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

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22539 » 16 Jan 2015 14:35

^Are there any parts that we cannot make for the Su-30MKI? I do not mean the parts/raw materials that Russia forces us to buy, but anything that we absolutely cannot replace indigenously at this point?

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8118
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

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

Postby Pratyush » 16 Jan 2015 16:21

There was a news a few years ago, which suggested, that the first SU 30 with 100% Indian raw materials had flown. It was reported on the BRF as well.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Gyan » 19 Jan 2015 07:56

We should go for even deeper indigenisation of Su by ordering more of them rather than running after new chick in town ie Refail.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20169
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 19 Jan 2015 13:09

The achievement of MKI overhauls now available in India itself is a v.laudable achievement. Some time ago reports said that "70%" of our MKIs were now being made from locally sourced material with 100% due within a couple of years.As the numerous above posts have said,having spent so much time and money on setting up such an infrastructure which will keep these frontline aircraft flying for at least 2-3 decades more,acquiring more of them would be the most cost-effective manner in which to re-equip the IAF which according to the parliamentary committee on defence has fallen to an all-time low of just 25 sqds! Decisions have to be taken to acquire more sqds. on a war footing whatever happens to the Rafale deal.At least 120-200 extra aircraft are required and the snail's pace of LCA MK-1 production,4 this yr. and only 8/yr afterwards cannot replace the hundreds of MIGs being retired which are still flying thanks to string and glue and the ingenuity of the IAF's tech and maintenance branch..

Sanjay
BRFite
Posts: 1224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Chaguanas, Trinidad

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

Postby Sanjay » 20 Jan 2015 00:40

As Phillip mentions that, can we collect the articles that show the level of indigenization achieved in the MKI project ? I know that many raw materials are still from Russia though.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Gyan » 21 Jan 2015 17:47

I would have expected Russia to come out with an aggressive offer for more Su-30 MKI with Refail in trouble.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3459
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Postby kit » 21 Jan 2015 18:14

IAF would then essentially be a top heavy air force ..unless the HAL and IAF get together the LCA in real numbers

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

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

Postby Vipul » 24 Jan 2015 03:37

The Russians have never let go an opportunity in screwing us and making us pay more when we are in desperate need. They are not going to waste the chance this time around and will certainly ask for a high price for any fresh order for MKI's. Time to go the JSF route for the Air force and Navy.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

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

Postby koti » 24 Jan 2015 05:51

^I can't think of any such instance saab. The Russians, the french and the Israelis were all pretty helpful when we were in desperate need.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

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

Postby koti » 24 Jan 2015 06:10

kit wrote:IAF would then essentially be a top heavy air force ..unless the HAL and IAF get together the LCA in real numbers


Is this argument complete saab? I know the three weight categories we see but let's look at the RuAF itself.
It has about 450 Sukhois and 250 Fulcrums in Fighter/Multirole category and scores of more Sukhois in the making. Most of their strike aircraft inventory(tactical) will be progressively replaced with the Su-34's which are again heavy(about 150 in the order books so far).

All their future additions are Sukhois except a small batch of SMT ordered last year but sizable numbers of the Fulcrums should be retired in time.

So being a low-medium-heavy may not be for a perfect operational capability advantage but more for an operational affordability advantage.

In case the operational affordability advantage can not be achieved with Rafale, why should IAF still look for the low-medium-heavy mix?

To summarize, I like to ask why not a top heavy force with more numbers and similar/higher capability then a more balanced force with lower numbers? At no long term cost advantage.

Even though I am in love with Rafale.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3849
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 24 Jan 2015 06:44

Kotiji, actually the top heavy structure is a big concern. even during their peak both VVS and USAF had far more light fighters , fulcrume and vipers than flankers and eagles. And both these nations have pretty cheap gas.

But yeah, I am not sure if rafale is less expensive lifecycle wise even after taking into consideration the flankers big engines and older design. Shudder to think of the MLU price for a fleet of 190 Rafales :-o

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

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

Postby koti » 24 Jan 2015 07:20

Cain Marko wrote:But yeah, I am not sure if rafale is less expensive lifecycle wise even after taking into consideration the flankers big engines and older design. Shudder to think of the MLU price for a fleet of 190 Rafales :-o

Expense is not the only concern I am having CM saab, considering wartime attrition, MKIs might offer better capability then the Rafales. Especially with better Radar, upgradability and B'mos Mini (vis-a-vis scalp).

