Su-30: News and Discussion

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 Jun 2013 22:04

pre-pone is peculiarly indian, like charge-sheeting or eve-teasing

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Jun 2013 09:46

Sukhoi Test Pilot Explains ‘Supermaneuverability’

The high agility demonstrated by the Sukhoi Su-35S fighter at the Paris air show is rooted in a Russian concept in which close-range, low-speed air combat remains important, according to Sukhoi chief test pilot Sergey Bogdan.

The aircraft, equipped with three-axis thrust-vectoring and fully integrated flight and propulsion control, performed maneuvers here which no other operational fighter can match. These include a controlled vertical, flat-attitude descent with the aircraft rotating, and a dynamic deceleration, or “cobra”, leading to a small-radius 180-deg. turn and course reversal. It demonstrated a dynamic deceleration followed by extremely slow flight at a near-90-deg. angle of attack.

“Most of the fighters we have available today with vectored thrust, the Su-30MKI and MKM, can perform these maneuvers,” Bogdan tells Aviation Week. “Where this aircraft is different is that it has more thrust, so when it performs the 'bell' maneuver, it can stand still, with afterburning on, and can sustain flight at 120-140 kph.”

The emphasis in “supermaneuverability” runs counter to much Western air combat doctrine, which stresses high speed, the avoidance of the slower “merge” and tactics that do not lose the aircraft's energy. Bogdan, however, says supermaneuverability can be essential.

“The classical air combat starts at high speed, but if you miss on the first shot—and the probability is there because there are maneuvers to avoid missiles—the combat will be more prolonged,” he says. “After maneuvering, the aircraft will be at a lower speed, but both aircraft may be in a position where they cannot shoot. But supermaneuverability allows an aircraft to turn within three seconds and take another shot.”

However, Bogdan adds, “you have to be careful using that weapon. It's like a sniper—you can't shoot many times from the same spot because you disclose your position.”

As for the doctrine that energy should be conserved, Bogdan notes: “The theory of air combat has always evolved. In the 1940s and 1950s, the first priority was height, then speed, then maneuver and then firepower. Then with the third and fourth generation, it was speed, then height and then maneuver. Supermaneuverability adds to this. It's the knife in the soldier's pocket.”

Bogdan repeats a claim made when the Su-27 first performed the cobra maneuver: The rapid change in velocity can cause a Doppler fire-control radar to break lock. The maneuver is more useful on the Su-35S because the pilot can fly the aircraft out in any direction.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Jun 2013 09:47

Bill Sweetman's analysis.

http://youtu.be/ddQ-OoUraqs

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 24 Jun 2013 12:13

Thank you for the above video. Never knew thrust vectoring defeats A2A missiles. The same may apply to SAM. Will MKI radar be able to lock on stealth Air Craft at a medium range, like above 20 kms? I have seen the Rafale video which tries to lock on a F-22.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Jun 2013 12:40

^^ ranji , IAF would keep BARS capability tightly wrapped so it would be unwise of us to speculate what BARS is capable of even today , not to talk of some upgraded variants under works ..... even during exercise it was operating in training mode.

If Rafale could track an F-22 at 20 Km and lock at it , most certainly BARS with its large Array and Power Output can do it at long ranges but I dont know what Rafale did or did not wrt to F-22 .....MKI also has a very capable IRST for passive tracking at long ranges.

Combat with stealth fighter like F-22 or PAK-FA dont take in its most lower RCS zone as it keeps changing altitude , position and speed , its quite reasonable to assume , not all position/angle of F-22 or any other LO RCS aircraft will have same RCS value in dynamic air combat manouvering ........... so at close combat/WVR fight Kinemetics,TVC, Radar ,Passive Tracking ,Sensor Fusion,Weapons capability will play a far greater role then stealth IMO, MKI bring a lot of these capabilities to the table which a good pilot can use it to its advantage.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 24 Jun 2013 13:15

Was at Paris Air Show on saturday, saw Mr. Sergey Bogdan do a little ballet in the sky, stunning, Su-35 is loud and the power is incredible, the sound it self should give any enemy dhoti shivers.

Pity it was mostly very cloudy with a low cloud cieling so he couldn't do a full scale show yet best display I have seen so far. Unfortunately my Sony A77 didn't arrive yet so I had to shoot with my Sony A-37, managed to get some decent shots in RAW but need to process before posting, hopefully tonight.

ashvin · Post by **ashvin** » 24 Jun 2013 14:29

I saw her, too! She is an amazing bird! Loved every minute of her performance. I loved watching the vortices from the lerxes whenever she banked or went into high alpha. An amazing show. Whats amazing is that it was his bad weather demonstration. The vertical ceiling was limited due to clouds, but even then the test pilot, Sergey Bogdan danced this bird like a ballerina!

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 24 Jun 2013 15:08

Hey Ashivin, I see your in Belgium, I live in Antwerp and work in Brussels, what about you?

