Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

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.
Post Reply
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

nachiket wrote:
Cain Marko wrote: Do you think this has been precipitated by the supposed lack lustre performance of Su35s vs raffles in the Egyptian air force (if at all)?
Why would the IAF use unconfirmed reports from Egypt when they can test the MKI vs the Rafale capability themselves?
Just like they did with the MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 in the 80s.

Senior leadership in the IAF - including the Chief himself - have stated that the Rafale and Su-30 will be a lethal combination.

And with the Super Sukhoi upgrade, the Rambha will live up to her moniker - air dominance fighter.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

See this tweet from Wolfpack. While the Rafale certainly has her strengths, the actual parameters of the exercise is unknown and thus it is challenging to conclude anything on the Rafale's superiority vis-à-vis the Flanker, just based on some random article.

The Rambha is the backbone (270+) of the Indian Air Force, not the Rafale. It is crucial that funds are readily made available for the Rambha upgrade. It is more important than getting 114 MRFAs.

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 35226?s=20 ---> A middle-east based defence publication claims that the Spectra EW suite onboard Rafale F3R successfully jammed the powerful radar of Su-35E repeatedly from ~100 km away, during testing by the Egyptian Air Force. No official confirmation.
Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7793
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Prasad »

Guys, we have our own ranges to pitch these fighters against each other and figure out what stands where. Pretty sure IAF knows whats what about the MKI & Rafale by now.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Exactly! Well said Prasad-ji.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by nachiket »

Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 35226?s=20 ---> A middle-east based defence publication claims that the Spectra EW suite onboard Rafale F3R successfully jammed the powerful radar of Su-35E repeatedly from ~100 km away, during testing by the Egyptian Air Force. No official confirmation.
The tweet may make it seem like jamming a radar from 100km away is great because of the longer distance. But it should be easier to jam a radar at longer distances than shorter ones. If the Spectra's jammer had no effect on a non-AESA fighter radar at 100km, one could perhaps question its reputation for being one of the most advanced onboard EW systems around somewhat.
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10388
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Yagnasri »

No one will show all the radar range, modes and allow other such tools/capabilities of the fighters in any exercise. We also know that Mki when took part with the US and other airforces in the exercises only used Bars in the training mode.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

Cain Marko wrote:
Karan M wrote:
The thing is Bars is powerful enough to compensate for the large RCS and gives the MKI first look against smaller platforms, and equivalent/sufficient even with them using their EW. However, by using a SPJ the Su30 would again dominate smaller aircraft, with the larger SPJ variant only necessary against large AESA equipped platforms.
Do you think this has been precipitated by the supposed lack lustre performance of Su35s vs raffles in the Egyptian air force (if at all)?
This program has been in the works for around 5 years now. It predates any Su-35 or Rafale procurement and is purely built around the fact IAF wants a lightweight SPJ.

The SAP-518 on the Su-30, is no slouch. Its very potent and can blank out very powerful radars. After it was deployed, folks with AESA radars promptly accelerated their deployment of IRSTs noting that EW was now capable of blanking out their systems.

It's biggest disadvantage is its size. Though with its performance its arguably an OK tradeoff.

What the desi SPJ does is give the MKI flexibility. Its Mk1 variant is the original El 8222 ++, and the full sized Mk2 version with more TRMs will be more capable still, yet be light enough.

The SPJ is also AESA based making it capable of handling more targets instantenously with its field of view.

The other thing is it will be fully interfaced with the desi digital RWR, and hence will have a greater field of view and can also operate completely automatically.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

nachiket wrote:
Cain Marko wrote: Do you think this has been precipitated by the supposed lack lustre performance of Su35s vs raffles in the Egyptian air force (if at all)?
Why would the IAF use unconfirmed reports from Egypt when they can test the MKI vs the Rafale capability themselves?
That, and the IAF has been very blasé about a Su30 upgrade, taking its own sweet time to decide a fit, indicates there is still a lot of capacity left within the Bars. If it was completely outclassed, the IAF would be scrambling for an upgrade. The ones we have were thoroughly tested in a variety of EW scenarios in India and abroad, and we have a variant developed keeping that in mind, and inducted in the 2012-14, time frame.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by nachiket »

Yagnasri wrote:No one will show all the radar range, modes and allow other such tools/capabilities of the fighters in any exercise. We also know that Mki when took part with the US and other airforces in the exercises only used Bars in the training mode.
If you are talking about the unconfirmed reports from Egypt they weren't from an exercise but from internal testing by the Egyptian AF which has access to both aircraft.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by nachiket »

