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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22777
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 08 Oct 2019 15:26

nam wrote:Given the need to "respect" the LoC and standoff fights like we had on Feb 27, the way to create a "no fly zone", without firing off a BVR is to use long range jamming.

Also given the dense PLAAF air defence SAM, might require lot of SEAD jamming.

IAF could invest some effort and ask DARE to come up with a suite and prototype it on a Su30 test platform from HAL.

HAL needs to built couple of Su30 test platform to try out AESA, jammers and other kit. I don't understand why they haven't done it already.


why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 08 Oct 2019 16:11

^^^
Indian Aerospace should be looked at from a more collaborative manner. It should not be us vs them mindset.

Modern combat aircraft upgrades are no trivial matter. HAL has been building Su-30MKI for some 15-years with the ability to build from raw materials. Recently, Brahmos was integrated, which required airframe modifications. HAL is supported by hundreds of Tier-1/2/3 manufacturers and suppliers. Then there is a whole DRDO aerospace cluster supporting with their R&D and tech transfer to the Indian industries. No one is an island ;)

Raghunathgb
BRFite
Posts: 111
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

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

Postby Raghunathgb » 08 Oct 2019 16:41

chetak wrote:
nam wrote:Given the need to "respect" the LoC and standoff fights like we had on Feb 27, the way to create a "no fly zone", without firing off a BVR is to use long range jamming.

Also given the dense PLAAF air defence SAM, might require lot of SEAD jamming.

IAF could invest some effort and ask DARE to come up with a suite and prototype it on a Su30 test platform from HAL.

HAL needs to built couple of Su30 test platform to try out AESA, jammers and other kit. I don't understand why they haven't done it already.


why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


Is DARE capable of integration test and certify the entire aircraft for flying? Integration of subsystems is more complex than plug and play. It's HAL which has ensure integration don't create other problems.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19578
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 08 Oct 2019 16:48

Cain Marko wrote:Hmm, I'm not so convinced with that Rajat Pandit article. There have been many speculations so far but nothing has come through. I wouldn't be surprised if the IAF just went for a more advanced Bars derivative with irbis TWT. That should produce equally good range specs, iirc 400km for 3msq, which is ridiculous.


That extreme range is only available in a 10 degree by 10 degree sector, i.e. 100 square degrees. The claimed "standard" range (which of course is likely lowballed and an underestimate) is around 200km. Typically, the radar should be able to divide a sector into slices (such as the 100 degree one above) and then operate in a slow, but long range mode.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3676
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 08 Oct 2019 16:50

chetak wrote:why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


HAL is the producer and it needs to own the various version and upgrades. We should not restrict ourselves to requirements from IAF. HAL & our aerospace ecosystem should propose and trail out capabilities, to provide IAF the option to apply them in their operational doctrine.

Right now all our tech requirement is based on what US or Russia have come up with. Most of the aero tech development in US is run by NASA, supported by Boeing/LM.

Our tech development is shoe boxed by IAF requirement and GoI approval.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22777
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 08 Oct 2019 17:40

Raghunathgb wrote:
chetak wrote:
why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


Is DARE capable of integration test and certify the entire aircraft for flying? Integration of subsystems is more complex than plug and play. It's HAL which has ensure integration don't create other problems.


DARE is more than capable.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22777
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 08 Oct 2019 17:46

nam wrote:
chetak wrote:why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


HAL is the producer and it needs to own the various version and upgrades. We should not restrict ourselves to requirements from IAF. HAL & our aerospace ecosystem should propose and trail out capabilities, to provide IAF the option to apply them in their operational doctrine.

Right now all our tech requirement is based on what US or Russia have come up with. Most of the aero tech development in US is run by NASA, supported by Boeing/LM.

Our tech development is shoe boxed by IAF requirement and GoI approval.


IAF owns the aircraft and HAL builds them on contract.

DARE is an independent entity.

nothing wrong with IAF dealing directly with DARE.

The only contribution from HAL is a needless bill for minimal services rendered that would have contributed zilch to the project.

such competencies are best developed in a distributed environment and skills are allowed to proliferate.

The IN and the IAF have in house design capabilities and qualified personnel as good as any in the country and those capabilities are recognized and certified and also, these two services are design authorities in their own right.

