitting mines while attempting to pass the Strait of Hormuz, which the Trump administration said was free of mines and under American control.

For instance, on 25 August, Trump posted on Truth Social: “I have just been informed by the United States Navy that all mines have been removed and/or detonated from within the International Waters of the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has been notified that any ship or boat placing new mines will be immediately and systematically destroyed. Through Space Force, we are watching every square inch of the Strait, as we are, also, with Pickaxe Mountain and the already destroyed three other Nuclear sites. There is a Zero Tolerance policy on mine placement in full force and effect.

IRGC said in a statement: “Over the past 24 hours, three violating oil tankers exploded and caught fire after striking mines while attempting to pass through the unauthorized southern route of the Strait of Hormuz.

The vessels had switched off all their radar and navigation systems and disregarded warnings from the IRGC Navy as they attempted to leave through the unauthorized southern route. The tankers were left stranded/abandoned along the southern coast of the Strait.

The IRGC Navy states that the unauthorized route through the Strait of Hormuz is mined, and that vessel owners and crews are responsible for transiting these routes and should not pay attention to CENTCOM’s delusions/illusions on social media.

The facts on the ground will speak for themselves / will determine the outcome. Any provocative action, supported by the terrorist and invading US military’s act of mischief, that disregards the regulations governing the Strait will be met with a resolute/firm response.”

In recent weeks, Iran has reported multiple vessels striking sea mines, prompting CENTCOM to reaffirm that all mines in “primary transit routes” have been cleared.

On Thursday, Hossein Mohebi, the IRGC spokesman, challenged the claim, saying, “Prove your Hormuz mine-clearing claim with independent evidence, not statements!” in a post on X.

Arsenio Dominguez, Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization, said: “The traffic separation scheme, the information that we have is that they still have mines. And of course, whilst the conflict is ongoing, it’s very difficult for us to use third parties to verify that it is clear of these hazards. So in the meantime, we cannot guarantee that a vessel that intends to transit that route will not be hit by a mine.”

Jakob Larsen, Chief Safety & Security Officer, BIMCO (Baltic and International Maritime Council, the world’s largest international shipping association), also highlighted the risk of mines and said: “We still consider it very risky for ships to commence transits at this point. The threat of mines in the area remains a concern immediately as well as further down the line, and mine-free routes need to be established.”

By ET Online Desk

The post U.S. Rejects Iran’s Claim of Seizing MQM-170 Drone as Four Tankers Catch Fire in Strait of Hormuz appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

The US Navy saw a 10-year high in Class-A mishaps in Fiscal Year 2026, underscoring the risks of naval operations even for the world’s most powerful military.

The US Navy recorded its highest number of serious Class-A aviation and afloat mishaps in at least a decade in FY26, according to data the Naval Safety Command released Oct. 26, 2026.

The Naval Safety Command reported 16 Class A aviation mishaps and 11 Class A afloat mishaps between October 1, 2025, and September 30, 2026 — the highest combined total in at least a decade and a clear sign of a difficult year for naval operations.

These accidents are the most since FY2014, when the Navy had 17 Class A aviation mishaps and four afloat Class A mishaps.

Class A mishaps are accidents that result in damage of at least US$2.5 million, destroyed aircraft, or fatalities or permanent total disabilities.

A Bad Year For Naval Aviation

In the one-year period between October 1, 2025, and September 30, 2026, the aviation mishap rate rose to about 2.23 per 100,000 flight hours, up from 1.60 the previous year and well above the 10-year average of about 1.31.

Some of these notable incidents that were widely publicized are: 

In a shocking incident on October 26, 2025, a US Navy MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopter assigned to the ‘Battle Cats’ of Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 73 and the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet assigned to the “Fighting Redcocks” of Strike Fighter Squadron 22 crashed into the South China Sea within 30 minutes of each other, as the EurAsian Times reported.

The back-to-back crashes occurred in relatively shallow waters of the South China Sea, which China claims almost entirely. The wreckage of the aircraft was pulled out of the crash site from a depth of about 400 feet only in December 2025.

