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

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 May 2016 17:43

Austin, voldemort forum link is actually from Ausairpower.

Interestingly, the last 40 Su-30s we got may have had an additional upgraded radar, mission computer and software. Plus they had SAP-518s.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 May 2016 18:59

Karan M wrote:Irbis is derived from Bars but uses a much lighter antenna, from the Osa. Less gain but better scan angles.
However, the signal processing and Tx system are new.

The gain is marginally lower than BARS but the performance is far better

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

The follow on to the BARS is the new Irbis-E (Snow Leopard) hybrid phased array, in development since 2004 and planned for the Su-35BM block upgrade, and as a block upgrade or new build radar for other Flanker variants, such as the Su-35-1. It will enter production before the end of this decade.

The Irbis-E is a direct evolution of the BARS design, but significantly more powerful. While the hybrid phased array antenna is retained, the noise figure is slightly worse at 3.5 dB, but the receiver has four rather than three discrete channels. The biggest change is in the EGSP-27 transmitter, where the single 7 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok TWT is replaced with a pair of 10 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok tubes, ganged to provide a total peak power rating of 20 kiloWatts. The radar is cited at an average power rating of 5 kiloWatts, with 2 kiloWatts CW rating for illumination. NIIP claim twice the bandwidth and improved frequency agility over the BARS, and better ECCM capability. The Irbis-E has new Solo-35.01 digital signal processor hardware and Solo-35.02 data processor, but retains receiver hardware, the master oscillator and exciter of the BARS. A prototype has been in flight test since late 2005.

The performance increase in the Irbis-E is commensurate with the increased transmitter rating, and NIIP claim a detection range for a closing 3 square metre coaltitude target of 190 - 215 NMI (350-400 km), and the ability to detect a closing 0.01 square metre target at ~50 NMI (90 km). In Track While Scan (TWS) mode the radar can handle 30 targets simultaneously, and provide guidance for two simultaneous shots using a semi-active missile like the R-27 series, or eight simultaneous shots using an active missile like the RVV-AE/R-77

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 03 May 2016 19:27

Bakis are buying SU-35 and we are atko on SU 30.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 May 2016 20:39

rsingh wrote:Bakis are buying SU-35 and we are atko on SU 30.

Sukhoi numbering is on log scale

Su 31 is 10 times better than Su-30, Su 32 is 100 times better etc. So Su 35 is 100,000 times better than Su-30.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 May 2016 20:50

Austin wrote: The gain is marginally lower than BARS but the performance is far better

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html

Quote:
The follow on to the BARS is the new Irbis-E (Snow Leopard) hybrid phased array, in development since 2004 and planned for the Su-35BM block upgrade, and as a block upgrade or new build radar for other Flanker variants, such as the Su-35-1. It will enter production before the end of this decade.

The Irbis-E is a direct evolution of the BARS design, but significantly more powerful. While the hybrid phased array antenna is retained, the noise figure is slightly worse at 3.5 dB, but the receiver has four rather than three discrete channels. The biggest change is in the EGSP-27 transmitter, where the single 7 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok TWT is replaced with a pair of 10 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok tubes, ganged to provide a total peak power rating of 20 kiloWatts. The radar is cited at an average power rating of 5 kiloWatts, with 2 kiloWatts CW rating for illumination. NIIP claim twice the bandwidth and improved frequency agility over the BARS, and better ECCM capability. The Irbis-E has new Solo-35.01 digital signal processor hardware and Solo-35.02 data processor, but retains receiver hardware, the master oscillator and exciter of the BARS. A prototype has been in flight test since late 2005.

The performance increase in the Irbis-E is commensurate with the increased transmitter rating, and NIIP claim a detection range for a closing 3 square metre coaltitude target of 190 - 215 NMI (350-400 km), and the ability to detect a closing 0.01 square metre target at ~50 NMI (90 km). In Track While Scan (TWS) mode the radar can handle 30 targets simultaneously, and provide guidance for two simultaneous shots using a semi-active missile like the R-27 series, or eight simultaneous shots using an active missile like the RVV-AE/R-77

Austin, you are not getting the point. An antenna with higher gain is a very very important thing since you have to put out far more power in equivalent terms to compensate, because of the log relationship.
ERP is proportional to Gain and Power delivered to the Tx. Gain in db, Convert Kw to dbm, 4kw is 65-66dbm. Gain is 38 db. So if I drop gain by 10% - I get the output as 20Kw to retain the same overall Power flux at 73 odd dbm times 34 db, do you see the impact?

So all things being equal, this is why antenna designers would justifiably brag about creating a high gain antenna system (with minimal noise factor & Tx losses being important too).

Also, Bars is 980mm. Irbis is 900 min. This affects the Ae, basically the Aperture area that will capture reflected energy back. Again, use the area percentages, the Bars is 20% better.

As I said:

Irbis is derived from Bars but uses a much lighter antenna, from the Osa. Less gain but better scan angles.
However, the signal processing and Tx system are new.

So:

The biggest change is in the EGSP-27 transmitter, where the single 7 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok TWT is replaced with a pair of 10 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok tubes, ganged to provide a total peak power rating of 20 kiloWatts. The radar is cited at an average power rating of 5 kiloWatts, with 2 kiloWatts CW rating for illumination. NIIP claim twice the bandwidth and improved frequency agility over the BARS, and better ECCM capability. The Irbis-E has new Solo-35.01 digital signal processor hardware and Solo-35.02 data processor, but retains receiver hardware, the master oscillator and exciter of the BARS.

So lets tie this together, Irbis is a lighter weight antenna with a smaller dia that can be moved over a wider look area by its motors, lesser gain, same receiver and signal generation capability as Bars. It's key advantage so to speak was dramatically scaling up power by two ganged up Bars TWTs! Signal processor hardware is new and that's good and would come with newer algorithms (e.g. ability for precision SAR). The bandwidth bit is interesting and may indicate something on the filtering and signal processing side, as they kept the Bars receiver and TWT is linked to ECCM (peak power for burn through in noise jamming) as could the signal processors (more powerful algorithms).

In short, an upgraded Bars with a more powerful TWT and signal processing can do very well without the need for a "full up" Irbis type replacement. Enhance the TWT and signal processing and you can boost performance, while retaining the current antenna for a lower cost but powerful upgrade.

Did we do this in 2012 final specs?. We don't know.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 03 May 2016 20:55

shiv wrote:....

Su 31 is 10 times better than Su-30, Su 32 is 100 times better etc. So Su 35 is 100,000 times better than Su-30.

It's the Mercedes syndrome: the 500 is better than the 400 but is less than the 600. A long time ago in Los Angeles, I had a neighbor who decided to up the ante. He removed the 300 badging from the trunk and installed a '1000 SEL' badge. This gave him bragging rights.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 03 May 2016 20:59

Who is stupid enough to sell them Su-35? At best they will try to get second hand Mirages from gulf or most likely the chines crap J-10's.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 May 2016 21:10

Bheeshma wrote:Who is stupid enough to sell them Su-35? At best they will try to get second hand Mirages from gulf or most likely the chines crap J-10's.

Who is naive enough to believe Pakis when they say that they will buy Su 35s?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 May 2016 21:13

Su-35 apparently still has teething issues so RusAF is purchasing more and more Su-30 SM.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 May 2016 21:18

The Pakis do a deal a month apparently. Sometimes its Su-35, sometimes its the F-35, on other occasions its the J-10 and when they are really feeling lucky they talk about the J-31 with its integrated smoke generators

. Meanwhile not sure whether they have the first customer for the JF17 that they announced a few months back.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 May 2016 23:23

Those 8 F-16s, I am told come with AESA. Not the kind India will get on Rafale, but super AESA. The kind India does not have.
Also, the F-16s will be F-16s which makes them F-16s and hence superior to anything which is not a F-16

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 May 2016 23:37

But there is that JF17 which is one better

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 03 May 2016 23:39

if they had 8 of those, thats a whole new squadron!
IAF doesn't have 45 squadrons
and they are saffron bandits
they will be thrashed by the green djin ghost of alam

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 03 May 2016 23:53

The JF-17 we agree is better than a F-16 however the PAF likes F-16.

The F-16 is better than all non F-16s except JF-17 which has 17 in its name.

However JF-17 and F-16 are better than Su-30. Also F-16 is better than Rafale.

My uncles aunts brothers son is serving in Mianwalli and he told me this.

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 04 May 2016 02:09

^^

How many Litenings do we have?
Pak Fizzl'ya has 8 Sniper pods for 18 FSolah Block 52+, IIRC...
Hope that Rafale deal gets screwed and we get way more Rambhas and Tejas.
Maybe we get to Magic no. 42 with the Rafale's earmarked 8Billion Euros!

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 04 May 2016 03:57

Karan M wrote:The JF-17 we agree is better than a F-16 however the PAF likes F-16.

The F-16 is better than all non F-16s except JF-17 which has 17 in its name.