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1863
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

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

Postby eklavya » 10 Jan 2020 15:10

222 Squadron gets resurrected with Su-30 MKI Multirole Fighter aircraft

New Delhi: The 222 Squadron 'The Tigersharks' of Indian Air Force got resurrected on Wednesday with state of the art Su-30 MKI Multirole Fighter aircraft, Indian Air Force said.

"#Resurrection: 222 Sqn 'The Tigersharks' got resurrected today with state of the art Su-30 MKI Multirole Fighter aircraft. Raised on 15 Sep 69 with Su-7, the Sqn was later equipped with #MiG27 Ground Attack Aircraft prior to getting numberplated in 2011.," IAF said in a tweet.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9258
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 20 Jan 2020 00:04

Finally, Southern India Gets First Su-30 MKI Squadron Tomorrow
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2020/01 ... orrow.html
19 Jan 2020

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 20 Jan 2020 09:48

^^^
Is this the last squadron of MKIs (no signs yet of additional orders)? Also how many do we have currently in total?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12133
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 20 Jan 2020 10:18

Another 12 above the original 272-9 crashes=263 have been ordered, HAl will keep producing them till March 2021.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 20 Jan 2020 16:39

Image

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2738
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

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

Postby JTull » 20 Jan 2020 17:47

Production item! Nice.

Anurag
BRFite
Posts: 398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby Anurag » 20 Jan 2020 18:17

Zoom in to the Rhamba’s underbelly and you’ll notice it has a “hard on” 8)

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 20 Jan 2020 18:47

Aditya_V wrote:Another 12 above the original 272-9 crashes=263 have been ordered, HAl will keep producing them till March 2021.

Do we have confirmation of the 12 order - i don't think it has actually been signed yet.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8841
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 20 Jan 2020 21:58

nam wrote: Most of the aero tech development in US is run by NASA, supported by Boeing/LM.



No it is not. NASA's aeronautics budget is puny. Majority of the S&T and R&D thrust comes from the services, and their associated labs. Even the tactical programs DARPA (again a relatively frugal organization with a relatively small check book) runs are usually thrust into its portfolio by the services.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2769
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 21 Jan 2020 03:34

abhik wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:Another 12 above the original 272-9 crashes=263 have been ordered, HAl will keep producing them till March 2021.

Do we have confirmation of the 12 order - i don't think it has actually been signed yet.


How Sukhoi-30 fighter jets will help check Chinese footprint in Indian Ocean.

The Indian Air Force is raising a new squadron of Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter jets at the Thanjavur air force station in Tamil Nadu on Monday, a development that will boost the IAF’s capabilities in peninsular India and help keep an eye on the Indian Ocean Region where Chinese footprint is growing at a swift pace.

The Sukhois will be equipped with the air version of the BrahMos cruise missile. The No. 222 squadron, nicknamed Tiger Sharks, is being raised with six Su-30 fighter jets and it will have its full complement of 18 warplanes by the year-end.

Here are eight things you should know about the Su-30s.

1. The IAF has contracted 272 Su-30 MKI fighter planes out of which nearly 260 have been delivered. The remaining 12 jets will be delivered by the end of 2020.

2. The first 50 jets came in ready from Russia; the remaining were being built under licence by the state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.

3. The IAF inducted its first Su-30 fighter at the Lohegaon air base in Pune in June 1997. A total of 12 Su-30 jets have crashed since the fighter jets were inducted. The IAF is likely to place an order for 12 more jets to make up for the losses.

4. India’s Su-30 fleet has been plagued by engine troubles. The Russian-origin fighters have had a history of engine failures or engine-related problems.

5. In the past, the Su-30 fleet has battled poor serviceability, standing at barely 60%. Simply put, only 60 of 100 fighter planes were mission-ready at any given time.

6. India successfully launched the world’s fastest supersonic cruise missile, BrahMos, from a specially-modified Su-30 warplane for the first time against a target in the Bay of Bengal in November 2017. The BrahMos missile, an Indo-Russian joint venture, has a range of 290 km.

7. At least two Su-30 squadrons consisting of 18 planes each are likely to be equipped with the 2.5-tonne missile that flies at nearly three times the speed of sound.

8. The BrahMos missile is the heaviest weapon to be deployed on the Su-30. The missile’s land and naval variants– 500kg heavier than the air launched version– are already in service. BrahMos is now capable of being launched from land, sea and air, completing the tactical cruise missile triad for India.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 21 Jan 2020 03:47

SB-227 for No.222 squadron. So clearly one of the later builds, but not a brand new one; possibly a MKI that was pulled out of another squadron and upgraded to carry the Brahmos-A.

What is the last registration number seen on a Su-30MKI so far? Given that nearly all of the Su-30MKIs have been manufactured and delivered to the IAF, shouldn't it be in the late SB-25X or 26X?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2968
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

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

Postby tsarkar » 21 Jan 2020 04:59

Kartik wrote:SB-227 for No.222 squadron. So clearly one of the later builds, but not a brand new one; possibly a MKI that was pulled out of another squadron and upgraded to carry the Brahmos-A.

What is the last registration number seen on a Su-30MKI so far? Given that nearly all of the Su-30MKIs have been manufactured and delivered to the IAF, shouldn't it be in the late SB-25X or 26X?

The entire premise of your post is based on your assumption that numbering is sequential.

It is not. There are 3xx & 4xx aircraft. The reason for random numbering sequence is to prevent the enemy from tracking aircraft in service over years. Numbering is often changed. IAF does not show Squadron markings. The Israelis often change numbers weekly - gives the enemy the impression of larger number of aircraft.

Here is SB323 in Australia for Exercise Pitch Black

Image

SB309
Image

SB403
Image

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2968
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

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

Postby tsarkar » 21 Jan 2020 05:19

Vips wrote:
abhik wrote:Do we have confirmation of the 12 order - i don't think it has actually been signed yet.

How Sukhoi-30 fighter jets will help check Chinese footprint in Indian Ocean.

1. The IAF has contracted 272 Su-30 MKI fighter planes out of which nearly 260 have been delivered. The remaining 12 jets will be delivered by the end of 2020.

3. The IAF inducted its first Su-30 fighter at the Lohegaon air base in Pune in June 1997. A total of 12 Su-30 jets have crashed since the fighter jets were inducted. The IAF is likely to place an order for 12 more jets to make up for the losses.


Delivery of last 12 planes of original 140+42 should not be confused with new orders of 12 that are yet to be placed. It hasn’t got AON by IAF or DAC or CCS Approval and is quite far off.

There are 7 crashes so far and not 12. The replacements are not 1:1 as assumed by DDM

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12133
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 21 Jan 2020 07:10

I think the actual number of crashes are 9 . IAF will have you factor some future crashes as well

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2472
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 21 Jan 2020 09:37

tsarkar: thanks for the post about numbering. One learns something new in BRF every day.

LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 229
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

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

Postby LakshmanPST » 21 Jan 2020 10:14

abhik wrote:^^^
Is this the last squadron of MKIs (no signs yet of additional orders)? Also how many do we have currently in total?


As per this pic---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7294&p=2404098#p2404098, IAF currently operates 12 squadrons of Su30 MKIs:-
1) 2 at Halwara
2) 1 at Sirsa
3) 1 at Jodhpur
4) 2 at Pune
5) 2 at Bareilly
6) 2 at Tezpur
7) 1 at Chabua
8. 1 at Thanjavur (new No. 222 Tigersharks)

I do not know how many jets IAF operates per squadron for Su30MKI... I'm assuming 20-21 per squadron...
IAF ordered 50+140+40+42 jets (which include jets for TACDE)... That is enough jets for 13 squadrons...

So, one more squadron of Su30 MKIs will be raised once remaining jets of original 272 are delivered...
The 12 additional jets planned to be ordered are for replacement of crashed jets only...
Last edited by LakshmanPST on 21 Jan 2020 14:11, edited 1 time in total.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 21 Jan 2020 13:53

LakshmanPST wrote:
abhik wrote:^^^
Is this the last squadron of MKIs (no signs yet of additional orders)? Also how many do we have currently in total?


As per this pic---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7294&start=3840#p2404098, IAF currently operates 12 squadrons of Su30 MKIs:-
1) 2 at Halwara
2) 1 at Sirsa
3) 1 at Jodhpur
4) 2 at Pune
5) 2 at Bareilly
6) 2 at Tezpur
7) 1 at Chania
8. 1 at Thanjavur (new No. 222 Tigersharks)

I do not know how many jets IAF operates per squadron for Su30MKI... I'm assuming 20-21 per squadron...
IAF ordered 50+140+40+42 jets (which include jets for TACDE)... That is enough jets for 13 squadrons...

So, one more squadron of Su30 MKIs will be raised once remaining jets of original 272 are delivered...
The 12 additional jets planned to be ordered are for replacement of crashed jets only...


18 per squadron and with some of the MKIs at TACDE.

Total will be (272-9)+12 = 275

That gives nearly 15 squadrons with 3 units for TACDE. Of course, some may be kept in reserve, so we may either see 13 or 14 squadrons max. Nearly 50% of the IAF's combat fighter fleet.

Barath
BRFite
Posts: 163
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

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

Postby Barath » 21 Jan 2020 20:54

DRDO guided bomb successfully launched from a Sukhoi

DRDO test fires guided bomb from Sukhoi combat jet
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... afJhJ.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54516
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 21 Jan 2020 23:12

Barath wrote:DRDO guided bomb successfully launched from a Sukhoi

DRDO test fires guided bomb from Sukhoi combat jet
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... afJhJ.html



This is last year news about the 500 kg IGB.
You can see the miss distance is quite low from the picture.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3454
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 22 Jan 2020 03:15

Does one of the Russian SU 3X has multiple optical sights (many, not the just one in the front nose like SU30MKI or Mig 29) imbedded throughout the aircraft? Are these to identify stealth aircraft? Stealth do have heat signature (no matter what, even 1 degree difference in higher altitude shows up). However one IRST can only get the bearing and never the range (unlike radar). However multiple optical sights can also get range through triangulation. Is it true?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9258
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 22 Jan 2020 06:16

tsarkar wrote:It is not. There are 3xx & 4xx aircraft. The reason for random numbering sequence is to prevent the enemy from tracking aircraft in service over years. Numbering is often changed. IAF does not show Squadron markings. The Israelis often change numbers weekly - gives the enemy the impression of larger number of aircraft.

Does not the MoD release info of the number of Sukhois built to date? IIRC, I have seen those parliamentary questions from Lok Sabha members to which the Raksha Mantri replies to. When such info is publicly released, does it not defeat the purpose of tracking aircraft in service over years?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9258
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 22 Jan 2020 06:17

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1219141500333850624 ---> And...first photos just in from the IAF’s new Tigersharks squadron at Thanjavur!

Image

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9258
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 22 Jan 2020 06:28

What a depressing picture of a shark. The official crest of No 222 Squadron, IAF.

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1219241981928464384 ---> Thanjavur’s No 222 Squadron ‘Tigersharks’ crest will get a Flanker silhouette added soon. Happy Hunting!

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1219246302061637637 ---> And yeah, wish the shark looked more menacing and less weary.

Image

Twitterverse providing their own versions....

https://twitter.com/RajeshSN1999/status ... 9552086016 ---> What About This One?

Image

https://twitter.com/mahendr46642796/sta ... 6139197440 ---> Somewhat like this...@IAF_MCC.
(The shark below is from the crest of INS Kalvari, the Indian Navy's first Scorpene submarine).

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 22 Jan 2020 06:38

that crest is the same as the original one, designed most likely by hand, by someone in the 1980s, when No.222 'The Killers' was changed to No.222 'Tigersharks' during Rajiv Gandhi's tenure as PM.

A lot of the older hand drawn squadron crests are lousy looking by today's standards. There weren't graphic design software around in those days and so we got what we got. But if the IAF is amenable to refreshing the crest, then it could be updated with a more modern looking design. As it is, the swing wing MiG-23/27 silhouette has been removed and will be replaced by a Su-30MKI silhouette.

Image

BRF Squadron page- 222 Tigersharks

The No.222 'Tigersharks' patch is however, far more modern, so ignore the Crest

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5275
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 18 Feb 2020 06:14

Did anyone notice this poster from DefExpo 2020? The Proposed Indigenous upgrade for Su-30MKI, which includes an AESA radar, which I pray to God implies the Uttam AESA and not some Russian set.

It's a pretty comprehensive upgrade, but the Enhanced EW Suite is not clear, as in what equipment will it include. No Towed Decoy and no MAWS seen in the list of proposed equipment.

Image

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 18 Feb 2020 08:41

>> MAWS seen in the list of proposed equipment.

:( Really don't understand how we are flying our mainstay fighter in 2020 without maws.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 18 Feb 2020 09:02

That's because they already integrating the MAWS now.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4435
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 18 Feb 2020 11:11

fanne wrote:Does one of the Russian SU 3X has multiple optical sights (many, not the just one in the front nose like SU30MKI or Mig 29) imbedded throughout the aircraft? Are these to identify stealth aircraft? Stealth do have heat signature (no matter what, even 1 degree difference in higher altitude shows up). However one IRST can only get the bearing and never the range (unlike radar). However multiple optical sights can also get range through triangulation. Is it true?

