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.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

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

Postby Manish_Sharma » 18 Mar 2017 12:02

What if we go for 45 Su-35S single seater as Brahmos carriers? Due to one pilot more fuel longer range. Could be in placed in Orrisa for both NE and Mallacca Straits.

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

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

Postby Singha » 18 Mar 2017 12:10

there is credible surface threat from the malacca straits direction yet.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 12:22

Manish_Sharma wrote:What if we go for 45 Su-35S single seater as Brahmos carriers? Due to one pilot more fuel longer range. Could be in placed in Orrisa for both NE and Mallacca Straits.


Check the AFM piece I posted last page , Super Brahmos would be upgrade to Su-35+ standard

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 12:25

Planned Su-30MKI upgrade

Via Air Forces Monthly /April 2017


DETAILS HAVE emerged of the major upgrade planned for the Indian Air Force (IAF) Su-30MKI fleet. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) officials confirmed the company will be one of the primary contractors involved in the programme.

Indian defence minister Manohar Parrikar said Russia and India were expected to sign a formal contract later this year, once the technical requirements had been finalised.

Alexander Artyukhov, CEO of Russia’s United Engine Corporation, said that the company has offered the AL-41F-1S turbofan to re-engine
the IAF Su-30MKIs. The powerplant, which is currently being installed on the Su-35, offers 18% more thrust than the Saturn AL-31F that is
fitted in the Su-30MKI.


HAL company chairman T Suvarna Raju said the upgrade would be carried out in two phases, with a contract for phase one expected
to be signed within 90 days. He did not say what would be included in the initial deal.

Dubbed the ‘Super Sukhoi’, the upgraded IAF Su-30MKI will feature a modernised cockpit, along with an active electronically scanned
array (AESA) radar, plus advanced avionics and sensors. The Indo-Russian developed BrahMos supersonic cruise missile will also
be integrated. After an upgraded prototype has been built in Russia, the remaining aircraft are expected to be modernised
in India by HAL.


The IAF has ordered 222 HAL-built Su-30MKIs, in addition to 50 produced in Russia. HAL has manufactured 183 to date. The order
will be completed by 2020 and the company is currently able to produce 12 aircraft annually. Dave Allport

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8221
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 18 Mar 2017 21:02

Wow. This is pretty serious upgrade!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 21:29

Indeed and will remain potent for next 30 year with incremental upgrades

What I would also want to see with Super-30 program is they make it compatiable with all the weapons in IAF service as possible for eg Astra is getting integrated with Su , IAF will be operating 3 types of WVR AAM , Python-5/ASRAAM/R-73 , Hopefully they can also integrate all 3 with Su-30.

In BVR Derby-ER will be integrated with Tejas , Meteor/Mica-EM with Rafale ...... They can integrate these types besides Astra/R-77

The idea would be to not limit MKI with a single weapon type and any weapons available can be used , All Weapons have certain life time span either you use it or you retire it or use it in exercise to dispose it off with EOL ......Making multiple weapons compatiable with MKI would also limit the number of weapons we order for single type including reserves.

The same should be done with Tejas , With Tejas and MKI we having the source code means the only limitation will be the Pylon compatiability for these types.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1913
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

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

Postby Zynda » 18 Mar 2017 22:05

I dunno if Rus has actually tested or even if they are interested in equipping their Su-30SM with 117S engine. If IAF goes for the upgrade, probably we will be beta testers for the new engine on Su-30. Having said that if it helps in stretching the legs of Su-30 even a little bit, IAF probably should go for it considering 117S also offers increased dry & wet thrust (will be useful while hauling heavy loads including Brahmos).

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 22:34

Dimensional/Weight 117S is same as AL-31FP and they are used on Su-35 for some years now but thrust was never an issue with Su-30 even with AL-31FP series , In Aircombat having more thrust would help you dictate the terms of engagement or disengagement is my impression.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 21 Mar 2017 22:22

UEC signed a contract on long-term cooperation with the Indian corporation HAL

http://www.aex.ru/news/2017/3/20/167537/
United Engine Corporation (part of the State Corporation Rostec) concluded with the Indian corporation Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) a contract for long-term cooperation. The signing took place on March 17 in the course of the Russian-Indian military-industrial conference in New Delhi. This was reported in the UEC.