Upgradability of MKI should be much much effective in MKI then with Rafale.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

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

Postby Vipul » 24 Jan 2015 08:37

koti wrote:^I can't think of any such instance saab. The Russians, the french and the Israelis were all pretty helpful when we were in desperate need.


Kotiji, not sure if you have posted in jest. If not then recall how Russians have incrementally squeezed our nuts when we bought aircraft carrier, before that how they did not do full TOT for T90, then the costly upgrades of Kilo class submarines in Russia, then check the per unit price for Talwar class frigates that we paid from the first through the sixth ship. See how they are charging us billions in the name of co-development of FGFA but will only ultimately give us CKD kits for assembling in India.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

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

Postby koti » 24 Jan 2015 10:45

Vipul wrote:
koti wrote:^I can't think of any such instance saab. The Russians, the french and the Israelis were all pretty helpful when we were in desperate need.


Kotiji, not sure if you have posted in jest. If not then recall how Russians have incrementally squeezed our nuts when we bought aircraft carrier, before that how they did not do full TOT for T90, then the costly upgrades of Kilo class submarines in Russia, then check the per unit price for Talwar class frigates that we paid from the first through the sixth ship. See how they are charging us billions in the name of co-development of FGFA but will only ultimately give us CKD kits for assembling in India.

OT.
True Vipul saab.
But I was thinking more in the lines of contingencies like Kargil when we were replenished from the war reserves by some while another assisted us in spite of first world opposition. The only reason I brought this up is to persuade shifting the criticism from generalizing into foreign government bashing to specific financial game played by the buyer-seller.

I tend to see the deals with less emphasis on the money.

Not OT.
The reason I am willing to bat for MKI is because of its history of quick upgrades/customizations. I cannot think how EW/Sensor upgrades on Rafale will be easier/cheaper then on MKI. New weapon system integration to the platforms even more on the same lines.

The only reasons I see Rafale benefiting IAF is because of its availability and reliability which is a BIG deal too. And then there is its superior data integration which may/may not be compensated by the WSO of the MKI.

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

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

Postby Austin » 03 Feb 2015 11:38

Integration of air-based cruise missile with Su-30MKI fighter completed in India

In October 2012, the Indian government’s security committee endorsed allocation of $ 1.1 billion for purchasing 200 BrahMos missiles to be installed on Su-30MKI fighters

NEW DELHI, February 3. /TASS/. Integration of the air-based version of the BrahMos-A supersonic cruise missile with a fighter jet of the Su-MKI family has been successfully completed in India, an official at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) state aircraft manufacturing corporation told TASS on Tuesday.

Several key structural changes have been introduced in the missile and the jet over the past seven to six months, including re-distribution of loads on the lifting elements of the aircraft after the bench running.

The project’s Managing Director S. Subramanyan told TASS in this connection the Russian side had provided a whole team of technology consultants, who resolved one of the most complex tasks the accommodation of the 9-meter-long missile by altering the configuration of the fuselage.

First trial tests that will make it possible to assess the results of more than two years of joint work of Russian and Indian designers will be held in March.

Preparations of a second fighter jet for trial testing will begin right after the March test flights. Plans suggest that the works involving it will take about a year.

In the future the same pattern will be applied to 42 Su-30MKI jets of the Indian Air Force.

In October 2012, the Indian government’s security committee endorsed allocation of $ 1.1 billion for purchasing 200 BrahMos missiles to be installed on Su-30MKI fighters of the Indian Air Force. To make the integration successful, the weight of the air-based version of the missile was reduced by 500 kilograms and the length, by about 50 centimeters.

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_26622 » 03 Feb 2015 12:54

^ Am I reading this right? That comes to 5 million per air launched Brahmos missile. Is this bird been made in France or in a Swiss bank locker?

Even the Tomahawk comes for $1.6 million a piece (Wiki and http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/ ... df#page=65).

Even if you consider development cost and facilities cost and all, it should not be this this super expensive.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8118
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

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

Postby Pratyush » 03 Feb 2015 13:32

How much of the money has gone for the RD needed for mounting the Missile on the Su30 MK1

member_28703
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_28703 » 03 Feb 2015 13:34

Incorrect reporting by TASS.