The su-35 was really quite something, I wish IAF orders these instead of the Rafale or as an extension of the MKI fleet.

ashvin · Post by **ashvin** » 24 Jun 2013 16:20

Hello Septimus,
That is awesome! I live in Brussels and work in Charleroi -- how about a BRF mini-meet in Brussesl?
Ashvin

ashvin · Post by **ashvin** » 24 Jun 2013 16:24

Septimus,
We can even have a meet in Antwerp. Let me know.
I have no idea when the Rafale will don IAF colors. At this rate we will all be in our 70s and still discussing the merits of the Rafale in the IAF.

By the way there is a wonderful Airshow in Belgium, too. Its next year. Great for plane spotting.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Jun 2013 16:40

Interview with Sergei Bogdan Sukhoi Test Pilot

http://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2013/06/24/257770.html

The main advantages of the Su-35 can not be demonstrated at the air show, for obvious reasons, because its main advantages - it's combat effectiveness. And here it is possible to give specific figures: combat effectiveness by 40 percent, he is superior to all other aircraft of the 4th generation, and in number of parameters is able to surpass 10 percent of the planes of the 5th generation.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 24 Jun 2013 18:59

So, what is the numbers here? SuMKI and SuMKI++ upgrades - especially the better MTBF engine ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jun 2013 11:23

Malaysian Su-30MKM Cockpit

http://youtu.be/lDM-_WSvdiY

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Aug 2013 15:03

Indian Air Force to get first BrahMos-armed Su-30MKI fighter in 2015

The Russian-Indian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace hopes to transfer the first Su-30MKI jet fighter to the Indian Air Force in September 2015, BrahMos President Sivathanu Pillai said.

Two Su-30MKI fighter planes are now being modernised by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. Their full-scale mock-ups have already been made and delivered to India. They will be tested before December of this year.

According to Pillai, the first launch of an airborne BrahMos missile is scheduled for June 2014. He expressed hope that the Su-30MKI jet fighter armed with BrahMos missiles would be ready in September 2015.

Pillai told Itar-Tass that Russia would surpass its competitors in terms of military-technical cooperation with India only if the two countries created more joint ventures.

In 1960s-1980s India was completely dependent on contracts with the Soviet Union and use of Soviet technologies. After the Soviet Union’s breakup, other countries started supplying arms and hardware to India, and Russian-Indian military-technical cooperation decreased, he said.

Pillai believes that Russia and India should have understood that the two countries need to create more joint ventures to design and make military products. In his opinion, the development of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles is a successful example of such cooperation.

“India and Russia are big friends. I would even say that Russia is the only true friend of India. And if we want to keep military-technical cooperation at the previous levels, we have to create more joint ventures, especially where it concerns high-tech products,” Pillai said.

This would allow Russia to go far ahead of its competitors in India, he added.

Pillai is confident that the BrahMos missile project can be considered successful only if the missiles are bought by both Russia and India. At the moment, only India is buying them. He said this issue is being discussed at different levels and expressed hope that Russia would make a positive decision.

The overall value of BrahMos missile contracts with India’s Navy, Air Force and Army has reached $4.2 billion and may increase to $7.5 billion by 2015

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 18 Aug 2013 14:03

from BR Link

No CurrentType Location

2 Su-30 MKI Tezpur
8 Su-30 MKI Bareilly
20 Su-30 MKI Pune
24 Su-30 MKI Bareilly
30 Su-30 MKI Pune
31 Su-30 MKI Halwara?
102 Su-30 MKI Chabua
220 Su-30 MKI Sirsa

from wiki as of jan 2013 -

No CurrentType Location

2 Su-30 MKI Tezpur
8 & 24 Su-30 MKI Bareilly
20 & 30 Su-30 MKI Pune
220 Su-30 MKI Halwara?
17 Su-30 MKI Bhatinda
102 Su-30 MKI Chabua
21 Su-30 MKI Sirsa

future squadrons

15 Su-30 MKI Bhuj Flying Lancers (converting dec 2012) - 4 SU MKIs with SAR Pod
18 Su-30 MKI Kalaikunda By june 2013
222 Su-30 MKI Hashimara By june 2013
? Su-30 MKI Thanjavur ??

-------------------------------------------------------

is there any discrepency in either of the links??

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 18 Aug 2013 23:06

pragnya wrote:from BR Link

No CurrentType Location

2 Su-30 MKI Tezpur
8 Su-30 MKI Bareilly
20 Su-30 MKI Pune
24 Su-30 MKI Bareilly
30 Su-30 MKI Pune
31 Su-30 MKI Halwara?
102 Su-30 MKI Chabua
220 Su-30 MKI Sirsa

from wiki as of jan 2013 -

No CurrentType Location

2 Su-30 MKI Tezpur
8 & 24 Su-30 MKI Bareilly
20 & 30 Su-30 MKI Pune
220 Su-30 MKI Halwara?
17 Su-30 MKI Bhatinda
102 Su-30 MKI Chabua
21 Su-30 MKI Sirsa

future squadrons

15 Su-30 MKI Bhuj Flying Lancers (converting dec 2012) - 4 SU MKIs with SAR Pod
18 Su-30 MKI Kalaikunda By june 2013
222 Su-30 MKI Hashimara By june 2013
? Su-30 MKI Thanjavur ??