India for many years, is an important partner of APC and one of the key markets for the products of the holding. Large-scale cooperation with Indian partners JDC developed mainly for military-technical cooperation. First of all, it is - the continuing delivery in the framework of the AL-31FP technical sets of contracts concluded earlier engines (mounted on the multi-purpose fighter Su-30MKI) for their licensed assembly in India. Currently, however, the DCS calculates and interest of Indian customers to their civilian products, noted in the UEC.

Contract on long-term cooperation JDC and HAL signed by Director General of the Russian holding Alexander Artyukhov and chairman of HAL T Suvarna Raju in the presence of the Minister of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov. The document identifies the key aspects of the cooperation between the parties on the after-sales service of aircraft engines AL-31FP, RD-33 different series, RD-33MK, P-25-300, R29B-300, operated by the Ministry of Defence of India.

"Within the framework of cooperation programs with India a top priority for us is to improve the speed and quality of after-sales service, the formation of an integrated customer support system, - said General Director of JSC" UEC "Alexander Artyukhov. - I am sure that the contract signed today will contribute to this seriously. "

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9601
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 24 Mar 2017 23:22

India's Sukhoi fleet faces problems despite Russian spare parts deal
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ind ... parts-deal

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

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

Postby Viv S » 24 Mar 2017 23:41

Manish_Sharma wrote:What if we go for 45 Su-35S single seater as Brahmos carriers? Due to one pilot more fuel longer range. Could be in placed in Orrisa for both NE and Mallacca Straits.

The Su-35S is not capable of carrying the BrahMos. Its a massive missile - HAL has spent a lot of time, effort & money to modify the Su-30 for the BrahMos (although it was still far cheaper than what the Russians demanded to do the job).

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8015
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 24 Mar 2017 23:51

Austin wrote:Dimensional/Weight 117S is same as AL-31FP and they are used on Su-35 for some years now but thrust was never an issue with Su-30 even with AL-31FP series , In Aircombat having more thrust would help you dictate the terms of engagement or disengagement is my impression.

If the upgraded MKI is to have an AESA radar the extra cooling requirements would also necessitate extra thrust. The t:w ratio of the MKI while adequate, is still short of Mig-29, F-15 and F-16 A/B levels IIRC. The strengthening done for Brahmos carriage would have increased weight as well. Extra thrust is critical for the upgraded MKI IMHO.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 26 Mar 2017 19:01

Interview with Malaysian Su-30 Pilot , Malaysian Su-30MKM is closer to IAF Su-30MKI using HAL Built components

Best maneuver

Interview with the pilot Su-30MKMM Malaysian Air Force (RMAF)

The most spectacular performances in the course of the flight show program for aircraft of the first day of work of the aerospace and naval salon LIMA'2017 were performed on the Su aircraft. High skill of maneuvering in the group was shown by crews from the Moscow region of Kubinka on Su-30SM fighters. And the best solo performance was demonstrated by the crew of Su-30MKM on-board number 18, belonging to the Royal Air Force of Malaysia (RMAF). Immediately after the completion of the demonstration flights, we spoke with the Su-30MKM pilot. Lieutenant-Colonel Edros JBorg became our interlocutor.

JBorg Edros
Lieutenant Colonel of the Air Force of Malaysia (RMAF), pilot Su-30MKM


Image

Comrade Lieutenant-Colonel, please tell us how long have you been flying Russian-made aircraft? What is your flight time?


The total flying hours are more than 2000, of which 1400 in the cockpit of MiG-29 fighters and more than 500 hours on Su-30MKM. The military service for about 30 years, flight practice in the Royal Air Force of Malaysia continues for 24 years. The first type of aircraft of the Russian design and construction, which I mastered over the years of service - the MiG-29, including the MiG-29N-UB Spark and the single-seat MiG-29N fighter. As a fighter pilot, I was formed in the MiG cockpit, and then I moved to the Su.

Comparing the MiG-29N and Su-30MKM, what would you say?

According to the general technical level, the Su-30MKM is ahead of the MiG-29N for a generation. The difference between the two types of aircraft is enormous. Firstly, the MiG-29N is equipped with the usual mechanical wiring from the handle of the aircraft control to the aerodynamic surfaces - ailerons, rudders, and the all-pivoting horizontal tail unit. This determines its stability and controllability characteristics, as well as the impression that the pilot receives from the piloting process. Secondly, the crew cabin is equipped, mainly, with turnouts. In a word, the MiG-29N is a "mechanical plane".