That 1.1 B$ was for

10,000 'Invar' missiles from Russia for the Army's T-90 tanks
+ Licence manufacture of 15000 Invar missiles by BDL under TOT
+200 Brahmos
+ Brahmos integeration and dev cost

http://profit.ndtv.com/news/economy/article-ccs-clears-rs-8-000-crore-missile-purchase-for-armed-forces-312239

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9556
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 03 Feb 2015 14:12

A mini nirbhay which is cheaper may be a way ahead. You need a Mac 3 missile for attacking ground targets ? May be these 200 are for anti ship purpose.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16408
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 03 Feb 2015 19:36

There was a (Indian?) report earlier that stated that the Russians were interested in finding out what the Indians had done to get this problem solved.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2144
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

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

Postby John » 04 Feb 2015 05:09

nik wrote:^ Am I reading this right? That comes to 5 million per air launched Brahmos missile. Is this bird been made in France or in a Swiss bank locker?

Even the Tomahawk comes for $1.6 million a piece (Wiki and http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/ ... df#page=65).

Even if you consider development cost and facilities cost and all, it should not be this this super expensive.


Its bit expensive but Tomahawk has been mass manufactured and doesn't have an active seeker. But if 5 million is bad your blood is going to boil when you hear for example we are paying 200 million for 21 Harpoon block 2 (which are freebies to Pakistan) and 1000 crores (2009) for 36 SM-39s.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7923
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 04 Feb 2015 05:55

Its bit expensive but Tomahawk has been mass manufactured and doesn't have an active seeker


And doesn't travel at mach 3.

Shalav
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Shalav » 04 Feb 2015 06:06

nik wrote:Even if you consider development cost and facilities cost and all, it should not be this this super expensive.


Based on what metrics?

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

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

Postby Singha » 04 Feb 2015 07:54

>> You need a Mac 3 missile for attacking ground targets ?

well protected targets like big radars, missile storage sites, leadership bunkers etc.

we are 3-4 yrs away from mass production start of the Nirbhay and add another 3 for production line to hit full steam.
so I expect the first Nirbhay GLCM regiment to form not before 2020. we have 1 successful test so far, needs atleast
another 5 I would imagine to fine tune the thing and demonstrate reliability before user trials start another 5 shots.

we really need to speed things up on the nirbhay front. let on their own scientists and engineers have a tendency to
endlessly change and tune things.....its upto the program & product managers to periodically halt this activity and
ship product as time to market is key here.

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_28640 » 04 Feb 2015 11:14

Yagnasri wrote:A mini nirbhay which is cheaper may be a way ahead. You need a Mac 3 missile for attacking ground targets ? May be these 200 are for anti ship purpose.

From Wiki
In particular, Nirbhay is being adapted for the Indo/Russian Su-30MKI. The missile is capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirbhay
Edit :
This is why I belive that greater number of Mki's is the way forward for us..
Even if its availability is less a greater number of planes that releases a greater number of missiles will be a bigger asset than a rafale.
Greater numbers offset availability issues.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20169
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 04 Feb 2015 11:17

And Uncle O'Bomber has just punished Pak ,after returning to the White House after his lavish Indian reception,with a punishment of $1billion $$$ of mil.aid,etc.,and ostensibly for improving relations with India! As they famously say in the US of A,"sell that to the Marines"!

If the Sukhois can accommodate BMos ,they can surely also accommodate Nirbhay. Now we all know that the 300 km range of Bmos should be taken with a pinch/handful of salt.The missile can surely be tipped with an N-warhead and used as a stand-off tactical nuke if required and bring most of Pak within range with our aircraft flying within our airspace. This will give the IAF a significant boost in delivery of our N-warheads which as of now are supposed to be carried by M-2000s,which cannot carry BMos and neither can the Rafale. The development is v. significant as the planned Mini-BMos,BMos-M has yet to take off.Once that programme is given the green light,it will permit all our med-sized aircraft like MIG-29Ks.M-2000UGs,etc to carry the missile. Any further news about the MIG-29K being planned to carry 1 BMos underbelly?

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby shaun » 04 Feb 2015 14:09

An ARM version of Brahmos IAF is need of the hour . This will give a significant boost to shoot down hostile emitter in the class of s-300 , 400 which is a significant threat from chini border and will also become a big threat once pakis procure some HQ-XYZ from panada.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1639
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

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

Postby Sid » 04 Feb 2015 18:09

IAF already has Kh 31P, which are more then enough to deal with Porki radars. No need to spend on uber expensive silver bullets.

Instead IAF should try to standardize its armaments, like use same SR-AAM, MR-AAM, ASM, AShM,.. etc. across all platforms. As things are, we got separate weapon suite for each platform type in IAF inventory.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby shaun » 04 Feb 2015 19:01

kh-31Ps range is not enough to penetrate the bubble of S-300 class SAMs. Brahmos Block 3 can offer some interesting solutions .

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2144
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

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

Postby John » 04 Feb 2015 19:18

^ Brahmos can be guided to hit S-300 batteries using RF why do you want to add anti radiation capability. Considering later S-300 variants already have capabilities to defeat such threat, they can detect inbound missiles and alert the operator allowing the system to be turned off and repositioned in minutes.

member_24684
BRFite
Posts: 197
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_24684 » 04 Feb 2015 19:51

^

is that our Harpy target drone who can take out those ubber Air defence network.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby shaun » 04 Feb 2015 20:32

For neutralizing SAM systems which after detecting anti radiation missiles , shut off and scoot , ARM can have the following systems to counter
1. millimeter wave radar terminal seeker
2. multi-spectral guidance system
3. anti-radiation homing sensor
4. GPS

Why Brahmos can be used as a platform
1. way point navigation
2. can perform rolls and a vertical dive towards the targeted ( help full in mountain warfare )
3. Better Range
4. Can carry the above payloads.
Last edited by shaun on 04 Feb 2015 22:53, edited 1 time in total.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 987
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby shaun » 04 Feb 2015 20:35

SajeevJino wrote:^

is that our Harpy target drone who can take out those ubber Air defence network.


Harpy and Harop are subsonic

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_28640 » 05 Feb 2015 10:25

Shaun wrote:An ARM version of Brahmos IAF is need of the hour . This will give a significant boost to shoot down hostile emitter in the class of s-300 , 400 which is a significant threat from chini border and will also become a big threat once pakis procure some HQ-XYZ from panada.

I guess that the IAF realized this hence we have the 100 km range glide bomb. Should work against most SAM and Bunker targets.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 05 Feb 2015 10:44


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

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

Postby Singha » 05 Feb 2015 11:07

the proper missiles like NGARM will remember the position of hostile emitters and attack those if radars get switched off.
but 100km is too dicey to tackle the big missiles of S300 family.
these also will have shorter range Tor type missiles to tackle cruise missiles or any other incoming weapon.

so in that sense the brahmos is a potential platform but not sure if ARM seeker will be affected by the heat in the nosecone area.

amrika officially claims the JASSM will target such large sam complexes. unofficially the MALD and growlers will also be in the mix to trigger AD networks.

we need similar air launched decoys mixed in with the nirbhays and brahmoses (hopefully with mid course updates to aimpoint) to have a flexible response.

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_28640 » 05 Feb 2015 12:15

srai wrote:^^^

FYI, DRDO has a 100-km range Next-Gen Anti-Radiation Missile (NGARM) project.

Image

Saar , IIRC Pakistan doesnt have mobile SAM units. Makes sense to go for the Glide bomb in such scenarios where we can saturate their already meagre AD capabilities. Reduced costs compared to a NGARM, of course the IAF knows best. Though the future 500 and 250 Kg glide bombs would be a better fit

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

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

Postby Singha » 05 Feb 2015 12:33

their crotale-NG units are mobile. they might also have obtained some mobile kit from china

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9556
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 05 Feb 2015 13:03

My mango khan/Clancy novel reading sense says that there are missiles which has both heat and radar seeking and when faced with jamming they switch on the the ARM mode and attack the jamming things. Being mango khan novel knowledge it may be wrong.

Can it be done???

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_28640 » 05 Feb 2015 13:13

Singha wrote:their crotale-NG units are mobile. they might also have obtained some mobile kit from china

Just a side doubt :
But Saar wouldnt the Kh-31 be enough for the 11Km Crotale and Cloo-taa-lin (HQ-7ski).


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashokk, brar_w and 44 guests