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.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4770
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 15 Aug 2019 02:19

chola wrote:
Bhaskar_T wrote:


What good is making 70% of the MKI when it is tied to some damn contract with a phoren nation? Why can't that line in Nasik be used to build an indigenous aircraft? Hell even an desi Flanker clone. I don't give rat's arse if it is illegal or not. Far better than letting a hard fought production line and, more importantly, a precious local eco-system die on the vine.

I am so tired of us paying for "partnerships" and "ToT" that ends after a contract run and we are left blank sheet again and having to pay the next set of goras for every new goddam project.


Its a license. You pay for each unit you assemble/build at your facility. That is how every licensing deal works. They make royalty on each unit built. the contract included provisions to have Russia supply various raw materials used to build up parts like titanium forgings, various fasteners and such that are cheaper to obtain directly from Russia.

Your not caring whether it is legal or not doesn't make a whit of a difference. The Govt. of India will not willy nilly authorise reverse engineering or cloning because you don't care whether it's legal or not. India is not China. India and Russia have a different relationship and legal contracts do matter. There is not much to be gained by cloning it in contravention of legal contracts. On the contrary there is a lot to lose in terms of support for the fleet as well as future contracts and partnerships.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4400
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 15 Aug 2019 03:12

HAL pitches for 4 more squadrons of Su-30MKI

The proposal for manufacturing 72 more fighter jets to add to the current order for 272 was made by the HAL but officials said that the air force has not been keen due to budgetary issues. - By Manu Pubby, ET Bureau | Updated: Aug 14, 2019, 10.01 AM IST

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 668419.cms

Given the current squadron shortages, it would be stupid to let one of the two Indian combat aircraft assembly lines (MKI & LCA) shut down. Forget about “optimal category mix” for the time being. Keep the lines humming along until another option hits production line.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8097
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 15 Aug 2019 03:17

I do not believe the IAF will bite. Perhaps 1 (or 2) more squadrons, but four is a stretch. At four squadrons, that will eat into the MRFA numbers. That is how the bureaucrats will perceive it. They control the purse strings after all.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2391
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 15 Aug 2019 04:05

Cant help but post this:
HAL did not increase production to 16-18 per year inspite of the MOD and air force pushing for it. The SU30MKI production run was supposed to be over by 2016, but HAL stretched the production till 2019-2020 at 12 per year to ensure the union labor is occupied in the task of nation building. Even now they want to do more screwdrivergiri. Remember each SU30MKI 'manufactured' by HAL is costing at least 30% more then what would be the cost if it was imported in fly away condition. What exactly has HAL got to show and the nation gained by paying this premium?

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1135
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

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

Postby Rishirishi » 15 Aug 2019 04:18

Vips wrote:Cant help but post this:
HAL did not increase production to 16-18 per year inspite of the MOD and air force pushing for it. The SU30MKI production run was supposed to be over by 2016, but HAL stretched the production till 2019-2020 at 12 per year to ensure the union labor is occupied in the task of nation building. Even now they want to do more screwdrivergiri. Remember each SU30MKI 'manufactured' by HAL is costing at least 30% more then what would be the cost if it was imported in fly away condition. What exactly has HAL got to show and the nation gained by paying this premium?


I think the cost is the same, assembled or in parts.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8097
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 15 Aug 2019 04:19

No Sir, it is not.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 15 Aug 2019 07:50

Vips wrote:Cant help but post this:
HAL did not increase production to 16-18 per year inspite of the MOD and air force pushing for it. The SU30MKI production run was supposed to be over by 2016, but HAL stretched the production till 2019-2020 at 12 per year to ensure the union labor is occupied in the task of nation building. Even now they want to do more screwdrivergiri. Remember each SU30MKI 'manufactured' by HAL is costing at least 30% more then what would be the cost if it was imported in fly away condition. What exactly has HAL got to show and the nation gained by paying this premium?


First I don't understand what you get by posting these troll-ish, non factual posts. 75% of the Su-30 is being made in India and obviously anyone familiar with manufacturing would note HAL's cost includes the amount of infrastructure set up for a 80 odd unit manufacturing run, whereas the Russians could spread out that cost over a Flanker run in the thousands.
Second, HAL did not stretch the production for its labor etc, but the fact is the AF wanted Flanker-H's earlier so they reduced the number in the Stage 4 phase.
Third, the nation got a vendor base making Su-30 components, structures and spares out of the deal.

Less rhetoric and more sense will help, henceforth.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 15 Aug 2019 07:55

Well said. From now on pointless rants and whines will attract a warning. These issues have been discussed a 100 times before.

Kartik wrote:
chola wrote:
What good is making 70% of the MKI when it is tied to some damn contract with a phoren nation? Why can't that line in Nasik be used to build an indigenous aircraft? Hell even an desi Flanker clone. I don't give rat's arse if it is illegal or not. Far better than letting a hard fought production line and, more importantly, a precious local eco-system die on the vine.

I am so tired of us paying for "partnerships" and "ToT" that ends after a contract run and we are left blank sheet again and having to pay the next set of goras for every new goddam project.


Its a license. You pay for each unit you assemble/build at your facility. That is how every licensing deal works. They make royalty on each unit built. the contract included provisions to have Russia supply various raw materials used to build up parts like titanium forgings, various fasteners and such that are cheaper to obtain directly from Russia.

Your not caring whether it is legal or not doesn't make a whit of a difference. The Govt. of India will not willy nilly authorise reverse engineering or cloning because you don't care whether it's legal or not. India is not China. India and Russia have a different relationship and legal contracts do matter. There is not much to be gained by cloning it in contravention of legal contracts. On the contrary there is a lot to lose in terms of support for the fleet as well as future contracts and partnerships.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 15 Aug 2019 15:11

Post deleted. Poster warned for going on despite requests not to do so.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7427
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

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

Postby Prasad » 15 Aug 2019 16:12

It isn't as simple as that. IAF must be willing to buy more MKI or MKI variants. Is it? If not, HAL must see if it can export Su-30 variants using its existing infrastructure. Irkut might not like that. If that also isn't possible, HAL must then shut down most of its infra and keep whatever is needed for an upgrade program.

There is a lot of knowledge and infra built up from the MKI building program. Would be a shame to let it go to waste however. In that I'm with you.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 15 Aug 2019 16:19

HAL's unit costs are far too high.If HAL want more MKI orders they must reduce the cost drastically.One can understand a 10 to 15% increase ( approx 30 to 50 cr.) over OEM builg birds given our less sophisticated aircraft industry, but 150 crores? Profligate. Why can't Nasik get down to producing LCAs instead/ as well as MKIs, ramping up production to 30 to 40 a year from all lines.In any case, with the planned upgrade of a first batch of 40 MKIs to SS std.,and over 230 extras as well, there will be plenty of work for Nasik in the future.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 15 Aug 2019 17:34

^^^ @Prasad, @Phillip

I do not mind paying the extra 150 crores per plane if it means a permanent addition to our industrial base. But if the line and eco-system exist only for the duration of the contracted order then we have done nothing but paid extra for each aircraft.

The fact that HAL says the Nasik line and its eco-system will die without any more MKI orders confirm fears that they exist only for the duration of the contract.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4400
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 15 Aug 2019 17:50

Rakesh wrote:I do not believe the IAF will bite. Perhaps 1 (or 2) more squadrons, but four is a stretch. At four squadrons, that will eat into the MRFA numbers. That is how the bureaucrats will perceive it. They control the purse strings after all.

One more Su-30MKI squadron (18 units) being talked about from GoI according to news some weeks ago. Plus, another 8-10 units for attrition replacement by IAF.

Total = ~28 Su-30MKI

Good enough for another 2.5 years of production run @12/year. Until 2023 or so.

MRCA 2.0 & LCA Mk.2 MWF are post 2025-27 induction. Ideally, need both of the current lines (Su-30MKI and LCA Mk1A) to be humming along until then.

There will be lots of work for MLU and ongoing operational support though.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 15 Aug 2019 18:01

Note: Asking India to break license agreements and "be like China" constitutes trolling. If you need to ask why, and make repetitive, pointless arguments despite umpteen discussions on the topic which have already addressed these points and reiterated that it is the GOI's stated position that it will honor its agreements, then nothing further needs be said.

Refusing to read up about the terms of the Flanker licensing agreement and ignoring the details, likewise.

The forum does not exist to rehash circular arguments because anyone is fixated on some particular position because "China does it" or whichever other country does it.

Finally, if a moderator asks you to stop, then do so. Don't fish for a warning/ban.

No more responses on this please. A third warning triggers an automatic ban.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 15 Aug 2019 23:00

An Indian facility that makes Su-30MKI jets may shut down, toppling 400 local suppliers
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/20 ... ium=social

HAL wants a 72 Sukhoi order. Very unlikely that will happen. At its crux, this issue is due to the rapid induction of Su30s which saw Indian made units offloaded back to Russia. And that was in turn due to MMRzcA delay caused by Madame Mainos targeting of George Fernandes over Tehelka, causing the MMRCA fracas from a straightforward Mirage 2000 order.
At best 21 Sukhois and GOI should likely front order spares.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3212
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 15 Aug 2019 23:13

I would rather spend on additional Rafale. What 272-9+18 +72 Sukhoi can do can be done by 272-9+18 Sukhois. But yes 36+x Rafale can do more than 36 Rafale. Surely additional X additional Rafale can do more than additional 72 SU30MKI.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2227
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

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

Postby John » 16 Aug 2019 02:18

Note: Asking India to break license agreements and "be like China" constitutes trolling. If you need to ask why, and make repetitive, pointless arguments despite umpteen discussions on the topic which have already addressed these points and reiterated that it is the GOI's stated position that it will honor its agreements, then nothing further needs be said

In most cases China did not break any agreements, Russia gave them full tech transfer in under the table deals (S-300pmu, Su-27/30,Shtil-1). Most arms purchases are simply cover for tech transfer you can bet China will be cranking out S-400s even before the latter is fully inducted. So yes we cannot compare them with Chinese procurement, who are playing completely different game.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2391
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

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

Postby Vips » 16 Aug 2019 02:51

Hindsight being 20-20 jut think if we had opted to buy the SU30 in flyaway condition we could have saved Rs 160 Crore per plane. In other words we could have imported 425+ Su30 MKI with the same total amount we have spent on the program so far. The number plating of Indian squadrons could have been avoided and we would not have been in the desperate situation we are now.
Again this eureka realization is after the fact.....

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 16 Aug 2019 02:58

If you do that, you remain dependent on Russian suppliers completely. Not to the limit of 30% for raw materials etc. Then you would have been complaining about lousy Russian service gypping us. And in terms of life-cycle costs, the Su-30 project costs would have ballooned up as well.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3212
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 16 Aug 2019 05:49

Karan and others...someone needs to write a detail on what tech we got via SU30MKI. We definitely own the radar blackbox (as we are integrating Astra and Brahmos NG on our own). We have also successfully or otherwise integrated Israeli EW gear, A-G weapons that require radar queuing. We are the only supplier of SU30MKX tail and vertical stabilizer. Dont we have some kind of tech to manufacture SC blades for the engine?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 16 Aug 2019 06:34

We are making over 70% of the components locally per HAL data using Russian raw material and importing selected high value items e.g. some radar assemblies etc. Once production ends the agreement allows us to replace/supplant Russian raw material with our own, use own systems for spares (provided we choose to do so given cost issues). The AL-31FP is heavily indigenized including the SC blades.

We also have access to the weapons control computer using a desi mission computer which allows us to integrate our own weapons and systems.

So far we've integrated: Litening LDP, ELTA SAR pod, Griffin LGB, Astra, Brahmos etc. on our own. The number of kit that will be added will exponentially increase once desi weapons currently in testing on Su-30 get validated. These include SAAW, NGARM, the desi PGM gliders and other non desi systems planned like the ASRAAM, i-Derby ER, SPICE.

Non Russian kit on the Su-30 includes the HUD, the RLG-INS (both of which we locally assemble w/TOT), the DVRS, the maintenance health management suite, the RWR (being upgraded to a RWR-ESM via the DR-118 program) and several other subsystems of desi origin like one of the Mission computers, and the display processors for the existing MFDs, plus the Radar computers for Bars.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 16 Aug 2019 09:24

There has to be a balance between OEM imports / components and locally built aircraft. Since the '60s we've been doing it with the MIG-21s, etc.Surely during the 5 decades plus we've learnt the art of building local units at not to high a cost over imports? The Flankers have also been built in large numbers and one would've expected to see costs declining as more local raw material was used.Now the IAF wants another sdq. from Russia in somewhat similar manner that the IA is getting 400+ T-90SMs when Avadi is supposed to be building T-90s.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 16 Aug 2019 10:30

Philip wrote:HAL's unit costs are far too high.If HAL want more MKI orders they must reduce the cost drastically.One can understand a 10 to 15% increase ( approx 30 to 50 cr.) over OEM builg birds given our less sophisticated aircraft industry, but 150 crores? Profligate. Why can't Nasik get down to producing LCAs instead/ as well as MKIs, ramping up production to 30 to 40 a year from all lines.In any case, with the planned upgrade of a first batch of 40 MKIs to SS std.,and over 230 extras as well, there will be plenty of work for Nasik in the future.


What is the source for this Rs 150 corer figure?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 16 Aug 2019 17:30

Philip wrote:There has to be a balance between OEM imports / components and locally built aircraft. Since the '60s we've been doing it with the MIG-21s, etc.Surely during the 5 decades plus we've learnt the art of building local units at not to high a cost over imports? The Flankers have also been built in large numbers and one would've expected to see costs declining as more local raw material was used.Now the IAF wants another sdq. from Russia in somewhat similar manner that the IA is getting 400+ T-90SMs when Avadi is supposed to be building T-90s.


What relevance does having built a MiG-21 have to building a Flanker? Are the systems the same? Are the materials the same? Is the manufacturing machinery the same? Are the people who will build the Flanker the same as those who built the MiG-21? If not - then you have to reinvest in all of these!

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1694
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 16 Aug 2019 20:10

The caveat for this post is that these are just my observations, not passing judgment on anybody This is a comparison of how two different PSU's in India negotiated with Russia during the 1990s. And how one PSU got what it wanted and the other did not.

First, ISRO wanted cryogenic engine technology from Russia. In spite of the sanctions and roadblocks imposed by the Clinton Administration in the early 1990s ISRO successfully negotiated for the transfer of the RD-56/KVD-1 cryogenic engine and ultimately only 7 engines were supplied due to pressure from the US on Russia. Roughly 18 years after this transfer in 2010 ISRO successfully flew an Indian built "copy" of this engine as the CE-7.5 as the upper stage of the GSLV Mk 2. And then in 8 years after that flight, ISRO iteratively improved on that original design by building the current CE-20 cryogenic upper stage which has powered Chandrayaan 2 to the moon. It has mastered cryogenic technology. When it was negotiating with the Russians in the 1990s ISRO knew exactly what it wanted given it's then present knowledge base and capabilities. It had domain experts/rocket scientists who were part of the negotiating team.

In comparison MOD negotiated with Russia from 1994 to 1996 for the supply of the SU-30. The original contract was signed in 1996 and the first SU-30K arrived in 1997. The contract for the HAL production of 140 was signed in late 2000. I really wonder e.g. if any domain experts from GTRE were present at these negotiations to ensure that the ultimate goal of being able to master SCB technology for the AL-31/AL-31FP engines would be successfully achieved as part of the agreement that was eventually signed given that even at that stage GTRE was working on gas turbines as a precursor for the engine that would eventually power the Tejas. Or did some babus from MOD, HAL bureaucrats and some IAF officers did the negotiating with no comprehensive end goal at least as far as TOT was concerned. And yes, SCB technology is very closely guarded and is treated as a strategic asset by most countries, but Russia was in a uniquely weak position then. All that changed after Putin took over and centralized arms exports via one agency.

The link below is a great read on what it takes to master gas turbine technology:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2018 ... f9eae478c2

And an old article on the obstacles that India faced in getting those cryogenic engines:
https://www.rbth.com/blogs/2013/12/04/h ... cked_31365

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4400
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 17 Aug 2019 00:34

Vips wrote:Hindsight being 20-20 jut think if we had opted to buy the SU30 in flyaway condition we could have saved Rs 160 Crore per plane. In other words we could have imported 425+ Su30 MKI with the same total amount we have spent on the program so far. The number plating of Indian squadrons could have been avoided and we would not have been in the desperate situation we are now.
Again this eureka realization is after the fact.....

With that mindset, India will forever be the number 1 arms importer :!:

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4400
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 17 Aug 2019 01:00

Karan M wrote:We are making over 70% of the components locally per HAL data using Russian raw material and importing selected high value items e.g. some radar assemblies etc. Once production ends the agreement allows us to replace/supplant Russian raw material with our own, use own systems for spares (provided we choose to do so given cost issues). The AL-31FP is heavily indigenized including the SC blades.

We also have access to the weapons control computer using a desi mission computer which allows us to integrate our own weapons and systems.

So far we've integrated: Litening LDP, ELTA SAR pod, Griffin LGB, Astra, Brahmos etc. on our own. The number of kit that will be added will exponentially increase once desi weapons currently in testing on Su-30 get validated. These include SAAW, NGARM, the desi PGM gliders and other non desi systems planned like the ASRAAM, i-Derby ER, SPICE.

Non Russian kit on the Su-30 includes the HUD, the RLG-INS (both of which we locally assemble w/TOT), the DVRS, the maintenance health management suite, the RWR (being upgraded to a RWR-ESM via the DR-118 program) and several other subsystems of desi origin like one of the Mission computers, and the display processors for the existing MFDs, plus the Radar computers for Bars.

Took 15-years to get to this point. Know-how to indigenize further.

Soon these from DARE:
  • Dual Color Missile Approach Warning System (MAWS)
  • High Band Jammer (HBJ)

We may see scaled-up Uttam AESA at some point too.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1474
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Sumeet » 17 Aug 2019 02:43

One thing I didn't understand, we started off with El-8222 Jammer and then why did we move to Russian SAP-18 jammer instead of wide band jammer from Elta family ?

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3212
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 17 Aug 2019 04:10

non compatibility with BARS, plus we did not want to share more than required with Israel (Russia anyways knows) on the radar and other native Electronic gears (these are all my guesses).

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3906
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 17 Aug 2019 04:28

ldev wrote:In comparison MOD negotiated with Russia from 1994 to 1996 for the supply of the SU-30. The original contract was signed in 1996 and the first SU-30K arrived in 1997. The contract for the HAL production of 140 was signed in late 2000. I really wonder e.g. if any domain experts from GTRE were present at these negotiations to ensure that the ultimate goal of being able to master SCB technology for the AL-31/AL-31FP engines would be successfully achieved as part of the agreement that was eventually signed given that even at that stage GTRE was working on gas turbines as a precursor for the engine that would eventually power the Tejas. Or did some babus from MOD, HAL bureaucrats and some IAF officers did the negotiating with no comprehensive end goal at least as far as TOT was concerned. And yes, SCB technology is very closely guarded and is treated as a strategic asset by most countries, but Russia was in a uniquely weak position then. All that changed after Putin took over and centralized arms exports via one agency.

Iirc, Austin had once posted an article that suggested that Hal couldn'tt care less about getting deeper insight into the al31 even though it was very much on offer. The desire seemed to be to get enough tot to assemble the bird and provide adequate maintenance+uptimes. I do remember however that at the time most jingos on brf were quite happy about this deal. But alas we all know that this was not well negotiated and it to took MP sir to get the house in order at additional costs.

I wonder what would happen if India just procured off the shelf instead of tot screwdrivergiri and poured the money saved, probly in the billions, into domestic efforts? Might make procurement faster, with better uptimes and provide a boost to Desi products as well.

Have a feeling that Modi is trying to cut this Gordian knot via the rafale?

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1694
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 17 Aug 2019 05:18

Cain Marko wrote:Iirc, Austin had once posted an article that suggested that Hal couldn'tt care less about getting deeper insight into the al31 even though it was very much on offer.


I don't recall that article posted by Austin but if the AL-31 technology offer was indeed on the table and was not taken up because HAL was not interested, that is shocking!! Actually not shocking considering HAL culture.

I wonder what would happen if India just procured off the shelf instead of tot screwdrivergiri and poured the money saved, probly in the billions, into domestic efforts? Might make procurement faster, with better uptimes and provide a boost to Desi products as well.

Have a feeling that Modi is trying to cut this Gordian knot via the rafale?


Agree completely. Unless TOT is going to result in the Indian partner being able to thereafter iteratively develop better products on it's own, it is better IMO to buy off the shelf. It will result in cheaper and faster deliveries. And the money saved should be put in domestic R&D

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 Aug 2019 07:34

Again, TOT is used for product maintenance and support, to ensure that if there is a disruption in the host country, India can at least maintain its investment. Kindly don't mix this up with other issues. In the 1990s Russia went through severe upheaval. Yet we managed to indigenize many aggregates and kept our fleet going, because HAL was able to supply most of the other items because of TOT. If there had been no local manufacture, all spares would have to be imported.

This holds true tomorrow if some loony tune green party member or communist or evangelical extremist type comes into power and decides to stop spares to a conflict zone or because India is led by Hindu nationalists or whatever asinine reason they come up with.

For all the rah rah over Rafale, lets not forget for a brief period France was led by Sarkozy, whose loony tunes religious agenda almost derailed ties with India with the Indian ambassador summoned over Indian internal affairs, and all sorts of pressure applied. Just the other day, Swedens foreign minister pompously gave some comment about Kashmir (we are watching with concern etc) to India on twitter. Can you imagine the hypocrisy? Her country is the biggest weapons supplier bar the US and PRC, to Pakistan. Yet, there you go. Imagine being dependent on Gripens and this happens and some loony party decides to impose sanctions. This was the real reason behind TOT for all these years. Way back itself in the 60s and 70s our establishment figured out the truth behind the western arms sales to India. Its as much a long term dependence and attempt to exert pressure on us, as it is a short term boost to our strength. However, we got addicted and that's the other part of the issue.

With TOT you at least make most of the basic spares, and can stockpile the rest. Otherwise you have to maintain a huge inventory of all spares. Its impossible.

As regards Kashmir, we havent seen anything yet. The current GOI is not one to back down and will definitely disrupt the decades of social engineering done within India to ensure India remains a diffident has-been and catspaw of western powers. This means that every choke hold possible will be utilized. If we dont make MMRCA with TOT for instance, we remain completely at the beck and call of our suppliers. A delay in shipments of one widget can be overcome by stockpiling, even for a 100 odd items, but what if you are dependent on imports for all 10,000 odd units comprising the base items that go into your LRUs? All this is OK if you are a South Korea or a Japan which is ok with vassal state status geopolitically, OR if you are a fellow traveller like the western NATO countries. If you are India which has zealously guarded its sovereignty, what then. Ergo, only way out is to spend on domestic programs and move away from imports. PRC realized this, but we haven't.

So far Modi v1.0 was all about welfare, fixing processes, clean up of a broken GOI and some basics in place for MII. Modi v2.0 has put more impetus on MII in terms of ensuring import crazy tenders (Rs25000 crores worth) are rejigged for MII. But a lot more needs to be done, economy needs to be kickstarted. No easy answers. Defence needs more money but Modi v2.0 has not yet opened up the spigot. CAG is already cribbing about amount of "real debt" on the books.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 17 Aug 2019 08:05

ldev wrote:The caveat for this post...

Many thanks, Sir, for the post. I had always believed that ISRO is the one great example of desi ingenuity and that is because unlike aircraft or tanks there are not many sellers and they used our innate ability to the fullest.

The details you provided on the RD-56/KVD-1 cryogenic engine were spectacular. That is how ToT is supposed to be done. Magnificent post.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1694
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 17 Aug 2019 08:34

Karan M wrote:Again, TOT is used for product maintenance and support, to ensure that if there is a disruption in the host country, India can at least maintain its investment. Kindly don't mix this up with other issues. In the 1990s Russia went through severe upheaval. Yet we managed to indigenize many aggregates and kept our fleet going, because HAL was able to supply most of the other items because of TOT. If there had been no local manufacture, all spares would have to be imported. ........


........With TOT you at least make most of the basic spares, and can stockpile the rest. Otherwise you have to maintain a huge inventory of all spares. Its impossible.


No arguments with any of this and in fact I go back and quote one of your earlier posts in this thread:

What we do have in our local/imported kitty so far are:
6 channel RWR to prevent Blanking Eagle eye (on order, in induction) and DR118 (trials)
HBJ pod to replace Russian/Israeli jammers (status awaited)
MAWS (ready for fitment, trials?)
i-Derby ER (order yet to be placed)
ASRAAM (2x Su-30s modified as testbed, initial integration work cleared, orders yet to be placed)
Brahmos (orders placed)
Spice 2000 (being added)
Desi weapons - all in development but which will make a radical change to the Su-30: PGHSLD (450/500kg), GPS bombs (500kg/1000kg), Glide bombs (500kg-1Ton, 30km-100km range), NGARM, Rudra M2, SAAW
New avionics architecture + 2x wide area displays (DARE has proposal ready)
Software defined radio (orders placed, to replace/supplant existing Russian radios which are capable but lower bandwidth etc).

Additional "missing" items:
New IRST (program for domestic one has merely received DAC clearance)
Radar upgrades, run to Russia (which ideally IAF should have funded LRDE for, to at least progress domestic capability for the future)
Engine upgrades (Russians are putting in 117S variants into Su-30 SM)
New weapons from Russia e.g. VRLAAM for AWACS etc (RVV-BD, 300km range)
Towed decoy package (a bunch available) + expendable decoys (eg Brite Cloud)


What get's my goat is the missed opportunities for engines and GTRE hitting the wall on Kaveri. Also, about 10 days ago there was an interesting series of tweets by Harsh Vardhan Thakur re the SU-30 Mission Computer upgrade and the ability thereby to integrate any missile as a result including Meteor? 8) without reference to the vendor. Is he the real deal?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 Aug 2019 10:28

ldev wrote:What get's my goat is the missed opportunities for engines and GTRE hitting the wall on Kaveri. Also, about 10 days ago there was an interesting series of tweets by Harsh Vardhan Thakur re the SU-30 Mission Computer upgrade and the ability thereby to integrate any missile as a result including Meteor? 8) without reference to the vendor. Is he the real deal?


