Sir, every report of yours is worth its weight in gold...Anyone wants a report on Sweetmans lecture?? (I attended about half of it)
Also, Yair Ramati also gave a beautiful perspective of aviation market trends till 2020.. anyone interested???
To some extent it was a fluke.somnath wrote:the tech specs were defined by the Indians by a large extent for the MKI, and there the inputs obvioulsy came from DRDO/IAF. But the point is that the original deal went through in such a short time that I doubt that even the IAF had a full idea of what all could be put in that plaform when it was inked first. the key point here was to lock Russia in a sufficiently open ended contract for us to able to pretty much define the specs all the way up - the reason was the quick deal making with cash upfront. At least on occastion when we beat the Chinese to it - defines the different developmetn trajectories of the MKI and the MKK...
Though i dont have technical expertise, one thing i can tell from organisation and management point of view is that you cannot achieve what you don't aspire. I don't think SU and IAF was firing in air and eventually got the right shot. This is no game of chance.NRao wrote: To some extent it was a fluke.
The political angle you provided had no clue as to what the technical difficulties were. I doubt if any politician cared - only because no one had a clue. IF at all, it was only someone dreaming within the Indian technical group - that too it was a dream (to build out the Su-30 to include components from a variety of sources). The "lock" you talk of could have been the greatest blunder too. Which politician can understand integration at the level it should be? IIRC, the decision made by PM Rao was more of a political one, than a technical one. Just that the techies (Indian) proved him more than right - at a great risk.
On the technical side SU too had no clue what the end product would be (vs. look like) like. It was to a very great extent the literal demands of the IAF that drove the SU development team. I do not think am janata realises, even today, how different the MKI is from any of the Su-30 family. It is so different that I recall that even Su went through a bought of laughter. Somnathji, i would not even bother to compare the MKI to any other Su AC, forget the MKK. What was accomplished with the MKI is, even today, in a class by itself.
Correct me if I am wrong, but even the RuAF does not have a comparable platform, in large enough quantities to make a major difference, in its inventory.
firing in air and eventually got the right shot
It is the opportunities and challeges IAF faced with the Mirage platform, the innate thinking to the blend the product to the unique operating requirement and the parallel program in the form of LCA which provided much needed customization made the Su-30 MKI a successful program. I dont want to call it unique becoz there are other programs which will reveal itself in due course. Of these mentionables are, ATV, Brahmos and BMD program.NRao wrote: To some extent it was a fluke.
The political angle you provided had no clue as to what the technical difficulties were. I doubt if any politician cared - only because no one had a clue. IF at all, it was only someone dreaming within the Indian technical group - that too it was a dream (to build out the Su-30 to include components from a variety of sources). The "lock" you talk of could have been the greatest blunder too. Which politician can understand integration at the level it should be? IIRC, the decision made by PM Rao was more of a political one, than a technical one. Just that the techies (Indian) proved him more than right - at a great risk.
On the technical side SU too had no clue what the end product would be (vs. look like) like. It was to a very great extent the literal demands of the IAF that drove the SU development team. I do not think am janata realises, even today, how different the MKI is from any of the Su-30 family. It is so different that I recall that even Su went through a bought of laughter. Somnathji, i would not even bother to compare the MKI to any other Su AC, forget the MKK. What was accomplished with the MKI is, even today, in a class by itself.
Correct me if I am wrong, but even the RuAF does not have a comparable platform, in large enough quantities to make a major difference, in its inventory.
