Su-30: News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 27 Nov 2011 12:27

^^^ this article has some nuggets with a misleading title, AKA talking about 16 rambhas a year is indeed a good news, more orders coming HALs way cannot be ruled out considering that IAF has reduced the # of twin-seeters in PAK-FA order with more single-seeters. I think HAL will continue to chug out Rambha untill the line is needed for building PAK-FAs and FGFAs!!!

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4598
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 01 Dec 2011 03:37

I wonder if the Super-30 upgrade includes any work on shielding the compressor face from radar waves..it was looked at for the F-15 Silent Eagle but rejected due to high cost of changing structures. Which means from the front-on aspect, its stealth characteristics will be nowhere near that of the F-35 let alone the F-22.

“We now have conformal weapons bays,” Jones notes. “The engine face has been considered in the changes. We did not change the engine intakes because that would require changing big structure. An option is grill work over the turbine face that is similar to what like was done with the F/A-18 Super Hornets. For a relatively low amount of dollars you can get a certain reduction in signature.”


link

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 01 Dec 2011 04:16

can't they slam the radar blocker (I read they had some special blocker design) on the pak-fa on the super sukhois?

VishalJ
BRFite
Posts: 996
Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby VishalJ » 01 Dec 2011 05:49

Just approved a large bunch of Rambha shots on my FLickr Group > http://www.flickr.com/groups/sukhoi30/pool/

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3837
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 01 Dec 2011 06:04

Well, Knaapo has managed to reduce Su-35 RCS to around 1-3msq levels - a solid achievement imho. I think a blocker might be nice, but if they can get it to around the 5msq mark with a nice A2A load, the HUGE irbis type radar should give it enough advantage vs. say even an EF (1msq?) with an AESA. The EF would detect a 5msq target at around 350km, otoh, the Irbis does this at around 425km. IIRC, the Bars 2.0 should be slightly better - approximations from designer indicated that it would more than double its range for the upgrade.

Perhaps it may even catch the JSF early enough what to say of J10 or J20.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 01 Dec 2011 07:58

any plans on retractable refuel pods?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43697832@N ... -sukhoi30/

George J
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby George J » 04 Dec 2011 23:30

SaiK wrote:any plans on retractable refuel pods?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43697832@N ... -sukhoi30/


The fuel pod is retractable...and is retracted in the picture. Its on your right (the other side of the OLS...which is not visible).

What you are looking at is the pitot tube.

Could somebody please confirm that the No.24s are fully MKIized? No more Ks? All gone to Belarus as reported?

Source wrote:According to Kommersant, the aircraft were formally returned to Russia's Irkut aircraft corporation, but never touched the Russian soil and ended up in Belarus.

The first 10 jets have been recently delivered to an aircraft plant in Baranovichi for a deep overhaul to the Su-30KN version, Kommersant cited a source close to Russian state arms exporter Rosoboronexport. The remaining eight are expected to arrive in November.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7912
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Mort Walker » 05 Dec 2011 01:23

Welcome back George! It's good to see you here again.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Dec 2011 10:28

good to know the old K's have found loving new owners. should clear up that taxiway in pune where the K's were parked for years....any visitor flying through pune could pls confirm this.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11308
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Dec 2011 11:37

Kartik wrote:I wonder if the Super-30 upgrade includes any work on shielding the compressor face from radar waves..it was looked at for the F-15 Silent Eagle but rejected due to high cost of changing structures. Which means from the front-on aspect, its stealth characteristics will be nowhere near that of the F-35 let alone the F-22.

“We now have conformal weapons bays,” Jones notes. “The engine face has been considered in the changes. We did not change the engine intakes because that would require changing big structure. An option is grill work over the turbine face that is similar to what like was done with the F/A-18 Super Hornets. For a relatively low amount of dollars you can get a certain reduction in signature.”


link


Can't do a direct comparision between F-15 , SU-30 and Mig 29. If you see the F-15 its Intakes are in the side of the body and lead straight to engines. With SU-30 and Mig-29, intakes are below the body and do a vertical S before going to the engine.

Offcourse No Western source will talk about this disadvantage of the F-15.
Last edited by Aditya_V on 05 Dec 2011 13:05, edited 1 time in total.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Dec 2011 12:34

you are right...the f15 inlets lead straight to engine with no horizontal or vertical S

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7385
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Prasad » 05 Dec 2011 12:51

Thing is, the F-15 was developed to combat the imagined potential of the Mig-25. This was in the early 1970's. The Su-30/Mig-29/F-16 generation was the next. Its supposed to have canted vert stabs too.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7220
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 06 Dec 2011 02:45

Prasad wrote:Thing is, the F-15 was developed to combat the imagined potential of the Mig-25. This was in the early 1970's. The Su-30/Mig-29/F-16 generation was the next. Its supposed to have canted vert stabs too.

The Mig-29 has slightly canted vertical tail fins. The Flankers don't.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4598
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 06 Dec 2011 04:27

Aditya_V wrote:Can't do a direct comparision between F-15 , SU-30 and Mig 29. If you see the F-15 its Intakes are in the side of the body and lead straight to engines. With SU-30 and Mig-29, intakes are below the body and do a vertical S before going to the engine.

Offcourse No Western source will talk about this disadvantage of the F-15.


What vertical S are you talking about ?

Image

The picture shown above is a Su-30MKI's intake as seen from the front.

Its literally slam bang in the line of sight of a person peering into the intake. If any fighter needed a radar blocker, it is the Su-27 and its derivatives.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 06 Dec 2011 04:51

Kartik wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:Can't do a direct comparision between F-15 , SU-30 and Mig 29. If you see the F-15 its Intakes are in the side of the body and lead straight to engines. With SU-30 and Mig-29, intakes are below the body and do a vertical S before going to the engine.

Offcourse No Western source will talk about this disadvantage of the F-15.


What vertical S are you talking about ?

[img*]http://vayu-sena.indianmilitaryhistory.org/pix/Su-30MKI_intake_FOD_mesh.jpg[/img]

The picture shown above is a Su-30MKI's intake as seen from the front.

Its literally slam bang in the line of sight of a person peering into the intake. If any fighter needed a radar blocker, it is the Su-27 and its derivatives.

ha ha ha ... this is epic slam dunk
Last edited by Rahul M on 14 Dec 2011 11:27, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: do not quote pics.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7220
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nachiket » 06 Dec 2011 04:53

^^nothing to laugh about. We are going to have to address that somehow in the Super-30 upgrade.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 06 Dec 2011 04:55

nachiket wrote:^^nothing to laugh about. We are going to have to address that somehow in the Super-30 upgrade.


I am laughing at amazing confidence people talking about things which are far from reality.. I mean the fact is so direct opposite to the quoted fact .. that it sounds funny to me...

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Dec 2011 20:31

Image

above is on a ANG F-15A/B :oops:

both the F15 and su27 family seem to have a moveable rectangular panel on the roof of the intake and hinges down to constrict the airflow as the plane goes more supersonic. for both of them the initial part of tunnel is slightly sloped downward...you can see the start of the downslope in above pic...I think thats about where the F-18 E/F has the radar blocker vane system.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 06 Dec 2011 22:40

You either has a Low RCS or you dont , there is no middle ground so even if Su-30MKI has all the radar blockers and RAM in the world , it wont lead you much far becuase it misses the crucial shape and most importantly it carries external payload which can even spoil the RCS of carefully crafted LO aircraft.

So all the fantasy of Low RCS for Super-30 , F-18 , Euro Bird etc are just good marketing stuff , in real combat they would be betrayed by too many things.

Its similar to a dark lady trying to look fair with a good make up , a good make up can just take you that far becuase the real thing is still dark.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4598
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Kartik » 07 Dec 2011 02:25

Austin wrote:You either has a Low RCS or you dont , there is no middle ground so even if Su-30MKI has all the radar blockers and RAM in the world , it wont lead you much far becuase it misses the crucial shape and most importantly it carries external payload which can even spoil the RCS of carefully crafted LO aircraft.

So all the fantasy of Low RCS for Super-30 , F-18 , Euro Bird etc are just good marketing stuff , in real combat they would be betrayed by too many things.

Its similar to a dark lady trying to look fair with a good make up , a good make up can just take you that far becuase the real thing is still dark.


I don't agree with you here Austin. The Su-30MKI's RCS is one of its weaknesses and while it isn't possible to entirely redesign it to make it LO, the is some benefit to be gained from reducing its RCS further. If the radar blocker helps the Su-30MKI be detected say 10-15 NM later than it would be earlier, its an advantage. After all, compressor face is one of the biggest radar reflectors and possibly one of the big contributors to the MKI's RCS.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 07 Dec 2011 02:58

blunt edges needs serrations and zig zag slants too.
The blade design could also reduce RCS.
S-inlet is the way to go like in pak-fa/Ef2k.
There are many areas for serrations

but RAM coating is still required. I am for all Kevlar/composite
skins where the deflection is internally handled.
http://www.gizmag.com/new-nano-fiber-to ... lar/17203/

--
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRec ... =ADA343828
This paper gives some ideas how one could internally reduce RCS..

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 07 Dec 2011 08:51

to my knowledge nobody has been able to change the compressor blade design itself to reduce RCS - the shape is either straight or slightly curved.

looking at the kind of towed rcs targets used for AA crews to practise on (and perhaps as towed wingtip decoys as well),
http://www.peostri.army.mil/PRODUCTS/TOWTARS/

seems to me that biggest 360' spherical contributors to RCS could be the tailfins of plane and the fins of the external ordnance. hence the emphasis on carefully slanted/small/nonexistent tailfins in raptor/pakfa/flying wing (b2/x-planes) and on moving the external ordnance into internal bays.
the exposed compressor face will generate a return within a certain angle from the front of the plane. RAM material coated inside the tunnel has to be very resilient if they are not to ablate or peel off and get sucked into the engine causing some long term damage, but I guess everyone uses it now.

so I guess if a radar blocker could be installed infront of compressor and reduce the tracking range by X% its always a bonus even on a vanilla non-stealth design like f15/su30 as it probably generates a lot of return vs that from external munitions?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11308
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 07 Dec 2011 10:33

Kartik wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:Can't do a direct comparision between F-15 , SU-30 and Mig 29. If you see the F-15 its Intakes are in the side of the body and lead straight to engines. With SU-30 and Mig-29, intakes are below the body and do a vertical S before going to the engine.

