PAK-FA and FGFA: News & Discussion - June 2014

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 22 Feb 2018 18:26

If true, this deployment could be to benchmark it against the same defences that are being probed by the Israeli F-35s.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Feb 2018 18:30

JTull wrote:If true, this deployment could be to benchmark it against the same defences that are being probed by the Israeli F-35s.

How many aircraft have deployed, and how for how long? Where are verified claims that the Israelis are even "probing" defenses with F-35s? They are likely busy creating a training syllabus (notice that they chose to take their to training path and did not send instructors or pilots to Luke AFB with to spend time with their Adir's to develop those skills), and testing tactics and interoperability with their F-16s, F15's and ground equipment. One must not blow these things out of proportion. From the social media postings, it seems a pair of prototypes were sent in for testing. How are these prototypes equipped? What are the test gears that they will be carrying and what sort of testing will they be doing? One must factor these things and try to understand the overall objectives of such a small deployment after one gets past the initial 5 seconds of PR.

There are organizational and cultural differences b/w the west and Russia when it comes to this approach. Russia has in the past used combat deployments to test out new gear very early on in its development or life cycle. SU has done so in the past and as has Russia post SU collapse. The US and many western nations tend to not do that unless there is a demand signal which can only be met by capability under development. If not, they tend to deploy with a new combat system once the deploying unit has met the same competency and readiness goals as any other unit with an older type. For example, a pair of development aircraft for JSTARS were deployed to the Gulf War because the need for Battle Management and Command and Control (Army defined need) could not be adequately met by any other resource at the time. Similarly, Global Hawks and other drones were pulled from development and dev.testing and sent into Afghanistan to provide persistent ISR which was not possible with manned orbits. Israel famously used very new F-16's to bomb Osirak when it felt that those capabilities were needed at the time for mission success. As a contrast, when the first F-35's deploy to the Middile East later this year they will be deploying with a USMC squadron that would have put in serious times with its operational aircraft, attended advanced large force exercises and would have a ship that is capable of sustaining the aircraft through its deployment (First deployment is for the STOVL aircraft on a ship). Same with the F-35A which is also expected to deploy to UAE this year with an operational squadron that will likely have pilots with a significant number of time on their aircraft each. Both Israel and Turkey (which gets its first aircraft delivered this year) are likely to take a more cautious approach UNLESS there are needs which cannot be met at a reasonable cost and risk by their existing systems.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 22 Feb 2018 20:58

A lot of details on the Tejas, AMCA and the to and fro about the FGFA between Russia and India.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 23 Feb 2018 01:40

brar_w wrote:
Khalsa wrote:^^^^
I doubt it
i think Syria is afraid of Israeli and Turks attacking jointly in North and SOuth.
SYrian air defenses have been stretched thin
What does that have to do with this? How does deploying 2 prototype fighters help with that? If you wanted to bolster Syrian defensive capabilities and shoot down or deter Israeli or Turkish aircraft violating their airspace, putting down a squadron or two of Su-30's or 35's would be more beneficial to the cause.

I think you are and I are on the same page.
I should have elaborated more.
let me retry

I doubt that Su57s/ PAKFA have been deployed to Syria.
Syria is afraid of the Turks and Israelis and Pro Syrians elements are promoting this video to up the involvement and tech levels in the theatre of war.
I believe the video is somewhere in Russia.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 23 Feb 2018 01:49

The deployment of the 2 prototypes has been confirmed. That they are deployed isn't in question, it is the nature of what they are there to do. They are likely there for some testing, and some good PR. They aren't going to effect the capability of the Russians or the Syrians over and above what already exists.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 23 Feb 2018 05:53

Yeah fair enough. I don't see them adding much to the existing capability.
I saw Angad either tweet or like something which confirms their deployment.
The tweet also mentioned another 4 Su30 + an A50 which is a force multiplier.

As an aside there are four things noticeable that happened in 3 weeks.
1. Israeli F-16 shotdown after shooting Iranian drone. (consequently Syrian AA got a roasting)
2. Turks invade Afrin area
3. Assad's forces enter Afrin in support of Kurds.
4. Assad is trying to cleanse Surrounding suburbs around Damascus.

It is getting interesting again on the ground.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 26 Feb 2018 09:17

So why this deployment of in development fighters to a hot zone? Surely it's not just for photo ops and propoganda?

Just saw some mouthwatering hi res images on the afm phorum.... Damn it is one of the most beautiful birds ever... If looks could kill, the pakfa is without any doubt the best fighter in the world.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Feb 2018 20:56

Russia Deploys Su-57s to Syria
by Vladimir Karnozov
- February 26, 2018, 3:48 AM

The Russian Air and Space Force (VKS) deployed four Sukhoi Su-57 fifth-generation fighters, developed under the PAK-FA (Perspective Aviation Complex of the Frontal Aviation) program, to the Khmeimeem AFB in Latakia. The deployment came shortly before the Syrian army launched a major offensive in Ghuta, the last remaining rebel-held stronghold in the Damascus countryside. One pair arrived on February 21 and the second on February 23, the last move timed to coincide with the centennial anniversary of the Red Army.

