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.
Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1306
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

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

Postby Bart S » 15 May 2018 23:54

Is there any chance that we could put our own radar on the plane as part of the upgrade, or does Russia have a veto on that too?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19592
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 16 May 2018 00:00

Do we have a 400km range radar equiv. ? Even the Jags and LCAs are to have Israeli 2032/ 2052 ELTA radars.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1306
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

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

Postby Bart S » 16 May 2018 00:06

Philip wrote:Do we have a 400km range radar equiv. ? Even the Jags and LCAs are to have Israeli 2032/ 2052 ELTA radars.


Nice try at deflecting the question, but that is totally irrelevant. The question is whether we are allowed to do so or not.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1306
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

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

Postby Bart S » 16 May 2018 00:07

One also hopes that if we wanted to integrate Astra with the existing radar, we have a foolproof and implementable agreement in place and won't be subjected to the Bramhos style blackmail by the Russians.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2197
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 16 May 2018 00:23

Shouldn't all new MKI being built be built to the brahmos standard?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5217
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 16 May 2018 00:24

Cain Marko wrote:3. Reg. Rafales, the iaf seem really impressed with it's abilities, perhaps the Spectra, mica iir and meteor combo is to die for? They seem to be willing to put it against the j20.
Only on the assumption that the J-20 is not as stealthy as even the PAK-FA. With that assumption, even Tejas can go against the J-20?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 16 May 2018 00:29

Bart S wrote:
Philip wrote:Do we have a 400km range radar equiv. ? Even the Jags and LCAs are to have Israeli 2032/ 2052 ELTA radars.


Nice try at deflecting the question, but that is totally irrelevant. The question is whether we are allowed to do so or not.


The original agreement most definitely allows us to add what we wish. But replacing the radar is not that straight forward, you have to replace the whole WCS, that comprises the IRST plus LRF, radar, WCS, nav-attack interface and computers with all their black box software or somehow come up with a reverse engineered interface that talks indian in standard format and provides input to the WCS. Having our own radar, is good from the EW and RWR perspective too. They will work in synch.

But thats not the fun part as above is doable. We know how the interface works and we can extrapolate and put our desi radar - the real issue is weight!!

Bars weighs a minor, 450 odd Kg, replacing it is non trivialfrom the viewpoint of CG and FBW tweaks.

Only Sukhoi can fix this. Brahmos on centerline isnt comparable because it was modeled as a Kh59mk plus and all sorts of tweaks estimates applied to the model without modified FBW.

Changing the radar will require FBW work unless you put wasteful ballast.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1306
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

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

Postby Bart S » 16 May 2018 00:36

Karan M wrote:
Bart S wrote:
Nice try at deflecting the question, but that is totally irrelevant. The question is whether we are allowed to do so or not.


The original agreement most definitely allows us to add what we wish. But replacing the radar is not that straight forward,...


Great info, thanks! It's a pity they don't have a proven and competitive AESA FCR on offer.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 16 May 2018 01:46

They can offer us the NIIP AESA in trials on the PAKFA. Problem is since its LRIP, the cost per module will be high. Also, being a test article, debugging is a given. Again, several years- I have to reluctantly admit, all the PR articles in Russian press of radar being ready..is likely just a PR effort. MiG called MiG-29K as being excellently appreciated by IN, and it tooktill some 3-4 years back for even IAF ASR Bars to enter service.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6871
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 16 May 2018 01:51

nachiket wrote:Nitpick. The Super-30 upgrade does not include an engine change as per my recollection.

Correct. But it can easily be added. Add 5-7 Million to the cost.

Cain Marko wrote:1. How does original oem like bae hold us by the **"** when they don't even produce, dirt the birds anymore? Shouldn't Hal be able to produce the bird from scratch off it wants to? Engines?

The way the contract was agreed upon. EVERY IP developed by us is there's to use. They have marketed our safety-critical solutions in the past without any royalty or even a mention.
Cain Marko wrote:2. Are the engines on the mki sleep bring upgraded? If so, to what? 117s?

AFIK, everything has been proposed and nothing has been decided. The Super-30 discussion comes up every now and then. But who is really take this up to take it to fruition in the time-bound manner. NOBODY! Not even HAL. Now that the gravy train of the ToT-manufacture is coming to an end, it might become more important for them.
Cain Marko wrote:3. Reg. Rafales, the iaf seem really impressed with it's abilities, perhaps the Spectra, mica iir and meteor combo is to die for? They seem to be willing to put it against the j20.