Offcourse No Western source will talk about this disadvantage of the F-15.


What vertical S are you talking about ?

[img*]http://vayu-sena.indianmilitaryhistory.org/pix/Su-30MKI_intake_FOD_mesh.jpg[/img]

The picture shown above is a Su-30MKI's intake as seen from the front.

Its literally slam bang in the line of sight of a person peering into the intake. If any fighter needed a radar blocker, it is the Su-27 and its derivatives.


Thanks for correcting my wrong impression, I was wrong in this case , not having access to aircraft first hand.
Last edited by Rahul M on 14 Dec 2011 11:28, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: do not quote pics.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 07 Dec 2011 10:56

Kartik wrote:I don't agree with you here Austin. The Su-30MKI's RCS is one of its weaknesses and while it isn't possible to entirely redesign it to make it LO, the is some benefit to be gained from reducing its RCS further. If the radar blocker helps the Su-30MKI be detected say 10-15 NM later than it would be earlier, its an advantage. After all, compressor face is one of the biggest radar reflectors and possibly one of the big contributors to the MKI's RCS.


From what I have read they have applied RAM to the blade of RCS to reduce its visibility also there was this experiment done by ITAE to reduce RCS of Flanker , you must have read this before link
ITAE researchers had found materials that solved the dominant problem in the Sukhoi design: straight-through inlets to the compressor face, with no line-of-sight blockage. Rather than placing an absorber-treated blocker in front of the engine, as on the Super Hornet, ITAE developed a radar absorbent material (RAM) that could be applied to the first-stage compressor blades. The rest of the RAM suite included a metallic treated canopy and sprayed-on RAM coatings on the missiles.


Having said that most effort for RCS reduction on existing type has been measured for clean aircraft rather then a loaded one , so a Flanker with RCS reduction Clean will have difference RCS value then a loaded one.

Hence the actual value of such rcs reduction with combat payload against modern radars like BARS ,RBE2 and modern AESA types is truly debatable , its a good marketing strategy though to sell 4th Gen Aircraft with RCS reduction features .... considering most countries cannot develop or may not get or may not afford a true LO designed aircraft.

adityadange
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 04 Aug 2011 11:34

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby adityadange » 07 Dec 2011 11:08

why the tyre is flat? is it worn out? how safe is it to use such a grip-less tyre? or do they use such tyres purposefully

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby negi » 07 Dec 2011 13:27

Kartik Austin has a point ; even if you go by the elementary radar range equation the detection range only varies as 4th root of RCS (rest of the variables being same ). So change from 15m^2 frontal RCS to say 5m^2 frontal RCS will not reduce the detection range by much.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby negi » 07 Dec 2011 13:37

Slick tire provides maximum traction on a dry and even surface like a concrete/asphalt . Even formula 1 cars and other racing sport use slick tires unless conditions are wet .

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 07 Dec 2011 15:07

adityadange wrote:why the tyre is flat? is it worn out? how safe is it to use such a grip-less tyre? or do they use such tyres purposefully


What tyre? I don't see any tyre on this page. Must have worn out fully maybe? Oh! Just saw it :D

adityadange
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 04 Aug 2011 11:34

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby adityadange » 07 Dec 2011 15:46

^^i was referring to the sukhoi tyre in the pic above showing its air intake.

chiru
BRFite
Posts: 203
Joined: 17 Jun 2009 12:46
Location: mahishooru

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby chiru » 13 Dec 2011 14:13

Third Su-30mki crash today, reported just minutes ago near pune in Kashnand village, both pilots safe !

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 690
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby karan_mc » 13 Dec 2011 14:21


chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby chackojoseph » 13 Dec 2011 14:22


Asit P
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 14 May 2009 02:33

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Asit P » 13 Dec 2011 18:25

Thanks god. The pilots are safe.

Prabu
BRFite
Posts: 422
Joined: 22 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: In the middle of a Desert

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Prabu » 13 Dec 2011 18:49

self deleted.
Last edited by Prabu on 14 Dec 2011 12:46, edited 1 time in total.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16834
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 13 Dec 2011 18:50

why are you posting irrelevant news items in threads ?

sanjeevpunj
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 04 Sep 2009 13:10

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby sanjeevpunj » 13 Dec 2011 21:54

Image

IAF personnel inspect the debris of the Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SagarAg » 13 Dec 2011 23:21

Thank God the pilots are safe. :)
But really whats up with IAF recently. :x :shock:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36392
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 13 Dec 2011 23:25

relax.. until investigations are out, don't flare up on the services.

The first link said, the first failure was FBW, and the second one with Engine. So hang on to get to know what is up with this crash.


tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2803
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 14 Dec 2011 01:08

Can anyone post the flight safety article of the incident when the Su30 engine caught fire but pilots were able to land safely.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 38 guests