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

Cant comment on the Meteor because it is a political issue - MBDA does not want us to add the missile to the Su-30 apparently, but hey, our missiles our choice as long as we dont yack about it.

But that aside, the Su-30 mission computer from DARE will definitely replace the original ones.. but also, regarding the engine - this thread has got caught up so much in yackety yack, it misses important developments. Such as:
Russia has signed a deal for its Su-30 SM fleet to be upgraded to Su-30 SM1 standard. These will include variants of the AL-41F1 engines currently used in the Su-35 and also the N035 Irbis-E radar from the Su-35. The news report explicitly stated one of the aims of this mod is to market it to the IAF.
Second, BS Dhanoa is now on record stating IAF is interested in an upgrade. Indicates a level of seriousness.
All depends on funding as hitherto Rafale was the priority and even now MMRCA is.

However, if anything Balakote and then Feb 27th proved the Su-30 is a beast. On Feb 26th, two fighter sweeps of Su-30 spiked PAF defences. On Feb 27th, outnumbered Su-30s stayed in the fight, and apparently one Su-30 even went to far as to get into the AMRAAM NEZ deliberately, so as to get into a firing solution for the R77 and fought his way out of it. IAF is darn pleased with the Su-30s as it is. So the need for an upgrade is not as pressing as it may appear to us.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 17 Aug 2019 10:42

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/24367 ... o_Su_30MKI

Russia will upgrade its Su-30SM fighter jets with armaments and on-board equipment from the more powerful Su-35 aircraft and has offered to do the same to the Indian Su-30MKI.

“The Sukhoi Su-30SM fighter jet will be standardized with the 4++ generation Su-35 fighter by upgrading its onboard equipment and armament to cut its cost price and breathe a new life into the plane,” Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov told journalists on Tuesday.

The heavily upgraded Su-30SM plane may open a new niche for Russia in India, he said. "Considering that there are about 200 such planes in India [the Su-30MKI as the baseline version of the Su-30SM], an opportunity will probably open for modernizing this fleet to prolong its service life," the vice-premier explained, according to TASS.

Under Russia’s diversification program and amid the declining volume of the defense procurement plan, domestic defense enterprises should shift their focus towards life cycle maintenance and upgrade, Borisov noted.

During their upgrade the Su-30SM fighters would also get AL-41F-1S engines mounted on the Su-35 planes thus increasing thrust to be able to carry heavier armaments. Irkut Corp had announced last week that the prototype of the upgraded Su-30SM would be ready before the end of 2019.

The Su-30SM upgrade will boost the fighter’s combat capabilities: it will increase the range of detecting and identifying air targets and furnish the plane with new precision weapons to hit air, ground and sea targets at a range of several hundred kilometers, TASS said.


https://www.defenseworld.net/news/25249 ... 35_Fighter
Russian AF to Receive Upgrade Su-30SM Jet with Engine from Su-35 Fighter


The Russian Air Force will receive a batch of Su-30SM fighter jets upgraded with AL-41F-1S turbojet engine in 2021 taken from the current top line fighter, the Su-35.

The upgraded aircraft will arrive for the air regiment stationed in the Tver Region in west Russia in 2021, the press office of Russia’s Western Military District reported on Monday as reported by TASS.

"The fighter regiment of the Western Military District will get a batch of Su-30SM fighters under the state defense procurement plan with the upgraded engine. The first batch is planned for delivery in 2021. The new fighters are set to be outfitted with the latest AL-41F-1S engines," TASS said quoting the press office.

Current generation Su-30SM and their variants such as the SU-30MKI (India), Su-30MKM (Malaysia) are equipped with the AL-31F engine or its variants which provide a maximum thrust of 12,500 kgf. In comparison, the AL-41F-1S provides 14000 kgf of thrust allowing the aircraft to go faster or carry more weapons.

“The Su-30SM is being upgraded by the Irkut Aircraft Corporation and the Sukhoi Design Bureau on the assignment of Russia’s Defense Ministry in association with leading Russian defense enterprises. The upgrade will boost the fighter’s combat capabilities: it will increase the range of detecting and identifying air targets and furnish the plane with new precision weapons to hit air, ground and sea targets at a range of several hundred kilometers,” the TASS report said

The AL-41F-1S ( also known as article 117S) aircraft engine is a modular two-shaft turbofan engine with thrust vector control and integrated digital control.

The engine is installed on Su-35-type aircraft.

The 117S engine conforms to its predecessors, the AL-31F and AL-31FP engines. This makes it possible to use the 117S engine for upgrading the entire fleet of previously built Su-27-/Su-30-type aircraft, with minor engine nacelle and equipment modifications.

Engine performance enhancement has been achieved through the use of a new low-pressure compressor with increased air flow and efficiency and a new turbine with an improved blade cooling system, A Rosoboronexport brochure about the AL-41F-1S engine said.

Along with the engine, the Su-30 is also planned to be fitted with a new phased array radar and new weapons.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 18 Aug 2019 12:53

If we bite, then surely Nasik will be kept busy for many years with upgrades of the huge fleet of SU- 30s.How many MKI upgrades will it be able to accomplish in a year? Perhaps the MIG-29 and M2K upgrades will give us some idea .

My reference to local manufacture from MIG-21 days was in the context of incremental improvement from mere assembly to local manufacture using local materials- as is happening with the MKIs , but also reducing costs too as we strengthen and enlarge the local supply chain .If the deals were poorly negotiated by the MOD regarding TOT, things have to change.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 18 Aug 2019 21:56

The deal allows us to make spares with our own raw materials, for the production run we have to depend on them. For reducing costs, the actual run has to be high. What people on BRF often miss is the 4th phase of local production (raw material stage to full manufacture) was cut down and numbers shifted to partial assembly stages (Phases 1-3) to ensure quicker induction per IAFs timelines. Obviously, this has meant fewer orders for domestic manufacturers and an advantage for the Russian supplier instead!

Philip wrote:If we bite, then surely Nasik will be kept busy for many years with upgrades of the huge fleet of SU- 30s.How many MKI upgrades will it be able to accomplish in a year? Perhaps the MIG-29 and M2K upgrades will give us some idea .

My reference to local manufacture from MIG-21 days was in the context of incremental improvement from mere assembly to local manufacture using local materials- as is happening with the MKIs , but also reducing costs too as we strengthen and enlarge the local supply chain .If the deals were poorly negotiated by the MOD regarding TOT, things have to change.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7713
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

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

Postby rohitvats » 18 Aug 2019 22:00

^^^Karan M - If I remember the numbers from CAG Report, it was the delay in HAL meeting the delivery schedule because of which some numbers were shifted to CKD/SKD format. And even with this augmentation, the delivery timeline for 272 was pushed to 2020. IIRC, original delivery timeline was 2017/2018. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18828
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 18 Aug 2019 22:53

rohitvats wrote:^^^Karan M - If I remember the numbers from CAG Report, it was the delay in HAL meeting the delivery schedule because of which some numbers were shifted to CKD/SKD format. And even with this augmentation, the delivery timeline for 272 was pushed to 2020. IIRC, original delivery timeline was 2017/2018. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


The compressed delivery schedule was done on the basis of addressing reducing IAF force levels in the timeframe being compressed heavily. HAL faced a problem in meeting the delivery schedule even with revised schedule (with reduction in Phase 4 numbers) because the Russians did their usual TOT fun.

The original numbers for Phases 1-3 were 26 and 114 in Phase 4 with entire production to be completed by 2018. Phase 4 production (at 12/year) would be 2009 onwards.

Per the new schedule, the Phases 1-2 became 34, Phase 3 became 46, and Phase 4 only 60. Production would cease by 2015.

Even this schedule was not met because there massive delays by the Russia side in supplying drawings, tooling etc for the actual aircraft plus the engines. So HAL ended up offloading 20 aircrafts worth of work back to the Russian side. The average delay in overall program vis a vis what Russia delivered, and what they gave was of the order of 5 years worth (if added up).

So here you have the genesis of why HAL is now asking for its vendors to get 72 more orders, as they have received TOT, only made around 60 airframes, but can only make spares thereafter (and spares are made on a limited front loading as otherwise, that would break IAF Revenue budget and HAL doesn't want to load up its balance sheet beyond a point either; plus vendors making structural components need actual aircraft, cant manage spares).

I'd still submit buying spares and probably 2x squadrons of the Su-30 is probably the better way than 4 more of the Su-30, until and unless we can do a detailed analysis of the Su-30SM1 upgrade and cost/benefit analysis vs the Rafale.

If we do buy more Su-30s, then we have to ensure Russia doesn't do its BS of deciding what we integrate on it and don't, and we get proper access to upgrading the Su-30 radar, EW on our own.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dumal, evm, Rakesh, srin and 47 guests