Two US Navy EA-18G Growler jets from the VAQ-129 “Vikings” Growler Demonstration Team collided mid-air during the Gunfighter Skies Air Show at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho on May 17, 2026.

Eventually, videos of the collision surfaced on social media, showing one plane coming up from behind before it collided, hitting the back of the lead aircraft with its nose. All four pilots of the two planes managed to eject in time and safely parachute down to the ground even as their aircraft crashed and exploded.

On July 1, 2026, a US Navy MH-60S Sea Hawk helicopter assigned to the USS George H.W. Bush aircraft carrier ditched in the Arabian Sea early on July 1, leaving one crew member missing who was later presumed dead. While the crash occurred in a war zone, it wasn’t caused by hostilities, the Navy said, adding that an investigation had been launched.

A US Navy EA-18G Growler assigned to the “Zappers” of Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 130 experienced an arresting-gear failure while landing aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) off the Virginia coast on September 28. The two crew members ejected and were safely recovered, though about four to six personnel were reportedly injured.

Other notable manned-aircraft incidents include two separate engine fires aboard the Navy’s carrier-capable fighter, the Super Hornet. On July 1, 2026, a two-seat F/A-18F Super Hornet assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron 22 at Naval Air Station Lemoore, California, experienced a left engine fire during a routine training mission. 

Later, an F/A-18E experienced an in-flight engine fire during a routine training mission and landed safely at Naval Air Station Oceana, though the exact date wasn’t specified.

The US Navy also lost an MQ-4C Triton unmanned aircraft. 

On April 9, the MQ-4C Triton high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) disappeared over the Persian Gulf near the Strait of Hormuz during a maritime surveillance mission.

The Navy finally acknowledged on April 14 that the drone had crashed that day, as the EurAsian Times had previously reported. An MQ-4C costs slightly more than $238 million per unit, and the crash was classified as Class A.

US Navy Afloat Accidents

A Supply-class fast combat support ship, USNS Supply, and the USS Truxtun destroyer collided while conducting a replenishment-at-sea on February 12, 2026. Two personnel sustained minor injuries in the collision, and the Navy was investigating the incident.

“Two personnel reported minor injuries and are in stable condition. Both ships have reported sailing safely. The incident is currently under investigation,” the USNI News reported at the time, citing a statement from the US Navy.

On March 12, 2026, the most severe accident occurred aboard USS Gerald R. Ford when a fire broke out in the laundry room.

“The cause of the fire was not combat-related and is contained. There is no damage to the ship’s propulsion plant, and the aircraft carrier remains fully operational. Two sailors are currently receiving medical treatment for non-life-threatening injuries and are in stable condition. Additional information will be provided when available,” the US Navy said at the time.  “There is no damage to the ship’s propulsion plant, and the aircraft carrier remains fully operational.”

The fire burned for more than 30 hours, damaged berthing for hundreds of sailors, and forced the carrier to divert to Split, Croatia, for repairs.

On April 19, 2026, a fire on board the destroyer USS Zumwalt (DDG-1000) at HII Ingalls Shipbuilding injured three sailors. The fire was reported at around 9:45 p.m. local time while Zumwalt was pierside at the Pascagoula, Miss., shipyard. The guided-missile destroyer was at Ingalls for a modernization phase since August 2023. 

Two more notable incidents that resulted in the death of the crew include the assumed death of Lance Cpl. Chukwuemeka Oforah, who fell overboard from USS Iwo Jima on February 7, and the death of Lance Cpl. Armando Ortiz Canseco, attached to the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock USS Anchorage (LPD-23), who vanished at sea on June 25.

The report also notes that although the absolute numbers of catastrophic events rose, off-duty fatalities declined, and many aviation mishaps did not result in loss of life thanks to successful ejections and rescues. The Navy experienced 30 total on-duty Class A incidents in FY 2026, the highest number since the sea service experienced 30 in 2022.