Unlike MiG, Su-30MKM has a so-called "glass cabin", the information-control field of which is built on multifunction indicators with color liquid crystal matrices. In addition, the "Su" is distinguished by a modern electro-remote flight control system (fly-by-wire, which operates in conjunction with a controlled thrust vector. As you can see, on the plane next to which our conversation passes, the deflected engine nozzles are installed. In short, the Su-30MKM is a completely "digital" aircraft, and this fact allows us to refer it to the next generation of aircraft for the MiG-29. All this is confirmed by the high maneuverability of the fighter: the Su-30MKM has much better maneuverability.

Image

Let's discuss the maneuverability of the Su-30MKM in comparison with Western fighters, which are presented at LIMA'2017.


And what is there to discuss ?! Obviously, due to its maneuverability, the Su-30MKM far exceeds the planes of all other brands presented at our exhibition and those only. In my opinion, in the world there is no other aircraft that would re-maneuver our fighter. Yes there is "re-maneuvering" - few other fighter can replicate those aerobatics that Russian and Malay crews demonstrate here at the exhibition!

Image

In addition to the MiG-29N and Su-30MKM, in the armament of the Royal Air Force of Malaysia are American fighters F-18D Hornet. Did you test them in the air?


Indeed, we are armed with several machines such as F-18D. I myself have not flown them, but I have read them in full detail with them and perfectly represent their technical level. Moreover, during combat training and improvement of flight and tactical skills, we often interact with the squadron of "hornets", together we perform flights for the development of air combat and strikes against ground targets. Therefore, I can say with knowledge that the Su-30MKM pilots are confident in its superiority over the F-18D, we know how to win a training battle with him and in the event of the deployment of real military operations with the enemy, which is armed with "hornets". In my opinion, "Su" has a significant advantage, especially in close combat.

Do you take part in the flights during the LIMA'2017 exhibition? Are you able to see the speeches of your colleagues and foreign colleagues?


The answers to both your questions are yes. True, today, on the opening day of the exhibition, I did not fly, but I will fly Su-30MKM tomorrow - March 22nd.

Image

Today, during the demonstration performance, the Su-30MKM Royal Malaysian Air Force demonstrated great skill. In particular, the pilots deliberately introduced the aircraft into a tailspin, but brought it into a horizontal flight not immediately, but after five or six turns. Usually Russian and Indian pilots do two or three turns ...


My colleagues wanted to show the excellent properties of the aircraft and their mastery of managing them. As for the figure you are talking about, we call it "tumble and yaw". The pilots gain altitude of 7,000 feet () and deliberately inject the aircraft into a tumbler ("tumble"). Then for a while they give the plane to move without the intervention of the crew, which is reflected in the fact that the car makes two or three turns - 360 degrees at the rate. Then the pilots take control and withdraw the car from the corkscrew in a horizontal flight. The remarkable aerodynamics and controllability of the Su-30MKM and the presence of a controlled thrust vector allow the crew to demonstrate such maneuvers that are not available to Western fighters.

Image

Share, please, the figures for altitude and speed, other flight parameters that the crews of the Su aircraft reach during the demonstration program on LIMA'2017.

During the demonstration flights at LIMA, we accelerate the aircraft to a maximum speed of 400 knots (740 km / h), and gain the maximum height of 7000 feet (3200 m). Sorry, I can not immediately recount these figures into a metric system - we are used to the measurement system adopted by the Royal Air Force of the United Kingdom.

Image

We have already mentioned that at the exhibition on Langkawi Island there are several types of fighters, including American F-15 and F-18, as well as European JAS-39, Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon. On which characteristics of these aircraft would you pay attention in comparison with the Su-30SM and Su-30MKM? What distinguishes them in the context of demonstration flights?


The main difference between them lies in what the aerobatics figures show the crews. By the nature of maneuvering, even ordinary viewers without aviation education can easily distinguish Russian fighters from cars of this class from Western aircraft manufacturers. Su-30SM / MKM maneuver best at low speeds and incomparably - at ultra-low (about zero) speeds. Our aircraft will easily win over any Western fighter in the course of a maneuverable close-range battle. This is because the Su-30SM / MKM is distinguished by an excellent control system, excellent aerodynamics and the presence of a controlled thrust vector. All the other types of fighters represented here at the exhibition, including the Swedish Gripen and the French Rafale, are not as good as the Su. Before executing this or that maneuver, their pilots must first accelerate to a sufficiently high speed because their cars can not maneuver at low speeds. And here

The Su-30MKM is equally well controlled both at high and low speeds. In this - its significant difference and superiority over Western fighters, whose capabilities are revealed only at high flight speeds.

Image

Comrade Lieutenant-Colonel, tell our readers about the situation that takes place with the staff of the Royal Air Force of Malaysia. Sometimes the media writes about the outflow of highly professional personnel to commercial airlines, where they are promised to pay more. At past exhibitions we talked to Malaysian pilots and then they confirmed the existence of such a problem. Does the Ministry of Defense of the Kingdom of Malaysia have difficulty in attracting young people to military service, training new flight personnel?

We do not have any problems with the release of pilots because there is a great interest from young people to serve in the army and especially in aviation. The Royal Air Force created and maintains a stable flight crew training system. In addition, those pilots who graduated from military schools and mastered a particular type of aircraft in the Air Force Academy, mostly try to continue their service, and not quickly go "into commerce." In a word, now the situation looks different than you described it, referring to publications in the media and interviews with pilots at exhibitions of past years. The few pilots who decided to leave the service in the army for the sake of a career in commercial aviation sometimes explain their desire to earn more. But most often they are driven by a desire to change something in their destiny, or, as they say, "to start a new life in a citizen". I will not condemn them, because every person has the opportunity to choose his own way. The desire for change is the natural desire of every person. Perhaps, first of all, this explains their decision to leave the military service, and considerations of large earnings - a secondary one. My opinion is that for a good pilot a career in commercial aviation is not at all what is in combat. I sometimes fall out of meetings outside the military base with aviators, who used to fly on fighters, and then went to the airline or tried to realize their abilities on a commercial line. Many later regret their decision to quit their service, and frankly tell me that the best thing for the pilot is service in the Air Force. The fact is that military service gives aviation specialists much more opportunities to study aircraft, and, in addition, gives them life lessons. In military service, capable people "grow" faster, because the army teaches them many useful things that are not available to those who prefer a career in civil aviation.

Explain, please, your thought. Is not the transition from the army to work in the airline found expression in the best earnings? And for any career in terms of progressing the career ladder can count the pilot, who decided to fully devote himself to military service?


The fact that the service in the Air Force teaches a lot, gives officers a large amount of knowledge, experience, teaches practical skills in working on aircraft. The flight on the combat vehicle gives the pilot more than a passenger airliner. I repeat that those pilots who left the military service for the sake of work in passenger aviation were for the most part motivated by a desire to change their destiny, to start a new life, including from the point of view of earnings. Their desire for change does not at all mean that something needs to be changed in the army. In fact, their choice is in no way connected with the state of affairs in the Air Force.

As for specific examples of the career of an officer in the Royal Air Force of Malaysia, I can give you the case of Mr. Affendi (chief of air staff, Royal Malaysian Air Force). He began his career as a fighter pilot, flew on the MiG-29N. At one time he was my commander and mentor, when I was just starting the career of a military pilot. And today Mr. Affendi - chief of staff (commander-in-chief) of RMAF, is headed by one of the clans of the Armed Forces of the Kingdom of Malaysia.

https://www.aex.ru/docs/2/2017/3/21/2583/

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

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

Postby ashishvikas » 10 Apr 2017 07:31

Flying coffins in making? Second hand engines used in Sukhois

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... khois.html

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 10 Apr 2017 07:41

ashishvikas wrote:Flying coffins in making? Second hand engines used in Sukhois

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... khois.html

There is something suspicious about this "news". Someone is paying someone else to publish stuff like this.

One possibility is the Rafale/Gripen/F-16 import lobby are trying to run down both Sukhois and HAL - so this evidence of uselessness weighs against them. Or some babu is trying to hit out at someone in HAL. Difficult to tell

Expect a rebuttal in a few days..

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4884
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 10 Apr 2017 07:50

ashishvikas wrote:Flying coffins in making? Second hand engines used in Sukhois

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... khois.html



F-king Russians. Pretty much expected of them to do this shit everywhere.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_wires/2008Feb19/0,4675,RussiaAlgeriaArmsBlunder,00.html

Algeria said it wanted to return the first 15 MiG-29 fighter jets supplied last year and refused to take the remaining aircraft under a $1.3 billion contract, Russian news reports said. The 2006 deal envisaged the delivery of 34 MiG-29s in 2007-2008.

Algerian officials said the planes had some old and substandard parts

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 10 Apr 2017 10:13

ashishvikas wrote:Flying coffins in making? Second hand engines used in Sukhois

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... khois.html


Looks like a case of HAL fitting one old and one new engine which IAF initially accepted it and then rejected during CAT B inspection , Quite possible HAL must have had old serviced engine as they build and service it at koraput and they could have used it may be not malafied intention just sheer laziness.

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

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

Postby srai » 10 Apr 2017 10:15

ashishvikas wrote:Flying coffins in making? Second hand engines used in Sukhois

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... khois.html


Is this really a big deal? Unlike car engines that stay with the car till the very end, aero-engines are a bit different. They are meant to be serviced and rotated at different frequency interval than the airframes. Think of it as a pool of engines and a pool of airframes. Whichever engines have been either built new or certified after servicing would be made available to whichever airframes require them at that point in time. Besides, an airframe would go through at least two/three engines before retirement given longer airframe life compared to engine life. To me, this sounds like a standard practice.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 10 Apr 2017 10:46

shiv wrote:There is something suspicious about this "news". Someone is paying someone else to publish stuff like this.

One possibility is the Rafale/Gripen/F-16 import lobby are trying to run down both Sukhois and HAL - so this evidence of uselessness weighs against them. Or some babu is trying to hit out at someone in HAL. Difficult to tell

Expect a rebuttal in a few days..


Cant rule that out when officially both have said so http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... s-4584488/

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20972
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 10 Apr 2017 13:54

The engines were supplied by HAL ,not the Ru OEM.We're told that now "80% of the bird is made from indigenous raw material. The big Q is "how much did HAL charge for the second-rate engine?" If the cost was that of a brand new aircraft with brand new engines then definitely some hanky-panky has taken place involving both HAL and the IAF.If on the other hand the IAF shows that it accepted a second-rate engine in the interests of the situation where it is critically short of aircraft,perhaps with the intention of replacing it with a new one when new ones arrived,then we can rest easy.

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

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

Postby srai » 10 Apr 2017 14:17

What's with all these articles that quote some unnamed officials and reports whenever there is negative thing to say about a local program? If you read that deccanchronicle article, there is no independent verification of whatever report they used for publishing some blurb. All they say about their source is "a report encapsulating the findings that have been accessed by this newspaper". Anyone can make that stuff up.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23358
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 10 Apr 2017 14:44

Philip wrote:The engines were supplied by HAL ,not the Ru OEM.We're told that now "80% of the bird is made from indigenous raw material. The big Q is "how much did HAL charge for the second-rate engine?" If the cost was that of a brand new aircraft with brand new engines then definitely some hanky-panky has taken place involving both HAL and the IAF.If on the other hand the IAF shows that it accepted a second-rate engine in the interests of the situation where it is critically short of aircraft,perhaps with the intention of replacing it with a new one when new ones arrived,then we can rest easy.


there is no "second rate" engine.

A new or overhauled engine of the similar mod standard will have the same performance standards and will be test bed checked and certified.

This is a needless controversy.

Where do you expect to find "new" engines all the time?? Are you going to junk the old ones??

any overhauled engine will perforce have many many critical parts that are mandatorily brand new. It will not be released into service otherwise.

also all overhauled engines are usually customer property.

HAL only sells brand new engines unless otherwise clearly specified for any reason.
Last edited by chetak on 10 Apr 2017 14:50, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 10 Apr 2017 14:47

The news item is full of negativity - and basically no one could have made money out of this from either HAL or air force. But money has definitely exchanged hands to get an article that says "used engines" and then gives the following summary:
    18 Su 30 MKIs fitted with old engines
    Poses reliability and safety risk
    Fitment violates contractual conditions
    India has about 230 operational fighters although just half is available for operational flights at any given point of time
    7 Sukhoi 30 MKIs have crashed to date, causing a loss of about Rs 2,350 crore

What about 5 year old Sukhoi 30. Will have new engine? if no then it is a safety hazard and should be grounded.

Engine maintenance scedules basically ensure that critical parts are inspected and changed so that old engines serve like new. Also if an aircraft goes to an air bas and has an engine failure - that engine is swapped out with guess what? A used engine. This is a motivated paid article
It goes to show the sort of stuff we "jingo enthusiasts" are exposed to as news. And if one of our "trustworthy" news sources is compromised by lifafa - then we are basically discussing and peddling BS. This is not new. It has gone on since the early days of the MiG accident rate saga.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4884
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 10 Apr 2017 15:00

Okay if you bought a new car and it has an old engine would you say "Hey it would be old in five years anyways" and dismiss it?

As far as the MiG crash rate: we lost HALF of all MiGs we ever operated and more importantly 200 (TWO HUNDRED) Indian lives.

You going to dismiss that?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 10 Apr 2017 15:02

chola wrote:Okay if you bought a new car and it has an old engine would you say "Hey it would be old in five years anyways" and dismiss it?

As far as the MiG crash rate: we lost HALF of all MiGs we ever operated and more importantly 200 (TWO HUNDRED) Indian lives.

You going to dismiss that?

Yes

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23358
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 10 Apr 2017 15:12

shiv wrote:The news item is full of negativity - and basically no one could have made money out of this from either HAL or air force. But money has definitely exchanged hands to get an article that says "used engines" and then gives the following summary:
    18 Su 30 MKIs fitted with old engines
    Poses reliability and safety risk
    Fitment violates contractual conditions
    India has about 230 operational fighters although just half is available for operational flights at any given point of time
    7 Sukhoi 30 MKIs have crashed to date, causing a loss of about Rs 2,350 crore

What about 5 year old Sukhoi 30. Will have new engine? if no then it is a safety hazard and should be grounded.

Engine maintenance scedules basically ensure that critical parts are inspected and changed so that old engines serve like new. Also if an aircraft goes to an air bas and has an engine failure - that engine is swapped out with guess what? A used engine. This is a motivated paid article
It goes to show the sort of stuff we "jingo enthusiasts" are exposed to as news. And if one of our "trustworthy" news sources is compromised by lifafa - then we are basically discussing and peddling BS. This is not new. It has gone on since the early days of the MiG accident rate saga.


Any squadron will be allotted with a certain number of aircraft as sanctioned by the Govt and also a certain number of spare engines to be used in contingencies, along with a lot of spares etc.

The squadron will normally operate with this kitty.

If extra replacement engines/aircraft/spares are required for any reason, these can be allotted by the concerned HQs

There is no risk to using overhauled or "used" engines.

ALL air forces in the world do this as standard practice.

The IAF is nothing special to be using only "new" engines all the time.

So if the IAF has accepted overhauled engines on some aircraft it's because the IAF has told the HAL that I need the aircraft so I will give you my engines (and also my permission), to fit on the new aircraft that you are going to deliver to me.
Last edited by chetak on 10 Apr 2017 15:18, edited 1 time in total.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20972
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 10 Apr 2017 15:12

Stick to the point.MIG crashes were the subject of much investigation.Here too the IAF had great angst against HAL for shoddy quality of HAL built MIGs,where in some cases,engines were touching fuselage skins.Purchases of spares by the MOD from dubious sources another problem. The crashes increased mainly after the fall of the USSR when s[pares became a problem. Who's responsible for today's "flying coffins",as it is being called (with protests from families of IAF pilots.),Chetak helos?

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chee ... 03414.html
This report was way back in 2014!
Army wives want Cheetah, Chetak helicopters phased out
According to the Indian Army Wives' Agitation Group, the 191 crashes have claimed 294 lives. On an average, there are three to four Army Aviation accidents every year.

Which car manufacturer sells you anew car with an old engine? Would anyone pay the full price for such a scam? This is called cheating.
And even if a firang manufacturer tried the same,it would still be called cheating.The big Q is how come the IAF accepted this? Is there more to this than meets the eye? We've heard of stories about pvt.sector cos. passing off second hand eqpt. (for example to state elec. boards),roads,highways,bridges, not upto specs,etc.,but this is the first time that in the defence sector we've heard of an Indian DPSU selling second-hand eqpt.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23358
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 10 Apr 2017 15:25

^^^^^^^

The IAF is the final authority to accept or reject any aircraft from HAL, irrespective of what any two bit inspector may or may not say.

This being the case, why did the IAF accept the so called "unsafe" aircraft with "used" engines??

Who can pressurise the IAF into accepting such aircraft??

or is there a CT for that too??

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 10 Apr 2017 15:48

Basically Su-30 engines have been giving so much trouble that I am sure a few dozen of them have gone back to manufacturer for suitable modification with consultation from Russkis to upgrade or replace troublesome parts. Once that is done the engine would be as good as new - or have a residual engine life of say 1000 hours. That would be noted in the log of the aircraft and the servicing of the engine done as per schedule.

If you go to any army depot - they may have 1000 trucks some brand new and some old. Parts are exchanged all the time . It's only us Patsies who buy 1.5 cars in a lifetime and need to sell one every few years who think owning one car and dealing with the car dealer is samesame equalequal to two organizations dealing with hundreds of aircraft and tens of thousands of parts - some of which have a longer life than others. I can see nothing wrong in HAL and the air force taking delivery of a new airframe with a previously used engine as long as both have the history of that engine. An engine that has already flown safely for say 100 hours is a known engine and all its details are documented and some parts may have been replaced or upgraded.

If you look at old pilot logbooks - and the book that the pilot signs before he flies and aircraft he will know (or at least someone in the maintenance/engineering chain will know) that this is an airframe that has already done 1500 hours, port engine has done 500 hours and has been through X overhauls and starboard engine has done 75 hours and is due for an inspection after Y hours. Now which of these is new? Which is old?

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

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

Postby srai » 10 Apr 2017 18:04

^^^
For reference, Rafale's engines can be swapped out in 3-hours or less. A 7-man team was able to do it in 3-hours on a USN carrier. That just shows engine can be swapped-out fairly easily and probably happens quite often. There was a report of quite a few Su-30MKIs having to make emergency landing due to failure of one of the engines. Those engines would have been swapped-out and those failed ones would have been sent for repairs and then certified for installation on whichever MKI airframe required it next.

French Squadron Performs Jet Engine Swap-Out on Board Truman
ABOARD USS HARRY S. TRUMAN, At Sea (NNS) -- As part of interoperability operations with the French Navy, a maintenance crew for the French aircraft Rafale F3 performed a jet engine swap-out on board USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) June 4.
...
According to French Navy Cmdr. Henri Mahe, the chief maintenance officer for Charles de Gaulle, the Rafale was specifically designed for performance and for efficient maintenance. The seven-man French navy maintenance team from the Rafale squadron 12F completed the engine swap-out in three hours.
...

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 10 Apr 2017 21:01

Su-35 vs Su-30 ( HUD view from Su-35 )


jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

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

Postby jayasimha » 11 Apr 2017 12:18

Old news.

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=144973

Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
06-May-2016 16:18 IST
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.

---------

my guess is as anybody's guess.. long ago some of the new engines might have failed( as mentioned above) it must have have been refurbished and fitted again.

DDM got some info and showing as litter..

Guys,, have trust on public sectors. At least I have..

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2415
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

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

Postby Manish_P » 11 Apr 2017 14:04

<OT>Chetak sir - Again. Thank you for your service. Out there. And your patience. Over here.</OT>

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1553
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

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

Postby Gyan » 11 Apr 2017 23:35

So possibly out of around 40,000 sorties conducted by Su-30 MKI in two years, only 34 had to be aborted. which theoretically means that in a 30 day war wherein 20,000 sorties may be conducted only around 20 sorties may get aborted.Rafale lobby at work to defame Su-30 MKI?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 12 Apr 2017 20:26

Take Off Mag March Issue on Malaysian Su-30MKM and Indian MKI program

http://www.en.take-off.ru/index.php/com ... cle/45/431

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4550
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 13 Apr 2017 00:31

Gyan wrote:So possibly out of around 40,000 sorties conducted by Su-30 MKI in two years, only 34 had to be aborted. which theoretically means that in a 30 day war wherein 20,000 sorties may be conducted only around 20 sorties may get aborted.Rafale lobby at work to defame Su-30 MKI?


Incorrect inference. In a war the machines will not get all the love in MRO that they get normally. The failure-rate would see exponential increase when the machines are pushed to the limits. IAF is not worried for nothing.

BTW the report is clearly not worthy of much attention.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5344
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 13 Apr 2017 02:26

shiv wrote:Basically Su-30 engines have been giving so much trouble that I am sure a few dozen of them have gone back to manufacturer for suitable modification with consultation from Russkis to upgrade or replace troublesome parts. Once that is done the engine would be as good as new - or have a residual engine life of say 1000 hours. That would be noted in the log of the aircraft and the servicing of the engine done as per schedule.

If you go to any army depot - they may have 1000 trucks some brand new and some old. Parts are exchanged all the time . It's only us Patsies who buy 1.5 cars in a lifetime and need to sell one every few years who think owning one car and dealing with the car dealer is samesame equalequal to two organizations dealing with hundreds of aircraft and tens of thousands of parts - some of which have a longer life than others. I can see nothing wrong in HAL and the air force taking delivery of a new airframe with a previously used engine as long as both have the history of that engine. An engine that has already flown safely for say 100 hours is a known engine and all its details are documented and some parts may have been replaced or upgraded.

If you look at old pilot logbooks - and the book that the pilot signs before he flies and aircraft he will know (or at least someone in the maintenance/engineering chain will know) that this is an airframe that has already done 1500 hours, port engine has done 500 hours and has been through X overhauls and starboard engine has done 75 hours and is due for an inspection after Y hours. Now which of these is new? Which is old?


+1

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2475
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

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

Postby manjgu » 13 Apr 2017 13:32

Shiv..but that depends on what u consider as a new aircraft (as negotiated) ? if new aircraft means a new airframe with a new engine ( i mean with the minimum no of hours ) then a old engine is not in order..however if it only means a new airframe then ofc i would agree with u. by your logic even engine with 1000 hrs is fine as long as we have the history. I am not sure what is definition of a new aircraft as per agreement.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4550
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 13 Apr 2017 14:36

manjgu wrote:Shiv..but that depends on what u consider as a new aircraft (as negotiated) ? if new aircraft means a new airframe with a new engine ( i mean with the minimum no of hours ) then a old engine is not in order..however if it only means a new airframe then ofc i would agree with u. by your logic even engine with 1000 hrs is fine as long as we have the history. I am not sure what is definition of a new aircraft as per agreement.


Its not unusual to have separate contract for engines and the aircraft. Even if first pair of engines is included in the aircraft price, we don't have any proof saying HAL did not supply those new engines directly to IAF as spare engines later. What matters is whether IAF got contracted number of new engines or not. We do not have any data on this, to make any comment. The report itself shows that the IAF knows exactly what they are getting. The "used" engines must be already owned by IAF, which might have come to HAL for repair/overhaul. There is no reason to believe IAF will pay HAL for the engine they never got. They ain't that stupid. They must be getting those new engines may be later. From the report anyway it looks like only one aircraft had "used" engine on it. Could have been because of non-availability of brand new engine on time. Both HAL and IAF agreed there is no point keeping the delivery pending for engines when they have overhauled engines at hand.

I don't understand why are we even discussing this issue so much. Aircraft engines are not like Car engines where one engine stays for entire life. Fighter jet engines and even commercial jet engines are constantly swapped/replaced from one airframe to another. They have these A (~50h), B(~100h), C(~200h), D(overhaul ~1000h) checks (typical numbers in brackets for engines such as Al-31FP) and engines typically have much more frequent inspection intervals than airframes, where the engines are taken out and inspected for specified items and then put back. There is no need to keep the airframe grounded while doing engine inspections. Just take out the engines and replace with other engine which is already inspected. IAF itself might be replacing the brand new engine on the brand new aircraft in as low as first 50hr of usage or less if some snag comes up. Some idiot wrote some crap and we are overblowing it.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 13 Apr 2017 15:11

manjgu wrote:Shiv..but that depends on what u consider as a new aircraft (as negotiated) ?

Do we know? Yes or no.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests