Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 14 Apr 2015 04:03

Wow already happened? I thought they were still working it ? No pictures released?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Apr 2015 23:58

Austin wrote:
Karan M wrote:To my mind, its very clear IAF wants AESA. NIIP is proposing a graduated move from Bars to Irbis level, then to AESA. IMO, IAF may well choose to hold out and move directly to AESA, if it can. At best, a few fighters may get upgraded Bars.

They have time, as the current Bars/avionics fit on Su-30 MKI are very capable systems.
Doubtfull for AESA the only AESA is from Zhuk ie Zhuk-AE they need to scale that to 1024 T/R module , the average and peak power of Zhuk-AE is also lower compared to Irbis , not to mention the AESA upgrade is also expensive.

AESA is not a cost effective option for MKI upgrade.

IAF was evaluating Zhuk AE. They want AESA. Cost effective and IAF? Ha!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Apr 2015 12:16

BTW all Russian military electronics guys are now united as KRET
http://kret.com/en/about/info/

Includes both Phazatron and NIIP and the EW guys (SAP-14/518 etc on our Sukhois)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2015 13:17

why cannot the radar of the Pakfa be used in a few years ? whatever the pakfa nose can take , the su30 has a equal nose.

the N036 consists of the main nose-mounted N036-1-01 X band Active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, or Active Phased Array Radar , with 1,552 T/R modules

IRBIS-E is labelled N035 and was used to proof the technology

even the L402 himalaya ECM suite could be backported if desired.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Apr 2015 13:28

Singha, that's exactly what the IAF would prefer and is waiting for.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2015 13:43

irbis-E being a first effort would have lots of rough edges we'd have to pay heavily to fix since unlike their su35, our su30 has to do everything.
Zhuk ae would be even more of a 1st cut quality.

so we have no option but to wait 5 yrs for the pakfa radar to pass all tests and be the 2nd gen munna aesa for russia.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Apr 2015 14:36

karan , The IAF is better of opting for Irbis Class Upgrade as it would be very capable for 10-15 years .....The upgrade is not an Irbis per say but using BARS antenna and twin TWT to get IRBIS like power , Irbis is a lighter antenna almost less than half the weight of BARS. The back end would change entirely though so that in future they just need to replace the Antenna to AESA and not backend. ( i am not sure how that works coz AESA is incompatiable with TWT so I would suppose that means back end electronics )

The best option for IAF is now to upgrade the entire fleet to IRBIS standard and use it for 10-15 years and then selectively 80-100 MKI upgrade to AESA standard say 10 years from now when AESA is available in ample production , AESA is any way expensive even today.

The ZHUK-AE is less capable then IRBIS by arm and length and as such is good for Medium class aircraft. The Ga/N TR module would be available in production only from 2020 , Check Jo post on AFM.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Apr 2015 18:15

heat and sufficient electrical power is also a new concern with aesa. the apg77 is cooled with a liquid nitrogen system, dont know what the others are using...perhaps the newer modules are less hot mirroring advances in commercial chipsets and can be air cooled?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Apr 2015 18:30

Austin wrote:karan , The IAF is better of opting for Irbis Class Upgrade as it would be very capable for 10-15 years .....The upgrade is not an Irbis per say but using BARS antenna and twin TWT to get IRBIS like power , Irbis is a lighter antenna almost less than half the weight of BARS. The back end would change entirely though so that in future they just need to replace the Antenna to AESA and not backend. ( i am not sure how that works coz AESA is incompatiable with TWT so I would suppose that means back end electronics )

All the reasoning is there and I do agree with you. But I can still tell you the IAF wants AESA. They have their heart set on it and a new Irbis style upgrade while powerful, is not that attractive to them. At best a few may be procured as an interim in Phase 1. Say a few squadrons worth. Some 40-80 airframes. Bulk upgrade will be AESA.