Karan M wrote:
nachiket wrote: Why would the IAF use unconfirmed reports from Egypt when they can test the MKI vs the Rafale capability themselves?
That, and the IAF has been very blasé about a Su30 upgrade, taking its own sweet time to decide a fit, indicates there is still a lot of capacity left within the Bars. If it was completely outclassed, the IAF would be scrambling for an upgrade. The ones we have were thoroughly tested in a variety of EW scenarios in India and abroad, and we have a variant developed keeping that in mind, and inducted in the 2012-14, time frame.
Perhaps but there is no direct correlation between the urgency shown for a program or procurement and its criticality in India. Too many examples - MRCA, artillery, APC's, P75I, Tejas Mk1A, LCH, NAMICA etc. We only seem to wake up when there is a crisis and look for emergency purchases.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

nachiket wrote:
Karan M wrote:
That, and the IAF has been very blasé about a Su30 upgrade, taking its own sweet time to decide a fit, indicates there is still a lot of capacity left within the Bars. If it was completely outclassed, the IAF would be scrambling for an upgrade. The ones we have were thoroughly tested in a variety of EW scenarios in India and abroad, and we have a variant developed keeping that in mind, and inducted in the 2012-14, time frame.
Perhaps but there is no direct correlation between the urgency shown for a program or procurement and its criticality in India. Too many examples - MRCA, artillery, APC's, P75I, Tejas Mk1A, LCH, NAMICA etc. We only seem to wake up when there is a crisis and look for emergency purchases.
This is not the case with the IAF or even the other services post 2014. We have in line with our budget, made selective and focused acquisitions to fill existing gaps. Even before that, the IAF was more successful in working the system to get its priorities cleared.

When the IAF sees an issue with an existing system, they make the case forcefully and early. Even if the procurement is delayed like with the new SDRs, there is a track record of pushing for it. There is nothing is the sort for Bars or the other key avionics subsystems bar the "heavy EW".

We exercised against the FAF and found our Mirages lacking, we progressed the case for a Mirage 2000 upgrade. We progressed the MiG29 upgrade on priority post our exercises with the US and other AF, and saw they were falling further behind.

Post Balakot, we've done a lot to add new AAMs, and theres been a lot of talk about it too. The CAS has gone on record stating new AAMs were a priority, so even if they weren't the deciding factor during the post Balakot skirmish, the fact they were slightly behind what the Pakis had was unacceptable and given budget constraints the dream of a 126 Meteor armed Rafake force being the Air Superiority mainstay have faded away.

The Su30 upgrade itself though has not been progressed on "emergency" basis. Instead the IAF, Russia and HAL plus DRDO have all been discussing the fit and finalising it. If there was really an issue with the Bars etc, the IAF would be pushing for it on emergency basis and be willing to accept whatever was already there (the Russians Bars ++ proposal or even Irbis).

The fact we are willing to wait for the "right" choice - whether it be Uttam or a Russian proposal for the short term, then Uttam, speaks volumes.

Comimg to the Indian system, what you've stated was an issue predominantly in the past, the only constraints that exist now are budgetary, which is why Tejas Mk1A was stuck.

But after Rawat took charge at the IA and the other Chiefs , they worked out a system with the GOI, that each service would have its glaring gaps fixed and the budget would rotate so to speak.

IAF received the Rafale, S400 and 7 more Akash squadrons, later the Tejas.
IA received new BPJs, additional BMP/T series NV upgrades, 145 M177s, 100 K9s, 6 Pinaka regiments, and a new Brahmos regiment along with a MRSAM one, plus Apaches. They also got the pvt sector to finally step in and start making ammo for them. And also new rifles starting with the front line troops.
Similarly, the Navy got its Romeos, anti sub gear, P8s, and other specific programs cleared which fixed specific gaps, added punch.

Bottomline, the era of indecisive "anything goes" has gone, the 3 forces were asked to first improve their serviceability and get selective accretions with the understanding bulk orders would go to domestic industry if an equivalent program was underway or available.

This is the reason there is a general tendency not to break the bank on a single MMRCA etc. There was also a move to relook at all the pending acquisitions and rationalise, obsolete items were dropped, only select imports were prioritised for limited acquisition (where possible domestic alternatives were greenlighted, hence QRSAM, MPATGM, domestic VSHORAD, Akash NG etc).

In line with these changed sensibilities, the services are also moving towards looking at doing more with what they already have. The new AAMs for the Su, MiG fleet, the focus on upgrades and desi AEW&C (an achievable Netra Mk2) all come from that.

Even many of our so called emergency imports have been primarily because OFB was slow in terms of delivery and unable to meet domestic needs. Not planning failures. They asked for long term, multi year indents and GOI gave it to them. They were unable to meet those, and instead of waiting for file pushing, GOI gave the AF expanded monetary reserves to build up their WWR by getting ammo and spares from abroad.

When it was seen budgetary issues due to Covid were preventing orders for Tejas Mk1A, HAL was asked to use internal funds to keep progressing the project under the guarantee GOI would place the order. When further ALH orders were stalled due to low serviceability, GOI authorised new logistics agreements and further HAL infra to support the armed forces (no more dividend games alone as under Chidus time). When IA indicated it needed new ATGMs, further Milan, Konkurs and only selected numbers of Spike were ordered, giving time for a new domestic MPATGM to be the bedrock whether the DRDO one or another with significant local input.

Namica's LSP has been cleared. It needed further trials for the baseline launcher and missile both have been done. In Arty, OFB has come a cropper (no surprise), and hence the GOI is looking at a system for a limited first order. Again, domestic capacity is paramount.

Things have changed substantially under this GOI, and if there was a significant gap in the Su-30 or any other fleet, the IAF has had full freedom to push for its rectification. They have however focused on AAMs, new hangars, and SDRs indicating these were areas of concern. Apart from building up spares and other essentials. They've also pushed for more AEW&C.

The new aim at the MOD is to get all deals cleared within a 2 year tineframe. This will further improve budgetary utilisation efficiency.

That the current methods have rapidly boosted combat efficiency can be judged from the fact we went toe to toe with China and didn't blink.

In Feb 2019, two and a half years back, when the services were asked to evaluate their readiness vs Pak, the IA chief stated he was at 75% readiness but Pak wasn't even at 50%, whereas IAF was ready for full intense ops (thanks to multiple procurements post 2016 and the planning and ops capabilities worked out during Gagan Shakti) and the IN Chief indicated his capabilities were overwhelming.

After that, we have had two more rounds of substantial procurement, the Balakot incident itself, and then post /during Galwan.

Despite well known issues - IAFs at 30 odd squadrons, IA wants more arty and its networking programs are yet to pick up, Navy wants a carrier, overall the services are more combat ready than they have been in roughly two decades, and the procurement process at MOD has been drastically improved. The funding shortage is also sought to be addressed via the land monetisation and other proposals.

Each service has the freedom to decide its priorities under the current budget levels. Thanks to OROP, IAs Capex is the most affected, so it is they who have to make the hardest choices first. But even there they've prioritised infantry gear, ammo and spares for existing weapons, NV gear etc. Their other priorities coming up are additional towed artillery, LuHs, and new SAMs (Akash Prime most likely or they could instead prioritise the QRSAM). Its happening in a methodical fashion.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by ldev »

Anyway, one good thing about the Rafale purchase is that now the IAF has a baseline in the form of a contemporary Western fighter with a state of the art AESA radar and a defensive EW suite against which to benchmark upgrades to the SU-30MKI. It will become more difficult for the Russians to pass off vaporware to the IAF specially the upgrade to the BARS radar. If the IAF formally decides to go with Uttam vs Irbis-E the inference is then obvious.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

The Irbis-E is actually one of the most potent radars in the world today because of its innovative gimbal arrangement, and high power. It can literally swivel its radar to 120 degrees on either side. This allows the Su-35 to really be very dangerous in a BVR fight as the aircraft keeps turning, forcing the AAM to match it, losing valuable energy in the process, whereas it fires an AAM at the opponent and the opponent tries the same tactic, he will lose lock as the missiles goes out of radar coverage, unless he has a partner to cue it for him.

This is why take all these Spectra jammed Irbis etc news with a grain of salt. If it did happen with one of the lower power, wide area modes, all that will happen is a Russian team will arrive in Egypt to analyse why and address it. This is why buying local is so important. What you learn and the fixes that they develop, stay local and inhouse.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by ldev »

Karan M wrote:The Irbis-E is actually one of the most potent radars in the world today because of its innovative gimbal arrangement, and high power. It can literally swivel its radar to 120 degrees on either side. This allows the Su-35 to really be very dangerous in a BVR fight as the aircraft keeps turning, forcing the AAM to match it, whereas it fires an AAM at the opponent and the opponent tries the same tactic, he will lose lock as the missiles goes out of radar coverage, unless he has a partner to cue it for him.

This is why take all these Spectra jammed Irbis etc news with a grain of salt.
Could be. But the evaluation of the Irbis_E will become simpler now. Just get the Russians to send a SU-35 over to India with the Irbis-E and let the IAF evaluate it against the Rafale, IAF crew in both fighters.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

There is no "could be" re: the gimbal advantage, as it is well known and which is why the Europeans have gone to such effort to develop swash plate antennas for the Euro fighter and Gripen. AESAs have a significant disadvantage vs even conventional antennas in that they are limited to +/-60 degrees, and the gimbal arrangement or a swash plate one addresses this. It adds more mechanical complexity and weight though.

The only way to fight this is to launch first, which is where the Meteor comes in. But if that's fought by an equivalent system, or even RVV BD salvos, and the other side has heavy EW like the SAP type system, things like the expanded gimbal are very nifty. The aircraft need not even maneuver very aggressively, it needs to keep making directional changes and the AAMs Pk, range will both keep dropping.

IAF will know this and even ask for a competitive eval, but there's no guarantee that the Russian system will fail against a Spectra, or the Russians will agree to it without their involvement, see my edited post with more details.

The Egyptians (like us) have a long history of working with the Russians and they will fix any perceived issues with the Su-35E if there was such an issue, and the Russians will roll it out fleetwide, may charge extra for export too. That's the advantage of exporting to customers like Egypt with mixed fleets. The Su-35E is part of Egypts praetorian fleet to make up for F-16s with subpar weapons, they will do all they can to improve them. Using the recent Middle East conflicts as a guide, the Russians have rolled out variant after variant of the Pantsir.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by ldev »

Karan M wrote:The IAF will know this and even ask for it but there's no guarantee that the Russian system will fail against a Spectra, see my edited post with more details.

The Egyptians (like us) have a long history of working with the Russians and they will fix any perceived issues with the Su-35E if there was such an issue, and the Russians will roll it out fleetwide, may charge extra for export too. That's the advantage of exporting to customers like Egypt with mixed fleets. The Su-35E is part of Egypts praetorian fleet to make up for F-16s with subpar weapons, they will do all they can to improve them.
I think it should be Uttam all the way for the SU-30MKI for all the reasons you have stated.

I am not sure about additional Egyptian SU-35s though. They ordered 24 and deliveries are ongoing. With the Rafale, they ordered 24 in 2015 and now a follow on order of 30 early this year. There were issues with the supply of the SCALP AGM and Meteor. Both were initially refused and maybe the Egyptians decided to go for the SU-35s in 2018/19 because they feared a repeat of the F-16 saga i.e. state of the art fighters but no long range AAMs/AGMs. But it looks like SCALP is included in the follow on package of 30. Not sure of the Meteor, conflicting reports on that. The Qatari Rafale's supposedly have their SCALP range restricted to 250 km vs the 550-600 km range for the French/Storm Shadow versions. Do not know if the SCALP deliveries to Egypt come with a similar range restriction.
Last edited by ldev on 19 Aug 2021 23:13, edited 1 time in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Karan M wrote:There is no could be here, the gimbal advantage is well known and which us why the Europeans have gone to such effort to develop swash plate antennas for the Euro fighter and Gripen. AESAs have a significant disadvantage vs even conventional antennas in that they are limited to +/-60 degrees, and the gimbal arrangement or a swash plate one addresses this. It adds more mechanical complexity and weight though.
To illustrate KaranM's excellent post above....

https://twitter.com/Amitraaz/status/141 ... 92133?s=20 ---> Three design approaches for AESA arrays: a non-moving array; a single array that can be repositioned; and multiple arrays. The first is the least technically complex and does not re-introduce some of the mechanics that risk greater failure rates. The second offers greater fields of regard, while accepting the complexity of moving the array; the third avoids the complexity of moving the array, but introduces the challenge of integrating multiple radar.

Image

https://twitter.com/GripenNews/status/9 ... 79137?s=20 ---> Leonardo/Saab RAVEN ES-05 AESA for Gripen E with a repositioner for increased scan area.

Image
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

Thanks Rakesh. The original video of an Irbis at Maks at YouTube, can't locate it. Showed its incredible swivel capability. This should still explain a bit. 120 degrees on either side.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p8C06dHhlXc
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

And here is an interesting back-and-forth between Indranil (& others) and HVT Sir on upgrading (or not!) the Rambha's engines.

https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 63233?s=20 ---> The Su30's nose area and engine power is over 2 times that of LCA mk2. So, I will be surprised if the radar for MKI isn't almost twice as big. If only we can get the engines of Su-30 upgraded, it can become a top dog again!

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13935 ... 22272?s=20 ---> Engines? Why?

https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 58274?s=20 ---> Some pe suhaga sirjee. Imagine HAL's proposed upgrades + AL41 engines + 2 wet pylons. Equal to, and likely better than Su-35 and F15EX.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13935 ... 92896?s=20 ---> Upgrade includes wet stations. Engine is fine. A change will not yield any specific operational benefit.

https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 78978?s=20 ---> On wet tanks: Nice! Developing our own or adopting the PTB-3000?

On engines: I understand that slightly better kinematics hardly move the needle for operations, especially on such a high performance machine. But what about better maintainability and lifetime costs?

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13937 ... 53152?s=20 ----> Engine change is not a practical or economic solution to any perceived problem on a fighter. There are no successful programs of engine retro-mod on an existing fighter. Su-30MKI definitely doesn't need an engine upgrade. It's lifetime support is well established in India.

https://twitter.com/Krish9670/status/13 ... 68865?s=20 ---> Thanks for the clarity sir, engine upgrade was the biggest mystery. Any studies on replacing metal structure with carbon fiber, where feasible given our experience with Tejas development or is not worth the effort overall?

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13937 ... 05025?s=20 ---> It wouldn't alter operational efficacy in any way. It'll not be done.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Karan M wrote:Thanks Rakesh. The original video of an Irbis at Maks at YouTube, can't locate it. Showed its incredible swivel capability. This should still explain a bit. 120 degrees on either side.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p8C06dHhlXc
Great video Karan. Thanks for this.

Quoting a former Indian Air Force officer - when he was criticized for depicting an IAF MiG-29 in a disadvantageous position vis-a-vis a PAF F-16 - his reply was that the MiG-29 is being flown by an Indian pilot, so it does not matter :mrgreen:
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

ldev wrote:
Karan M wrote:The IAF will know this and even ask for it but there's no guarantee that the Russian system will fail against a Spectra, see my edited post with more details.

The Egyptians (like us) have a long history of working with the Russians and they will fix any perceived issues with the Su-35E if there was such an issue, and the Russians will roll it out fleetwide, may charge extra for export too. That's the advantage of exporting to customers like Egypt with mixed fleets. The Su-35E is part of Egypts praetorian fleet to make up for F-16s with subpar weapons, they will do all they can to improve them.
I think it should be Uttam all the way for the SU-30MKI for all the reasons you have stated.

I am not sure about additional Egyptian SU-35s though. They ordered 24 and deliveries are ongoing. With the Rafale, they ordered 24 in 2015 and now a follow on order of 30 early this year. There were issues with the supply of the SCALP AGM and Meteor. Both were initially refused and maybe the Egyptians decided to go for the SU-35s in 2018/19 because they feared a repeat of the F-16 saga i.e. state of the art fighters but no long range AAMs/AGMs. But it looks like SCALP is included in the follow on package of 30. Not sure of the Meteor, conflicting reports on that. The Qatari Rafale's supposedly have their SCALP range restricted to 250 km vs the 550-600 km range for the French/Storm Shadow versions. Do not know if the SCALP deliveries to Egypt come with a similar range restriction.
The Uttam can be a real game changer if we can squeeze out additional range from it despite all the power burden of the Su-30s electronics.
Even otherwise if it gives Bars level performance with the attendant advantages of being a full AESA it will be a handful no doubt. Best is it opens up weapons options.

The Rafales key advantages over the Su-35E right now are its reduced RCS and the excellent Meteor, plus better logistical setup. But if the Russians offer a new dual pulse AAM and advanced EW, the Egyptians may well take more. The Rafale is a generation ahead of the Su-35E no doubt, but the Su-35E is still very potent.

As I recall they've gone for MiG35s, Su35Es and now Rafales. The Russians are offering better and better weapons packages given they're finally realising how their export competitiveness is being affected.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Karan M wrote:The Uttam can be a real game changer if we can squeeze out additional range from it despite all the power burden of the Su-30s electronics. Even otherwise if it gives Bars level performance with the attendant advantages of being a full AESA it will be a handful no doubt. Best is it opens up weapons options.
That is the key takeaway - opens up [weapons] options. The more Indian maal we can place on the Rambha, the more potent she becomes.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

I am hoping we see the Astra Mk2 enter developmental trials this year and user trials next year itself. And Brahmos-ER, NGARM, SAAW EO, LRGB clear user trials while Rudra M2/2A and M3 enter advanced developmental trials.

Rakesh, that's an incredible find, wet stations will dramatically improve the Su30s already already excellent persistence. It will become an phenomenal platform! The tactical options that open up will be immense.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Exactly KaranM!

With the Rafale, Tejas Mk1A and Su-30MKI....it covers all the bases in 114 MRFA. What is the point in inducting a new fourth generation fighter?

Order another two squadrons of Rafales and end this MRFA tamasha. Invest in Super Sukhoi upgrade and get that production line for the Mk1As up & running.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

ramana wrote:Rakesh, What role do the Russians have in the Super Sukhoi upgrade? From the above article it's an avionics upgrade and essentially no Russian role.
Ramana-ji, please read all the posts from KaranM. Will answer your questions.
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4712
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by nam »

The advantage of going with Uttam is that it will allow us to be created a distributed aperture to increase the field of view.

I don't think IAF will go for such a solution, however it would be a great addition is LRDE does create such a radar.
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4282
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by fanne »

ramana wrote:Rakesh, What role do the Russians have in the Super Sukhoi upgrade? From the above article it's an avionics upgrade and essentially no Russian role.
If there is no engine upgrade required (for two reasons -1) we have painfully finally established life time support taking the availability from dismal 30% to say 70% 2) Maybe that 14% extra thrust does not make much of a tactical difference) then there may not be any Russian involvement. The Russians may not like it though and that dislike can be of strategic nature.

Anyways - Radar (Uttam), Spectra like sensors and countermeasures, indigenous or Israeli/French packages, sensor fusion, wide angle displays, NG HUD, AI for voice and flight and fight assistance ....all of it can be done in house with same or better hardware that mother Russia can provide.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

nam wrote:The advantage of going with Uttam is that it will allow us to be created a distributed aperture to increase the field of view.

I don't think IAF will go for such a solution, however it would be a great addition is LRDE does create such a radar.
There is that possibility but it comes with significant weight, complexity and power penalties. Plus the distributed apertures are unlikely to have the same range and power performance as the primary array. This is why the Europeans went with the swashplate approach with the Captor E likely to be the best example of its class.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

fanne wrote:
ramana wrote:Rakesh, What role do the Russians have in the Super Sukhoi upgrade? From the above article it's an avionics upgrade and essentially no Russian role.
If there is no engine upgrade required (for two reasons -1) we have painfully finally established life time support taking the availability from dismal 30% to say 70% 2) Maybe that 14% extra thrust does not make much of a tactical difference) then there may not be any Russian involvement. The Russians may not like it though and that dislike can be of strategic nature.

Anyways - Radar (Uttam), Spectra like sensors and countermeasures, indigenous or Israeli/French packages, sensor fusion, wide angle displays, NG HUD, AI for voice and flight and fight assistance ....all of it can be done in house with same or better hardware that mother Russia can provide.
An engine upgrade is planned for the Su-30 SM, and the primary reason for that it is brings back the tactical gains lost when the Su-27SK got beefed up to the Su-30 airframe, vadded extra structural and component weight both. It gained weight, lost a bit of acceleration, speed.

HVT is pointing out that the gains aren't worth the cost given we'd have to import all these engines, integrate them etc. And Money is better spent elsewhere on newer sensors and weapons.

It also indicates that we can manage the power draw for Uttam and the SPJ with the existing setup itself and without even hanging the alternators.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

Rakesh wrote:Exactly KaranM!

With the Rafale, Tejas Mk1A and Su-30MKI....it covers all the bases in 114 MRFA. What is the point in inducting a new fourth generation fighter?

Order another two squadrons of Rafales and end this MRFA tamasha. Invest in Super Sukhoi upgrade and get that production line for the Mk1As up & running.
Completely agree. There is little point (in my view) in wasting huge amounts of funds in licensing yet another 4G+ fighter and license assembling it in India. Spend that money across the exact areas you've already mentioned and there will still be money left over for AWACS, EW, IFR and new weapons and even accelerating the Tejas Mk2, AMCA, even ordering a few more Mk1As. That's how expensive buying 126 4G+ fighters of the Rafale class with an assembly line will be. Its a phenomenal boondoggle.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4053
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by ArjunPandit »

Karan M wrote: Even otherwise if it gives Bars level performance with the attendant advantages of being a full AESA it will be a handful no doubt. Best is it opens up weapons options.
Hi Karan, Can you please explain that for newbees. My understanding (based on googling ) is that PESA requires mechanical steering of the radar beam, is more susceptible to jamming (one beam v/s multiple beam), has low scan rate and has high failure rate. However, in practical terms what does it mean for the fighter pilot. I can understand for single pilot config, but what about for twin pilot fighter.
ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 441
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by ManuJ »

Rakesh wrote: Order another two squadrons of Rafales and end this MRFA tamasha. Invest in Super Sukhoi upgrade and get that production line for the Mk1As up & running.
Like!
Sometimes the right thing to do is so obvious it's frustrating to not have everyone on the same page.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/GODOFPARADOXES/stat ... 41025?s=20 --->

DRDO Long Range Glide Bombs. Certified on Su-30MKI at weapon stations 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

* Winged: PF, PCB & Tandem warheads
* Non-winged: PF & PCB warheads

* Guidance: INS + GPS + IRNSS
* Range: > 80 & 30 KM respectively

Low altitude proximity fuze & time delay fuze for PF & penetration warheads respectively.

Image
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Cain Marko »

Karan, thanks for the detailed responses. The above is great information.... And much to learn.
Karan M wrote:
nachiket wrote: Perhaps but there is no direct correlation between the urgency shown for a program or procurement and its criticality in India. Too many examples - MRCA, artillery, APC's, P75I, Tejas Mk1A, LCH, NAMICA etc. We only seem to wake up when there is a crisis and look for emergency purchases.
This is not the case with the IAF or even the other services post 2014. We have in line with our budget, made selective and focused acquisitions to fill existing gaps. Even before that, the IAF was more successful in working the system to get its priorities cleared.

When the IAF sees an issue with an existing system, they make the case forcefully and early. Even if the procurement is delayed like with the new SDRs, there is a track record of pushing for it. There is nothing is the sort for Bars or the other key avionics subsystems bar the "heavy EW".

We exercised against the FAF and found our Mirages lacking, we progressed the case for a Mirage 2000 upgrade. We progressed the MiG29 upgrade on priority post our exercises with the US and other AF, and saw they were falling further behind.

Post Balakot, we've done a lot to add new AAMs, and theres been a lot of talk about it too. The CAS has gone on record stating new AAMs were a priority, so even if they weren't the deciding factor during the post Balakot skirmish, the fact they were slightly behind what the Pakis had was unacceptable and given budget constraints the dream of a 126 Meteor armed Rafake force being the Air Superiority mainstay have faded away.

The Su30 upgrade itself though has not been progressed on "emergency" basis. Instead the IAF, Russia and HAL plus DRDO have all been discussing the fit and finalising it. If there was really an issue with the Bars etc, the IAF would be pushing for it on emergency basis and be willing to accept whatever was already there (the Russians Bars ++ proposal or even Irbis).

The fact we are willing to wait for the "right" choice - whether it be Uttam or a Russian proposal for the short term, then Uttam, speaks volumes.

Comimg to the Indian system, what you've stated was an issue predominantly in the past, the only constraints that exist now are budgetary, which is why Tejas Mk1A was stuck.

But after Rawat took charge at the IA and the other Chiefs , they worked out a system with the GOI, that each service would have its glaring gaps fixed and the budget would rotate so to speak.

IAF received the Rafale, S400 and 7 more Akash squadrons, later the Tejas.
IA received new BPJs, additional BMP/T series NV upgrades, 145 M177s, 100 K9s, 6 Pinaka regiments, and a new Brahmos regiment along with a MRSAM one, plus Apaches. They also got the pvt sector to finally step in and start making ammo for them. And also new rifles starting with the front line troops.
Similarly, the Navy got its Romeos, anti sub gear, P8s, and other specific programs cleared which fixed specific gaps, added punch.

Bottomline, the era of indecisive "anything goes" has gone, the 3 forces were asked to first improve their serviceability and get selective accretions with the understanding bulk orders would go to domestic industry if an equivalent program was underway or available.

This is the reason there is a general tendency not to break the bank on a single MMRCA etc. There was also a move to relook at all the pending acquisitions and rationalise, obsolete items were dropped, only select imports were prioritised for limited acquisition (where possible domestic alternatives were greenlighted, hence QRSAM, MPATGM, domestic VSHORAD, Akash NG etc).

In line with these changed sensibilities, the services are also moving towards looking at doing more with what they already have. The new AAMs for the Su, MiG fleet, the focus on upgrades and desi AEW&C (an achievable Netra Mk2) all come from that.

Even many of our so called emergency imports have been primarily because OFB was slow in terms of delivery and unable to meet domestic needs. Not planning failures. They asked for long term, multi year indents and GOI gave it to them. They were unable to meet those, and instead of waiting for file pushing, GOI gave the AF expanded monetary reserves to build up their WWR by getting ammo and spares from abroad.

When it was seen budgetary issues due to Covid were preventing orders for Tejas Mk1A, HAL was asked to use internal funds to keep progressing the project under the guarantee GOI would place the order. When further ALH orders were stalled due to low serviceability, GOI authorised new logistics agreements and further HAL infra to support the armed forces (no more dividend games alone as under Chidus time). When IA indicated it needed new ATGMs, further Milan, Konkurs and only selected numbers of Spike were ordered, giving time for a new domestic MPATGM to be the bedrock whether the DRDO one or another with significant local input.

Namica's LSP has been cleared. It needed further trials for the baseline launcher and missile both have been done. In Arty, OFB has come a cropper (no surprise), and hence the GOI is looking at a system for a limited first order. Again, domestic capacity is paramount.

Things have changed substantially under this GOI, and if there was a significant gap in the Su-30 or any other fleet, the IAF has had full freedom to push for its rectification. They have however focused on AAMs, new hangars, and SDRs indicating these were areas of concern. Apart from building up spares and other essentials. They've also pushed for more AEW&C.

The new aim at the MOD is to get all deals cleared within a 2 year tineframe. This will further improve budgetary utilisation efficiency.

That the current methods have rapidly boosted combat efficiency can be judged from the fact we went toe to toe with China and didn't blink.

In Feb 2019, two and a half years back, when the services were asked to evaluate their readiness vs Pak, the IA chief stated he was at 75% readiness but Pak wasn't even at 50%, whereas IAF was ready for full intense ops (thanks to multiple procurements post 2016 and the planning and ops capabilities worked out during Gagan Shakti) and the IN Chief indicated his capabilities were overwhelming.

After that, we have had two more rounds of substantial procurement, the Balakot incident itself, and then post /during Galwan.

Despite well known issues - IAFs at 30 odd squadrons, IA wants more arty and its networking programs are yet to pick up, Navy wants a carrier, overall the services are more combat ready than they have been in roughly two decades, and the procurement process at MOD has been drastically improved. The funding shortage is also sought to be addressed via the land monetisation and other proposals.

Each service has the freedom to decide its priorities under the current budget levels. Thanks to OROP, IAs Capex is the most affected, so it is they who have to make the hardest choices first. But even there they've prioritised infantry gear, ammo and spares for existing weapons, NV gear etc. Their other priorities coming up are additional towed artillery, LuHs, and new SAMs (Akash Prime most likely or they could instead prioritise the QRSAM). Its happening in a methodical fashion.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Cain Marko »

ManuJ wrote:
Rakesh wrote: Order another two squadrons of Rafales and end this MRFA tamasha. Invest in Super Sukhoi upgrade and get that production line for the Mk1As up & running.
Like!
Sometimes the right thing to do is so obvious it's frustrating to not have everyone on the same page.
Amen. Dimag ka dahi bana ke choda hai.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/syedmohdmurtaza/sta ... 79983?s=20 ---> As India wants to arm Su-30MKI with long range version of the Israeli Derby missile, the Russian missile maker Vympel is now offering it's RVV-BD or R-37M BVR to India. Derby ER range = 100 km, while RVV-BD can hunt beyond 150 km. Where will Astra Mk2 & Mk3 go?

https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/143 ... 08999?s=20 ---> The 300-km range RVV-BD weighs 500-kg & features a 60-kg warhead! It uses a DRFM active seeker that cannot be spoofed for the endgame, during which it is capable of 8g maneuvering flying at 6M!

Image
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by ldev »

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/syedmohdmurtaza/sta ... 79983?s=20 ---> As India wants to arm Su-30MKI with long range version of the Israeli Derby missile, the Russian missile maker Vympel is now offering it's RVV-BD or R-37M BVR to India. Derby ER range = 100 km, while RVV-BD can hunt beyond 150 km. Where will Astra Mk2 & Mk3 go?

https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/143 ... 08999?s=20 ---> The 300-km range RVV-BD weighs 500-kg & features a 60-kg warhead! It uses a DRFM active seeker that cannot be spoofed for the endgame, during which it is capable of 8g maneuvering flying at 6M!

Image
The question to ask is at what range does the Bars radar give tracking quality data to enable proper utilization of these longer range missiles? The Russians have been pushing to upgrade the Bars radar with Irbis E. According to the UAC website the following are the ranges of the Irbis E on the SU 35:
The Irbis-E radar station with rotating phased antenna array designed by the V. Tikhomirov Research Institute of Instrumentation provides for the assured detection and acquisition of typical aerial targets at a range of up to 200 km (up to 170 km against ground background), and in a narrower field of view¬ – up to 350-400 km.
https://www.uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/li ... n-features

Narrower field of view has not been defined here but suggestions on certain sites indicate an FOV of 10 degrees x 10 degrees i.e. a cued search. But in a volume search the range is limited to 200 km. And this will be for a typical 4th generation fighter with an RCS of 3 sq. m. These ranges are for the Irbis E. For Bars, the respective ranges will be less.

And what about tracking data which is vital to target radar guided missiles? Given below is a video which shows that the Irbis E detected a target at 268 km, supposedly with an RCS of 3 sq. m and this is with a cued search. Tracking data for that target was available at 100 km. Given this data for the Irbis E, the tracking range of Bars should be lower. So IMO right now the IAF plan to equip the SU-30 with the Astra and the I-Derby ER both of which have assured performance in the 100km-110km range is quite adequate. Anything beyond that will not be supported by the current radar. To fully utilize Astra 2 the SU-30 will need a new radar. And given the range limitation (in a non jamming environment) as shown in the video, I think it makes far more sense to go in for an AESA LPI radar like the Uttam.

In contrast the RBE2 AA AESA on the Rafale can enable tracking quality data at the maximum range of the Meteor ~ significantly in excess of 100 km, could be as much as 200 km.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by nachiket »

The R-37M is not a competitor of Astra Mk2 or Meteor. It is too big and heavy to be used against a maneuvering target like a fighter jet. Nor can a fighter sized target be tracked and engaged at 300km with a fighter radar. It is meant for shooting down large, relatively slower and less maneuverable high value targets like AWACS, tankers and bombers.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Aditya_V »

nachiket wrote:The R-37M is not a competitor of Astra Mk2 or Meteor. It is too big and heavy to be used against a maneuvering target like a fighter jet. Nor can a fighter sized target be tracked and engaged at 300km with a fighter radar. It is meant for shooting down large, relatively slower and less maneuverable high value targets like AWACS, tankers and bombers.
It would be a very good addition then- the Bars should be able to track SAAB Erieye at 300-350Km range, then they will be have to keep AEW aircraft far away then ops cannot be cordinated by Erieyes? Imagine 27-Feb-19 scenario, IAF first fires at these and then takes on the fighters. The PAF will keep itself grounded leaving the PA and Jihadis at the mercy of what the IAF/IA can throw at them.

Operation Swidt Retreat will become Swifter retreat.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

Post by Karan M »

ldev wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/syedmohdmurtaza/sta ... 79983?s=20 ---> As India wants to arm Su-30MKI with long range version of the Israeli Derby missile, the Russian missile maker Vympel is now offering it's RVV-BD or R-37M BVR to India. Derby ER range = 100 km, while RVV-BD can hunt beyond 150 km. Where will Astra Mk2 & Mk3 go?

https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/143 ... 08999?s=20 ---> The 300-km range RVV-BD weighs 500-kg & features a 60-kg warhead! It uses a DRFM active seeker that cannot be spoofed for the endgame, during which it is capable of 8g maneuvering flying at 6M!

Image
The question to ask is at what range does the Bars radar give tracking quality data to enable proper utilization of these longer range missiles? The Russians have been pushing to upgrade the Bars radar with Irbis E. According to the UAC website the following are the ranges of the Irbis E on the SU 35:
The Irbis-E radar station with rotating phased antenna array designed by the V. Tikhomirov Research Institute of Instrumentation provides for the assured detection and acquisition of typical aerial targets at a range of up to 200 km (up to 170 km against ground background), and in a narrower field of view¬ – up to 350-400 km.
https://www.uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/li ... n-features

Narrower field of view has not been defined here but suggestions on certain sites indicate an FOV of 10 degrees x 10 degrees i.e. a cued search. But in a volume search the range is limited to 200 km. And this will be for a typical 4th generation fighter with an RCS of 3 sq. m. These ranges are for the Irbis E. For Bars, the respective ranges will be less.

And what about tracking data which is vital to target radar guided missiles? Given below is a video which shows that the Irbis E detected a target at 268 km, supposedly with an RCS of 3 sq. m and this is with a cued search. Tracking data for that target was available at 100 km. Given this data for the Irbis E, the tracking range of Bars should be lower. So IMO right now the IAF plan to equip the SU-30 with the Astra and the I-Derby ER both of which have assured performance in the 100km-110km range is quite adequate. Anything beyond that will not be supported by the current radar. To fully utilize Astra 2 the SU-30 will need a new radar. And given the range limitation (in a non jamming environment) as shown in the video, I think it makes far more sense to go in for an AESA LPI radar like the Uttam.

In contrast the RBE2 AA AESA on the Rafale can enable tracking quality data at the maximum range of the Meteor ~ significantly in excess of 100 km, could be as much as 200 km.


Your surmise here regarding highly limited scan angles for Bars is incorrect. The FOV in which Bars achieves its max ranges is quite higher than the above. Plus basic trigonometry. Even a small FOV close up translates to much more at a distance.

The Bars is easily able to support the Astra Mk2 etc. The above data for Irbis is also indicative. Real World ranges of any radar system will not be put up in a video for obvious reasons.

Bars has actually got a better antenna than Irbis in terms of range performance. It's issue was weight and scan angle limitations for the PESA array, overall scan angles were lower but it achieved excellent results in the above. So the Russians developed the Irbis, much lighter and which could be skewed around more, had better scan angles, but sacrificed range performance to a degree, compensating for it with huge power output (5X peak power, inefficient as versus a high efficacy antenna but still useful).
Post Reply