Su-30: News and Discussion

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 16 Jun 2009 06:28

SB122 - thats a first. the last highest number seen was SB115 isnt it?

Still no idea about which squadron flew there. The Patch is cleverly blocked out!

Edit: SB052 is a new one as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2009 09:00

Jagan wrote:SB122 - thats a first. the last highest number seen was SB115 isnt it?
.

If I had seen it on a dog, I would have identified it right away. But could someone please say what that red thing is beneath the SB 122?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 16 Jun 2009 09:06

Shiv you beat me to the question. What is SB 122 lugging?

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 16 Jun 2009 11:45

Looks like a EL/M-2060P pod covered in a red tarp or casing/covering to me
pics - http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/27497.pdf

3rd pic in this link - http://www.spyflight.co.uk/iaipod.htm

SanjibGhosh · Post by **SanjibGhosh** » 16 Jun 2009 19:55

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/sukho ... ry/477431/

Sukhois are safe, insists Defence Ministry

A joint probe by India and Russia into the crash of IAF's Sukhoi aircraft over Jaisalmer in April has given a clearance to the quality of the fighter plane, indicating that the mishap took place due to human error.

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 17 Jun 2009 03:27

Vivek K wrote:Shiv you beat me to the question. What is SB 122 lugging?

From the blog we don't speak about:

For intelligence, surveillance, targeting for attack and reconnaissance (ISTAR) operations during both peacetime and wartime, the IAF has decided to equip its Su-30MKIs with Elbit Systems' Condor-2 LOROP pod (photos 1 & 2) and ELTA's 590kg EL/M-2060P (Photo 3) belly-mounted inverse synthetic aperture radar (ISAR) capable of tracking ground targets—both stationary and mobile—300km away and using the EL/K-1850 microwave data link operating in C-band, Ku-band and X-band for transmitting battlespace reconnaissance data to ground-based Corps-level HQs in real-time. generates in real-time synthetic aperture radar-based (SAR) maps approaching photographic quality (in both STRIP and SPOT modes) and ground moving target imagery (GMTI) while cruising at an altitude of more than 45,000 feet, and are capable of penetrating clouds, rain, smoke, fog and smog.

FWIW onlee...

p_saggu · Post by **p_saggu** » 17 Jun 2009 03:41

Buddy refueling pod?

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 17 Jun 2009 06:11

Srivastav wrote:Looks like a EL/M-2060P pod covered in a red tarp or casing/covering to me
pics - http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/27497.pdf

3rd pic in this link - http://www.spyflight.co.uk/iaipod.htm

su30 doesn't need these pod mounted radars its got its own huge bars radar which provide much better SAR imagery and this too at longer ranges

these pod mounted radars have been selected for jagaur upgrade or probably for mig27 as well not for su30

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jun 2009 06:47

Andrew,

Do you have a URL for that (Jag upgrade)? (There are URLs for the MKI.)

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 17 Jun 2009 07:55

NRao wrote:Andrew,

Do you have a URL for that (Jag upgrade)? (There are URLs for the MKI.)

its a common sense no need for any URL here

why su30 need a pod mounted radar(which consumes 3.5kW) when its got its own radar

its costly to rebuild the nose to mount radar on jaguar so cheaper option is pod mounted radar for SAR and same pod can be used on upgraded mig27

i am saying this because jaguars and mig27 sometimes are used for recce missions as well and pod mounted radar is perfect for attack ,recce

its same like su25 which has no radar for this deficiency russians built pod mounted KOPYO radar
note that there is pod mounted radar on center line

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... u-25TM.jpg

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Jun 2009 08:23

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
NRao wrote:Andrew,

Do you have a URL for that (Jag upgrade)? (There are URLs for the MKI.)
its a common sense no need for any URL here

That is not common sense - it is nonsense. If you have an opinion - say it is an opinion. If it is information that you have acquired from elsewhere please post the source.

That is common sense on this forum.

naird · Post by **naird** » 17 Jun 2009 08:29

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
NRao wrote:Andrew,

Do you have a URL for that (Jag upgrade)? (There are URLs for the MKI.)
its a common sense no need for any URL here

why su30 need a pod mounted radar(which consumes 3.5kW) when its got its own radar

PLAAF did use SAR pods for their recon missions against taiwan...somewhere in early 2000. I dont know if Su30 MKK has a powerful radar such as BARS (i will try to post links), but i would think it would be relatively comparable to BARS. So who knows maybe BARS SARS might have some demerits, which might have prompted IAF to aquire a specialized SARS radar.....

And ohhh the rule in defence is never say never.....it might be a SAR pod (for reasons unknown) or it might be a buddy refuelling POD ...my bet is on the later.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 17 Jun 2009 09:09

naird wrote:
NRao wrote:Andrew,

Do you have a URL for that (Jag upgrade)? (There are URLs for the MKI.)
its a common sense no need for any URL here

why su30 need a pod mounted radar(which consumes 3.5kW) when its got its own radar

PLAAF did use SAR pods for their recon missions against taiwan...somewhere in early 2000. I dont know if Su30 MKK has a powerful radar such as BARS (i will try to post links), but i would think it would be relatively comparable to BARS. So who knows maybe BARS SARS might have some demerits, which might have prompted IAF to aquire a specialized SARS radar.....

And ohhh the rule in defence is never say never.....it might be a SAR pod (for reasons unknown) or it might be a buddy refuelling POD ...my bet is on the later.

SAR imagery is good till 60km beyond this resolution is bad so its better to get more refined pics from satellites

and it is clear that at same distance SAR imagery produced by bars is more clearer than SAR produced by pod mounted radar

SAR imagery resolutions of russian fighter radars are known from various sources and you all know this so beyond 60 km SAR resolution is not much clear

and if higher power nose mounted radars have SAR resolution limitation to 50-60 km then pod mounted radar has much smaller antenna compared to nose mounted radars and low power consumption and so lower SAR range

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 17 Jun 2009 10:58

Andrew, this is for your reading pleasure. And from Harry's Aero India 2003 report info

This is the IAI Elta EL/M-2060P SAR Reconnaissance System for combat aircraft consisting of a detachable pod mounted Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and a built in bidirectional datalink. Near photo-quality real time SAR images are transmitted to the Ground Exploitation Station (GES). There are 3 modes of operation namely the STRIP mode for fast coverage and mapping at stand off ranges, the SPOT mode for high res detailed examination and GMTI mode for highlighting moving targets within the SAR strip. The pod weighs 590 kg and requires a power supply of 3.5 kW(typical). The ground datalink uses the Elta EL/K-1850 operating in the C or X band with full duplex capability and a range of more than 250 nautical miles.

Can you please stop or atleast slow down the BS'ing ?

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 17 Jun 2009 11:44

JaiS wrote:Andrew, this is for your reading pleasure. And from Harry's Aero India 2003 report info

This is the IAI Elta EL/M-2060P SAR Reconnaissance System for combat aircraft consisting of a detachable pod mounted Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and a built in bidirectional datalink. Near photo-quality real time SAR images are transmitted to the Ground Exploitation Station (GES). There are 3 modes of operation namely the STRIP mode for fast coverage and mapping at stand off ranges, the SPOT mode for high res detailed examination and GMTI mode for highlighting moving targets within the SAR strip. The pod weighs 590 kg and requires a power supply of 3.5 kW(typical). The ground datalink uses the Elta EL/K-1850 operating in the C or X band with full duplex capability and a range of more than 250 nautical miles.

Can you please stop or atleast slow down the BS'ing ?

JaiS know what he is talking.. bcoz he was one of the early members along with JCage who brought up the discussion of Airborne SAR for IAF fighter a/c... IIRC even ISRO had offered a primitive version of SLAR which at the time IAF found no use for.. until they fell for the Yehudi marketing tricks... (that by no means discounts the performance of EL/M 2060P though)

By googling for pictures of 2060P and comparing the shape - it is a no brianer that the "thing under the dog" is EL/M 2060P SLAR... Obviously the MKI SAR gives it enough capability to "detect" or "identify" targets such as ships or tanks.. But may be the SAR on MKI Bars is not as good when it should be used as a reconnaissance system.. and that is where IAF might have found operational reasons for EL/M 2060P..

While Jaguars have the center pylon payload capacity for EL/M 2060P SLAR, they dont have the service ceiling.. Su30MKI can fly safely at 45000ft and keep clicking away.. Jaguars cannot operate at that altitude which is crucial for surveillance & reconnaissance missions.. Mirage2000 has a service cieling close to Su30MKI, but there is no doubt which is a better platform to put your jewels on at that altitude -- either in terms of avialable airborne endurance time or defensive capability..

What though seems to have been on order for Jaguars is EL/M 20600 RTP (not to confuse with EL/M 2060P seen on the Sukhoi) which is a radar targetting pod at 196kgs.. when compared to the 590kg thingy under the Sukhoi belly.. which was kind of open "speculative" secret for a longtime now until 2days ago IAF decided to make it discreetly (wrapped in a red cloth) public at Tezpur..

Raman · Post by **Raman** » 17 Jun 2009 13:24

Let's not forget that the pod provides sideways-looking SAR imagery, which the Bars cannot provide outside its scan limits. The aircraft will have to be closing towards the threat if one were to only rely on the primary radar's SAR capability. Plus, the Bars can be dedicated to scanning for airborne threats, which would be very useful since the aircraft would be operating near the battle area.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jun 2009 19:02

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
NRao wrote:Andrew,

Do you have a URL for that (Jag upgrade)? (There are URLs for the MKI.)
its a common sense no need for any URL here

why su30 need a pod mounted radar(which consumes 3.5kW) when its got its own radar

its costly to rebuild the nose to mount radar on jaguar so cheaper option is pod mounted radar for SAR and same pod can be used on upgraded mig27

i am saying this because jaguars and mig27 sometimes are used for recce missions as well and pod mounted radar is perfect for attack ,recce

its same like su25 which has no radar for this deficiency russians built pod mounted KOPYO radar
note that there is pod mounted radar on center line

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... u-25TM.jpg

either you cannot read a post or you are on a high. Or a lack of common sense.

I asked for a URL for the Jaguar.

What has a Jaguar to do with a MKI?

Like I said you bring nothing to the table.

And, IF you want to speculate, perhaps you should consider sites that encourage that.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 17 Jun 2009 19:09

rakall wrote:Andrew, this is for your reading pleasure. And from Harry's Aero India 2003 report info

This is the IAI Elta EL/M-2060P SAR Reconnaissance System for combat aircraft consisting of a detachable pod mounted Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and a built in bidirectional datalink. Near photo-quality real time SAR images are transmitted to the Ground Exploitation Station (GES). There are 3 modes of operation namely the STRIP mode for fast coverage and mapping at stand off ranges, the SPOT mode for high res detailed examination and GMTI mode for highlighting moving targets within the SAR strip. The pod weighs 590 kg and requires a power supply of 3.5 kW(typical). The ground datalink uses the Elta EL/K-1850 operating in the C or X band with full duplex capability and a range of more than 250 nautical miles.

Can you please stop or atleast slow down the BS'ing ?

JaiS know what he is talking.. bcoz he was one of the early members along with JCage who brought up the discussion of Airborne SAR for IAF fighter a/c... IIRC even ISRO had offered a primitive version of SLAR which at the time IAF found no use for.. until they fell for the Yehudi marketing tricks... (that by no means discounts the performance of EL/M 2060P though)

By googling for pictures of 2060P and comparing the shape - it is a no brianer that the "thing under the dog" is EL/M 2060P SLAR... Obviously the MKI SAR gives it enough capability to "detect" or "identify" targets such as ships or tanks.. But may be the SAR on MKI Bars is not as good when it should be used as a reconnaissance system.. and that is where IAF might have found operational reasons for EL/M 2060P..

While Jaguars have the center pylon payload capacity for EL/M 2060P SLAR, they dont have the service ceiling.. Su30MKI can fly safely at 45000ft and keep clicking away.. Jaguars cannot operate at that altitude which is crucial for surveillance & reconnaissance missions.. Mirage2000 has a service cieling close to Su30MKI, but there is no doubt which is a better platform to put your jewels on at that altitude -- either in terms of avialable airborne endurance time or defensive capability..

What though seems to have been on order for Jaguars is EL/M 20600 RTP (not to confuse with EL/M 2060P seen on the Sukhoi) which is a radar targetting pod at 196kgs.. when compared to the 590kg thingy under the Sukhoi belly.. which was kind of open "speculative" secret for a longtime now until 2days ago IAF decided to make it discreetly (wrapped in a red cloth) public at Tezpur..

friends ,you all must know that power consumption of el/m 2060 is 3.5 kW but its weight higher

and the power consumption of el/m 20600 RTP is 4.5kW but its lighter and this pod also produces SAR imagery

darin3 upgrade will have 3 MFDs in jaguars and jaguar can haul 4.5 tons paylaod and can provide 4.5 kW to el/m 20600 then its also capable in carrying el/m2060 as well cuz it consumes less power than el/m 20600

and for SAR imagery jagaur can hover at 12 km altitude for recce mission although this altitude is not good as sukhoi but let me remind you that operating cost of su30 is more than operating cost of jaguar at the same time

and also optical sensor on KH 29 missile also provides real time or live pictures to ground stations

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jun 2009 19:20

Now that makes a lot more (common) sense.

Thanks.

Aditya_M · Post by **Aditya_M** » 17 Jun 2009 19:26

The RTP is a targeting pod. Which means that the range is likely to be far less than a specialized recon pod.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 17 Jun 2009 19:28

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:
friends ,you all must know that power consumption of el/m 2060 is 3.5 kW but its weight higher

and the power consumption of el/m 20600 RTP is 4.5kW but its lighter and this pod also produces SAR imagery

darin3 upgrade will have 3 MFDs in jaguars and jaguar can haul 4.5 tons paylaod and can provide 4.5 kW to el/m 20600 then its also capable in carrying el/m2060 as well cuz it consumes less power than el/m 20600

and for SAR imagery jagaur can hover at 12 km altitude for recce mission although this altitude is not good as sukhoi but let me remind you that operating cost of su30 is more than operating cost of jaguar at the same time

and also optical sensor on KH 29 missile also provides real time or live pictures to ground stations

Read in between the lines..

El/M 20600 is lighter bcoz it is only a RTP...

EL/M 2060 is heavier bcoz it has to account for all the extra hardware required to beam back the images to GES... it relays tons of the surveillance images it takes to a GES via a C & X-band datalink.. the hardware required to realise the datalink, photographic quality SAR imagery (the El/M 20600 provides SAR imagery good enough for "identification & targeting" purposes, but not high quality required by surveillance system) dont come without the extra weight.. the imagery from El/M 2060P is the quality that sexy-cameras on board Mig25 would have taken.. you dont get that quality SAR with pod mounted radar like the EL/M20600. And the EL/M20600 doesnt have the deep vision that EL/M2060P has, either..

And regarding Jaguar being able to haul EL/M2060P - as mentioned in my previous post, to look deep inside enenmy territory the aircraft needs to fly higher.. and Jaguar doesnt have the operational/service ceiling that Su30MKI has for the purpose.. flying at 12km versus flying at 15km is the difference between coming back alive and getting shot down by a SAM (besides being able to look deeper - higher you fly, deeper you can look).. Another point mentioned earlier -- Jaguar doesnt have the endurance of Su30MKI which is what you might like to have when you are on a clicking mission.. keep clicking as long as you can.. thats why EL/M2060P for Su30MKI & EL/M20600 for jaguar.. different capabilities, different missions, different machines, different equipment..

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jun 2009 19:36

JaiS,

The "250 nautical miles" - is that for the data-link?

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 17 Jun 2009 19:42

NRao wrote:JaiS,

The "250 nautical miles" - is that for the data-link?

yes..

I guess the "vision range" would be less likely to be publicised easily..

Shameek · Post by **Shameek** » 17 Jun 2009 22:39

Andrew DeCristofaro wrote:and for SAR imagery jagaur can hover at 12 km altitude for recce mission although this altitude is not good as sukhoi but let me remind you that operating cost of su30 is more than operating cost of jaguar at the same time

I request you to please use proper terms while posting. I am sure you did not mean 'hover' at 12 km. maybe loiter is a better term. Might sound like nitpicking, but we point out DDM errors and hence lets make sure we dont join their ranks.

Andrew DeCristofaro · Post by **Andrew DeCristofaro** » 18 Jun 2009 01:08

NRao wrote:JaiS,

The "250 nautical miles" - is that for the data-link?

rao sahab ,

and best resolution SAR images can be taken upto 100km.

and its anyone's guess what a SAR image would look like if its takes from 250NM or roughly 450km and at this range what will be the resolution of that SAR image and at 450 km rage satellite images provides much better resolution.

and jaguar is also capable to carry 2060 pod as well because it requires less power than 20600 RTP but 2060 pod is heavier but that doesn't matter because jagaur is capable of carrying 4.5 tons payload so it can carry 2060 pod with ease

and if an AEWACS flying at 10km altitude can cover wide area than a jaguar flying at 12-14 km altitude carrying 2060 pod is also capable to cover wide area as well

the general SAR imagery ranges published for russian radars are

80km for 300*300 meter sq area

60km for 30*30 meter sq area

20 km for 1*1 meter sq area

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jun 2009 03:01

signore DeCristofaro,

Thanks. I now have a halo behind my head.

I am sure BRiets appreciate it too - they ALL will bookmark this page.

(I will now spend some time on the other discussion group.)

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 18 Jun 2009 09:08

Hi,

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
su30 doesn't need these pod mounted radars its got its own huge bars radar which provide much better SAR imagery and this too at longer ranges

Wrong. Read this article. So the MKI with it's powerful Bars radar is still going to use this pod.

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
these pod mounted radars have been selected for jagaur upgrade or probably for mig27 as well not for su30

Wrong. Read above.

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
its a common sense no need for any URL here

Sorry, your common sense is not acceptable here. That's because your "common sense" has been proven to be wrong - as shown above. So, cite your sources, or do not post here.

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
why su30 need a pod mounted radar(which consumes 3.5kW) when its got its own radar

Because the pod is more than just a SAR. It can store data locally as well as transmit it in real-time via a dedicated datalink to extended ranges ? Or because the Programmable Signal Processor used by the MKI/Bars is infact the rather old Leninets Ts.200 and not the "Baguette/Baget-55", and this affects it's SAR performance ?

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
SAR imagery is good till 60km beyond this resolution is bad so its better to get more refined pics from satellites

Really ? Is there a magical rule which states 60 KM wonlee ? Did you even consider the size of the scatterer ? What target RCS does this 60 KM figure represent ? Heck, the piddly Lynx II SAR for UAVs has a range of more than 80 kms.

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
and if higher power nose mounted radars have SAR resolution limitation to 50-60 km then pod mounted radar has much smaller antenna compared to nose mounted radars and low power consumption and so lower SAR range

BS. Read above.

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
and also optical sensor on KH 29 missile also provides real time or live pictures to ground stations

So what ? Do not bring in needless distractions to the discussion. Do you plan on using the Kh-29 missile for Recce ops ( and consume missile's shelf life in the process) ? Do you know that an optical sensor is not an all-weather solution, while a SAR would infact be capable of handling night / bad weather conditions ?

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
and best resolution SAR images can be taken upto 100km.

Once again, is this a "universal" rule because Gurudev Andrew said that best resolution SAR images will appear at the magical number of 100 KMs ? What emitter output and scatterer size are you assuming ? And what is your definition of "best resolution" ? Also, unfortunately Jane's Avionics would like to disagree with you when it states that the EL/M-2060P has a range of 120 KMS.

AndrewDeCristofaro wrote:
the general SAR imagery ranges published for russian radars are

80km for 300*300 meter sq area

60km for 30*30 meter sq area

20 km for 1*1 meter sq area

Published where ? And are these numbers universally true for all *russian radars* ?

rakall,

rakall wrote:
I guess the "vision range" would be less likely to be publicised easily..

rakall, as posted above, the "vision range" for the 2060P is 120 KMs as per Jane's Avionics (2007 numbers).

malushahi · Post by **malushahi** » 18 Jun 2009 09:21

edited typical pakiness.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 18 Jun 2009 10:59

JaiS wrote:Hi,

rakall, as posted above, the "vision range" for the 2060P is 120 KMs as per Jane's Avionics (2007 numbers).

I had looked at that particular article.. But felt it was a mistake or something.. my feeling is 120km for a dedicated SAR pod is (much) on the lower side... Would expect that to be higher -- so that without crossing the border, you get a good picture deeper inside..

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 18 Jun 2009 12:38

JaiS wrote:Hi,

Wrong. Read this article. So the MKI with it's powerful Bars radar is still going to use this pod.

[.

From the article, 24 Squadron is supposed to take over recce activities from the Foxbats. Assuming that people are correct in identifying the payload as the recce pod, 1+1=2, means that 24 Squadron is in Tezpur, right?

Is there any significance of posting the only dedicated (?) recce squadron on the eastern front?

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 18 Jun 2009 13:15

I'm out of my league here, but the below comparison came to my mind

EL/M-2060P 590kg SAR with C-band/X-band datalink
Vision range ?? and data-link range is 400kms +

RISAT2 300kg SAR X-band
It is on 550km sun-synchronous orbit with supposedly sub-1 meter resolution.

Is it a valid comparison, or the SAR is different in two systems?

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 22 Jun 2009 00:29

Can someone inform me how many SU-30MKI flight hours has been produced so far ? I feel the safety record per hours must be really good despite the tragic accident. I was planning to compare with the russian SU-27/30 numbers if I can find those.

JaiS · Post by **JaiS** » 26 Jun 2009 06:18

Nothing new, but just for the records.

Russia doing well at Le Bourget

Irkut Corp. has already shipped an estimated 40 Su-30 MK jets to India and if the talks on modernizing the Su-30MKI are a success, the plane will also be capable of carrying the Indians’ BRAMOS missile making it a qualitatively new strike weapon.

malushahi, thanks for your very valuable post which ofcourse highly contributes to the signal-to-noise ratio in this thread.

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 27 Jun 2009 19:55

IAF taking steps to prevent another SU-30MKI crash

http://www.hindu.com/2009/06/27/stories ... 122000.htm

Ajay K · Post by **Ajay K** » 27 Jun 2009 20:51

JaiS
Post subject: Re: Su-30: News and Discussion
Nothing new, but just for the records.
Russia doing well at Le Bourget
Quote:
Irkut Corp. has already shipped an estimated 40 Su-30 MK jets to India and if the talks on modernizing the Su-30MKI are a success, the plane will also be capable of carrying the Indians’ BRAMOS missile making it a qualitatively new strike weapon.
malushahi, thanks for your very valuable post which ofcourse highly contributes to the signal-to-noise ratio in this thread.

What is the role of KA-226T that IAF envisages?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Jun 2009 22:42

Jamal K. Malik wrote:IAF taking steps to prevent another SU-30MKI crash

http://www.hindu.com/2009/06/27/stories ... 122000.htm

There are serious design flaws in addition to pilot error!?

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 28 Jun 2009 00:12

SaiK wrote:
Jamal K. Malik wrote:IAF taking steps to prevent another SU-30MKI crash

http://www.hindu.com/2009/06/27/stories ... 122000.htm
There are serious design flaws in addition to pilot error!?

Did you read the article?

The design flaw consists of having pilot accessible switches which can be inadvertently toggled since the visibility into that area is not good. The fix is to cover them with a protective case so that they are not accidentally toggled in flight.

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 28 Jun 2009 00:59

Small mention of Flanker in July ’09 issue of Popular Mechanics.

Flanker show as a threat in Air-to-Air defense.

F-35C Lightning II projected to defend aircraft carriers against SU-30 Flankers.

Don't Sink My Battleship: 5 Ways to Defend a Supercarrier

Threat Su-30 Flanker: Russian-made airplanes have long been designed to attack carrier groups. The Su-30 can fire barrages of missiles to overwhelm an aircraft carrier’s defenses. In 2011 the Russians plan to export an upgraded version called the Super Flanker

Defense F-35C Lightning II: When it comes to defending the airspace around a carrier, the F-35C is expected to carry the load for the Navy. The stealth airplane is made to kill foes before being seen. However, it is not an agile, cannon-equipped dogfighter like the F-18A Super Hornet, which it will replace in 2015.

Rohit_K · Post by **Rohit_K** » 28 Jun 2009 13:48

Can some su-30/IAF guru pls answer this nanha mujahid's Q's?

Wiki states that the IAF has received 94/230 su-30's till now.

a) Apart from Tezpur, Srinagar and Lohegaon are they based anywhere else? where?
b) Does the IAF receive these one at a time or in batches? When was the last induction? Any pics?
c) When will deliveries end?

anand_sankar · Post by **anand_sankar** » 28 Jun 2009 15:31

The ejection seat harness of the Su-30MKI failed due to exposure to the sun!

I mean this again... what do you say about it...

If you use Google Earth or Wikimapia and zoom into Diego Garcia, you will see what little things we can learn from the Americans. They have these nifty collapsible tents to shelter their B2 bombers when they transit through the base.

I have seen the MKI's parked always in the sun with just a cover over the canopy and the IRST. The cover on the canopy will do nothing to stop the heat of the Indian summer.

How much will it take for local industry --- read DRDO (who are currently busy certifying the spiciest chillies btw) --- to design a smart collapsible waterproof tent for the MKI or any other fighter aircraft. Simple park the aircraft, power it down, let it cool and in 15 mins it can have a cover around it.

The MKI story is like the Indian Army's... They bought the T90s, but oops no coolings packs... Er... we operate in one of the hottest deserts on the planet... no matter... The main gun's computer just went kaput! And now all tanks get computer cooling packs as line replacement units!