-------------------------------------------------------

is there any discrepency in either of the links??

31 Lions - Jodhpur not Halwara

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/squad ... on/852822/

220 Desert Tigers - Halwara not Sirsa

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=87963

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 19 Aug 2013 13:19

^^^

RajitO,

Thanks.

i have never heard of SU 30MKIs at Bhatinda (in future may be) as the wiki link shows while it misses Jodhpur!!

btw the BR link needs to be updated too with the present info.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 19 Aug 2013 13:41

Wiki is never a good source at the best of times.

If BR is planning to update the page then

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... ect-chabua

this might be a good reference for the Su 30MKI OOB in 2018

Pune/Lohegaon - 2 Sqns.

Bareilly - 2 Sqns.

Chabua - 2 Sqns.*

Tezpur - 2 Sqns.*

Halwara - 2 Sqns.*

Jodhpur - 2 Sqns.*

Sirsa, Thanjavur - 1 Sqn. each*

This can all change though...

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 22 Aug 2013 10:28

Astra BVRAAM in captive flight trials on an IAF Su-30MKI

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2013 04:00

As mentioned before, thats the old version. The new one is to get on the Su this year.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Aug 2013 04:05

Two things

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... gs-389723/

1. Good we didnt go this (the MiG-35) turkey. Some of the usual Russia-uber-alles crowd on BR were busy tom tomming its paper capabilities.
2. Its likely the problems include those with producing the oft claimed, yet to be proven Zhuk A AESA. At this point, it does seem likely that even the Super 30 upgrade will hence go with the relatively lower risk Bars upgrade in Phase 1, and transition to the PAK FA AESA in Phase 2 - both from NIIP. Instead of changing the radar to Zhuk A

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 28 Aug 2013 04:54

imagine if the russians themselves have problems with their supply chain

what nightmare would visit us

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Aug 2013 06:22

OT for this thread.

But, the FGFA could be facing similar issues. Where the PAK-FA is plain vanilla for India, which requests more features (40 of them), which of course cost more (this could be why Russia is hiking the price) and there is no guarantee that the end product will work (like the MiG-35).

Was the MiG-29K paid for by India by any chance?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Aug 2013 19:09

SU Flanker development has been a colossal success.SEveral variants have been produced.However,there is a major gap in the IAF's inventory,no strategic or LR tactical strike/bomber which is sorely needed to strike deep into China.We allowed a decade+ offer of producing/acquiring Backfires to lapse.Now there are reports of the Chinese picking up the lot along with production.There is an opportunity to acquire the SU-34 dedicated strike variant which would be easy to induct.The Q being whether the upgraded "30s" for the IAF,perhaps with internal weapons bays will suffice.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/rus ... #more-2595
In production (Wik)

Delivery came in the form of two contracts, the first in 2008 for 32 aircraft and the second in 2012 for a further 92 aircraft, totaling 124 to be delivered by 2020

PS:The MIG-29K development was not paid for by India.It was demonstrated if I'm not mistaken 3-4 air shows ago,developed even before we ordered it along with the Gorky.Here is a report about the Russian MIG-29Ks which will feature a Zhuk MA AESA radar unlike the IN Zhuk M variant.Quotes from Wik"

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... order-navy

The Mikoyan MiG-29K (Russian: Микоян МиГ-29K, NATO reporting name: Fulcrum-D[1]) is an all-weather carrier-based multirole fighter aircraft developed by the Mikoyan design bureau. The MiG-29K was developed in the late 1980s from MiG-29M..

Production MIG-29K differ from prototypes by features such as a multi-function radar and several new cockpit displays; the adoption of HOTAS (hands-on-throttle-and-stick) controls; the integration of RVV-AE air-to-air missiles, along with missiles for anti-ship and anti-radar operations; and several ground/strike precision-guided weapons.

The MiG-29K was not ordered into production and only two prototypes were originally built because the Russian Navy preferred the Su-27K in the early 1990s. The Mikoyan Design Bureau did not stop its work on the MiG-29K aircraft despite the lack of financing since 1992. The programme got a boost in the late 1990s to meet an Indian requirement for a ship-borne fighter following the purchase of a former Soviet aircraft carrier. It was first received by the Indian Navy in 2009.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... order-navy

Russia Confirms MiG-29K Order for Navy
AIN Defense Perspective » March 16, 2012

by Vladimir Karnozov
MiG-29K
Russia has placed its first order for the MiG-29K carrier-based fighter, which is already in service with the Indian Navy. (Photo: Vladimir Karnozov)
March 16, 2012,

Russia’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) finally awarded the Russian Aircraft Corporation a firm order for 24 MiG-29 carrier-capable fighters. MiG will deliver 20 single-seat MiG-29Ks and four MiG-29KUB two-seaters between 2013 and 2015. The Russian Navy stated its intention to introduce the MiG-29K two years ago, but the order was not confirmed until now. Currently, Russia’s sole carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov, is equipped with Sukhoi Su-33 fighters modified from the original Su-27 design.

Defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov said that the new contract is part of the government’s plan to boost weapons funding between 2011 and 2020. New orders for Su-34 strike fighters and Yak-130 jet trainers, plus a MiG-31 upgrade, have already been announced. “Following the Air Force example, the Navy air arm will also get modern combat jets that are equivalent to the best aircraft available elsewhere,” Serdyukov added. MiG general director Sergey Korotkov said the MiG-29K order comes after an “extensive multi-year effort” to develop the aircraft and prepare it for production. Together with expected new orders for land-based derivatives of the MiG-29, the MiG-29K order will “ensure a stable workload for the company in the middle term,” he added.

MiG said that the aircraft for the Russian Navy would differ from those already delivered or being built for India, the launch customer. New Delhi ordered 16 MiG-29K/KUBs in 2003, and they were delivered between February 2010 and early this year, according to Indian media reports. In August last year India took up an option for 29 more MiGs for the Navy. These are intended to equip the Russian-built INS Vikramaditya (ex-Gorshkov) and follow-on Project 71 aircraft carriers to be built in India. The difference was not specified, but the Russian Navy version is expected to have Phazotron’s Zhuk-MA radar with an active electronically scanned antenna (AESA). This was developed for the exportable MiG-35D, which failed in the Indian tender for 126 medium multirole combat aircraft. The Indian MiG-29Ks carry the Phazotron Zhuk-M with a slotted antenna and mechanical radar beam scanning.

The MIG-35 "turkey" development is very much alive and kicking from latest reports,though delayed with technical/production issues,with MIG-29SMTs being ordered in the interim until MIG-35 production is firmed up.Earlier reports last year indicated that Russia was shifting its MIG facility to a brand new modern location/facility,which would slow production of existing types .

Speaking to Russian media on 20 August, Russian Deputy Defence Minister Yuri Borisov confirmed that the order for the MiG-35s had been delayed, but stated that the reason was due to industrial/technical challenges rather than finance.(JDW).

Latest report.

13:22 24/08/2013
Preparing for Moscow’s MAKS-2013 Airshow

MOSCOW, August 24 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s Defense Ministry is not abandoning the purchase of MiG-35 fighter jets and could sign a deal next week, Trade and Industry Minister Denis Manturov said Saturday.

The contract could be signed at Moscow’s MAKS International Aviation and Space show, which will run from August 27 through September 1, while first deliveries could start in 2015-2016, he said.

Deputy Defense Minister Yury Borisov said Tuesday the ministry had postponed the purchase of 37 MiG-35’s until 2016 because the defense industry cannot fulfill the contract, and would buy 16 MiG-29SMT fighter jets instead.

The ministry was due to sign a 37 billion rubles ($1.1 billion) deal with MiG in June, but last month the aircraft corporation's CEO Sergei Korotkov told RIA Novosti the contract had still not been signed.

The Mikoyan MiG-35 (Fulcrum-F) is a 4++ generation fighter jet and a modification of the MiG-29M. It is equipped with air-to-air and air-to-surface guided missiles, as well as the Zhuk-A radar system.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 28 Aug 2013 19:30

Philip wrote: PS:The MIG-29K development was not paid for by India.It was demonstrated if I'm not mistaken 3-4 air shows ago,developed even before we ordered it along with the Gorky.Here is a report about the Russian MIG-29Ks which will feature a Zhuk MA AESA radar unlike the IN Zhuk M variant.Quotes from Wik"

It is fact that India paid for completing the Mig-29K development. I don't know why you are so pro Russia and anti India? There is no deny that Russian is a all weather friend but I don't understand you logic of rubbing India's nose to ground when it comes to Russia. Russian is ordering these after IN sorted out all major problems. History repeated itself like in case of Su-30, which was first inducted in IAF and later on in RuAF.

MiG-29K Carrier-Based Multirole Fighter Aircraft, Russian Federation

MiG-29K development history

The MiG-29K project was initiated in the late 1970s to meet the requirements of the Soviet Navy for a supersonic carrier-based fighter. The first proof of concept version, MiG-29KVP, was developed based on the MiG-29M.

The MiG-29KVP completed its maiden flight in August 1982. The aircraft with new undercarriage and folding wings of greater area, differed from the MiG-29 production model.

The first MiG-29K took to the skies on 23 July 1988. The aircraft performed its first carrier landing on the aircraft-carrying cruiser Tbilisi (now Admiral Kuznetsov) on 1 November 1989. The project was halted due to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Mikoyan continued the development and struggled with funding issues until it received orders from India. The MiG-29KUB aircraft completed its first flight in January 2007.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Aug 2013 19:36

1) Where did an IAF Need/requirement for a bomber come from/ Seriously? IS it an IAF one or yours?

2) The MiG-35 issue is a technical one - we know it will be ordered (heck they have to keep MiG on life support). The point being Russia was ready to pawn off an immature product for the Indian MMRCA (with plenty of BR supporters). Good for MiG that the Russians are funding them. Hopefully they can now let India go. Meanwhile they can keep flying planes that were rejected by the Algerians?