They will put everything against J-20. There is no silver bullet to win a war. Not Rafale, not, J-20.
JayS wrote:Its perplexing for me that as company, when it has a capability to build from scratch, HAL is proposing CKD/SK assembly. Which company in its sane mind would propose a project with less value addition of its own while it can do much more value addition on the same proposal..? And no one would hold HAL in contempt if they propose completely made in india Su30, rather than CKD/SKD import, even if they cost more or would take 2-3 yrs longer.

I think this is what really differentiates a PSU from a Private company, Absolutely lunatics proposal, I feel, based on the limited info from one article, given its correct.

Absolutely.
JayS wrote:Also IR, lets not forget that the Rafale purchase is a legacy of the time when Su-30MKI used to have 55% availability, dozens of engines related incidences and uncertainty over any possibility in improvement in the situation. Manohar Parrikar happened later.

True. But, they way to increase MKIs availability was known for a very long time. Nobody was serious about it till MP wielded the stick.

Philip wrote:Do we have a 400km range radar equiv. ? Even the Jags and LCAs are to have Israeli 2032/ 2052 ELTA radars.

The BARS is an incredible radar. But, not irreplaceable. Look at its size and weight. If Uttam is scaled up to that size and power, it won't be too far behind in range. It is the fine tuning of an FCR for different operations that India lacks in. And it will always lack in it, till we field our radars, in our planes, in our war scenarios. Somewhere, we have to bite the bullet.

Bart S wrote:One also hopes that if we wanted to integrate Astra with the existing radar, we have a foolproof and implementable agreement in place and won't be subjected to the Bramhos style blackmail by the Russians.

Astra will be India's BVR for almost all platforms, but Mirage 2000s, Rafale. That decision has been made at all levels. IAF is very pleased with Astra's performance.

Cybaru wrote:Shouldn't all new MKI being built be built to the brahmos standard?

No. Why spend extra on a generalize a specialty? There are small weight penalties as well.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2197
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 16 May 2018 03:34

Indranil wrote:[

Cybaru wrote:Shouldn't all new MKI being built be built to the brahmos standard?

No. Why spend extra on a generalize a specialty? There are small weight penalties as well.


Ok. I presume the smaller Brahmos is in works as well.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 16 May 2018 11:12

nachiket wrote:
Indranil wrote:Austin, the 100 crores for the Su-30 upgrades is not additive because no new Super-30s will be made. HAL's proposal is to undertake MLUs of the existing Su-30s to Super-30 standard for 100 crores per plane. And, I say it is a great deal. That is roughly 17-18 million per plane for a much deeper upgrade than what we got for our Mirages. You are speaking radars, engines, avionics, cockpit ...

Nitpick. The Super-30 upgrade does not include an engine change as per my recollection.


Su's dont face any issue with Power unlike Jaguar , So Engine change is not needed ......It would be nice to have a higher power engine for any fighter but it would add to cost

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 16 May 2018 11:33

Regarding Su-30 upgrade. To my mind -

Displays - DARE + Samtel large format displays
http://www.samtelavionics.com/smfd.php
plus new display processors
http://drdo-ada-aeroindia2017.com/parti ... labs/dare/
Mission computer - DARE
See the new MIPs based MC above
RWR - DR118 again, DARE
Jammers - DARE
See:https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02/how-a-secretive-drdo-lab-is-saving-the-iaf-su-30mki.html

The key items missing are mission software i.e. sensor fusion, possible if DARE can port the AEW&C Mission software to a Su-30.

And of course, the all-important radar, new weapons (e.g. RVV-BD, new Russian weapons including long range missiles and ARMs), and new engines plus FBW tweaks and wet plumbing for the wings, like Su-35, plus RCS reductions (heavy duty coating, new cockpit transparencies, radome, internal hot spot treatment).

Su-30 needs wet wings because with a heavy warload, its combat radius will be LCA style 500 odd km, not the much touted 1500km which only exists with 4 AAMs, of which 2 are fired at range and then the fighter returns.

NIIP radar will have to be integrated with Indian EW suite and new mission software as well.

New engines will be icing on cake, albeit come with all sorts of new teething issues but will genuinely make the Su-30 ready for many decades to come.