The ZHUK-AE is less capable then IRBIS by arm and length and as such is good for Medium class aircraft. The Ga/N TR module would be available in production only from 2020 , Check Jo post on AFM.

I said they evaluated it, not that they chose it. GaN modules may be available post 2020, the current PAKFA radar uses GaAs.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 17 Apr 2015 23:25

I remember reading the Irbis was unavailable to the mki since it needer greater power that the current mki engines could supply. This when it was first fielded on the su-35, Outdated information?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 17 Apr 2015 23:58

I am actually not that concerned about the engines - esp. thrust. The IAF seems quite satisfied - I have a distinct feeling based on a few open sources that the AL-31FPs crank out 13.5 tons of thrust unlike the 12.5 bandied about.

In any case the fact that the IAF has waited on the MKI upgrade for so long is indicative imvho that they want a Pakfa based solution. My guess is - 240 deg X-band coverage via AESA + Lband on the wings. Possibly podded underbelly carriage of a few weapons.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 18 Apr 2015 09:52

I remember that about a year back a picture of Su30mki with internal weapon bay (center space converted) was out .

Can't seem to find that picture now but maybe IAF will go for Silent Su30mki concept with ram coating / internal weapon bay / Improved Radar coverage that Cain Marko said in the last post.

We are already making SU30mki in India so it would be a logical step to improve the platform & order a few sqds. It looks more logical step as MMRCA is now cancelled & LCA is taking its own sweet time.(HAL is ....)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Apr 2015 13:26

Prasad wrote:I remember reading the Irbis was unavailable to the mki since it needer greater power that the current mki engines could supply. This when it was first fielded on the su-35, Outdated information?

Su-35 117S engine when compared to AL-31F gives 4T more thrust

http://www.npo-saturn.ru/?sat=64&slang=1

And Irbis peak power is 20kW and avergae of 5 kW which means it need those high thrust if at some point in time it operates at peak power but thats a rare thing when figher operates at peak power , even if they do they probably dont do few speeds in quick seconds to get a wider picture or to just burn through using raw power.

Chances are most part of their like BARS , Irbis or other type would be using it average power or even lower power as RF can be double edge sword and smart ESM these days even detect LPI radars.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Apr 2015 16:40

Prasad wrote:I remember reading the Irbis was unavailable to the mki since it needer greater power that the current mki engines could supply. This when it was first fielded on the su-35, Outdated information?

They'll need to change the power generation equipment in the aircraft (generators linked to the engine). Its not about the engines per se. You don't have to throttle up the engine f.e. if radar power needs to be boosted.. NIIP is pushing an Irbis style upgrade for Bars to the IAF so power is not the issue.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 18 Apr 2015 16:50

Like the indigenous manufacturing initiative for the Su-30, is there one for replacing metal parts with composites progressively? With the LCA the claim was its RCS is smaller due to extensive use of composites even though it added weight penalty. The MKI due to its sheer size has higher margins to absorb any weight growth while suffers from huge RCS.

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 18 Apr 2015 21:28

Hi Austin

Quote "And Irbis peak power is 20kW and avergae of 5 kW which means it need those high thrust if at some point in time it operates at peak power but thats a rare thing when figher operates at peak power , even if they do they probably dont do few speeds in quick seconds to get a wider picture or to just burn through using raw power.

Chances are most part of their like BARS , Irbis or other type would be using it average power or even lower power as RF can be double edge sword and smart ESM these days even detect LPI radars." Unquote

The radar wave a pulse shape in micro seconds followed by a silent non transmitting stage which could be 1x100 times the pulse with.
The average power is the peak power of the pulse divided by the whole period of the transmit/non transmit waveform.

Also like a capacitor which can give a high peak power, radars have circutry that caters to the peak power requirement.
As far as the electrical power pack is concerned, the average power is what is important. The engine and alternator are not concerned with peak power as the period of the peak power waveform is negligable from a mechanical point of view.