Moscow confirmed that the Su-57s have arrived in the war theater for “operational and combat trials,” but did not elaborate any further. Apparently, the VKS is in a hurry to test its newest and most advanced combat jet in a real war environment before the army of the incumbent president Bashar Al-Assad potentially crushes the remaining points of resistance west of the Euphrates riverbank.

Formally, the VKS shall become the first Su-57 operator next year, when it is set to take delivery of the first pair in the initial order for 12 production aircraft, but the service already operates several operable prototypes provided by the industry for firing trials and initial operational assessment. According to Dmitry Rogozin, Russian vice premier responsible for the military-industrial complex, the Su-57 has passed the first phase of state acceptance trials, during which its developer validated design solutions concerning the airframe, onboard systems, mission equipment, and air-launched munitions. The second phase is scheduled for 2019, involving “the initial production batch.”

During the seven years since the type’s maiden flight, 10 operable examples have flown, the last one on Dec. 23, 2017. Around that time, Boris Obnosov, general director at the Tactical Missile Corporation, said that the company had developed six new missile types especially for the Su-57, and was going to add six more by 2020. All those are shaped to fit into the aircraft’s internal weapons bays, which consist of two in the wings for short-range air-to-air missiles and two inside the fuselage measuring 16.4 feet (5 meters) in length for payloads of up to 2,200 pounds (1,000 kg) each. The aircraft also has six external hard-points for weapons.

Presumably, the Su-57 pilots in Syria would exploit an opportunity to use the Kh-38 air-to-surface missile developed as a replacement for the long-serving Kh-25 family, so far the only one of the self-propelled air-launched munitions developed for the type that has been accepted into service. More recently, the Tactical Missile Corporation unveiled the Grom series of glide bombs, and they might see action in Syria, too. The Su-57s might also employ older-generation KAB-250, KAB-500 and KAB-1500 guided bombs with laser, TV, thermal imager, and satellite-aided seekers, which are already in use in the theater on Su-35Ss, Su-30SMs, Su-25SM3s, Su-24Ms and MiG-29SMTs.

It is also believed that by fielding the Su-57, the VKS seeks to supplement the Su-35S and Su-30SM fourth-generation fighters on air patrols in Syrian airspace, whose stated purpose is to defend strike aircraft against U.S.-led coalition fighters after a Turkish air force F-16C downed a Russian Su-24M in 2015 and a U.S. Navy F/A-18E destroyed a Syrian air force Su-22M4 in 2017, in both cases with Sidewinder AIM-9X air-to-air missiles. Last year, there were a number of close calls involving Russian and U.S. aircraft, including a confrontation between an Su-35S and F-22A Raptor over the Euphrates river. The low-observable, supercruise-capable Su-57 may prove a more difficult opponent than the Su-35S, the best of Russian fighters previously deployed to Syria. The newer type is more suitable for an intended role of “shooter” using targeting fed by the older generation fighters, A-50U AWACS, and the ground radar network. Apart from the standard R-77 missiles—similar in performance to the Raytheon AIM-120—the Su-57 (as well as Su-35S) can potentially employ a newly developed scramjet version of it, as well as the heavier R-37 and other longer-range air-to-air missiles.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Feb 2018 21:37

The deployment to Syria of the SU-57 should put to rest most of the doubting experts about the progress of the aircraft. It will be fielded in a v.hostile environment and the world's majors will be keenly watching how it performs.Israel operates F-35s too, so there is another interesting prospect in store for us if both these types come close to the other.

chola · Post by **chola** » 27 Feb 2018 23:15

Okay we no longer doubt that the Su-57 can fly from Rus to Syria.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 28 Feb 2018 00:19

Su-57 is an evolutionary design from the Su-27 family. To say that it is not mature is nothing else but bias.

F-35 wins in two aspects:
1. Large scale production
2. Avionics

Other than that the capability of F-35 vs a Su-57 is a matter of speculation.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Feb 2018 00:55

India is not getting the F22 or the F35.
Its not like US planes are freely available.
Other than Kargil, we haven't fought a hot war in long years since 1971.

World is getting hotter and Xi JInPing consolidation in China is moving inexorably.
Pak is being taken over by China. Its not an independent player.
Most likely it will be a Chinese NATO ally with delegated nuke launch authority.
Soon I expect Pak to form a joint military command under overall Chinese leaders.
Then Punjabiyat which pervades Indian military circles goes for full toss.

Meantime Indian military behaves like British forces before 1939 rejecting everything with luxury of time despite impending war clouds.

Even to buy a rifle it takes a decade of discussion and is usually wrong decisions.

Its better that IAF gets on board with the PAKFA and not nickel and dime while nit-picking about short comings.

Does IAF even support one bomb fuze development? NO.
That's my honest opinion.

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 28 Feb 2018 01:16

ramana wrote:India is not getting the F22 or the F35.
Its not like US planes are freely available.
Other than Kargil, we haven't fought a hot war in long years since 1971.