People forget the Su-30 MKI is much heavier than the vanilla Su-27SK. It can carry upto 38.8 ton, plus has canards, a TVC apparatus and around 500 kgs in the nose. As a result, a loaded Su-30 MKI has limitations in performance and can go upto a max of 1.9M, not the 2.2 M + the vanilla Flankers claim.

New engines will return the performance to somewhat near the vanilla Flanker level, but increases in military power/AB thrust will come up with SFC increases, which means wet plumbing for the wings, is essential.

The IFR stuff quoted on BRF has limitations regarding the number of refuellers, the fact that Buddy refuelling from Cobham pods is # of Pods w/IAF limited, and has fuel transfer limitations (how many Sukhois can transfer how much fuel).

So key things from Russia
#New radar (has to work with our EW so we need their cooperation on RF details, timing, beam control)
#Structural mods - fuel lines
#New engines (again structural mods to intakes for larger thrust, new attachment points)
#FBW work (for weight changes)
#Mission software improvements (integrate new desi HW + weapons)
#New Russian weapons
#Additional gizmos (new HMS)
#RCS reductions

Indian side
#EW
#Displays
#Mission hardware (computers, software)
#Indian weapons
#New datalinks and radios

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 16 May 2018 12:10

Things could have changed in the upgrade front , We will have to see the specs that IAF has finally freezed ......My information is Super MKI upgrade will be similar to Su-35 in capability and other systems minus the new engine .....but we will have to see the final specs

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 16 May 2018 12:16

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 16 May 2018 12:24

Something i found on a forum board , Cant vouch for its authenticity ...... Comparision between MKI and Jags at standard payload

Image

Based on fuel fractions MKI might outrange the Jag by almost twice.

in addition it will have exceptional maneuverability and speed compared to the jag with a TWR of almost 0.5 compared to 0.3 for jag at dry and almost 0.83 compared to Jags 0.46 after burner TWR.


Image

Now in a strike role if we want a sluggish MKI, which can at worst go to a 0.39 twr dry, MKI can carry an additional 8.7 Tons of Strike munition than the Jag and still get a 789 Km range based on a 0.248 Fuel Fraction.

source

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 16 May 2018 12:33

Official Presentation from Irkut/HAL on Indian Su-30MKI program

http://eng.irkut.com/upload/Su-30MKI_eng.pdf

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 16 May 2018 12:43

Austin wrote:
nachiket wrote:Nitpick. The Super-30 upgrade does not include an engine change as per my recollection.


Su's dont face any issue with Power unlike Jaguar , So Engine change is not needed ......It would be nice to have a higher power engine for any fighter but it would add to cost


Maybe not as bad as jags, but the mki is the heaviest flanker and could use the bigger engines if they are to carry around brahmos types and if the upgrade includes any more internal weight increases via ew/jammer or 360 maws and optics.

Never hurts to have more power.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 16 May 2018 12:51

I think that the pakfa derived aesa radar is a given along with wing mounted L band radar ala su 35. This is one reason that they are taking so long to finalize imho.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 16 May 2018 13:26

Cain Marko wrote:Never hurts to have more power.


Never hurts any fighter aircraft to have more power but at what cost ?

IF they decided to uprate the engine then logical choice would be Salut FM2/FM3 or Saturn 117S both will add 4 T more thrust in AB mode.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2506
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

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

Postby tsarkar » 17 May 2018 00:16

Here's my take on Su-30MKI upgrade and a comparison with Rafale.

We've integrated Litening, Ehud ACMI and Elta 8222 with Su-30MKI, so there are no Russian veto on adding any third party systems. Only OEM refuses to support incase of any issues, that anyways we deal with ourselves like BrahMos integration.

AESA radar - Israeli Elta 2052 and Thales RBE2AA are already mature and in service. Even the older Elta 2032 has phenomenal ground mapping modes. US AESA radars from NG & Raytheon also mature but unlikely to be offered for Su-30. The Russian Phazotron Zhuk AE didnt move beyond brochure. The N036 Byelka is under development and hasnt completed testing.

Conclusion - Elta 2052 is probably the best option for Su-30MKI upgrade.

EO suite - Litening is the best of breed solution already used on Su-30MKI. The Russians use Thales Damocles pod which is inferior to Litening.

Conclusion - Newer marks of Litening already integrated is the best option for Su-30MKI upgrade.

EW suite - The Rafale SPECTRA is miles ahead of competition offering real time data fusion and adaptive response. The actual field performance of Russian systems is revealed here https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02 ... 30mki.html
Israeli and Indian systems are far ahead.

Conclusion - An Indian equivalent of SPECTRA with possibly Israeli components can be built as per the DARE article combining RWR, MAWS, wideband jammers, chaff & flares.

Weapons - More than the engine range of weapons, the ability of sensors to develop a firing solution at that range is important. The Derby and MICA missiles offer that ability. MICA has a phenomenal unjammable IIR seeker. Again, French, Indian & Israeli datalinking solutions are far ahead.

Conclusion - Indian & Israeli missiles like Astra, NGARM, BrahMos, Nirbhay, SAAW, Derby ER, SPICE, Griffin & Paveway kits offer an adequate armament fit for Su-30MKI upgrade. As per this report Derby is already qualified on Su-30MKI https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... by-438514/

He said that while the earlier version of the I-Derby is already carried by the Indian air force's LCA and Sukhoi Su-30, an effort is being made to allow the integration of the I-Derby ER on these aircraft.


Pilot Ergonomics and Data Fusion - Karan has highlighted the cockpit displays already indigenously developed. Indian Mission and other computers already developed. New ones based on those developed for Mirage 2000 upgrade and possibly Tejas Mk2 can be added.

That leave only airframe and engines from Russia.

The best option going forward is to take the airframe like we took the Jaguar and upgrade it with domestic and global best of breed systems where domestic is unavailable.

The current HAL proposal is lazy and more of a Rozgar Yojana for its MiG Complex

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2643
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Postby kit » 17 May 2018 02:58

tsarkar wrote:Conclusion - Elta 2052 is probably the best option for Su-30MKI upgrade.

Conclusion - An Indian equivalent of SPECTRA with possibly Israeli components can be built as per the DARE article combining RWR, MAWS, wideband jammers, chaff & flares.


Agree with both ., but the MKI can carry a much bigger and capable version of the 2052 .. and definitely a good idea to carry forward..maybe an Indian SPECTRA for a Super Sukhoi ?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 17 May 2018 03:05

What exactly is an Indian version of Spectra. Can you simply just take the Rafales Spectra and stick it in the mki pnp? Sounds miraculously easy.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 May 2018 03:37

There is no Indian version of Spectra and given how packed the Su-30 airframe is, we probably can't fit one within either. Packed as Soviet era LRUs are 2x the size of newer ones, and overengineered for reliability, using heavier alloys etc. Take a look at the Su-30 BOM and then the specific Soviet designations for each item. They are large boxes. Bottom line, if HAL had the wherewithal and GOI the guts, the Su-30 is an amazing airframe to build on, you have the overall airframe and aerodynamics worked out, and you can replace with LCA era LRUs and avionics and hydraulics which in many cases will be a fraction of the size and weight of the original Flanker era items. Anyhow, that isn't happening.. so to get back to what we do have.

By 2018, the Digital RWR - 6 channel, digital receiver to pick up LPI signals, but most importantly, to actually work (as versus the R-118 and Tarang both of which had reliability issues and blanking issues with the Su-30's canards getting in the way)

By 2019, we have the high-band wingtip pods, which are to be smaller and lighter than the SAP-518. Basically, the same GHz range (high band, useful against fighter & ground based FCRs) but won't stop S- Band (2-4) or L-Band surveillance radars. That's the plan.

We have (supposedly) the Elbit-DARE MAWS in trials, and hopefully, the revised fit is not mucking up the aerodynamics and flight performance, unlike the SAAB one on Su-30 MKM.

So, if these three work, then you don't need Spectra because you will at least have a basic EW fit on our Su-30. All can be put on one display (R-118 already had it) and true sensor fusion means even the radar and IRST tracks would be integrated, but even leaving that aside.

Then you have the chaff & flares, with the new flare cartridge from HEMRL which they claim can jam even AIM-9M/L class missiles and they are working on something that can jam AIM-9X class FPAs

A Su-30 MKI with the above will be able to detect enhanced radars (LPI ones) and hopefully jam them (noise + deception) and it will also have a MAWS to tell the pilot to runnnnn awaaaaay (cue Monty Python) and chaff & flares (as always).

