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.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Katare » 06 Aug 2012 01:37

Design flaw is responcibility of OEM, why should HAL get into it and void the warranty?

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 » 06 Aug 2012 01:49

shiv wrote:My personal guess is that it is the switch and nothing else. A switch that can be turned off in flight leading to shut down of FBW and a crash is a design flaw by any stretch of imagination.

But afaik crazy Roosis have it there for a reason; isn't it a manual override of sorts which they think can be of use in certain situations, like airshows ? 8) .

If that is the case one fit a hinge cap over it which will have to be flipped open in order to activate the switch , that should prevent anyone from activating it by accident.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 06 Aug 2012 01:55

Why is that a big issue. What I am trying to say is this.. we are not that gullible NOT to disable a function if it is riskier to keep it, and perhaps have couple of the airframes for russkie type airshows. Now, that only if the argument is true. There is absolutely no requirement for that button to be there, then HAL can very well get that done, by disabling it permanently. Now, if it requires OEM approval, so be it.. the user wants it that way [.]

Now, the question of design arise here because our air chief said it.. that means something., and can't be ignored. Hence, an oppty.. for us. We are not the same as any other supplier-consumer nation, and our terms with Russia is of a collaborator kind.. and hence, a learning oppty is what my thought is.. and perhaps a wonderful one at it.

Our PAK-FA deal is $30b, and make no mistake, many of the MKI components will in there too.. and we don't want then air chief to say the same thing.. and for this $30b, we are investing a blood lot more than MKI.

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby member_20067 » 06 Aug 2012 03:08

I agree that it is not a big issue but given the propensity of the press to sensationalize things what is the point of even talking about it?

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 06 Aug 2012 06:55

negi wrote:
If that is the case one fit a hinge cap over it which will have to be flipped open in order to activate the switch , that should prevent anyone from activating it by accident.


There may be something we do not know here. Something on the lines of the switch being off initially, and requiring to be operated as part of the flight checks and then left alone until after landing or some such thing. Don't want to make a joke out of a potentially serious issue but there was that joke about the man who was told not to use the ATR switch in a high tech automated toilet. He woke up in hospital with after using it and was old that it was "Automatic Tampon Remover" that castrated him.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 06 Aug 2012 07:22

Why so much speculation gentlemen? and then discussions on speculations!

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 Aug 2012 07:41

imo its not the switch - can be fixed easily with a plastic cover or wire lock.
has to be some flight regime problem.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 06 Aug 2012 08:08

The problem is out and well scoped to FBW. Now, there is no speculation at that 30K ft level of the problem.

See, Russians were slow to adopt digital controls.. for example: AL-31FP has no FADEC... which alone can improve efficiency by 0-30% if done correct.

We are talking about relaxed stability of the a/c, and nothing beyond the 3-axis controls here is my first assumption. It could be the turn rate at high mach levels or some such problem if it ain't just the switch issue. Assuming because, there is a scope out there about the design flaws, and none willing to explain or will know in detail owing security issues.

But then, we already have the problem stated in public by the chief.. what else we need to think about discussing various issues?

It is a perfect GA by the chief to discuss the problem./jmt

aniket
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 17:34
Location: On the top of the world

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby aniket » 06 Aug 2012 15:40

I don't get it, what is the need to disclose information like this to the media, why can't they just solve it ?

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 Aug 2012 15:43

perhaps to put pressure on Rus to ack and solve it promptly. this could have a history...

aniket
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 17:34
Location: On the top of the world

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby aniket » 06 Aug 2012 15:56

I suppose that would help but I feel that news like this shakes the trust of the general public in the concerned equipment.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 06 Aug 2012 16:13

There have been plenty of news about the LCA & F-35 and their drawbacks. This piece of news just shows that even the Sukhois are not perfect. There is nothing wrong in pointing out shortcomings. Better to have news like this than to have the TOI article comparing LCA's measly mach 1 speed to mach 20 of the PGS which may not see the light of the day.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2274
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 26 Aug 2012 05:15

Cross Posting from the Missiles thread

Brahmos missiles to get airlift, to be mounted on Sukhoi-30MKI
NEW DELHI: The government is set to approve an over Rs 6,500 crore programme to mount supersonic cruise missile Brahmos on Sukhoi-30MKI fighters of the Indian Air Force (IAF). The air-launched missile system would significantly add to the conventional offensive capabilities of Indian military might, while intensifying arms race in the region.