A 46-year-old lieutenant commander who perished in a motorcycle accident during a military motorcycle safety group ride and a death during physical training were the other two on-duty fatalities in FY 2026. 

There were 45 fatalities from 48 off-duty accidents in the Navy. That was less than the 54 accidents and 53 fatalities from the previous year. 

Meanwhile, the report suggests that the Marine Corps recorded six aviation Class-A mishaps, including five flight and one ground-related, up one from the prior year, and 12 total on-duty Class-A mishaps that resulted in seven fatalities.

One high-profile Marine aviation loss occurred on October 16, 2025, when an AH-1Z Viper attack helicopter crashed in a Southern California desert during a training flight. The pilot, Maj. Tyler Braconi, was killed in the deadly crash, while the second Marine was hospitalized after the incident.

The Navy’s high Class A mishap rate comes amid sustained operational tempo, including its Indo-Pacific presence, the war with Iran in West Asia, and ongoing training requirements. A range of issues caused these accidents, from maintenance problems and equipment failures to human factors and environmental conditions.

The numbers are a sobering reminder of the inherent risks of naval aviation and surface operations amid ongoing security risks and military operations.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

The post U.S. Navy Records Worst Year in a Decade as Jets Collided, Helicopters Ditched & Aircraft Carrier Caught Fire appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Poland has been selected as the maintenance site for Patriot’s most advanced interceptors, the first and only such facility outside the United States.

The decision highlights two very different American approaches: the F-35’s highly globalized supply chain versus the Patriot’s more tightly controlled production and maintenance model.

Two simultaneous wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have strained global Patriot interceptor stockpiles, and multiple European countries, including Germany, Poland, and Ukraine, have urged the US to establish new production and maintenance facilities for the air-defense system.

Poland highlighted how multiple European countries were lobbying and competing for the Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) missile maintenance facility.

“Four countries competed for the ⁠European location of this investment: alongside Poland — Germany, the ​Netherlands, and Norway,” Poland’s Deputy Defense Minister ‌Magdalena Sobkowiak-Czarnecka wrote on social media platform ​X.

Announcing the decision, the Pentagon said in a statement: “The United States Government, in coordination with Lockheed Martin and European Allies, announced the selection of the Republic of Poland as the host nation for the European Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile Maintenance Facility (MMF).”

It added that the “new facility will be underpinned by robust, transatlantic industrial cooperation, with critical supply chain integration led by Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden.”

Notably, the center in Poland will be the only one outside the United States.

The Pentagon statement underlined that the facility will “significantly enhance operational readiness,” ensure rapid surge capacity during a crisis, and reinforce “credible collective deterrence along NATO’s Eastern Front.”

“By establishing regional maintenance, repair, and overhaul capabilities directly within the European theater, the MMF will dramatically shorten turnaround times and further secure critical supply lines,” it added.

While the Pentagon statement highlights the importance of the new PAC-3 maintenance facility in Poland for Europe’s collective security, deterrence, and operational readiness, the fact that it is the only such PAC-3 maintenance facility outside the US still underscores Washington’s relatively centralized, tightly controlled approach to Patriot interceptor production and sustainment.

Beyond Poland becoming the first host of a PAC-3 maintenance facility outside the US, Japan remains the only country so far permitted to license-produce the more advanced PAC-3 MSE interceptors. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries assembles the missiles under a Lockheed Martin license, though output has remained limited.

Despite Ukraine’s repeated requests, it has not been allowed to license-produce the PAC-3 MSE interceptors.

U.S. Eyes F-16 Revival With Blackbeard Hypersonic Missile as Air Force Continues its Stealth Push

In July, U.S. President Donald Trump announced an agreement to allow Ukraine to produce Patriot missile interceptors during the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey.

However, Trump reversed course within a week, saying no final agreement had been made and expressing caution about transferring the sensitive technology.

Reportedly, the prime contractor for the PAC-3 MSE interceptors, Lockheed Martin, was opposed to transferring the sensitive technology to Ukraine.

In September, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced that Trump had made a “final decision” to grant Kyiv production licenses for PAC-3 MSE interceptors; Washington has not confirmed this.