With all the above, then IAF can think of adding low band jammers (desi Growler) and towed decoy (for enhanced protection). But at least, let the basics come.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 May 2018 03:42

Now the big question is whether all the above will work with a foreign radar. On the face of it, its a timing issue and can be worked out (the true sophisticated Khan land solutions have both EW + Radar work together with DSP filtering out own RF return). Question is whether we can actually do it, we have had a decade now to figure out things and work them out. And hopefully, the brains to actually negotiate a deal that the radar supplier cooperates with our desi EW guys.

One possibility is to have the Israeli EL-2052 with a desi -EW suite, as tsarkar says, now that would be something. In time, get a Su-30 sized Uttam.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2733
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 17 May 2018 04:36

Radar on a plane is not just radar. All a-a weapon (including cueing for just IR ones) and almost all a-g weapon depend on the radar, along with EW suite that has to interface correctly with own radar. If we ever put 2052 on SU30MKI (which Russia wont allow, we have better chances putting LCA LRUs), SU30MKI will in effect become a Israeli plane. Russia still has more depth than Israel in weapons, radars (the current SU30MKI is still one of the best, AESA will be great, but the current one is no slouch) and other stuff. 2052 is not happening for SU30MKI and shouldn't. Let's wait for the PAKFA radar (and perhaps the reason for delay).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 May 2018 06:14

Backs up what I had said. MKI with a heavy warload will have around a 500km strike radius. Best not to start thinking its a one stop answer for everything and equal to heavy bombers. It needs better engines and wet wings to retain payload and regain its Su-27 heritage agility, like the newer F-15s with enhanced motors.

Austin wrote:Something i found on a forum board , Cant vouch for its authenticity ...... Comparision between MKI and Jags at standard payload

Image

Based on fuel fractions MKI might outrange the Jag by almost twice.

in addition it will have exceptional maneuverability and speed compared to the jag with a TWR of almost 0.5 compared to 0.3 for jag at dry and almost 0.83 compared to Jags 0.46 after burner TWR.


Image

Now in a strike role if we want a sluggish MKI, which can at worst go to a 0.39 twr dry, MKI can carry an additional 8.7 Tons of Strike munition than the Jag and still get a 789 Km range based on a 0.248 Fuel Fraction.

source

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15519
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 May 2018 06:16

The PAKFA radar will take several more years, besides why will Russia give you that radar when you refused their PAKFA?
Best bet is Irbis-E derived Bars++ radar.

fanne wrote:Radar on a plane is not just radar. All a-a weapon (including cueing for just IR ones) and almost all a-g weapon depend on the radar, along with EW suite that has to interface correctly with own radar. If we ever put 2052 on SU30MKI (which Russia wont allow, we have better chances putting LCA LRUs), SU30MKI will in effect become a Israeli plane. Russia still has more depth than Israel in weapons, radars (the current SU30MKI is still one of the best, AESA will be great, but the current one is no slouch) and other stuff. 2052 is not happening for SU30MKI and shouldn't. Let's wait for the PAKFA radar (and perhaps the reason for delay).

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63107
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

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

Postby Singha » 17 May 2018 07:13

will a small high supersonic EMP weapon be possible ?

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6884
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

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

Postby Prasad » 17 May 2018 11:05

Austin wrote:
nachiket wrote:Nitpick. The Super-30 upgrade does not include an engine change as per my recollection.


Su's dont face any issue with Power unlike Jaguar , So Engine change is not needed ......It would be nice to have a higher power engine for any fighter but it would add to cost

Engine change was proposed to help power a newer more powerful radar with greater energy need no?

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2733
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 17 May 2018 16:03

It has to be a Russian radar. Whatever it is. While AESA has it's advantages, I hope we do not pick the next one just because it's AESA, it should offer big leap over current SU30MKI radar. A marginal leap, and we should wait for better alternative from Russia (or co develop IBRIS to something bigger/better)

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2311
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

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

Postby JTull » 17 May 2018 16:38

fanne wrote:Radar on a plane is not just radar. All a-a weapon (including cueing for just IR ones) and almost all a-g weapon depend on the radar, along with EW suite that has to interface correctly with own radar. If we ever put 2052 on SU30MKI (which Russia wont allow, we have better chances putting LCA LRUs), SU30MKI will in effect become a Israeli plane. Russia still has more depth than Israel in weapons, radars (the current SU30MKI is still one of the best, AESA will be great, but the current one is no slouch) and other stuff. 2052 is not happening for SU30MKI and shouldn't. Let's wait for the PAKFA radar (and perhaps the reason for delay).