The project seeks to mount the missile on 42 Sukhoi fighters, and includes 216 air-version missiles.
:
:

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 03 Sep 2012 12:50

^ I dont understand this obsession of fitting one Brahmos on MKI. Get Su-34 to carry the missile and let MKI provide air support. But why convert an air superiority fighter into a bomber?

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 03 Sep 2012 12:54

There is no conversion as such. It can be used as any other Su 30 MKI plane while not carrying Brahmos. That is why the IAF has gone for it keeping in mind its multirole capability.

tushar_m

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby tushar_m » 10 Sep 2012 11:10

absolute newbie question only su30 seem to have canards while su35/su37 earlier su27 have no such things doesn't it add to the RCS of the fighter ???

after upgrade of su30 will there be any structural changes on the fighter as stealth will become primary goal for upgrade with radar & other systems ???

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 10 Sep 2012 11:48

it depends on the canard material, and shape, plus in addition since this for frontal RCS, and given that no time the canard would be perpendicular to radiation to source, I doubt it adds anything big to RCS. Again, if the frontal edge is sharp, it should be negligible is my understanding.

canards can help for high AoA. so it is a nice to have feature or something like movable LERX in PAK-FA.

chiragAS
BRFite
Posts: 169
Joined: 16 Nov 2006 10:09
Location: INDIA
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby chiragAS » 10 Sep 2012 15:19

abhijitm wrote:^ I dont understand this obsession of fitting one Brahmos on MKI. Get Su-34 to carry the missile and let MKI provide air support. But why convert an air superiority fighter into a bomber?


+1
OT
IMO not a direct relation but MiG 21 became difficult to manage when they turned it into ground attack roles.
/OT

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 10 Sep 2012 19:35

Would'nt su34 order and induction be more expensive and process hurdled than say having a bomb squadron of MKI?

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 10 Sep 2012 20:03

SaiK wrote:Would'nt su34 order and induction be more expensive and process hurdled than say having a bomb squadron of MKI?

But for a long term perspective having a few dedicated modern bombers provide more options than makeshift su-30.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 10 Sep 2012 20:12

sure

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 10 Sep 2012 20:17

But for a long term perspective having a few dedicated modern bombers provide more options than makeshift su-30.


The past problems with spares and other issues arising from interacting with the OEM may have led to this decision by the IAF. They would rather have HAL making everything as they would not have to rely on external vendors. That is why most orders are big (126 Rafales, 200 LCA, 270 MKI) since these can be built at home. We could get a few Back fires or other dedicated bombers which are far better than Su 34 but this does not happen.

We could see dedicated bombers once our defense budget crosses US$ 100 billion. Until then or till our indigenous MIC ramps up, we will continue with baniya giri...

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby adityadange » 10 Sep 2012 20:22

abhijitm wrote:^ I dont understand this obsession of fitting one Brahmos on MKI. Get Su-34 to carry the missile and let MKI provide air support. But why convert an air superiority fighter into a bomber?


1. consider a su-30 taking off from pune with a brahmos (maybe +2 aam for self defence). it will fly over arebian sea to at least 1500km one way and return back. with brahmos range of 300km it is possible to keep 1800kms of clean water for nearly 4 hours.
2. take half a squadron. load: 2/3 with brahmos, 2-4 with kh-35 ashm and 2-3 with aam + buddy refuellers. take off from andamans and engage a a distroyer group 200km away. add few more planes and engage carrier group maybe?? shoot and scoot. why buy new platforms when we have similar capabilities?

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Sep 2012 21:33

I dont think a Su30 with a brahmos and aam has a combat radius of 1500km....even with zero loiter time on station.

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Austin » 23 Sep 2012 12:40

came across this older but interesting news RAF chief mentions Typhoon beat the MKI in last Indo-UK exercise

'British Typhoons whacked India's Sukhois in joint exercises'

RAF Fairford (Britain) : Britain's frontline fighter jet Eurofighter Typhoon, shortlisted for India's $10.4-billion combat jets tender, whacked the Indian Air Force (IAF) warhorse Sukhoi in one-on-one dog fights during bilateral air war games, if Britain's air chief is to be believed.

"Well, they lost," was Stephen Dalton's response when IANS asked how the Russia-developed India-manufactured Su-30MKI air superiority jets performed against the Royal Air Force's (RAF) Typhoons when they matched their wits during the joint exercises in recent years.

However, he was quick to add that the two aircraft are different in technologies, and that Typhoons are next generation, and hence there is no comparison.

Dalton was interacting with IANS at the recently held Royal International Air Tattoo military air show at the RAF base here.

The two aircraft were pitted against each other during 'Indradhanush' exercises in 2007 at Waddington in Britain and in 2010 at Kalaikunda in India.

Interestingly, the IAF had claimed in 2007 that Sukhoi's performance against Typhoon had convinced the RAF of its superiority. "The RAF pilots were candid in their admission of the Su-30 MKI's observed superior manoeuvring in the air, just as they had studied, prepared and anticipated," an Indian defence ministry release had said during the July 2007 Indradhanush.

It was, however, fair to Typhoon, saying the IAF pilots were impressed with its agility in the air.

Dalton was also all praise for the IAF for training its pilots to put any aircraft they fly to best use.

"The issue is you are comparing technology and people. So, more often than not, technology can give you a great edge, a great lead. But actually it is always the people (behind the machines) who make the difference at the end of the day," he said.

"It is not just how the aircraft did in the air. It is also about how the individual thinks, how they work, and their willingness to develop and to experiment.

"I have always found the IAF to be extremely good. Yes, technology is a significant element, but also the individual is really important in this," he added.

Dalton also indicated that the IAF inventory of Sukhois, MiGs and Mirages are no match to the Typhoons.

"Nothing that India has got is anything anywhere near this (the Typhoon). I would say that absolutely. This airplane is phenomenally different in both performance and technology in anything they (IAF) got right now," he said.

But, he added, it was not criticism, as Typhoon is the product of next generation technology.

"I would say the IAF crew that I have worked with and seen are every bit as clever as any other air crew in the world, and in many cases better. It is all about the man as the machine that they operate," he added.

Dalton said the cooperation between the RAF and the IAF will continue, as Britain valued this relationship. "IAF has a lot of experience and I would like to suck that out and use it, quite frankly," he added.


nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 23 Sep 2012 12:47


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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 23 Sep 2012 19:24

must be a EF handout. they missed the elephant in room - internal weapons bay for A2A and A2G weapons to preserve VLO.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 23 Sep 2012 21:46

That is surprising... on a dog fight, having a TVC.. it could be just that fraction of second locking. So, an advanced OLS (pak-faish) integrating/fused with I got you first is all that is needed. I guess reducing the RCS is another big factor where MKI needs to focus on. change them to kevlar composites and better skins could change the MKI profile totally, in addition to advancing the radar and OLS.

--

and from the assimilation angle.. IAF should look at Rafale vs EF, and ask for modifications in MKI++ next versions and upgrades. kudos to IAF for being very smart. never let the secrets to firangs!

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Indranil » 23 Sep 2012 23:33

Singha wrote:must be a EF handout. they missed the elephant in room - internal weapons bay for A2A and A2G weapons to preserve VLO.


Obvious :| . WHAT IS A 5TH GENERATION FIGHTER

It came out when US was trying to pitch in the F-35 into the MMRCA :-)

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 23 Sep 2012 23:50

It is quite funny f-22 is not net enabled ops.. the only hindering aspect in the f22 architecture is stealth even to the level communication and bandwidth, where it is classified how it communicates. this does not mean it is not net enabled. interfacing f22s are a challenge even to maasan programs, however, there are teams internally who are working on it.. nothing is impossible.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 24 Sep 2012 00:13

It is quite funny f-22 is not net enabled ops.. the only hindering aspect in the f22 architecture is stealth even to the level communication and bandwidth, where it is classified how it communicates. this does not mean it is not net enabled. interfacing f22s are a challenge even to maasan programs, however, there are teams internally who are working on it.. nothing is impossible.


The problem is the standards. f 22 communicates using diff standards. It can only communicate with other f22 planes. Not with others.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 24 Sep 2012 00:29

Except for VLO, the Eurofighter still is a 5th gen fighter. Pity it could not convince a partner nation to buy it over the F 35.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 24 Sep 2012 01:21

says who? f22 can communicate with others with an interface box. it is not a magic to adapt to various communication formats. those public news report are to keep things classified for a long time, and enhance the moolah value of the a/c.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 24 Sep 2012 11:25

That is what I have been reading for a long time. If they have introduced a way to get around it, its good for them. In the USAF, they usually use different aircrafts using networking & the F 22 stuck out because it couldn't get along well with others. That prevented it being used as a mini AWACS for other planes.

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 24 Sep 2012 11:59

its a problem that money & time can fix but EF cannot grow a internal bay.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 24 Sep 2012 12:06

its a problem that money & time can fix but EF cannot grow a internal bay.


Heres is how EF gets around the problem:
High survivability through balanced mix of: kinematic performance, RCS reduction, EW Suite (incl. towed decoys), passive sensors, LPI radar modes, standoff weapons, supercruising, networked tactics, mission planning, standoff jamming assets. Potential future developments: non-kinetics weapons, i.e. cyberwarfare, Electronic Attack, HPM (High Power Microwave) devices.

We have most of these on the Su 30 MKI.

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

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 24 Sep 2012 13:31

the Khan planes also have such stuff (usually better) in spades as well. khan wrote the book on network integration for aircraft and still rules that roost there.

internal bay and small long range guided weapons are still good to have for high risk missions.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby nakul » 24 Sep 2012 13:40

The problem with Khan is usually keeps the good stuff for itself. Other countries cannot cutomize an F35 like the FGFA is to the PAK FA. So for an export customer, he has to either be happy with a black box (F 35) or rely on lesser ones like Rafale or EF with more freedom.

What the Su 30 MKI vs F 15 showed was that Khan overstates its abilities & the humongous 15:0 kill ratios that F22 vs F15 curiously disappeares when Rafale or EF showed up. Over the years, I have learnt to take khan desxcriptors with iodine namak in large quantities.

The Chinese are following in Khan's footsteps thinking that seeing is believing. Khan maintains a huge lead in nos over its opponents & China is expected to do the same. But they lack in quality. There is one more thing that China lacks -- Khanesque PR which shows F 22 killing Su 30 MKKs over the Pacific with total impunity. EF is now trying to play catch up in this regard.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1971
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Kakarat » 25 Sep 2012 20:18

Su-30 MKI inducted at AF Station Halwara

While the first batch of SU-30 MKI was inducted into IAF in Sep 2002, the 220 Squadron at Halwara known as ‘Desert Tigers’, which flew the MiG-23 aircraft till 2005 is now resurrected with the latest SU-30 MKI Squadron in Western Air Command.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion

Postby Cybaru » 25 Sep 2012 20:33



Haha, funny Fridays already here ??

Khan will intercept/jam/curry-pickle that stupid thing called ef without it even knowing who and what is messing with it. Let them silly folks in ef marketing make slides..


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests