Su-30: News and Discussion

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Dec 2011 12:32

makes it evident anything at or beyond 4th gen heavy in avionics needs the khan style maalish paalish hangers and not just left out in sun.
esp true as a/c are expected to be in service for 40 yrs these days vs a soviet era Mig21 which was abused and then scrapped after 5 yrs probably in its home country.

maybe we shall see the desi Aviano, Offutt,Al-dhafra and esp Ramstein

(sorry Shiv!) afterall

al dhafra shelters - fairly cheap to put up
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/9855314.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4112/5016 ... 6725_z.jpg

more costly maalish paalish AC hangers in al-udeid
http://www.airport-data.com/airport/photo/016643L.html
a simple shelter in al-udeid
http://www.fencecheck.com/files/2B9spnt ... OZ26Lz.jpg

IAF simply has no excuse financial or otherwise not to be putting up these cheap plastic and metal frame shelters to shield our costly puppies....a mid level local contractor could do it to spec - no bideshi consultant or TOT needed to teach us that.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 27 Dec 2011 12:44

As a Positive, all our aircraft can now be bomb proof shelters, rather than being in open and baring all to satellites.

K_Rohit · Post by **K_Rohit** » 27 Dec 2011 12:48

Singha wrote:makes it evident anything at or beyond 4th gen heavy in avionics needs the khan style maalish paalish hangers and not just left out in sun.
esp true as a/c are expected to be in service for 40 yrs these days vs a soviet era Mig21 which was abused and then scrapped after 5 yrs probably in its home country.

maybe we shall see the desi Aviano, Offutt,Al-dhafra and esp Ramstein (sorry Shiv!) afterall

al dhafra shelters - fairly cheap to put up
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/9855314.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4112/5016 ... 6725_z.jpg

more costly maalish paalish AC hangers in al-udeid
http://www.airport-data.com/airport/photo/016643L.html
a simple shelter in al-udeid
http://www.fencecheck.com/files/2B9spnt ... OZ26Lz.jpg

IAF simply has no excuse financial or otherwise not to be putting up these cheap plastic and metal frame shelters to shield our costly puppies....a mid level local contractor could do it to spec - no bideshi consultant or TOT needed to teach us that.

Already done for Mirages in Gwalior

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Dec 2011 12:53

I am in favour of the 2nd pic (al dhafra big tent shelter) than individual ones along flight apron...it shut on the sides, the gate can be closed if weather conditions get really bad, accomodates maybe 3-4 a/c (2 can use from front, 2 from back) and permits loading and minor repair work under more controlled conditions. it can also be made AC if needed which would certainly be a plus in places like bhuj, nalia, jodhpur infact most places in indian summer.

on -ve side it needs more apron space to be created - but what the hell, if we are aspiring to ramstein status its "go big , or go home"

vishnu.nv · Post by **vishnu.nv** » 27 Dec 2011 15:43

The shelters should be made for all the aircraft's in the IAF not only the Su-30 MKI's. Actually IAF should have created provisions for this in the MAFI project which is happening right now.

In forward bases we should have the Concrete shelters which can withstand cruise missile attacks.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 27 Dec 2011 16:15

well if we have to put up new shelters, they should be well cammoed according to the location of the base. the following old type gives inspiration. We should make it bomb proof to some extent using modern materials. we could dig deep in to secure the aircraft, we could have food crops growing on top. some of these structures are massive, we can literally camo all of them with roof top farming, this would also reduce the need to ferry in food supplies to these bases, most of the larger airbases have hundreds of acres of land which could be used to support the base population by farming all around. with natural floral coverage on top of all the large buildings and shelters, in & around the base, we could confuse the enemy and feed the people on the base, killing two birds with one stone.

http://www.google.be/imgres?q=modern+ha ... 29,r:3,s:0

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/138027/enlarge

KiranM · Post by **KiranM** » 27 Dec 2011 16:51

^^^ Wouldnt farms in Air Base also bring with it presence of birds and other fauna increasing chances of bird hits?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Dec 2011 17:19

yes birds, rabbits, mice, snakes, mongoose even wild boar ..each animal will attract its predator.

VinayG · Post by **VinayG** » 27 Dec 2011 17:28

Hardened aircraft shelter. A disused Hardened Aircraft Shelter (HAS) at a Polish air base. Such shelters were built during the early 1970s to protect fighter and strike aircraft from damage during an air raid. Built of stressed concrete, these shelters could survive a direct hit by a small bomb (about 250kg) or a near miss by one slightly larger. They were also designed to protect the crew from chemical or biological attack and nuclear fallout. Camouflage and covering with grass and trees made them difficult to spot. The development of precision guided bombs toward the end of the 20th century rendered such shelters useless and other techniques of dispersal had to be adopted. Photographed at the Koszalin air base on the Baltic coast, one of the potential sites for a planned US missile defence system.

so normal shelters like the one a simple shelter in al-udeid with good air defense system will be enough to protect the aircraft from enemy raids and from natural elements

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 27 Dec 2011 17:51

^^^
It depends on how hard it is.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 27 Dec 2011 18:21

pandyan wrote:http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/12/e ... [quote]HAL says it had communicated officially to the IAF the need for providing shelters....“The UV rays will have faster aging and hardening effect on the rubber and other non-metallic parts, which can lead to more premature failure, in the longer run. The canvass can only protect the aircraft from UV rays, but not the heat, which can harm avionics parts,” sources said.

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/12/e ... [quote]HAL officials are amused as to why the IAF didn't bother to provide shelters to the fighters' biggest bases at Pune and Barelley....Air Marshal (Retd) T.S. Randhawa, an expert with Sukhoi platforms, said that the IAF is already in the process of getting shelters. “We understand that there can be an effect due to exposing the fighter to sun. The weather varies – like hot, cold, dust, breeze and over a longer period of time, YES, there could be an impact. But, these fighters are serviced as per the IAF SOPs,” he said.[/quote][/quote]The reporting is factually not correct, and is more of an attempt by HAL to deflect attention from quality and other issues.

As an example, an aircraft carrier hanger cannot accomodate full complement of aircraft onboard the ship. As a result, half the aircraft complement are parked on deck, exposed not just to sunlight but to corrosive sea spray as well. IAC being built has a hangar capacity of 17 and the remaining 13 that make up its full complement of 30 will be parked on deck. US Navy carrier hanger too can accomodate only 50 odd planes and the remaining 30 odd planes are parked on deck.

Yet US Navy and IN planes dont fall off the sky on their air test after overhaul. Seahawks flew around three decades 60's, 70's & 80's.

And as per available indicators, the present crash was not caused by any rubber or canopy or fuel tank deformation failure. It was under HAL shelter before it took flight.

Most HAS are to protect the aircraft from enemy attack rather than sunlight.

Optronics and radars on ships are exposed to sun all their lives. Yet they dont fail like avionics like HAL states. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HUTDk79tdgE/T ... tpura5.jpg

Sources said that even lightning strike didn't spare a Sukhoi in 2009 causing serious emergency. “The aircraft suffered structural damages, which is unheard of in modern times. All these are definitely pointing towards quality and design issues. If we don't address them now and take corrective steps, it will be a bad publicity for the IAF, HAL, and to both friendly nations of India and Russia. At what cost are we losing them?” a veteran pilot, who were among the first to fly the Sukhois, said.

Lightning strike protection is a design and build issue, rather than parked-under-sun issue.

I'm sure HAL would have done some research, and there might be some correlation between sunlight and flight safety, but from my understanding, it isnt significant, as long as maintenance procedures are adhered to.

Refer http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... a.jpg.html &
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... d.jpg.html all engine inlets above and below wings are covered against sand ingestion, as is IRST, and canopy.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 27 Dec 2011 18:46

While I cannot comment on the technical aspects of the Hangar issue, to me, the article on Tarmak seems a clear hit-job. The article is not so much about the shelter issue but to put "possible" blame on the recent Sukhoi crash on the IAF practice of parking the aircraft under the sun. Both, the timing and scope of that article is suspect. Which brings me to a question - is HAL prempting the findings of crash enquiry report? Do they know something and trying to cover the bases in advance? Will watch out for the report.

Another point - while a/c like MKI and other advanced gen aircraft have higher electronic which might require more delicate handling, all the other points about effect of sun and UV rays applies to other aircraft as well - whether they be Mig-29/27/23/21 or Jaguars. How come something like this has not been brought up earlier?

While the requirement for shelters seems all right - the issue being made out seems like a canard.

Avik · Post by **Avik** » 27 Dec 2011 18:57

The reporting is factually not correct, and is more of an attempt by HAL to deflect attention from quality and other issues.

Exactly right!

To everyone going on and on about hangars, have you ever seen commercial airplanes parked in hangars, when not undergoing deep repairs? And this when tolerance levels in some of the avionics in commercial planes is lower than military specs.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Dec 2011 19:02

rohit, newer gen aircraft do need more careful handling on ground, even russian ones are supposedly much less rugged than the earlier generations.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 27 Dec 2011 19:44

Rahul M wrote:rohit, newer gen aircraft do need more careful handling on ground, even russian ones are supposedly much less rugged than the earlier generations.

Sirji, I'm not for one moment doubting the argument about electronics. I've seen this in some stuff in the IA as well.

My point is simple - of all the points made by the author in the article, only one or two point to the electronics part. Most of the other stuff points to parts which will be part of any aircraft - generation not withstanding. For example, take the point about the engine blades - applies to all the a/c in IAF service. What is so special or delicate about the MKI blades?

Plus, he also mentions that stuff made in India for LCA/Dhruv/Sitara are qualified for higher temp - 71deg IIRC. Fine. But what about similar stuff in other Russian a/c we've been operating for donkey ears? As I said, I have my suspision on the timing of that article.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Dec 2011 23:08

>> HAL's first official communication, expressing serious concerns, is said to have been sent to the IAF's Maintenance Command in October 2010.

if true, that goes against the view in this thread that this is a CYA move from HAL.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 27 Dec 2011 23:49

Rahul M wrote:>> HAL's first official communication, expressing serious concerns, is said to have been sent to the IAF's Maintenance Command in October 2010.

if true, that goes against the view in this thread that this is a CYA move from HAL.

On the contrary, to me this is the smoking gun in the article. How didhe become privy to HAL letter and that too dated 2010? And again, what coincidence that a letter should exist to exactly match the 'cause' under investigation? And of all the things under the sun which can be cause of crash, the author picks this for investigation and lo and behold, there is 'evidence' to support the hypothesis.

To me, it is plain and simple that the author was 'encouraged' to use this line of argument and 'evidence' made available to support the same. The refrence to letters and memos is similar to how babus release info to press on vested issues.

To me Tarmak007 has always been the cat's paw to present the DRDO side of story which cannot be presented officially. The material, in terms of literature and pics/videos cannot come about w/o deep and consistent support within DRDO/DPSU. His stories and scoops are not some luck by chance events.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Dec 2011 05:08

Rohitvats and Tsarkar, Basicaly Tarmak is saying that aging due to weather will effect the non-metallics. Yes if that is going on for years in the sun.

As the former officer stated regular maintenance is IAF SOP. I agree the above article is a red herring.

They fact they had to plant a red herring shows that some thing is not right. Its a tactic of blaming the user for improper storage.

So did the rubber seals fail in the FBW end actuators and hence the aging due to heat exposure the cause?

Was this article commented on?

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/12/s ... gn-or.html

I didnt know that the plane was on first flight after maintenance.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Dec 2011 07:56

rohit, come on, he was HAL PRO not too long back, of course he will get info from his ex-colleagues. that by itself doesn't mean anything. also, HAL /= DRDO.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Dec 2011 08:02

I recall a photo from cope india 2004 wherein a usaf pilot was sitting in a MK and a indian wingco was standing on the ladder explaining the cockpit to him. the leather, rubber or plastic upholstery of the seat did look fairly beat up...I guess it happens if we expose any such material to strong sunlight. even running shoes these days have a line saying do not put in prolonged sun...

though it might not be a flight safety issue, at the very least these plastic and rubber parts that will crap out sooner will not be cheap to replace and will just consume extra ground hrs, so better put these pups inside a simple al-udeid style camel tents and keep them 'cool' imho. also makes life more comfortable for the ground crew who might need to work on the a/c for hours in blazing heat......

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 28 Dec 2011 11:13

Rahul M wrote:rohit, come on, he was HAL PRO not too long back, of course he will get info from his ex-colleagues. that by itself doesn't mean anything. also, HAL /= DRDO.

Sirji, HAL/=DRDO and yet, he has access to some fantastic stuff - both content and pics and vids - from across the spectrum.

I'm not casting any aspersions on him - I think he is doing a fabulous job and with him now writing for Indian Express, we can expect some decent coverage on work done by DRDO/HAL/DPSUs and not the Rajat Pandit type nonsense.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 28 Dec 2011 11:24

ramana wrote: <SNIP> Was this article commented on?

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/12/s ... gn-or.html

I didnt know that the plane was on first flight after maintenance.

ramana, I think there was a news report which said that the pilots tried for quite some time to get the plane under control but then punched out when all else failed. The ocsillation bit might be an indication of the cause.

However, we seem to have missed another data point in that article - the plane was manufactured in 2009-2010 period. So, over a likely flying period of 16-18 months, the a/c has already done 400 hrs of flying. Points to some serious amount of flying been done. Which reminds me of the Jaguar article on BRF - may be, issues which might have come to light couple of years down the year are being accelerated due to intensive flying? And the 'sunburn' issue might well add to it?

One thing I've learned from the various crash studies is not to comment unless all the facts are on the table. Let us wait and watch.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 28 Dec 2011 13:11

ramana wrote:Basicaly Tarmak is saying that aging due to weather will effect the non-metallics. Yes if that is going on for years in the sun. As the former officer stated regular maintenance is IAF SOP. I agree the above article is a red herring.
They fact they had to plant a red herring shows that some thing is not right. Its a tactic of blaming the user for improper storage.

Precisely. The investigations are not completed, and an as-of-now-unrelated-generic-PoV is being spread.

Secondly, engine, air-frame, missiles and consumables like tyres have specified lives in terms of flight hours/usage cycles/etc, and IAF maintenance staff (numbering double digit per aircraft from different specializations) is responsible for checking whether there is accelerated wearing of any part or consumable.

And the biggest flaw of the sunlight story is that that aircraft was on an air test AFTER being serviced/overhauled at HAL. So if any rubber part or avionics showed accelerated wear (due to any reason, sunlight or otherwise), then it should have been replaced, or indicated the finding in the records for the particular aircraft.

I would have given the story more credibility if it was backed by investigation findings.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Dec 2011 13:21

regarding oscillations, there was this high profile FBW failure in the F-22 leading to a crash.

the gripen had a couple of similar crashes. however none of these were after the aircraft was inducted and flying for more than a decade.

p.s. from what I gathered from reports I don't think anyone is saying env degradation has anything to do with the latest crash, have they ?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 28 Dec 2011 14:12

What the news reports said was a problem with the "control system" not specifically the FBW system. An FBW failure on a relaxed stability aircraft would mean an immediate and total loss of control and the pilots would only have a few seconds to bail out. That's not how it was reported. They said the pilots tried very hard to get the aircraft under control but gave up after they couldn't do it and then bailed. They wouldn't get any time in case of a FBW system failure like what happened during the first crash. Methinks this could be a mechanical fault.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 28 Dec 2011 14:28

>> An FBW failure on a relaxed stability aircraft would mean an immediate and total loss of control and the pilots would only have a few seconds to bail out. That's not how it was reported.

depends on the type of failure really. it would happen as you say if the FBW was shut down, as happened in the first crash. otherwise errors could get steadily accumulated leading to a crash. the F-22 crash for example. also, AFAIK even 4-5 seconds is a long time on a problematic fighter, given the speed at which situations change.

anand_sankar · Post by **anand_sankar** » 28 Dec 2011 16:09

A couple of things that disturb me about this issue of sunlight affecting the SU-30MKI, it should not be a big issue. I am taking avionics, and plastics and polymers separately.

1. Avionics

I come from an electronics background. From the time semi-conductors and transistor-based circuits came into being, it was realised that to operate it in conditions such as India, you need to adapt them, and this process is called Tropicalisation.

Anything from cellphones to TVs to computers, manufactured for India have to be tropicalised.

Now the IAF has been buying high-tech equipment, which use sensitive circuits, since the 1980s. Tropicalisation of circuit boards and components will be one of the main contractual terms. I would be surprised that the manufacturer didn't do it themselves as they would pay huge penalties in the statutory warranty period.

Also from the Soviet era they have been selling hardware across the world, so the circuits must be tropicalised.

I can safely say the sunlight, heat, or humidity, will have little or no effect over the Su-30's avionics.

2. Polymers, rubber and plastics

Now this unfortunately is open to standards that differ from country to country. It is possible that Russian components are designed for less direct sunlight, less heat and humidity thanks to their higher latitude.

But the question begs... The IAF should have insisted on Indian standards for these parts. Okay, it slipped our consciousness in the Russian-built frames, but HAL in all their wisdom I hope are using parts that are of Indian standard to assemble the Indian-build ones. If not it is a travesty! UV and heat tolerant polymers and plastics are available even for basic camping gear nowadays.

There is a benefit and drawbacks to using shelters. But the IAF is best judge of whether they need it and where they need it.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 29 Dec 2011 03:25

^^^ There could be another line to this "slated story" IAF COULD be angling for some additional moolah in the next plan period to do some serious upgrades to the AFBs. They have already got the MAFI approved for the initial set of bases as well as the next set of 30 odd bases (the second part is not signed but is put in as an option in the original contract/deal), this covers the aviation aids and related bells & whistles. Next step would be some major civil work across the bases... Even a casual inspection of our air bases would show a large number of HAS and dispersal zones.
unfortunately our Rambhas WOULD/MIGHT not fit into those structures designed for Migs, hence this big thakleef about Sub-burns and Tans for Ms Rambha. Hope these are done before Katrina starts performing her Chikni Chameli across SDRE Land.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Dec 2011 03:30

chetak wrote:quote="shiv"]quote="SaiK"]I think the question veerav is asking why there is a need for a "NON FBW" flight control?/quote]
There is no need for that on the Su 30 AFAIK, but there is a switch to shut down the systems presumably to be done after the flight like shutting down your computer./quote]

This switch is there for maintenance purposes only. It was supposed to be wire locked and guarded so that it is not operated inadvertently in flight like it was.

The more you idiot proof a system, the bigger the idiots they invent.

BTW, the pilot who inadvertently operated this switch was not even Su qualified.

The problem is one does not design for idiots, but for errors (accidental). To err is human [example: don't let driver to shift to reverse while in forward motion, means it is designed for errors].

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Jan 2012 09:23

Das Flanker .......Su-35 number 3

http://www.knaapo.ru/rus/gallery/events ... su-35s.wbp

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Feb 2012 13:21

City firm to help encase Sukhoi engines right

The Koraput division of the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), which is involved in the making of the Sukhoi-30 MK1, is getting a helping hand from a Bangalore-based firm, Hind High Vacuum (HHV), for its specialised welding needs and ensure the robustness and good quality of the weld of the casings of the fighter’s engines.

The Rs 26 crore welding unit made by HHV is being acquired by HAL’s unit. This is part of the attempts at indigeni-sation HAL is taking up in the manufacture of SU-30MK1.

The fourth generation multi-role fighter is being put together for the IAF under licence from Russia’s Sukhoi Corporation. In the first instance, the assembly requires welding of different titanium alloy components in a protected atmosphere sans oxygen. This is to prevent the formation of any oxidation spots on the welds which could weaken under the heat and stress of the engine’s service conditions.

Incidentally, “the cost of the welding unit HHV made is around half the price quoted to HAL by a European engineering company. This gave an opportunity to HHV for building such a complex system,” said Nagarjun Sakhamuri, MD of HHV.

The high vacuum technology company which, for the past 45 years, has been helping with the indigenisation for agencies like ISRO, Atomic Energy, ADA, DRDL among others which faced a denial of technology from abroad for many years. To HAL itself, HHV has designed, made and delivered nearly 25 different pieces of complex equipment in the last three decades.

HHV embarked on the task just two years ago and is now delivering the welding facility to the Koraput Divison of the HAL where the Sukhoi engine will be put together. The effort involved designing from scratch the unit.

HHV decided to robotise the welding for almost 85 per cent of the task, reducing the risk to human welders. Inputs from Pune-based Precision Automation and Robotics India Ltd (PARI) helped the cause.

The two robots were acquired from Kuka of Japan, the software and integration in the process was done by PARI.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 14 Feb 2012 20:15

Low flying SU-30 MKI creates alarm in TN District

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 14 Feb 2012 21:04

vishnu.nv wrote:The shelters should be made for all the aircraft's in the IAF not only the Su-30 MKI's. Actually IAF should have created provisions for this in the MAFI project which is happening right now.

In forward bases we should have the Concrete shelters which can withstand cruise missile attacks.

Most of the airbases on the western front have concrete shelter. The eastern front is different. New concrete shelters are being built at Tezpur & maybe Chabua. Surprisingly Gwalior does not "seem" to have many concrete shelters

K

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 15 Feb 2012 14:48

For the urbal area what is the standard altitude as flying SOP for SU-30MKI....? I am in pune and each day I have been seeing these beasts flying very low and gives shocking waves.

Sonic boom by jet creates panic

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 15 Feb 2012 15:05

^^
No SOP for altitude as such. Everything is preplanned and it all depends upon the mission objectives for that particular sortie.

member_19648 · Post by **member_19648** » 15 Feb 2012 16:57

^^Flying low is a practice being done excessively to evade enemy radars. Even transport pilots are trained to fly low and hug the terrain to evade radars.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 15 Feb 2012 17:01

Flying low...phalcon...city....

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Feb 2012 17:19

krishnan wrote:Flying low...phalcon...city....

Which City- Chennai?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 15 Feb 2012 17:25

lol

no..i was just saying....Su 30 flying low ... with AWACS around...fighter aircraft arent the only one which need practice...even big birds like AWACS do

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Feb 2012 17:42

Curious about Gwalior.Wasn't it the same base where aeons ago Mirage fighters were damaged when the false ceiling of the AC hangars allegedly gave way? I remember some disparaging articles in the media then about the need for air-con hangars.

If this indeed was the case,and there exist air-con hangars for special birds,what's the problem in not providing the Flankers with similar / basic protection? Everyone knws that Gwalior is one of the hottest places on earth in the summer,and surely,exposing an aircraft with such sensitive electronics/avionics,etc.,will take its toll sometime?