No, the F-35 is the Turkey. The MiG-35 is Dumb.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 28 Aug 2013 20:21

About Mig29K the link says Mikoyan struggled with funding issues. The development halted for about 20 years due to that. Indians got the most of our requirements is good for India. This is all to it. Russians are also developing new naval doctrines now and we should better wait and watch how it goes too. Run off the mill won't get us all the participation we need. Win-win.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Aug 2013 20:26

Where does it state that India paid for the development of the MIG-29K? A fallacy.All reports state that it was developed/flew a decade before we signed on for the Gorky.The aircraft flew long before the Gorky decision.The fact is for Kuznetsov class carriers,the SU-33 was a far better option on the larger carrier and thus rejected by Russia. It suited us when we acquired the Gorky because of the carrier's smaller size.However,the SU-33 isn't in production any longer and the Russians are ordering the 29K which can also do the business.

Where am I so extremely pro-Russia? "Rubbing noses into the ground,etc." I'm merely posting data from recognised open sources.If you look at the spectrum of my posts,I've advocated buying the Rafale despite the cost,accelerating LCA development,etc."Horses for courses" has been my motto all along,with realism the yardstick.The hard fact is that some Russian wares like the Flanker and Bison have proved themselves generally superior to equiv. generation US/Western air forces in exercises.Their wares are generally tough and much cheaper to acquire,why we have persisted with their wares,despite support problems,and in certain aspects,like N-sub tech,Brahmos,etc.,no one else is willing to deliver the same.

In fact,if you want to carry the argument further,there are better examples.Yes,we did further develop/suggest improvements to legacy Soviet/Russian fighters right from the MIG-21 onwards,due to our combat experience.Perhaps the case of the Bison would be a better example for you to quote,not the 29K.Yes,the Russians did benefit from our experience ,even on the SU-30,where they are imitating our MKI concept with their own eqpt.The argument holds good for the FGFA where even though we have joined the programme late,after the major dev. work and concept was finalised,we are paying a higher price for the JV because of the work already done and the tech that we will supposedly obtain, and to underwrite the costs of our share of the remaining work,whee we want certain India specific changes to suit our own needs.

It is a fact that because we operate large numbers of SU-30MKIs,acquired at affordable cost too in comparison with western fighters,we still possess a distinct qualitative advantage over Pak and China.Here is an old, dated price comparison of global fighters,definitely out of date by now,just look at est. JSF figures,but it gives a reasonably accurate comparison,% wise of the differences between types.

All countries tend to sell less capable versions to
foreign purchasers. Information about aircraft costs is hard to get hold of.
Because of inflation, one must also include the year that a cost refers to;
figures are in USD unless otherwise specified.

Rafale More than €50m, depending on export sales
Typhoon Austrian version: ’03 €62m
Mitsubishi F-2 US$ 100m
MiG-29 about ’98 US$ 27m
Sukhoi Su-27US$ 24m
Sukhoi Su-30 US$ ~38m (Several variants)
Sukhoi Su-30K for Indonesia: ’98 US$ 33m
Sukhoi Su-30MKI for India, highly specified version: ’98 US$ 45m
Sukhoi Su-30MKM for Malaysia, a variant of the Indian version: ’03
US$ 50m
Gripen about ’98 US$ 25m
Ching Kuo initially large order put cost per unit at US$ 24m
F-15 ’98 US$ 43m
F-16 late models about ’98 US$ 25m
F-18 E/F model ’98 US$ 60m
F-22A ’03 US$ 152m, based on production run of 276 aircraft costing
US$ 42bn
F-35 planned costs, based on version, in ’94:
F-35A US$ 28m
F-35B US$ 35m
F-35C US$ 38m

Actual costs of the F-35 JSF are:

F-35A US$ 45m
F-35B US$ 60m
F-35C US$ 55m

Prices come from the article, supposedly as per Asia Pacific Defence
Reporter, September 2005.

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/comparison-o ... z2dHDSl4bH

Now for some latest news,strangely it has similar echoes to what our new DRDO chief recently said about greater use of unmanned air and UW vehicles being the future direction of warfare.Check out the link for pics.

http://rt.com/news/sixth-generation-unm ... k-jet-998/

Russia is actively developing an unmanned sixth generation aircraft, said a former Air Force commander. Unlike NATO allies who will use American F-35 5Gs, self-sufficiency is an absolute must for Russia, said the commander, so 6G evolution is inevitable.

With a fifth generation PAK-FA heavy attack jet already developed and planned to enter service in 2016, Russian aviation is also looking to the future of air combat, conducting research and development for aircraft that can dominate airspace by the mid-21st century.

Ahead of the MAKS-2013 airshow due to start on August 27, the former Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force, Army General Pyotr Deynekin, gave an interview to the RIA news agency, in which he made vague, yet far-reaching remarks about the future Russian Air Force.