What optical sights? There are optical sensors for forward looking and down ward targets iirc on the 35 series.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 18 Feb 2020 18:56

Indranil wrote:That's because they already integrating the MAWS now.

c'mon that's unfair ! you cant just leave that comment hanging there ! :wink:
make,model,specs ?

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2738
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

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

Postby JTull » 18 Feb 2020 21:51

+1

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1156
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby shaun » 18 Feb 2020 22:42

Rahul M wrote:
Indranil wrote:That's because they already integrating the MAWS now.

c'mon that's unfair ! you cant just leave that comment hanging there ! :wink:
make,model,specs ?


EADS's AN/AAR-60 Missile Launch Detection System (MILDS)
Image

Image
Last edited by shaun on 19 Feb 2020 01:21, edited 3 times in total.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 18 Feb 2020 22:46

Everybody knows about how DARE bungled up the first effort of providing DCMAWS on the Su-30. It's a perfect case of how OEMs have us by the b@lls. DARE entered a tripartite agreement with BEL and Elisra to provide the MAWS solution for Su-30. When it got the sensors, they were way to heavy and big. Elisra said this is the best they can do (FALSE!). DARE and IAF both felt these sensors were too bulky, so they asked Sukhoi for help. Sukhoi confirmed that installation of such bulky MAWS will be detrimental to the Su-30s performance. They can't help except they had a solution that they are ready to sell. DARE then proposed a 4 sensor solution which obviously did not provide full coverage. IAF reluctantly said yes. The solution was proven on a business jet and retired as a TD.

In 2016, DARE took up the project again. This time with Alpha design and Cassidian. DARE And Alpha have already integrated this design in Cheetahs, Mi-17s and Netra AEW&C. It is basically Cassidian's MILDS system. They are adapting the same for fighters and calling it MILDS-F.

They have proposed two solutions. In the first solution, they said that they are going to integrate the sensors on a pylon, one pointing forward and the other pointing backward. They employed Zeus Numerix to conduct CFD studies on the same. This has become the norm now. They do not go back to the Russians anymore because every time they do, they get a stick. They have developed the capabilities in India to do CFD studies and wind Tunnel testing, followed by certification at CEMILAC and integration at HAL. This is what Tejas project has also given us: CEMILAC! For the MAWS pylon, you can read the use case from Zeus Numerix: https://www.zeusnumerix.com/resources/aeroaerodynamic-analysis-of-sensor-installation-on-interface-beam/
The simulations were also carried out for clean aircraft configuration on the same flight envelope for comparison. Figure shows the streamlines near the interface beams. Similar post-processing was done to find the change in pressure distribution, vortex formation, if any, and effect of shocks for supersonic cases.

The customer was provided with the aerodynamic coefficients showing less than 1percentage reduction in lift coefficients and less than 2percentage increase in drag coefficients. Additionally, the variation in pitching coefficients was found to be within ±5percentage. Certification studies were submitted for further approval.
Image

^^^ The above solution is similar to the one tried on the F-16 with the same MILDS sensors. I think this is an excellent solution for Tejas Mk1 and Mk1A.

The second proposal was to mount 6 sensors on the Su-30 platform itself. Once again Zeus Numerix was involved in the CFD studies.
Image
They (DARE) are engaged with development of sensors and their installation on India’s front line fighter aircraft. Though small in size, but since externally installed and facing free-stream flow, these sensors are expected to affect the aerodynamics of aircraft and it needs to be analyzed with respect to clean aircraft configuration. The percentage increase in drag due to sensors is required to be estimated from low subsonic maneuvering to supersonic cruise flight conditions i.e. full flight envelope.

In addition of aerodynamic coefficients, simulations also generated the effect of sensors on canard aerodynamics and engine mass flow rate. Force on sensors and fairings as well as aerodynamic heating on sensor surfaces was computed.

Customer was delivered with aero dynamics coefficients showing less than 3 percentage increase in drag and negligible effect on canard and engine performance. The study obtained approval for the installation of sensors, from experts and certification agency.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4435
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 18 Feb 2020 23:09

^based on the above, I'm not sure if they are going for the podded version or the integrated one? I hope it's the latter. Great news though Indranil


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bijeet and 41 guests