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.
ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1664
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 19 Aug 2019 01:33

Karan M wrote:
Group Captain Thakur is definitely the real deal, given he is the HAL CTP (Chief Test Pilot). You can see him here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mze7z-N9Gg&t=491s


Very impressive. Knowledgeable and articulate. Probably the best spokesperson HAL could have. They should keep him on as a spokesperson even after he finishes his flying days.

But that aside, the Su-30 mission computer from DARE will definitely replace the original ones.. but also, regarding the engine - this thread has got caught up so much in yackety yack, it misses important developments. Such as:
Russia has signed a deal for its Su-30 SM fleet to be upgraded to Su-30 SM1 standard. These will include variants of the AL-41F1 engines currently used in the Su-35 and also the N035 Irbis-E radar from the Su-35. The news report explicitly stated one of the aims of this mod is to market it to the IAF.


With the usual Russian BS in terms of delivery vs advertised promise, I would imagine that one is looking at 12-15 years from today when the last upgrade is finished to SM1 standards for the entire 270+ fleet if a decision is made to go ahead. Also it looks like the 2 significant upgrades are the AL-41P engine and the NO35 Irbis-E radar. What would it take for say an Uttam-2 to be ready in 5 years with the same peak power or at least similar performance? The engine upgrade is desirable but not essential? But a desi radar will open up the possibility of being transparent about integrating other vendor's AAM/precision A2G weapons on this platform.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7938
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 19 Aug 2019 01:53

ldev wrote:With the usual Russian BS in terms of delivery vs advertised promise, I would imagine that one is looking at 12-15 years from today when the last upgrade is finished to SM1 standards for the entire 270+ fleet if a decision is made to go ahead.


That is not a bad time-line for significant enhancements and upgrades. First you have to engineer, validate via testing all the proposed engineering changes. Then you have to upgrade actual aircraft at a rate that takes into account A) the annual modernization and upgrade budgets, B ) Operational availability required to meet requirements and C) picking a rate of upgrade that is affordable and manageable given other investments and priorities. For example, the USAF F-15E modernization (217 aircraft) involves an upgrade to an AESA radar, a new GaN based EW self-protection suite, new mission computers and a dedicated LWIR IRST and communication pod. In total the end to end upgrade (in phases) with all these and other changes (software mostly) would have taken about 13 years to complete (begining 2015 an concluding only in 2028 with the 217th aircraft delivered with 100% of the proposed enhancements). Granted that USAF is not going to an OEM for these (they are doing these themselves out of their organic depots) but still there are financial, operational, and logistical constraints on how fast you can realistically move especially given supplier production capacity, other commitments, and ramp up costs (at the time Raytheon was supplying >50 AESA's a year to support the F/A-18 and F-15C programs, and BAE ramping up its EW systems production to support F-35 production ramp up so bandwidth was an issue for both).
Last edited by brar_w on 19 Aug 2019 02:27, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 19 Aug 2019 01:58

ldev wrote:With the usual Russian BS in terms of delivery vs advertised promise, I would imagine that one is looking at 12-15 years from today when the last upgrade is finished to SM1 standards for the entire 270+ fleet if a decision is made to go ahead. Also it looks like the 2 significant upgrades are the AL-41P engine and the NO35 Irbis-E radar. What would it take for say an Uttam-2 to be ready in 5 years with the same peak power or at least similar performance? The engine upgrade is desirable but not essential? But a desi radar will open up the possibility of being transparent about integrating other vendor's AAM/precision A2G weapons on this platform.


The Russians are not going to be offering a single standard AFAIK. They will offer Phase 1 and Phase 2. Phase 1 will likely see around 100 Su-30s modded to Su-30 SM1 + desi kit standards, whereas Su-30 Upg Phase 2 will have an AESA radar modified from the one flying on the FGFA. An Uttam-2 is feasible but there is as of yet no publicly available information of the IAF asking for it. For the record, I am fully in agreement with you we should develop the capability and deploy it. The engine upgrade is judged to be necessary because it returns the agility advantage to the Su-30 series w/heavy loads (as versus light loads) and also enables the deployment of new gen heavy alternators to power radars like Irbis + mission avionics + EW.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 19 Aug 2019 02:03

See this report from as far back as 2009. The Russians are basically proceeding on that path as they had planned for India, with their own fleet (having purchased Su-30s) and are now again offering it to India.

AIRBORNE RADARS
BARS RADAR SYSTEM TANGIBLE ADVANTAGES

Tamerlan BEKIRBAYEV

The Su-30MKI lias become the world's first series-produced aircraft featuring supermaneuverability and the first export fighter fitted with the BARS electronically scanned radar.

The BARS radar control system is a radar system implementing the benefits of electronically scanned antenna over mechanically scanned antennas (installed on F-15, F-16, F-18, Su-27, MiG-29, etc.) and com¬puter capabilities, including digital radar signal processing. As a result, it can;
• Detect and track simultaneous¬ly several air targets within a large area (its electronic scan area exceeds 5,000 sq. deg).

• Detect, track and engage a ground target while simultaneously detecting, tracking and engaging air targets.
• Operate in standard radar modes that can be changed and adapted to specific missions and operational conditions, including ECM environments.
• Be tailored to the avionics of any aircraft.

The term «simultaneously» means a capability of switching between modes and positioning the radar beam anywhere within the electronic scan area in hundreds of microseconds.
The BARS supports traditional air-to-air and air-to-surface radar modes.
It has been integrated with the SuOOMKI, Su-ЗОМКА, and Su-30MKM aircraft. Efforts are underway to further enhance the BARS performance. Phase 1 upgrad¬ing efforts are supposed to:

• More than double the air target detection range.
• Increase the number of tracked and engaged targets 15 to 2 times.
• Double mapping performance as regards ground target detection range and resolution.
• Double the number of tracked ground targets.
• Add new operation modes in air-to-air and air-to-surface missions (particularly, Meteo, Active Counter-measures modes).
• Expand interaction with other avionics systems (ECM, EO target¬ing system, etc.).
• Extend the range of weapons.
• Enhance formation mission capabilities.
• Introduce service proposals. Implementing thesL> measures
will give the BARS tangible advan¬tages over radar systems installed both on current aircraft like F-15, F-16, F-18, etc. and their versions with respect to the transition to active electronically scanned arrays (AESA).

We should mention fifth-generation aircraft's AESA radar systems representing a pledge of over¬whelming superiority over the AESA radars are generally com¬pared to non-AESA radars, but in fact the question involves limitations of mechanically scanned antennas. The BARS radar uses a passive electronically scanned array (PESA). The PESA is not the AESA, however it offers the same key advantage over mechanically scanned antennas - a capability of almost instantaneously pointing the antenna beam in the desired direc¬tion (within several microseconds for the AESA and hundreds of microseconds far the PESA).

AESA's key advantages over the PESA are significantly higher reliability of antenna transmitting channel and a wider operating band. This favors the system's ECM immu¬nity and allows more missions to be handled simultaneously. Moreover, it should be noted that upon comple¬tion of the BARS Phase 1 upgrading program, a changeover to the AESA will be made. Then, both AESA- and PESA-equipped aircraft can be operated concurrently.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1664
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 19 Aug 2019 02:40

I guess one big question is really how mature is the AL-41F vs the AL-41FIS, they appear to have 2 different cores? And which one will be part of the upgrade? Also how mature is the NO36 mounted on the SU-57? Or will the upgraded radar be the NO35 Irbis-E? Or will both engine and radar be phased in depending on Phase 1 Standard and then the Phase 2 standard i.e. 41FIS going up to 41F and NO35 being upgraded eventually to NO36? On their evaluation the IAF had rejected the SU-57 for reasons not entirely in the public domain. And the Russians wanted India to pony up cash for continued development. Of what? Do either of the engines or radars need further development? That is almost a rhetorical question by the way.

That is why I really wish that money is poured into an Uttam-2 so that it is ready in say 5 years. And go to the Russians for the engine upgrade only.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 19 Aug 2019 04:29

The IAF wanted the Su-57 to be ready and mature + have further improvements + offer true TOT (per originally agreed workshare). A combination of these issues broke the agreement for license production.

Russia is now going to induct the Su-57 in VVS and then offer for export.

That's good for us. Most of the teething issues will be resolved by the time we get it. This is the difference between us being the launch customer for the Su-30 MKI and facing the brunt of the teething issues as versus getting a S-400 which first goes to the Russians themselves and then comes to us.

Of course, this does not mean it will be perfect, but it won't be super raw either.

Next, the NIIP AESA has been in trials for many years now and should be a fairly developed product. Issue is not merely whether *it* is ready, but whether it is manufactured in a cost-effective fashion. That's where the iterations really start helping, e.g. TRM module improvement and production line stabilization.

Uttam-2/advanced AESA is going to be a reality thanks to the AMCA, so there is that.

The Irbis-E is not a slouch either. While it may lack some of the advanced software features (say LPI) usually found in the AESAs available to stealth fighters, it offers a high power radar with a phenomenal ability to point its antenna around. This is exceptional for BVR combat.





ldev wrote:I guess one big question is really how mature is the AL-41F vs the AL-41FIS, they appear to have 2 different cores? And which one will be part of the upgrade? Also how mature is the NO36 mounted on the SU-57? Or will the upgraded radar be the NO35 Irbis-E? Or will both engine and radar be phased in depending on Phase 1 Standard and then the Phase 2 standard i.e. 41FIS going up to 41F and NO35 being upgraded eventually to NO36? On their evaluation the IAF had rejected the SU-57 for reasons not entirely in the public domain. And the Russians wanted India to pony up cash for continued development. Of what? Do either of the engines or radars need further development? That is almost a rhetorical question by the way.

That is why I really wish that money is poured into an Uttam-2 so that it is ready in say 5 years. And go to the Russians for the engine upgrade only.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 19 Aug 2019 04:30

Rishirishi - your post was pointless. Its been deleted. Kindly make relevant comments.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2252
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

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

Postby VinodTK » 19 Aug 2019 07:25



Interesting views on the combo of SU30 + Rafale during operations

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2650
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 19 Aug 2019 22:26

HAL could allocate a testbed Su30 to try out a bigger Uttam.

However the drawback is the amount of integration that needs to be done. Any Russian kit/weapon dependent on radar, would need new integration.

Going with the Russian radar, would save us from this effort.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 20 Aug 2019 00:06

VinodTK wrote:Interesting views on the combo of SU30 + Rafale during operations

It was mentioned in this video around 2:45 mins that Su-30 also has escort jamming capabilities against Surveillance radar. Can anyone elaborate on which pod we use here ? I wasn't aware of escort jamming capability of MKI.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2824
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

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

Postby tsarkar » 20 Aug 2019 00:46

Sumeet wrote:It was mentioned in this video around 2:45 mins that Su-30 also has escort jamming capabilities against Surveillance radar. Can anyone elaborate on which pod we use here ? I wasn't aware of escort jamming capability of MKI.

KNIRTI SAP-14 centerline and SAP-518 wingtip jamming pods.

During development in Russia last decade. Nose number 02 was used for Indian MKI development since early 2000's.

Indigenous Upgrade ---> https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02 ... 30mki.html

Image

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 20 Aug 2019 01:38

Thanks tsarkar

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 20 Aug 2019 03:25

nam wrote:HAL could allocate a testbed Su30 to try out a bigger Uttam.

However the drawback is the amount of integration that needs to be done. Any Russian kit/weapon dependent on radar, would need new integration.

Going with the Russian radar, would save us from this effort.

Given the large size of the Su30MKI fleet, upgrades will be done in batches (80-100 units each). The upgrade package will differ between the batches. IMO, the last batch is where Uttam integration could be attempted.

As far as weapons integration goes, not all Su-30MKI will be enabled to carry all weapons. Brahmos being an example. Integration of indigenous and Western weapons have accelerated over the last few years. This trend will continue.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7777
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 20 Aug 2019 03:27

tsarkar wrote:
Sumeet wrote:It was mentioned in this video around 2:45 mins that Su-30 also has escort jamming capabilities against Surveillance radar. Can anyone elaborate on which pod we use here ? I wasn't aware of escort jamming capability of MKI.

KNIRTI SAP-14 centerline and SAP-518 wingtip jamming pods.

During development in Russia last decade. Nose number 02 was used for Indian MKI development since early 2000's.

Indigenous Upgrade ---> https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02 ... 30mki.html

Image

Take a bow! How do you remember so much! I feel humbled as an IAF fan!

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2650
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 20 Aug 2019 11:35

srai wrote:
nam wrote:HAL could allocate a testbed Su30 to try out a bigger Uttam.

However the drawback is the amount of integration that needs to be done. Any Russian kit/weapon dependent on radar, would need new integration.

Going with the Russian radar, would save us from this effort.

Given the large size of the Su30MKI fleet, upgrades will be done in batches (80-100 units each). The upgrade package will differ between the batches. IMO, the last batch is where Uttam integration could be attempted.

As far as weapons integration goes, not all Su-30MKI will be enabled to carry all weapons. Brahmos being an example. Integration of indigenous and Western weapons have accelerated over the last few years. This trend will continue.


Missiles carried by jets are now tightly integrated with radar, specially with AESA and data link. Even "CCM" ASRAAM is all practical purpose a BVR. A2G weapons would probably be integrated with GMTI to hit moving targets or SAR scan to hit static stand off target.

Given the Multi beam capability of AESA, it has become a computer game. Fire multiple target at once.

So there would be lot of work to get all Russian, Indian, Israel, French weapons on board. Hence it is better HAL allocate a test bed Su30 right away. Even if Su30 may not get an Uttam, atleast Uttam will be ready with all tom dick & harry integration in place.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2650
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 20 Aug 2019 11:39

tsarkar wrote:Indigenous Upgrade ---> https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02 ... 30mki.html



Cannot wait for this to be on board. DRDO has been showing off GaN based wide band AESA emitter in the S, L, C band.

Hope this one has GaN. Ideally we want more power output per TRM, but no harm in putting more TRM module.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 20 Aug 2019 11:44

The radar does not directly talk to any missile. It communicates to the WCS, which transfers information via the mission computer and stores management system to the individual missile, based on pilot input. Similarly the datalink can be decoupled. The real issue is RWR-radar-SPJ compatibility + EMI/EMC testing to ensure (for example) when the radar is ON, RWR is ON, SPJ is OFF the radio does not blank out etc.

nam wrote:
srai wrote:Given the large size of the Su30MKI fleet, upgrades will be done in batches (80-100 units each). The upgrade package will differ between the batches. IMO, the last batch is where Uttam integration could be attempted.

As far as weapons integration goes, not all Su-30MKI will be enabled to carry all weapons. Brahmos being an example. Integration of indigenous and Western weapons have accelerated over the last few years. This trend will continue.


Missiles carried by jets are now tightly integrated with radar, specially with AESA and data link. Even "CCM" ASRAAM is all practical purpose a BVR. A2G weapons would probably be integrated with GMTI to hit moving targets or SAR scan to hit static stand off target.

Given the Multi beam capability of AESA, it has become a computer game. Fire multiple target at once.

So there would be lot of work to get all Russian, Indian, Israel, French weapons on board. Hence it is better HAL allocate a test bed Su30 right away. Even if Su30 may not get an Uttam, atleast Uttam will be ready with all tom dick & harry integration in place.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 20 Aug 2019 20:30


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 20 Aug 2019 23:46

Rakesh wrote:India aims to export Sukhoi upgrade
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 746927.cms


How much mithai are you promising this time, if this upgrade happens? :D

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3099
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 21 Aug 2019 00:08

Upgrade will happen. It could be that 272 (or eventual 350sh, if request for another 60-70 go through) will be divided in various groups and some get uber radar, some are hardened for multiple Brahmos, some (for maritime role) for brahmos and wet wings to carry additional fuel for long range Maritime strike, perhaps 1-2 sq for growler like role. Unlimited possibilities. All should get the basics to keep it viable air superiority fighter and basic A to G.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1983
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

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

Postby Manish_P » 21 Aug 2019 09:14

Rakesh ji, who are the target customers? Won't the upgraded MKI be costlier than the Russian Su 30. How will the target customers be able to afford it?

And won't we run foul of the Russians if we try and sell their Bird at undercut (friendly) prices.. requiring a quid pro quo (buying off the shelf Su 57s?). Which is actually not a bad deal since it will effectively mean the price we pay for them will be less.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 21 Aug 2019 09:36

What we are basically saying is we fund the program, have our own IP plus get rights to offer the package to others, Plus offer the HAL facilities to other customers seeking to upgrade their birds. All depends on Russia agreeing to this.
Russia is already hawking the Su-30 SM (in service) on the export market. Has an upgraded Bars-R radar and some improvements.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2323
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 21 Aug 2019 09:49

Sorry to be a pessimist, but given how Russia scuttled Brahmos sales by offering Yakhont as a competitor, this is likely to go down the same way. Its a question of whether the OEM is willing to let a reseller thrive

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 21 Aug 2019 09:54

Could be, but asking for it upfront is a good move. We are thinking beyond how we used to be.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2499
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 21 Aug 2019 12:19

Adding another 60-72 Su30MKI's is a great move.

I just hope we work out what the new version will be like and add the 60 as that variant. They still have another 2-3 year run from the current orders. They should just figure out what the upgrade looks like and add new radar/engines/OLS/missiles to the last order and then work others in. Cheaper and far more cost-effective.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 21 Aug 2019 12:25

Israelis have their own upgrades for F 16 and F 15E called Sufa and Ra'am, don't think they ever exported those upgrades to other countries. But am happy if we have improved our primary deterrent fighter.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

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

Postby Manish_Sharma » 21 Aug 2019 12:40

Cybaru wrote:Adding another 60-72 Su30MKI's is a great move...



Fuel bills over next 30 years for these 38 tons fuel guzzling behemoths will be too much.

While we can put our resources in NUMBERS , 450 SMALL LIGHT TEJAS WITH fuel sipping super reliable single engine will over 40 years be much more economical. Let's put all our resources in that.

Deejay ji stated sometimes back about unreliable problematic mki engines.

By all means we go for Super upgrade of sukhois but let Russians first prove through THESE UPGRADES THE WORTHINESS OF THEIR ENGINES.

Maybe later we buy off the shelf around 72 FGFAs

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 21 Aug 2019 12:49

Please don't go overboard about the engine stuff. Deejay's point was viz. a specific context.

As long as we are averaging around 70% reliability, we are in the ballpark for similar platforms. We were at 65% last year itself.

Second, we are facing PRC and Pakistan together. PRC itself has 370 + Flankers, 320+ MMRCA. PAF has a heavy core of around 70 odd F-16s plus several hundred light-medium aircraft.

Hence our need for similar platforms like the Flanker. Do more with less.

Also, having absorbed TOT, the Flanker is more cost-effective for us than the Rafale.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2499
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 21 Aug 2019 13:43

Fuel bill is immaterial in some sense. Leveraging supply chain will make it more effective! We need some while sale squadron replacements and adding all existing types is the right way forward.

A2G in some sense can be perfected on almost any platform, imo, the type that carries the most fuel and ordinance wins! Aim for upgrade should include adding all types of A2G weaponry.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 21 Aug 2019 14:02

Karan M wrote:Please don't go overboard about the engine stuff. Deejay's point was viz. a specific context.

As long as we are averaging around 70% reliability, we are in the ballpark for similar platforms. We were at 65% last year itself.

Second, we are facing PRC and Pakistan together. PRC itself has 370 + Flankers, 320+ MMRCA. PAF has a heavy core of around 70 odd F-16s plus several hundred light-medium aircraft.

Hence our need for similar platforms like the Flanker. Do more with less.

Also, having absorbed TOT, the Flanker is more cost-effective for us than the Rafale.


Little OT, not specific to MKI or anything else, but why do we think that cheen will get itself directly involved in any future full scale Indo paki war? They didn't do so during 65 or 71. Now they know they won't be able to save their munna, they also know they'll face heavy losses too, even if they manage to claim victory by bringing a war to a stand still it will still be pyrrhic victory. Cheen and their PRC heads are more like paki generals in that they are more interested in making money and staying in power by suppressing any democratic cries of population. Will they risk all that to save pakis? IMO not likely.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7391
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

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

Postby Prasad » 21 Aug 2019 15:03

Perhaps not in a conflict with the porkis. But we really do need to tailor our requirements to project power into Tibet and East into Kunming. And let us be honest here, the chinese can move a heck of a lot of bomber and heavy fighters from the east. Effectiveness in Tibet, training, logistics etc etc might be shortcomings but prepare for the worst and all that.
If we get into a kargil-level conflict with Cheen in the NE, we will need serious capability.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 21 Aug 2019 19:25

They can wage war directly with us, especially if they perceive we are pulling ahead economically & are challenging their position as the top dogs in Asia. In essence, a similar rationale (India's posturing as a leader of the developing world) was a key reason for Mao to decide to teach India a lesson in 1962. Given the fact they have the 2nd Arty, plus dominance in A2/AD systems in their own hinterland, they may just calculate that they can get by with less damage before we build up our forces and really become a pain.

Karthik S wrote:Little OT, not specific to MKI or anything else, but why do we think that cheen will get itself directly involved in any future full scale Indo paki war? They didn't do so during 65 or 71. Now they know they won't be able to save their munna, they also know they'll face heavy losses too, even if they manage to claim victory by bringing a war to a stand still it will still be pyrrhic victory. Cheen and their PRC heads are more like paki generals in that they are more interested in making money and staying in power by suppressing any democratic cries of population. Will they risk all that to save pakis? IMO not likely.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 21 Aug 2019 20:45

I think the IAF needs the planes they will fight with.

Giving arguments like fuel efficiency is nonsense.
Besides its not just HAL but the supply chain needs to be ramped up.
Its not like buying Tejas from LockMart.

Give the HAL 450 plane order and what will happen.
Nothing will happen more than the 16 planes/year.
Give them the 83 planes order they can fulfil that.


The IAF fleet will be Su-30s, Tejas variants and Rafale.
And the right attitude is being shown and already people want to dump on them.
Sad.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 21 Aug 2019 20:48

Deejay, Does IAF have a Systems Engineering or Program Office for Su-30 MKI?
That's the gap they have.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3888
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby deejay » 21 Aug 2019 21:06

ramana wrote:Deejay, Does IAF have a Systems Engineering or Program Office for Su-30 MKI?
That's the gap they have.


I do not know what they are called but they do have something. This Su 30 issue is a bit more than just "fuel guzzling" or just engine problems. They are maintenance heavy and eat up spares. Keeping the spare line working is a tough ask.

Operationally, where a 20 aircraft Sqn would have say 30 pilots posted to a Sqn, Su 30 Sqns need 60 pilots plus WSO. Now those are issues which are direct impact issues for IAF. At 272 fighters that is biig impact already. Add more and the problem grows. IN the intial year while the numbers were small, this did not seem such a monumental challenge, but as the numbers reach 200+, there is a major challenge both from maintenance and operational perspective. IAF or planners right from middle level are seeing what increased number of Su 30 is doing to their Maintenance and Ops plans.

Jay
BRFite
Posts: 164
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 18:24
Location: Gods Country
Contact:

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

Postby Jay » 21 Aug 2019 22:00

My noob question to learned folks. With my limited reading and understanding of the subject on 'composition of aircraft in airforce', it seems the light fighters usually form the bulk of the airforces with Medium and Heavy fighters occupying less in number. A quick example of the USAF, where there are 800 f-16, 400-F15, and 300 F22/F35 kinds. The idea is to use the less expensive/operationally fluid aircraft for the bulk of the activities. This stands in contract to IAF structure where SU30MKI is more than half of our numbers (> than 250). Why is it that IAF leans towards top-heavy fighters which demand and take away a lot of resources, and manpower to maintain?

If this is OT, I request admins to move this to the right thread.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 21 Aug 2019 22:07

ramana wrote:...
Besides its not just HAL but the supply chain needs to be ramped up.
Its not like buying Tejas from LockMart.

Give the HAL 450 plane order and what will happen.
Nothing will happen more than the 16 planes/year.
Give them the 83 planes order they can fulfil that.
...

This will happen :twisted:
Image

While it will take time to ramp up production, the net gain for the Indian aerospace ecosystem would be:
1. More Tier-1 level aerospace companies
2. Additional assembly lines beyond HAL
3. Increased capacity at the Tier-2/3 level aerospace manufacturers/suppliers

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3888
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby deejay » 21 Aug 2019 22:17

Jay wrote:My noob question to learned folks. With my limited reading and understanding of the subject on 'composition of aircraft in airforce', it seems the light fighters usually form the bulk of the airforces with Medium and Heavy fighters occupying less in number. A quick example of the USAF, where there are 800 f-16, 400-F15, and 300 F22/F35 kinds. The idea is to use the less expensive/operationally fluid aircraft for the bulk of the activities. This stands in contract to IAF structure where SU30MKI is more than half of our numbers (> than 250). Why is it that IAF leans towards top-heavy fighters which demand and take away a lot of resources, and manpower to maintain?

If this is OT, I request admins to move this to the right thread.


Su 30 was not supposed to be more than half the fighter numbers. Our dwindling single engine fleet is because many Mig 21 Sqns have been taken off and replacement SE have not been found.

Secondly, within the strength authorised, the role for IAF has been expanded. From pure defensive posture, the Su 30 brought in an element of offensive posture and it has since proven an advantageous balance of military power. Going ahead, IAF will move to more of a mix where light fighters , (not all SE fighters are light), are probably around 33% with the rest being Heavy and Medium. We can have 50% of the fleet as light fighters but for that we will need to increase the sqn numbers. That will be a function of economy and threat matrix.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2499
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 21 Aug 2019 22:38

Well if there is an addition to MKI/LCA/(local line) RAffy & new c295 orders then a whole ecosystem will get created around those. Waiting for further clarity on LCH/LAH/MCH and new orders for Dhruv. (Off topic) Hope they start working a 7-8 dhruv++ as well especially around naval requirements. The aerospace industry can be bright if we make the right moves.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3863
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 21 Aug 2019 22:48

deejay wrote:Operationally, where a 20 aircraft Sqn would have say 30 pilots posted to a Sqn, Su 30 Sqns need 60 pilots plus WSO. Now those are issues which are direct impact issues for IAF. At 272 fighters that is biig impact already. Add more and the problem grows. IN the intial year while the numbers were small, this did not seem such a monumental challenge, but as the numbers reach 200+, there is a major challenge both from maintenance and operational perspective. IAF or planners right from middle level are seeing what increased number of Su 30 is doing to their Maintenance and Ops plans.

Pardon the newbie post but why so many pilots? Double the number compared to single seaters I can understand but WSOs in addition to these?

Would this be mitigated any if the IAF gets single seaters instead? Or even Su-35MKI?

I guess ultimately there are always two sides to a coin. The MKI is a beast when it comes to performance but also demands proportionate levels of inputs. thing is, this heavy has become the backbone and default goto option thanks to the everlasting mrca saga. They would've had 200 odd mki plus 126 mirage 2000s by now if not for the lost decade under the UPA.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sagrawal and 46 guests