Please excuse me if my answer is tangential to what you are trying to explain.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 20 Apr 2015 09:31

Some amazing SU30 SM footage thanks to Tarmak007!!!
Hope the IAF releases something like this...given the sheer hours that Rambhas fly footage will be plenty!

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 20 Apr 2015 10:17

Thank You Andy B. Great video and amazing formation flying.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 20 Apr 2015 11:51

Why the BrahMos armed Sukhoi is bad news for India’s enemies

India has signalled its intent to strike enemy targets with devastating force early on in a conflict.

In September 2010 India’s newly constituted tri-services Strategic Forces Command (SFC) submitted a proposal to the Defence Ministry for setting up two dedicated squadrons of aircraft comprising 40 Su-30MKI air dominance fighters. The task of this “mini air force” is to deliver nuclear weapons.

The picture became clearer in October 2012 when the Cabinet Committee on Security green lighted a programme to carry out structural and software modifications on 42 Su-30MKIs and acquire 216 air-launched BrahMos missiles. Until then, the BrahMos – the product of an India-Russia joint venture – was for exclusive use by the Navy.

In March 2015 the SFC received the first of these 42 Sukhois equipped with the air launched version of the supersonic BrahMos. This is the first time that the SFC, which at present depends on the Indian Air Force (IAF) for delivering nuclear weapons under its command, is acquiring its own aerial assets.

Currently, India’s nuclear delivery system is based on land-based ballistic missiles such as the Agni and Prithvi plus the IAF’s nuclear-capable Mirage 2000, Su-30 MKI and Jaguar fighter-bombers. The final element of the nuclear triad, submarine-launched missiles, is still being tested.

Individually, the Su-30 and BrahMos are powerful weapons. But when the world’s most capable fourth generation fighter is armed with a uniquely destructive cruise missile, together they are a dramatic force multiplier.

The BrahMos’ 3000 km per second speed – literally faster than a bullet – means it hits the target with a huge amount of kinetic energy. In tests, the BrahMos has often cut warships in half and reduced ground targets to smithereens. The Sukhoi’s blistering speed will add extra launch momentum to the missile, plus the aircraft’s ability to penetrate hardened air defences means there is a greater chance for the pilot to deliver the missile on to its designated targets.

Likely targets

Considering that India’s primary enemy is Pakistan and that country’s chief backer is China, against which India has fought two conflicts – losing in 1962 and winning in 1967 – these two countries are the obvious targets.

Against Pakistan, the targets are obvious. A two-squadron attack using most of the SFC’s air assets can within minutes utterly cripple the country’s command and control centres; nuclear power plants, including the Kahuta ‘Death Star’ where the majority of the “Islamic” bombs are manufactured; the Sargodha Central Ammunition Depot west of Lahore where these warheads are stored; ballistic missile bases in Gujranwala, Okara, Multan, Jhang and Dera Nawab Shah; Pakistani Army Corp headquarters in Rawalpindi; the Karachi Port, Pakistani’s only major harbour and its Naval HQ; and ordinance factories that manufacture tanks and fighter aircraft.

The supersonic BrahMos armed with a conventional warhead can theoretically penetrate hardened command, control and communication centres. However, there is no guarantee these targets will be 100 per cent destroyed unless the BrahMos is nuclear tipped. A pre-emptive nuclear strike will therefore ensure that Pakistan’s offensive capability is effectively neutralised and it is never again a threat to India.

Against China, the Sukhoi-BrahMos one-two punch seems counter-intuitive as Chinese targets are located deep inland or on the coast. However, the Su-30MKI has a maximum range of 3000 km (extendable to 8000 km with in-flight refuelling). Now add the BrahMos’s 300 km reach and India can hit targets 3300 km inside China.

Why the Sukhoi-BrahMos option?