I have not read of even one missile/munition from Russia that India has considered to buy for Su-30MKI in last few years. Infact, IAF is actively substituting what we currently have with desi or other foreign solutions. It doesn't have to have a Russian radar. If Russians have a better solution than 2052 or Uttam, then I'm sure it can be considered. But, we should spend any new Paisa on AESA only, as the upgrades will have to be for next 20 years. I doubt, with 2052 finding it's way on Jags and Tejas Mk1A, Russian have anything that matches performance of a MKI sized version of 2052 or it's price (scale!!!).
Last edited by JTull on 17 May 2018 16:51, edited 2 times in total.

Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

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

Postby Chinmay » 17 May 2018 16:48

fanne wrote:It has to be a Russian radar. Whatever it is. While AESA has it's advantages, I hope we do not pick the next one just because it's AESA, it should offer big leap over current SU30MKI radar. A marginal leap, and we should wait for better alternative from Russia (or co develop IBRIS to something bigger/better)


Why does it HAVE to be Russian? Why cant we substitute it for any other, especially our own?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21909
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 17 May 2018 17:23

Prasad wrote:
Austin wrote:
Su's dont face any issue with Power unlike Jaguar , So Engine change is not needed ......It would be nice to have a higher power engine for any fighter but it would add to cost

Engine change was proposed to help power a newer more powerful radar with greater energy need no?


We don’t know if newer electronics can’t be powered by existing engine , if anything new electronics tends to be more energy efficient needing less power , the rest is the question of money , if Ajai Shukla is right upgrade cost 100 crore about 16 million in dollar term which is l ss than what we spent on mirage upgrade , so upgrade looks limited by amount and what gets upgrades considering we have a huge fleet to upgrade

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12856
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

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

Postby Lalmohan » 17 May 2018 17:45

Chinmay wrote:Why does it HAVE to be Russian? Why cant we substitute it for any other, especially our own?


the radar, nav/attack, flight management and other core systems are usually designed along common (to a manufacturer) standards and databus technologies. often mixing standards (whilst technically possible and often done) are practically difficult. every grouping has its own standards and often they are incompatible. integrating radar with other core computer systems on the aircraft is usually the most difficult system engineering task...

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1015
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 17 May 2018 17:53

tsarkar wrote:The current HAL proposal is lazy and more of a Rozgar Yojana for its MiG Complex


:D You forgot it will also enable the HAL Chairman to organize a press conference and do a photo-op of giving a giant notional cheque (of some tens of crores) to a clueless cabinet minister.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 17 May 2018 21:07

Singha wrote:will a small high supersonic EMP weapon be possible ?



And where would you use it?

US comes up with all these blue sky weapons/projects to use against non-nuclear deadbeats.

And we dutifully clamor for them.
How will you convince the Pakis or PLAAF its not nuclear weapon of some sort?
US can safely use that EMP thing as its opponent has Ak-47 on camels.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 17 May 2018 21:09

Chinmay wrote:
fanne wrote:It has to be a Russian radar. Whatever it is. While AESA has it's advantages, I hope we do not pick the next one just because it's AESA, it should offer big leap over current SU30MKI radar. A marginal leap, and we should wait for better alternative from Russia (or co develop IBRIS to something bigger/better)


Why does it HAVE to be Russian? Why cant we substitute it for any other, especially our own?



chinmay, Have you tried to install an non-Apple peripheral on a Mac?

Same thing. All these things have to work together.
And take long time integrating and testing by which time they become obsolete.

Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

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

Postby Chinmay » 18 May 2018 08:32

ramana wrote:
chinmay, Have you tried to install an non-Apple peripheral on a Mac?

Same thing. All these things have to work together.
And take long time integrating and testing by which time they become obsolete.


Ramana sir, I am aware that the testing and integration of non-OEM equipment will be prolonged. However, we do have experience integrating non-Russian equipment on Russian aircraft, especially with the Su-30. My query is that if the Russian radar is not up to the mark, then would it be worthwhile to integrate a superior non-Russian radar, instead of waiting for the Russians to improve their kit?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3209
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 18 May 2018 08:40

What guarantee do we have that the EL 2052 is up to the mark compared to say, the NO 36? How many fighters are equipped with it worldwide?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], komal, Trikaal and 37 guests