) to convince not just what a great AC it was but the up side this platform HAS - it is still evolving for heaven sakes. The 200th MKI will not be the same as the 100th MKI.I distinctly recall discussions on BR in mid-90s or so, including "accusations" that the MKI was nothing more than a Su-30 trainer in IAF colors.
they actually said Su-27 traineri completely agree . The config IAF decided in mid 90s is one most advanced even today and comparable to the best availaible in market. MKI alone changed the equations in the region, it provided that real tech edge against not only PAF but also Chinese. 230 of these beasts, imagine what they can do. they are alone are enough offset all the delays in fighter aquisitions. more importantly, India has first mover advantage with flanker. i wish IAF wud another 170, rounding off numbers to 400.NRao wrote:To some extent it was a fluke.somnath wrote:the tech specs were defined by the Indians by a large extent for the MKI, and there the inputs obvioulsy came from DRDO/IAF. But the point is that the original deal went through in such a short time that I doubt that even the IAF had a full idea of what all could be put in that plaform when it was inked first. the key point here was to lock Russia in a sufficiently open ended contract for us to able to pretty much define the specs all the way up - the reason was the quick deal making with cash upfront. At least on occastion when we beat the Chinese to it - defines the different developmetn trajectories of the MKI and the MKK...
The political angle you provided had no clue as to what the technical difficulties were. I doubt if any politician cared - only because no one had a clue. IF at all, it was only someone dreaming within the Indian technical group - that too it was a dream (to build out the Su-30 to include components from a variety of sources). The "lock" you talk of could have been the greatest blunder too. Which politician can understand integration at the level it should be? IIRC, the decision made by PM Rao was more of a political one, than a technical one. Just that the techies (Indian) proved him more than right - at a great risk.
On the technical side SU too had no clue what the end product would be (vs. look like) like. It was to a very great extent the literal demands of the IAF that drove the SU development team. I do not think am janata realises, even today, how different the MKI is from any of the Su-30 family. It is so different that I recall that even Su went through a bought of laughter. Somnathji, i would not even bother to compare the MKI to any other Su AC, forget the MKK. What was accomplished with the MKI is, even today, in a class by itself.
Correct me if I am wrong, but even the RuAF does not have a comparable platform, in large enough quantities to make a major difference, in its inventory.
There is a very focused information blockage and disinformation campaign on the Indian public. This group controls the world view of the Indians.NRao wrote:
However, go back to the very early days of the MKI and let me know how much confidence did anyone have.
Even after the first MK landed how many had a kind word to say about the MKI. It was not until very first MKI landed in India did eyes open, then it took a lot more time and even a trip to Lohegoan
More conspiracy theories. is it the right thread?Acharya wrote:There is a very focused information blockage and disinformation campaign on the Indian public. This group controls the world view of the Indians.NRao wrote:
However, go back to the very early days of the MKI and let me know how much confidence did anyone have.
Even after the first MK landed how many had a kind word to say about the MKI. It was not until very first MKI landed in India did eyes open, then it took a lot more time and even a trip to Lohegoan
Su-30MKI has 2D thrust vectoring.Aditya_M wrote:The Sukhoi always had 3d TVC. Or so I have been led to believe.
Sai K - The Sukhoi always had 3d TVC. Or so I have been led to believe.
MKI has pseudo 3D TVC. It has already been discussed here.sohamn wrote:Su 30 MKI always had 2D TVC. I think they are planning to implement a Pseudo 3D TVC. i.e. it mimics a 3D TVC by changing the thrust in the engines.
This is ridiculous.somnath wrote: ............... had after Nehru's first 10 years, ..................
IIRC, the 6% figure was being touted. Dunno if its by weight/surface area. My guess is that achieving this would be well within capabilities and perhaps is already done. The MiG-29K for example incorporates 15%.How much composites was achieved on the SU-30MKI?
Thanks, ramana
this means that the replacements of the 18 k have been delivered.Sukhoi and Irkut
The major portion of export work conducted by the Russian aircraft industry in 2008 was related to the contracts for Su-30 family multi-role fighters from Algeria, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Venezuela. Unlike in previous years, information about last year's export deliveries has not yet been made public, so all the figures below are preliminary.