The Su-30MKI is an obvious choice. The SFC does not want untested fighters but the ones which can be relied upon to deliver nuclear-tipped missiles. The aircraft has a titanium airframe strong enough to fly a high-speed terrain following profile. The batch of 42 Sukhois will also have hardened electronic circuitry to shield them from the electromagnetic pulse of a nuclear blast.

Having a dedicated aircraft for the nuclear attack role offers India’s war planners strategic flexibility and increases the odds of success. Because ballistic missiles are used only as a weapon of last resort, they cannot really be deployed at will. Once released, they cannot be recalled and if shot down are not easily replaced. Fighter aircraft, on the other hand, can perform repeated sorties and be directed to bomb targets as they move. For instance, if Pakistan moves it warheads out of Sargodha depot, which is presumably under constant watch by Indian satellites, the Sukhois can be vectored against a column of Pakistani trucks transporting their nuclear cargo.

The SFC’s mini air force of 42 Sukhois can also launch their missiles against Pakistani targets from within Indian airspace or while flying over international waters, thereby complicating the enemy’s defences. It is a lot easier for India to destroy Pakistani war fighting capability because not only is Pakistan relatively smaller but it has also concentrated its defences in one province, Punjab.

Further developments

Because heavy modifications were necessary for integrating such a heavy missile onto the Su-30MKI, initially it seemed to make little sense to deploy a single missile. Aviation Week reports that initially even Sukhoi was reluctant to go along. That prompted HAL to go solo, but Aviation Week says Sukhoi came on board in 2011. The Russian side provided HAL with technical consultancy especially for the modifications to the fuselage in order to accommodate the 9-metre-long missile.

“Work is also underway on a modified lighter and smaller-diameter version of the BrahMos for deployment on the Indian navy’s MiG-29K and, potentially, the Dassault Rafale,” says Aviation Week.

And signalling the country’s immunity from western sanctions, DRDO scientists say the 300 km cap on the missile’s range will be removed. The next generation BrahMos is likely to be a longer range weapon. And with the planned increased in speed, the missile will have considerably enhanced kinetic energy despite its smaller size optimised for relatively smaller aircraft such as the MiG-29.

That’s really bad news if you are in the Sukhoi-BrahMos crosshairs.

Source : RUSSIA & INDIA REPORT

http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2015/04/20/why ... 42687.html

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2015 13:16

Brahmos will get real punch once they develop and field the 600 km plus range that VKS spoke about with a higher altitude of flight ( 18 km vs 15 km )

Couple with the seeker they are developing for Brahmos-M

"“The seeker for BRAHMOS-M will have sufficient redundancies to include anti-radiation, Radio Frequency and Imaging Infra-Red capabilities. The guidance in addition to the present G3 combination will also come from indigenous satellite navigation constellation — IRNSS — which will have a total of seven satellites of which three have been placed in space.”

and the Block 3/4 capability "in addition to the steep-dive capability with Block-III LACM, there will be Block–IV LACM with a “surround capability, to hit hidden targets laterally from the side of mountains.” BrahMos’s own research team at Hyderabad is already working on Block-IV LACM."

This without adding weight volume or length compared to existing Brahmos , This would be a true stand off weapon that with capability mentioned above can take out S-400/300 class SAM keeping enough reserves in range and trajectory shaping.

This should be the Brahmos one can looking forward to by 2020.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2015 13:20

Came across this interview with Sudhir Mishra

http://imrmedia.in/showreporter/intervi ... aerospace/#

MR: Have any countermeasures been devised against supersonic cruise missiles anywhere in the world? In other words, what are the vulnerabilities today?