Deynekin admitted that work on the sixth generation long range assault jet is in “active phase” and “most probably” the aircraft will be unmanned. While some NATO member countries are planning to ‘forego’ development of a fifth generation fighter jet, buying American F-35’s instead and developing a sixth generation aircraft from scratch, Russia has no possibility to economize in that way, he said.

“We must do this serious undertaking on our own, so jumping over a [aircraft development] generation is hardly possible,” Pyotr Deynekin told RIA.

T-50 fighter (RIA Novosti / Vitaliy Belousov)

T-50 fighter (RIA Novosti / Vitaliy Belousov)

The former commander refused to compare the combat characteristics of the PAK-FA jet, the American F-22 Raptor and the Chinese J-20, fifth generation jet in development.“Only real practice can expose these aircrafts strengths and weaknesses,” he said.

At the same time Deynekin mentioned that in a real combat situation, the PAK-FA would make use of all the stealth equipment on board, making the aircraft undetectable by enemy radars. Still, the general admitted, making an absolutely undetectable aircraft appears to be an impossible task.

Deynekin also said that in his view the super-maneuverability of the PAK-FA is a big plus as despite advanced capabilities of modern air-to-air missiles, traditional ‘dog-fights’ will still be an option in the future. Therefore an ace pilot will need reliable technology on board and perfect flying skills.

The retired general was of the opinion that arming the PAK-FA with 400-kilometer range air-to-air missiles was excess weaponry more suitable for a tactical bomber rather than a fighter jet.

Pyotr Deynekin particularly stressed that Russian military thinking does not imply intent of aggressive action on foreign territory, but takes into consideration the size of the Russian Federation where the long-range capabilities of the PAK-FA are an absolute necessity.

In spite of the fact that future wars would be a testing ground for new kinds of air assault, the military goals of combatants won’t just be achieved by the Air Force, Deynekin acknowledged.

Earlier this month Russia’s possibly most awarded test pilot, Sergey Bogdan, who initially got the PAK-FA airborne, said that a new generation of fighter aircraft could not be expected soon.

“One would think that technology is moving forward fast but it has taken 35 years to get from the fourth generation fighter jet to the fifth generation. I believe the next generation fighter will evolve no earlier than in 15 years,” said Bogdan, who is busy preparing an air display of several PAK-FA jets for MAKS-2013. “Pilot-in-the-loop aircrafts will last for a long period of time,” Bogdan predicted.

Russian MiG 'Scat' (Stingray) Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) (Image from wikimedia.org)

Russian MiG 'Scat' (Stingray) Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) (Image from wikimedia.org)

According to American experts, a sixth generation fighter jet would have to display - so far these are only generally outlined characteristics - ‘extreme’ stealth, multimode fighting capabilities, the ability to destroy any kind of target in all flying regimes, from subsonic to up to 5 Mach, – about 6,000 kilometers per hour - possible fuselage self-healing potential, combined with ‘morphing’ and smart skins capabilities. The 6G aircraft is expected to boast extremely far-reaching sensors that would give a highly detailed picture of the battlefield, where every highly networked 6G aircraft would be a part of a bigger network. The most enthusiastic observers believe that one day such aircraft will be armed with ‘directed energy’ weapons.

In the US the sixth generation fighter jet program is generally dubbed the Next Generation Tactical Aircraft / Next Generation TACAIR, and is not scheduled to enter service anytime earlier than in 2030.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Aug 2013 22:00

Just saying ....................

May, 2013 :: Taja, taja khabar :: Indian Navy commissions first MiG-29K squadron

Russia developed the MiG-29K according to design specifications that the Indian Navy developed for itself a decade ago. “Our concept proved so successful that the Russian Navy is also planning to induct the MiG-29K into its fleet,” says former naval chief Admiral Arun Prakash, himself a decorated fighter pilot.

India, like many Russian aircrafts, resurrected the comatose MiG-29K, provided the fundas for this plane, had the Russians design it to specs and funded THAT plane. So, yes, the Indian MiG-29K (which the RuN will buy too, is an Indian funded plane.)

And, as usual, the Russians are now going to use that success to induct it into their own navy.

I am betting that that will be true for the PAK-FA too. I bet that the engine that Is supposed to come out in 2020 will not see the light of day without Indian funds. IMHO, the risk is too high for them.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Aug 2013 22:15

There is no deny that Russian is a all weather friend

Would not go that far.

As long as Indian funds flow through the pipeline things should be OK.

From my recent googling efforts there seem to be pockets within Russia that support India and I would expect there are pockets that are not so favorable (which should be natural) - like I am sure there are a ton that would sell to the Chinese and Pakis without hesitation.

Let us see what happens with the FGFA, which given the 40 improvements sought by the IAF, should be another one of these MiG-29K type of projects. Where the Russians have a product to offer, India wants quantum improvements, Russia asks to fund them, India gets what she wants and Russia incorporates those improvements into her supply chain to make more $$.

IIRC it was Manoj Joshi that stated (some 3 years ago) that Russia would make India fund the FGFA development and then sell India - AT cost - the FGFA. Which is what is happening.

All weather under the right financial circumstances.

kit · Post by **kit** » 28 Aug 2013 23:57

If indeed why not go for israeli collaboration for an aesa radar for the FGFA .. instead of sinking more billions upgrading russian tech levels .. and with france for the equivalent of the F35 DAS ?

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 29 Aug 2013 00:05

Russians are going to develop one anyway, if I am not mistaken. FGFA would rather have Russian stuff than one indirectly/directly dependent on any other.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Aug 2013 00:59

NRao, the only issue is we can't convert that maturity model as our capability in terms of making things happen without Russian support. After all, the platform is theirs.

You know the reasons well enough that I don't need to point them. But, the fact remains, that we are still a dependent nation in the chain of production and capability establishment.

Though the horizon looks bright, the distance is only a mirage that cheats us of our capabilities. It is not the technology nor money, but our poor management and lethargic attitude towards corrections. Institutional changes are needed for us.

A heavy combat aircraft like pak-fa is not out of reach considering the plans we can come up using su-mki, lca and amca projects.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Aug 2013 02:40

What "design specs" did the IN design a decade ago,without the existing aircraft may I ask? The 29K was already flying from the 1980s.We wanted the ready,available 29K platform improved to meet certain IN specific requirements that's the "development".We paid $730M for the first 16 ,which works out to around $45+M per unit.The second lot of 29 aircraft is being acquired for just $1.2B,that works out to just under $40M an aircraft.Just compare this with the cost of mere upgrades for 50 M-2000s at approx. $2.4B.,almost $50M per unit,far more than a brand new MIG-29K!
(http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... grade.html

Plus here are the latest costs of operating the M-2000s per yr.from DID.

Aug 5/13: Support. A a written reply to Shri Kalikesh N. Singh Deo in Lok Sabha sets out the cost of maintaining India’s Mirage fleet over the 2012-13 budget period. The total is INR 4.8685 billion (about $80 million): INR 2.28 billion for spares, INR 1.91 billion for aggregated repairs and maintenance, INR 611.6 million for “capital procurement,” and INR 66.9 million for “capital repair.”
It would be very useful to know how many flight-hours those figures reflect, but the questioner didn’t ask. Maybe next time. India MoD external link.

By comparison,the cost of 69 MIG-29s is only $900M.
The IAF has awarded the MiG corporation a USD 900 million contract to upgrade all of its 69 operational MiG-29s. Approx. just $13M per unit,when compared with $50M for an M-2000!
The MIG-29 consistently outperformed the M-2000 in IAF one-on-one exercises according to AM Masand (VAYU).BR has a comprehensive review of the aircraft in the service of nations operating the type,where the aircraft outperformed Block50 F-16s and scared off the Pakis during Kargil.From the data available,it can be seen that the MIG-29 series is a very capable and a cost-effective fighter,and the RuN is acquiring it because of its capability,and that it is in production unlike the SU-33 ,reopening production for a small run uneconomical.In fact in 1999,B'Desh bought its MIG-29s for around just $11M/unit.(http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/fighter ... iG-29.html)

http://bharatrakshak.wikia.com/wiki/MiG-29
1. IAF MiG-29 evaluation, versus the Mirage 2000-H.

Source:http://www.scribd.com/doc/21520658/Mira ... -same-team

Air Marshal rtd, Harish Masand, then Wing Commander and CO of First Supersonics (MiG-29 squadron) versus the No.1 Tigers squadron led by then Wing Commander Ahluwahlia (later Air Marshal).

Evaluation in 1988:

MiG-29 outperformed the Mirage 2000 in "every sphere", parameters mentioned: STR, ITR, climb (climb rate). Range to payload of Mirage 2000 better, but MiG-29 and Mirage consumed almost the same amount of fuel in combat situations as the latter had to use afterburner more often.
Group combat and role specific missions: "Radar, IRST, HMSD, voice information system put to good use".

The MiG-29K was not ordered into production and only two prototypes were originally built because the Russian Navy preferred the Su-27K in the early 1990s. The Mikoyan Design Bureau did not stop its work on the MiG-29K aircraft despite the lack of financing since 1992.The programme got a boost in the late 1990s to meet an Indian requirement for a ship-borne fighter following the purchase of a former Soviet aircraft carrier. It was first received by the Indian Navy in 2009.

The MiG-29Ks first flight was performed on 23 July 1988 at Saky by test pilot Toktar Aubakirov.[10] On 1 November 1989, on the same day as the Sukhoi Su-27K,[N 1] Aubakirov executed the first carrier landing of MiG-29K on the aircraft-carrying cruiser Tbilisi (now known as Admiral Kuznetsov), the first take-off from the carrier's deck was successfully performed the same day.[12] During 1989–1991, the MiG-29K underwent further tests aboard the Admiral Kuznetsov. The project was put on hold with the collapse of the Soviet Union, while the Russian Navy only pursued the rival Su-33.[13][N 2] Mikoyan continued work on the MiG-29K despite the lack of funding.[17][18]

During its tests aboard the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft-carrying cruiser, the aircraft had a springboard-assisted takeoff from strips 195 m and 95 m long. According to the results of the tests, the landing accuracy proved to be very high, which made it possible at a later stage to switch over to a three-cable arrester system on the Admiral Gorshkov.

One factor favouring the MiG-29K over the Su-33 in the Indian decision was the larger size of the Su-33, which further limited the number of aircraft on deck.[21][22] Modifications were made to the MiG-29K for Indian requirements, including the Zhuk-ME radar, RD-33MK engine, a combat payload up to 5,500 kg, 13 hardpoints, and updated 4-channel digital fly-by-wire flight control system. It is compatible with the full range of weapons carried by the MiG-29M and MiG-29SMT.[23] The MiG-29KUB made its maiden flight at the Zhukovsky test centre on 22 January 2007.[24]

The problem of lack of aircraft-carrier based AWACS platform may be tackled by further development of dual-seat MiG-29KUB. It is theoretically possible to outfit the MiG-29KUB with powerful radar, and encrypted data links, to permit networking of multiple MiG-29KUB aircraft for AEW coverage. The MiG-29KUB may also be enhanced in areas such as electronic warfare and long-range interdiction.[17][18]

India
MiG-29K in Indian Navy colors at MAKS Airshow

In 2004 India ordered 12 MiG-29K single-seat and 4 MiG-29KUB two-seat fighters.[8] The MiG-29K is to provide both airborne fleet air defense and surface attack capabilities. Deliveries began in December 2009.[33][34] Prior to their delivery to India, the MiG-29Ks underwent testing on board the Admiral Kuznetsov.[35][36] In January 2010, India and Russia signed a deal worth US$1.2 billion for the Indian Navy to receive an additional 29 MiG-29Ks.[37] The MiG-29K entered operational service with India in February 2010.[33] Further deliveries of 5 MiG-29Ks and a flight simulator took place in May 2011. Further deliveries are to continue through 2012

For future Russian carriers this is likely to happen (Wik):

Naval and other versions

Navalized Sukhoi T-50 PAK FAs will be deployed on the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and future Russian aircraft carriers.[103] There will be a competition between the Sukhoi, Mikoyan and Yakovlev design bureaus to choose the new naval aircraft.[3]

Alexei Fedorov has said that any decision on applying fifth-generation technologies to produce a smaller fighter (comparative to the F-35) must wait until after the heavy fighter, based on the T-50, is completed.[104]

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Aug 2013 03:20

What "design specs" did the IN design a decade ago,without the existing aircraft may I ask?

Yes, you may.

One does NOT need anything flying or even a model to spec out a design. It is just a design, why do you need something to fly?

Besides I did state that the Indians "resurrected the comatose MiG-29K", which clearly implies that there was a MiG-29K - that was already flying. Which was then re-designed based on the Indian specs. Why is so difficult to understand something that simple? And, I am supposed to be the juvenile from a dictitorial country!!!!

If you cannot subscribe to the fact that Indians are smart people and that they can take a plane like the MiG-29 - AND the Su-30 too, in case you forgot - and modify them to fit Indian needs, then there is a problem.

Finally, to follow your own thinking THAT is a quote from the Ex Naval chief!!!!! Who himself was a pilot.

Just compare this with the cost of mere upgrades for 50 M-2000s at approx. $2.4B

OK, on the cost, why are you using some MiG-29K to M2K upgrades? Who gives a crap for the French anyways? They are perhaps even worse when it comes to taking funds from India. But that is a diff story and a diff thread.

Yes, India paid $730 Mil for 16 MiG-29Ks: works to $45 mil per plane. Russia has contracted $41 Mil per plane!!!!!!

And, who paid for the development of the comatose MiG-29K?

India.

India should get a cut out of that sale to Russia for IP. The second batch @ 41 mil should be lower.

There are PLENTY of other arguments - that are not so nice - about the MiG or Sukhoi. It is all out there.

SaiK,

Will respond a little later. You do have a point, but that is not my argument.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Aug 2013 04:38

Will do. Thx for the advice too.

Need a break from BR itself.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 29 Aug 2013 05:23

Agupta. Mig29k was funded by india just like Su30mki. Both are based on an old soviet designed planes.

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 29 Aug 2013 07:43

Looks like the mods need to rename this thread Su30 + Mig29K.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 29 Aug 2013 12:46

---- OT Start ----
Don't want to get involved in name calling but sometimes don't feel like posting on BR as people just ignore facts and fixed on their opinions. No matter how you discuss, they might accept it for a moment and then go back to old track. It seems many locals are more loyal to Russia then the Russians themselves. Hail father land Russia!!

No doubt we are in middle of such mess and major conflict is around the corner.
---- OT End ----

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 29 Aug 2013 18:53

Gupta, why take patronizing tone? Where would it go? You are asking ppl to take break, read up, slowdown, not the right way to conduct youeself.

You have an opinion and you stated, drop the pretence that you r an authority in the field who can treat others in this manner.