India most probably received the largest number of Russian fighters in 2008. It can be safely assumed that New Delhi took delivery of the last two Su-30MKI fighters under a deal signed in April 2007. That contract envisaged the sale of 18 such aircraft to replace the same number of Su-30K warplanes delivered to the Indian Air Force in 1997 and 1999. The first 16-ship batch was handed over to India in 2007. In addition, India last year was expected to receive at least four aircraft under the November 2007 contract for 40 Su-30MKI fighters and knock-down kits, in addition to the 140 kits contracted in 2000. According to estimates, India took delivery of at least six Su-30MKI fighters in 2008 under the terms of the current contracts. It is also possible that 10 to 12 Su-30MKI kits were supplied to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd for subsequent assembly at its Indian facilities.
Su-30MK exports in 2008
Country Type Deliveries
Minimum Maximum
India Su-30MKI 6 6
India Su-30MKI (kits) 10 12
Malaysia Su-30MKM 6 8
Algeria Su-30MKI (A) 8 10
Venezuela Su-30MK2(V) 8 8
Indonesia Su-30MK2 2 2
Total 30, plus 10 kits 34, plus 12 kits
The company also signed a $964-million contract to modernize 64 Indian Air Force MiG-29B fighters to the MiG-29SMT configuration.
In separate development, Russia last February delivered the first Ilyushin Il-76EI aircraft to Israel for installation of the Elta Phalcon airborne early warning system. This work was completed during 2008, after which the aircraft was handed over to the Indian Air Force late last year. It arrived at an Indian Air Force station in Goa in January 2009.
Another notable accomplishment last year became the signing of the largest contract in the history of Russian helicopter manufacturers. Under the $1.2 billion deal, Mil undertook to deliver 80 Mi-17V-5 helicopters to India.
Sajith I highly reccomend you to read the respective pages for those jets on BR from which you will be able to get a very good idea of what is better...also for further info you can use google or wiki.Sajith_J wrote:Hi, can someone tell me how good the ground attack capabilities of Mki are compared to Mig 27, or Jaguar? I mean it has way more payload then any other ground attack fighter in our fleet, is faster, has more range and a higher service ceiling, so is it as good as them, or maybe better?
And what role will it take if Pak Fa comes in 2018 / 20? Both will be in service together for at least 10 years. But both for air superiority wouldn't make sence right? One is stealth, the other has a big RCS.
I asked a simillar qn in newbie thread. I basically asked " In what way is MKI inferior to modern strike jets (lets say F-18 an Rafale) when considering its strike capabilities? ". I ask this bcoz I saw a lot of comments in MRCA tread stating that MKI( and Mig-35 for that matter) is primarily an air superiority fighter and not a good strike fighter. I agree on the first statement but do not understand the rationale behind the second. So what if Su-30 was made primarily as an air superiority a/c? MKI is quite diff from Su-30 and has an excellent range, payload and armament. So what else is needed to be qualified as a good strike fighter? I got a few replies on the newbie thread but none to my full satisfaction. I would really like if you could give me MKI'S disadvantages ( if any exist ) as compared to F-18 and rafale.Sajith_J wrote:Hi, can someone tell me how good the ground attack capabilities of Mki are compared to Mig 27, or Jaguar?
Why dont you research the above question yourself and tell us....spoon feeding is not encouraged here my friend. The answer is out there all you gotta do is to look for it in the right way....Parijat Gaur wrote:I asked a simillar qn in newbie thread. I basically asked " In what way is MKI inferior to modern strike jets (lets say F-18 an Rafale) when considering its strike capabilities? ". I ask this bcoz I saw a lot of comments in MRCA tread stating that MKI( and Mig-35 for that matter) is primarily an air superiority fighter and not a good strike fighter. I agree on the first statement but do not understand the rationale behind the second. So what if Su-30 was made primarily as an air superiority a/c? MKI is quite diff from Su-30 and has an excellent range, payload and armament. So what else is needed to be qualified as a good strike fighter? I got a few replies on the newbie thread but none to my full satisfaction. I would really like if you could give me MKI'S disadvantages ( if any exist ) as compared to F-18 and rafale.Sajith_J wrote:Hi, can someone tell me how good the ground attack capabilities of Mki are compared to Mig 27, or Jaguar?
PS: I mentioned rafale coz many threads held it in high regard for its strike capability.