This approach of strictly guarding Patriot PAC-3 MSE production and sustainment contrasts sharply with Washington’s approach to another weapons platform, the F-35, whose production is highly globalized through a multinational supply web.

The F-35 vs Patriot PAC-3 MSE Interceptors: A Study in Contrasts

The F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and Patriot air defense systems are two of the US’s most successful weapons export platforms. The US has exported them to 20 countries so far, including original partners and foreign military sales customers.

However, many other countries, including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar, want to buy the stealth aircraft.

Notably, earlier this month, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin have agreed to a framework agreement to buy F-35 fighters for the next 10 years.

Under the framework, pending US Congress approval, Lockheed Martin will produce 1,560 F-35 Lightning II aircraft over the next ten years for the US and its international customers, at a rate of 156 fighters per year.

The US will buy at least 850 of these stealth fighter jets, and the remaining 710 F-35 fighters are expected to be built for export markets.

Similarly, 18 countries operate the Patriot air defense system, and it has been combat-tested in multiple theatres, including Ukraine and the Middle East War.

However, despite their similar export success and rising global demand, the two weapons systems could not have been different in how the US envisioned them, handled their design and development, and organized their production and sustainment.

U.S. Navy Records Worst Year in a Decade as Jets Collided, Helicopters Ditched & Aircraft Carrier Caught Fire

Patriot AD System

The MIM-104 Patriot is the US Army’s primary air-and-missile defense system, which evolved over decades from a 1960s anti-aircraft system to a truck-mounted mobile air defense system capable of intercepting ballistic and cruise missiles.

Patriot entered full-rate production in September 1980, and the US Army activated its first Patriot missile battalion in May 1982.

The Patriot system first saw combat service during the 1991 Gulf War, defending critical assets in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Israel, and intercepting Iraq’s Scud missiles.

Notably, from the 1960s through the development of PAC-1, PAC-2, and the highly capable PAC-3 MSE, the system was designed and developed exclusively to meet US Army requirements.

Patriot received its first export customer only in 1984, when the Netherlands ordered four Patriot batteries and received them in 1987.

Israel, the US’s strategic ally in the Middle East, got Patriots only in 1991 on an emergency basis during the Gulf War.

Many NATO countries and other US allies got the system only in the 2000s.

For instance, Spain, South Korea, and the UAE all ordered Patriots in the 2000s.

Countries like Qatar, Romania, Sweden, Poland, and Bahrain ordered them even later.

Ukraine received Patriot batteries as donations only in 2023.

Therefore, Patriot’s export success has followed a predictable path that many US weapons systems have followed.

The Pentagon defines the requirements, then runs a tender process, selects primary and secondary contractors, and fields the system with the US military.

Foreign customers enter the picture only later and have minimal influence on the design and development of the weapons systems. For instance, the Pentagon is currently running the US Army’s Future Interceptor program, for which multiple defense firms are competing.

Earlier this month, the Pentagon advanced Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 Edge interceptor to the next stage of this competition.

Although 18 other countries operate Patriot systems, they have no say in defining the requirements for the next stage of air-defense development.

The Patriot system therefore remains an exclusively US weapons platform, and Washington wants to maintain strict control over the production and sustainment of its radars, launchers, interceptors, and other components.

Even as the US struggles with low stockpiles of PAC-3 MSE interceptors due to the war in the Middle East, Washington is reluctant to let partners license-produce them.

F-35

The F-35 JSF program, however, was conceived, designed, and developed from the start as a multinational joint program, not a purely American fighter that would later be exported.

In the 1990s, the U.S. needed to replace multiple aircraft, such as the F-16, F/A-18, Harrier, and A-10 Warthog, with one common stealth fighter family.

To share the enormous development costs and lock in future allies, the Pentagon structured the JSF as an international partnership from the outset.

The program organized all international partners into investment tiers.

The UK remains the sole Tier 1 partner, with an initial investment of USD 2.5 billion in the JSF program. The UK also has the greatest access to F-35 technology and data outside the US.