However JF-17 and F-16 are better than Su-30. Also F-16 is better than Rafale.

My uncles aunts brothers son is serving in Mianwalli and he told me this.

I died of laughter reading all of this , especially the last one, that buried me .

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 04 May 2016 08:08

What is a Suar AESA on the F-16 hain ji?
How is it better than the AESA on the Rafale? They are getting GaN TRs?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 May 2016 18:44

The AESA on the F-16 is a super AESA unlike what Indians are getting on Rafale.

Pakistan sent PAF pilots to the US to show them how to make an AESA, same way they taught China how to make fighters like the JF-17.

Clearly, the Americans were facing challenges which only the PAF could resolve.
So they kept their best R&D guys on the job.

He discovered this thing called google and Master Painter Ahmed Pasha (son of Bilawal Pasha, district Rawalpindi) discovered a very hidden secret only known to Ahmed Pasha and then Head of PAF, Air Marshal #5 (as Pakistan Army calls the ones they send).

Ahmed Pasha wrote: " Rafaley palane being got by Bhartis has no got super in front of AESA, so AESA on Amurikan palane is janbaaz".

For this path breaking discovery, he received Sitara e Jurat, same as every PAF pilot shot down err by Bharatis got. This is a very prestigious award in Pakistan.

When the Pakistani pilots went to Amurika to tell them more about their discovery, the Americans said "suar ke baccho".

The Pakistanis understood this clearly as "super ke bacchon", talked about how the Americans were learning about how to communicate, though their pronunciation left something to be desired, and clearly this meant they were going to get super AESA.

So they went back home and distributed patches with super AESA on it. Alan Warnes will have a pictorial in his next article and i am sure you will be happy.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 May 2016 18:58

JF-17 Block 52 will also have AESA. Right now Block 2 does not but that does not matter because Block 52 will. It will be from China, which is renowned in Pakistan for how advanced its toys, milk, pork and other high tech items which Pakistan does not produce but which are very popular in Pakistan.

After Pakistan taught China how to make fighter planes, China is making them as well and Pakistan in order to ensure Chinese economy learns more is allowing them to make some for Pakistan also.

From time to time, Pakistanis go to China to share Pakistani culture.

China is so impressed it hosts them in places such as Shenyang Detention Center, where all Pakistani conventions are held.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 05 May 2016 01:31

^^^
This is gold.... just gold ... we gotta SUPER Archive this thread then it is superior to all other archived threads

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 05 May 2016 02:12

Some banter I picked up on the F-16 & JF-17

Apparently in the incident where F-16 drop tanks were shown by Taliban as evidence of hit, the story was that the F-16 was indeed hit, and it punched its drop tanks and went home. Drop tanks are expensive, and no one jettisons them in operations over own aerospace, unless an emergency occurs.

The F-16 drops LGB guided by Sniper pod.

After that incident, they use JF-17 as mules to carry and drop the LGB while F-16s lase the target at safe standoff distances using Sniper Pod.

They're desperate for a LDP pod for JF-17 and approached the French for Damocles

The simultaneous awe and jealously of the tribal mindset towards F-16 is indicated by naming it F-17

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 05 May 2016 06:54

Karan M

You are on a roll sir, keep them coming.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 May 2016 11:04

And don't forget,Amrika may have unmanned sub hunting sea ship, but the "land of the (im) pure" has already unmanned fighters,no pilots but instead,Djinns! Remember Pak's Djinn power?

Chandragupta · Post by **Chandragupta** » 05 May 2016 14:43

Haha, I went to the 'other side' that must not be named. Pakis have no money to even buy naada for their salwars but doesn't stop them from talking about buying Typhoon, Su-35, Mig-31, F-35 and even Rafale itself to 'balance' India's purchase of Rafale. Classic case of what centuries of inbreeding does.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 05 May 2016 17:24

I have heard that the Pakistani AESA has Gallium-Nedonium TR modules. This Ga-Nd TR is more sensitive and resilient in all threat environments. That makes their AESA better than any out there.
It can manage multiple missiles simultaneously - exactly how many, is being kept a secret for now.

But who ever the PAF decides to deploy such tech against, had better be really good. I can only pray for PAF's adversaries

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 May 2016 18:03

The technology was named Pakistani GaNd. Very sensitive apparently.