SKM: Few countries in the world have developed and deployed missile shield capable of intercepting and destroying incoming missiles, mostly it is for ballistic and sub-sonic cruise missiles. Efforts are also being made to develop missile defence systems against supersonic cruise missiles.
BrahMos is a very high-speed, low-flying cruise missile. It’s the supersonic speed of the missile that gives its adversary very short time to deploy any countermeasures. This renders BrahMos the power to evade any missile defence system in the world. Thus, BrahMos does not face any threats from countermeasures for many more years to come.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 20 Apr 2015 13:40

Brahmos with nukes ? Do we even have reliable nuclear warheads weighing less than 300 kg ? This website and one another are just Roosi propaganda websites.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2015 15:19

Most certainly if SFC ends up using Su-30MKI they would certainly be using more than dive-toss method for nuclear delivery , So Brahmos would have a nuclear derivative and eventually even Nirbhai too.

As to if we have a Nuclear weapons of those size/weight most certainly in worst case scenario low yeald nuclear weapons of half the weight of 300 kg is not outside the competency of BARC

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 20 Apr 2015 18:34

^ I think Brahmos may not require tossing and other such techniques as it is a powered and guided missile.

jamwal wrote:

Brahmos with nukes ? Do we even have reliable nuclear warheads weighing less than 300 kg ? This website and one another are just Roosi propaganda websites.

Sounds like they borrowed writers from IDRW

On a serious note, if at all Super-30 is for squadrons allocated to SFC, it is not necessary that Brahmos itself be a nuclear weapon. It may be used in conventional role against hardened "strategic" targets.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 20 Apr 2015 18:38

IDRWs patented ...,,,, and MIsCaPitaliZations among every three sentences, are also missing.

I kinda doubt all Super Su-30s will be for SFC. IAF asked for Brahmos for its conventional role..some 200 odd missiles IIRC.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Apr 2015 19:25

Pakistan makes 60 kg nukes so why not 300 kg in India?

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 20 Apr 2015 20:40

My personal guess:-

Ground launched Brahmos in hi, hi, hi, glide attack mode has a range of 1000km while Air launched Brahmos in hi, hi, hi, glide attack mode has a range of 1500km. Brahmos -M will have similar ranges with perhaps a smaller warhead & higher use of composites for internal structures.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 20 Apr 2015 20:49

tushar_m wrote:Why the BrahMos armed Sukhoi is bad news for India’s enemies

Considering that India’s primary enemy is Pakistan and that country’s chief backer is China, against which India has fought two conflicts – losing in 1962 and winning in 1967 – these two countries are the obvious targets.

http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2015/04/20/why ... 42687.html

I keep hearing about the bolded part off and on. Is there any online resource detailing '67? The only other officially mentioned China-related incident I know of post '62 is Sumdorung Chu.

Sorry for the OT.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 20 Apr 2015 20:50

That is the win..

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 20 Apr 2015 21:30

Google "chola incident"

Abhay_S · Post by **Abhay_S** » 20 Apr 2015 22:04

^^^ http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORC ... ident.html

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Apr 2015 22:05

This is the best source insofar as 1967 is concerned....thanks to the Great Lt Gen Sagat Singh..He disobeyed orders to vacate Nathu La and this is why this pass is with India today..

http://veekay-militaryhistory.blogspot. ... story.html

http://veekay-militaryhistory.blogspot. ... vsm_4.html

In January 1964, Sagat handed over command of 50 Para Brigade to Brigadier A.M.M. Nambiar, and proceeded to attend the fourth course, at the National Defence College, in Delhi. After spending a year on the course, he was posted as Brigadier General Staff 11 Corps, in January 1965. He served in this appointment for just six months, and in July 1965, was promoted Major General, and posted as GOC 17 Mountain Division, replacing Major General Har Prasad. The division was then in Sikkim, and soon after he took over, there was a crisis. In order to help Pakistan during the 1965 War, the Chinese served an ultimatum, and demanded that the Indians withdraw their posts at Nathu La and Jelep La. According to the Corps HQ, the main defences of 17 Mountain Division were at Changgu, while Nathu La was only an observation post. In the adjoining sector, manned by 27 Mountain Division, Jelep La was also considered an observation post, with the main defences located at Lungthu. In case of hostilities, the divisional commanders had been given the authority to vacate the posts, and fall back on the main defences. Accordingly, orders were issued by Corps HQ to both divisions to vacate Nathu La and Jelep La.

Sagat did not agree with the views of the Corps HQ. Nathu La and Jelep La were passes, on the watershed, which was the natural boundary. The MacMahon Line, which India claimed as the International Border, followed the water shed principle, and India and China had gone to war over this issue, three years earlier. Vacating the passes on the watershed would give the Chinese the tactical advantage of observation and fire, into India, while denying the same to our own troops. Nathu La and Jelep La were also important because they were on the trade routes between India and Tibet, and provided the only means of ingress through the Chumbi Valley. Younghusband had used the same route during his expedition, sixty five years earlier, and handing it over to the enemy on a plate was not Sagat's idea of sound military strategy. Sagat also reasoned that the discretion to vacate the posts lay with the divisional commander, and he was not obliged to do so, based on instructions from Corps HQ.

As a result of orders issued by Corps HQ, 27 Mountain Division vacated Jelep La, which the Chinese promptly occupied. However, Sagat refused to vacate Nathu La, and when the Chinese became belligerent, and opened fire, he also opened up with guns and mortars, though there was a restriction imposed by Corps on the use of artillery. Lieut-General (later General) G.G. Bewoor, the Corps Commander, was extremely annoyed, and tried to speak to Sagat, to ask him to explain his actions. But Sagat was not in his HQ, and was with the forward troops. So it was his GSO 1, Lieut Colonel Lakhpat Singh, who bore the brunt of the Corps Commander's wrath.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 21 Apr 2015 07:48

Thanks folks, will read up. I suppose the 'Chola' is a typo and is actually Cho La?

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 21 Apr 2015 07:54

deejay wrote:Thank You Andy B. Great video and amazing formation flying.

No worries saar!!

Here is another one looking at history of SU family developments. Hope Mods wont mind given that it does have great footage of SU30 and others including Pak Fa. It is a bit jingoistic but quality of footage is A grade!
Apologies if double post.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 21 Apr 2015 09:26

^^^ Andy B, this one is a gem! It talks of many things. Sure, it is Sukhoi PR exercise but there is so much in it. It talks about design to production integration in Soviet era. It talks about differences in what Pilots and Engineers think and how the designer works to get it all right. It talks of Test Benches. It talks of testing on simulators and taking up actual flight tests for only those data points that have been confirmed, hence saving time.

And I am just in the 11th minute. Lots of stuff on T- 50. Thank You again

(Was rushed so just saw this small part and posted)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Apr 2015 09:52

The French uses Rafale/ASMP-A for Nuclear Detterent.

See no reason why Super-MKI/BRahmos wont have this role specially if it involves man in the loop for N Detterent its more reliable.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 21 Apr 2015 11:59

jamwal wrote:

Brahmos with nukes ? Do we even have reliable nuclear warheads weighing less than 300 kg ? This website and one another are just Roosi propaganda websites.

Had bigger firework with less drag, don't know if it can be fitted on it.

member_28990 · Post by **member_28990** » 21 Apr 2015 12:32

Does any other nation use low range cruise missiles as a nuclear delivery platform? The only use case I would guess for this combination will be against a super carrier flotilla.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 21 Apr 2015 15:30

maxratul wrote:Does any other nation use low range cruise missiles as a nuclear delivery platform? The only use case I would guess for this combination will be against a super carrier flotilla.

France had the ASMP, now replaced with a longer range variant though

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Apr 2015 20:31

andy B wrote:
deejay wrote:Thank You Andy B. Great video and amazing formation flying.
No worries saar!!

Here is another one looking at history of SU family developments. Hope Mods wont mind given that it does have great footage of SU30 and others including Pak Fa. It is a bit jingoistic but quality of footage is A grade!
Apologies if double post.

Nice Video , Thanks for Video