U.S. Rejects Iran’s Claim of Seizing MQM-170 Drone as Four Tankers Catch Fire in Strait of Hormuz

Italy and the Netherlands are Tier 2 partners, with initial investments of USD 1 billion and USD 800 million, respectively.

Australia, Canada, Denmark, and Norway are Tier 3 partners. Turkey was one of the founding participants in the JSF program; however, it was kicked out in 2018 after controversially purchasing the Russian S-400 AD system.

All the initial partner countries contributed funding, industrial workshare, and design input in exchange for influence over requirements and a guaranteed share of production.

This created a global supply chain and production network from day one.

In fact, according to Lockheed Martin, nearly 30 to 42 percent of the jet is manufactured outside the US across three continents before final assembly in Texas.

While Lockheed Martin is the primary contractor, the UK’s BAE Systems and Martin Baker, Leonardo and Cameri in Italy, GKN Fokker in the Netherlands, ASDAM Group in Australia, and nearly 30 companies in Canada also supply crucial parts for the F-35 fighters.

Therefore, the Patriot remains an essentially US platform, tightly controlled but primed for exports, while the F-35 is a joint international effort.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com

The post F-35 vs Patriot: Poland’s PAC-3 Maintenance Selection Highlights Two Contrasting U.S. Approaches appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Ethiopia has taken delivery of the first 12 Russian Su-35 fighter jets, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced on Wednesday during a visit to Moscow.

This makes Ethiopia the third export customer of the Su-35 after China and Algeria. Russia remains the biggest operator of the fighter jets and has comprehensively used the warplanes in the ongoing war in Ukraine.

PM Abiy made the announcement on X while attending the two-day third Russia-Africa Summit, where Moscow is seeking closer security and economic ties with African countries amid Western sanctions over the Ukraine conflict, which has now entered its fifth year.

Abiy wrote on X: “Our comprehensive efforts to sustainably ensure our country’s peace and security have reached a new milestone today. The state of readiness being built within Ethiopia’s defense forces is endowing the nation with the capability to preemptively deter aggression.

In accordance with our prior agreement with the Russian government, we have today taken delivery of the first twelve Su-35 4++ Generation fighter jets. Additionally, Ethiopia will receive four S-400 air defense system batteries.

I would like to express my gratitude to my friend, Russian President Vladimir Putin, for his dedication in ensuring we received these warplanes a year ahead of our agreed schedule. By equipping itself with these fighter jets, Ethiopia has taken the lead among Sub-Saharan African nations.

This historic achievement further strengthens our nation’s sovereignty, and it will serve as a massive capability boost that allows us to confidently continue our journey toward ensuring our collective security and regional stability in the future.”

Ethiopian and Russian officials, including Abiy, attended a formal handover ceremony at Zhukovsky Airport near Moscow, and the prime minister’s office released photos showing Su-35s bearing Ethiopian markings.

The deal builds on a July 2021 military cooperation agreement that aims to boost training and technology for Ethiopia’s armed forces, which has previously relied on older Soviet-era Su-27 fighters.

Alexander Mikheyev, head of Rosoboronexport, said: “The choice of the Su-35 was not accidental. It is one of the best platforms, and it has proven itself in the conditions of the special military operation [in Ukraine], including in its interaction with air defense and electronic warfare systems. In fact, the complex is necessary in the current situation of the Ethiopian Armed Forces.”

“Ethiopia has operated Sukhoi aircraft for many years, so its pilots and technical personnel already have experience with the family. This will make the transition to the Su-35 easier. Russia will also provide specialized training for Ethiopian pilots, engineers and maintenance personnel.”

The Russia-Africa Summit, attended by delegations from 48 African countries including 22 heads of state or government, focused on trade, investment, energy, food security and security cooperation.

Interestingly, Ethiopia received two Su-30K fighter jets in January 2024. These aircraft were part of a small batch built in the late 1990s for the Indian Air Force. India later returned them to Russia after receiving the more advanced Su-30 MKI.

After India returned the early-model Su-30K fighters as part of a trade-in arrangement, Russia transferred the aircraft to the 558th Aircraft Repair Plant in Baranovichi, Belarus, for storage in 2011.

Angola signed a contract in October 2013 to buy 12 jets; they were overhauled and upgraded at the plant, with the first deliveries in 2017 and the last in 2019.

The Su-30 is a two-seat version of the same Russian “Flanker” family that Ethiopia has flown for years (the older Su-27). Pilots and ground crews already know the basic design, so the Su-30 will be a useful stepping stone to the Su-35.

Sukhoi Su-35

The Sukhoi Su-35 has basically evolved from the Su-27M air-defense fighter that first flew in June 1988.

Sukhoi refined the aircraft’s capability during the development of India’s Su-30MKI.

Sukhoi embarked on a second “deep” modernization of the Su-27 in 2003 to serve as an interim export aircraft while awaiting the development of the Sukhoi PAK FA (Su-57) program.

The aircraft’s ability to maintain a high angle of attack at near-zero airspeed has traditionally drawn considerable media and public attention.

The Su-35 incorporated technologies from the PAK FA program, with a redesigned cockpit and weapons-control system, and featured thrust-vectoring engines that eliminated the need for canards. The type made its first flight in February 2008.

Although it was designed for export, the Russian Air Force became the first customer in 2009, with the production version designated Su-35S. China’s Air Force also acquired 24 Su-35s.

The Su-35 employs the N035 Irbis-E “Snow Leopard” passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar, a further development of the N011M radar evaluated on Su-27M testbeds and the core of the Su-35’s weapons-control system. It can detect an aerial target up to 400 km away, track 30 airborne targets, and engage eight simultaneously.

In addition, the multi-function radar can provide high-resolution ground images in synthetic aperture mode. The aircraft is equipped with an OLS-35 optoelectronic targeting system ahead of the cockpit for other tracking modes, including infrared search and track. The Su-35 is equipped with the L175M Khibiny-M electronic countermeasure system.

Radar-absorbent materials have been applied to the engine inlets and front stages of the engine compressor to halve the Su-35’s frontal radar cross-section and minimize the detection range of enemy radars.

The multi-role Su-35 can deploy air-to-air missiles with a range of up to 300 kilometers, carry the heavy Oniks anti-ship cruise missile, and carry a multitude of air-to-ground weaponry.

The Su-35 is powered by a pair of Saturn AL-41F1S turbofan engines, a highly upgraded variant of the AL-31F. The AL-41F1S is closely related to the Su-57’s Saturn AL-41F1 and produces 137.3 kN of thrust with afterburner.

The engines have thrust-vectoring nozzles with canted rotational axes; the nozzles operate in one plane for pitch, but the canting lets the aircraft produce roll and yaw by vectoring each engine nozzle differently. The Indian Su-30MKI was the first to implement this configuration.

The engine gives the Su-35 limited ability to sustain supersonic speed above Mach 1.1 without afterburners (supercruise).

The maximum take-off weight is 34,500 kg. Combat range is 1,600 km. The 12 hard points (10 on wing and fuselage stations and two on 2 wingtip rails can carry 8,000 kg of ordnance. Various combinations could be up to 12 × R-77M/P/T/-1 AAMs, or 6 × Kh-29L/TE air-to-surface missiles, or 6 × Kh-31A/AD anti-shipping missiles, among others.

The early delivery of Su-35 fighters and the acquisition of the S-400 ‘Triumf’ AD system mark a monumental leap for Ethiopia’s military arsenal. While the aircraft build on Ethiopia’s long experience with Russian Su-27 and Su-30 platforms, the new ‘Super Flankers’, though limited in number, will make Ethiopia’s air power formidable in the region.

Mail us at: editor (at) eurasiantimes.com

The post From Ex-Indian Su-30 to New Su-35 Fighter Jets: Ethiopia Acquires a Dozen of Russia’s “Super Flankers” appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.