There is of course a plan to export these as well, so that select friendly countries can access Pakistan's GaNd, countries like China, Saudi Arabia etc but surprisingly it seems the UK and US have managed to reverse engineer the technology or grow it domestically, because they have informed the PAF, thanks but no thanks we have enough Pakistani GaNdO's already. Still figuring out what the word with O means. Perhaps its some new ability Pakistanis acquire.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 05 May 2016 18:12

the distinguishing feature of the GaNd technology is that it can handle multiple missiles homoing in simultaneously
it can manage deep penetration and multiple shoot offs
the ride however is said to be very rough

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 05 May 2016 18:47

Lalmohan wrote:the distinguishing feature of the GaNd technology is that it can handle multiple missiles homoing in simultaneously
it can manage deep penetration and multiple shoot offs
the ride however is said to be very rough

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 05 May 2016 18:50

I hear they are adding depleted Uranium to Gallium-Nedonium.
It is going to in widespread use in the pakistani armed forces.
These Ga-Nd-U modules have inspired a lot of attention from all fighting arms in Pak Mil. Pak Service chiefs were given a hands on demonstration just last week.

All this tech is in the wrong hands...

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 May 2016 19:10

Afghanistan is believed to have acquired a particular ability to deal with Pakistani Ga-Nds.
They also refer to Pakistanis as Ga-Nd-Us.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 May 2016 19:21

Lalmohan wrote:the distinguishing feature of the GaNd technology is that it can handle multiple missiles homoing in simultaneously
it can manage deep penetration and multiple shoot offs
the ride however is said to be very rough

This has been eased greatly by using the Ghori mijjile with a Uranium warhead and Boron cladding - called G-UBo for short. In a significant breakthrough Petroleum Jelly (a.k.a. Vaseline) is used to ease the entry of a large missile head into a small ejector cum receiver

But this is the Su 30 thread

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 May 2016 19:25

Quite right.The Pak mil thread is probably the right place to discuss Pakistan's GaNdUs.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 05 May 2016 20:06

What is this hain?
Here I am trying to have a serious, fact based discussion and everyone is just making fun.

Very sad...

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 06 May 2016 01:27

Karan's poetry is the reason I lurk this thread

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 06 May 2016 18:40

Government said on Thursday Su-30MKIs have been facing engine troubles and have been forced to land on single engine 34 times since April 1, 2014.

-In the parliament
Source

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 May 2016 19:27

MOD Press

Engine Failure of Sukhoi Aircraft

The fleet has encountered mid-air engine problems due to which single engine landings were effected.

There have been 34 occasions between 1st April, 2014 to 31st March, 2016 when the Sukhoi 30 MK-I aircraft were forced to land on single engine due to mid-air engine problems.

The operational reliability improvement programme is pursued regularly with Russian Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM). The Russian OEM has introduced a number of measures to resolve the technical issues that have led to engine problems. The OEM has offered certain modifications or technological improvements for implementation in the production of new aeroengines and during overhaul of engines. The modifications in the process of overhaul and manufacturing, proposed by Russian designers, have been implemented at HAL and OEM. The OEM has also advised certain precautions / predictive maintenance during exploitation of aeroengines which have been implemented by the Indian Air Force (IAF). Further, IAF has also finalised long term repair agreement with Russian OEMs to improve availability of aircraft for operational use.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri Manohar Parrikar in a written reply to Shri C.S Putta Raju in Lok Sabha today.

DM/NAMPI/RAJ
(Release ID :144973)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 May 2016 03:42

Further, IAF has also finalised long term repair agreement with Russian OEMs to improve availability of aircraft for operational use.

The most important line. Instead of spending all it has on Rafale or some other platform.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 May 2016 05:51

BharadwajV wrote:Government said on Thursday Su-30MKIs have been facing engine troubles and have been forced to land on single engine 34 times since April 1, 2014.

-In the parliament
Source

Just playing number games in my mind. Assuming 150 Sukhois and that 20% of them fly every day - we have about 10000 sorties a year, or 20,000 since April 1 2014. 34/20,000 is a failure rate of ~0.17% That is probably high compared with civilian engines and with Snecma/Mirage

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 07 May 2016 10:50

Aren't we the first users of the TVC system on the AL31?
RuAF got their SM's much later, and Malaysia and Algeria have much less airframes in service.
Looks like we are schooling the rest on this platform.
Won't be surprised if the other users use the same SOPs/incorporate certain practices as the IAF.
And ADA marketing Tejas for export means they have enough confidence to convince users that she can be used right off the box, without the Rambhaesque problems.
(Raksha Mantri's speech in the LokSabha also touched up on the need to trial equipment in desi conditions before decision making )

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 07 May 2016 13:06

some of the SOPs are climate dependent as well....