There is no airforce station in Goa. The Dabolim airport in Goa is owned by Navy and Navy operates its sea harriers and other aircrafts. And the Il-76 with Phalcon is supposed to be based from Agra.In separate development, Russia last February delivered the first Ilyushin Il-76EI aircraft to Israel for installation of the Elta Phalcon airborne early warning system. This work was completed during 2008, after which the aircraft was handed over to the Indian Air Force late last year. It arrived at an Indian Air Force station in Goa in January 2009.
And I am certainly not asking for spoon feeding. I have indeed researched on this topic and have personally felt that criticism of MKI's ground attack ability are baseless. There are basically 2 arguments given against MKI's ground fighting ability:andy B wrote:Why dont you research the above question yourself and tell us....spoon feeding is not encouraged here my friend. The answer is out there all you gotta do is to look for it in the right way....Parijat Gaur wrote: I asked a simillar qn in newbie thread. I basically asked " In what way is MKI inferior to modern strike jets (lets say F-18 an Rafale) when considering its strike capabilities? ". I ask this bcoz I saw a lot of comments in MRCA tread stating that MKI( and Mig-35 for that matter) is primarily an air superiority fighter and not a good strike fighter. I agree on the first statement but do not understand the rationale behind the second. So what if Su-30 was made primarily as an air superiority a/c? MKI is quite diff from Su-30 and has an excellent range, payload and armament. So what else is needed to be qualified as a good strike fighter? I got a few replies on the newbie thread but none to my full satisfaction. I would really like if you could give me MKI'S disadvantages ( if any exist ) as compared to F-18 and rafale.
PS: I mentioned rafale coz many threads held it in high regard for its strike capability.
what could have been the specific reason for IAF to order 40 more flankers. i mean were they worried about Mig-23s being retired or was it something else. is it possible that IAF might order more or main reason for not placing another big order is coz of maintainence issues.Rahul M wrote:something that solves our permutations and combinations.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpo ... tcount=535
this means that the replacements of the 18 k have been delivered.Sukhoi and Irkut
The major portion of export work conducted by the Russian aircraft industry in 2008 was related to the contracts for Su-30 family multi-role fighters from Algeria, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Venezuela. Unlike in previous years, information about last year's export deliveries has not yet been made public, so all the figures below are preliminary.
India most probably received the largest number of Russian fighters in 2008. It can be safely assumed that New Delhi took delivery of the last two Su-30MKI fighters under a deal signed in April 2007. That contract envisaged the sale of 18 such aircraft to replace the same number of Su-30K warplanes delivered to the Indian Air Force in 1997 and 1999. The first 16-ship batch was handed over to India in 2007. In addition, India last year was expected to receive at least four aircraft under the November 2007 contract for 40 Su-30MKI fighters and knock-down kits, in addition to the 140 kits contracted in 2000. According to estimates, India took delivery of at least six Su-30MKI fighters in 2008 under the terms of the current contracts. It is also possible that 10 to 12 Su-30MKI kits were supplied to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd for subsequent assembly at its Indian facilities.
Su-30MK exports in 2008
Country Type Deliveries
Minimum Maximum
India Su-30MKI 6 6
India Su-30MKI (kits) 10 12
Malaysia Su-30MKM 6 8
Algeria Su-30MKI (A) 8 10
Venezuela Su-30MK2(V) 8 8
Indonesia Su-30MK2 2 2
Total 30, plus 10 kits 34, plus 12 kits
The company also signed a $964-million contract to modernize 64 Indian Air Force MiG-29B fighters to the MiG-29SMT configuration.In separate development, Russia last February delivered the first Ilyushin Il-76EI aircraft to Israel for installation of the Elta Phalcon airborne early warning system. This work was completed during 2008, after which the aircraft was handed over to the Indian Air Force late last year. It arrived at an Indian Air Force station in Goa in January 2009.Another notable accomplishment last year became the signing of the largest contract in the history of Russian helicopter manufacturers. Under the $1.2 billion deal, Mil undertook to deliver 80 Mi-17V-5 helicopters to India.