World is getting hotter and Xi JInPing consolidation in China is moving inexorably.
Pak is being taken over by China. Its not an independent player.
Most likely it will be a Chinese NATO ally with delegated nuke launch authority.
Soon I expect Pak to form a joint military command under overall Chinese leaders.
Then Punjabiyat which pervades Indian military circles goes for full toss.

Meantime Indian military behaves like British forces before 1939 rejecting everything with luxury of time despite impending war clouds.

Even to buy a rifle it takes a decade of discussion and is usually wrong decisions.

Its better that IAF gets on board with the PAKFA and not nickel and dime while nit-picking about short comings.

Does IAF even support one bomb fuze development? NO.
That's my honest opinion.

Spot on... Is the bird perfect? no... Is the frontal rcs low enough to deal with the j-20 and that shortly headed for pakistan j-31? More than likely yes. Time to deal with the threat at hand rather than look for perfection.

chola · Post by **chola** » 28 Feb 2018 01:23

Two things:

1) We haven’t fought a hot war in decades but so haven’t Cheen and they had no Kargil. Also their soft spoiled little emperors performed very poorly in South Sudan,

2) Chini takeover of Pakistan actually LESSENS the chance of war as the mercantile PRC will be wary of fire and ruin raining on its investments and trade routes in Pakistan unlike the “martial” Pakis themselves.

I think the chini “takeover” is overstated because, seriously, there is little chance that some pork-eating chinimen addicted to massage parlours and girly magazines will ever be able to command the average paki taliban beardos. The danger from Cheen taking over TSP will not be war. It will be grayzone tactics involving the competition of industrial bases and MICs.

Unless the Su-57 improves our industrial complex, it is just another expensive firangi import that we are unlikely to ever use against the effeminate war-avoiding chinis.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Feb 2018 03:51

The plan is to make the PAKFA in India as we are paying for co-development.

Why do you think all those countries are buying F-35s?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 28 Feb 2018 06:21

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-s ... ody-2018-2
Russia thinks its new advanced fighter jet in Syria will scare off other countries — but nobody's afraid of it

The Times of Israel reports that Russia gave a "covert warning" to the Jewish state by saying the Su-57 will serve as a deterrent "for aircraft from neighboring states, which periodically fly into Syrian airspace uninvited."The veiled warning comes after Israel and Syria had a heated air battle with Syrian air defenses downing an Israeli F-16. Israel said that it took out half of Syria's air defenses in return.In an opinion piece in the New York Times, Ronan Bergman reported that Israel planned a larger response to Syria's downing of their jet, but a "furious phone call" between Russian President Vladimir Putin, Syria's ally, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.But whatever the two heads of state said on the phone, it's unlikely the Su-57 had anything to do with it. The Su-57, as it is today, doesn't pose a threat to Western fighters despite being Russia's newest and most advanced fighter jet. It awaits a pair of new engines and has significant problems flying and releasing bombs at supersonic speeds.
"I don't think anyone is too worried about a kinetic threat from Su-57s over Syria in its current state," Justin Bronk, a combat aviation expert at the Royal United Services Institute, told Business Insider.Bronk pointed to problems with the Su-57 integrating its radar into data the pilot can actually use in the cockpit, and difficulties in getting the jet to drop bombs properly, calling it "far from combat ready."
Though the Su-57's advanced and "innovative" radar set up could pose a threat to US stealth aircraft like the F-22, also operating in Syria, by scoping out its radar signatures and helping inform future battle plans, it's just not ready for a fight with Israel, the US, or even Turkey.Another Russian official gave Russian media an additional reason for the Su-57's presence in Syria that seemed to confirm Western analysis that the deployment is a marketing ploy and test run for the unproven jet.The official said the jet had a "need to be tested in combat conditions, in conditions of [enemy] resistance."Yet another Russian official said in Russian media that "as we helped the brotherly Syrian people, we tested over 200 new types of weapons," which have included very advanced systems like submarine-launched cruise missiles designed for high-end warfighting.
Essentially, all Russia's air force does in Syria is bomb rebel ground targets. In years of fighting, the bombings have only demonstrated one occasion that the target had anti-air defenses. On that one occasion, the rebels downed a Russian Su-25.As a result, Bronk said the Su-57s "will no doubt fly above 15,000 feet to avoid" those missiles, meaning the new Russian jet won't really be flying in combat conditions, only bombing defenseless targets.So why do they need a next-generation, stealth fighter built to dogfight with US F-22s and F-35s that isn't ready for combat yet? Bronk said the bombing campaign in Syria is "absolutely not the mission set [the Su-57s] are designed for."Retired US Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula, now the Dean of the Mitchell Institute of Aerospace Power Studies, told Business Insider that it's a chance for Russia to test out its new jet where they "don't have to pay for training ranges," and concurred with Bronk's assessment that the plane is not yet able to fully fight.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Feb 2018 09:56

So who are these so called "combat aviation expert" who have written their opinion about PAK-FA are they involved in its flight test program to know these details , Funny how these articles from Western MSM come out quoting western combat expert who would not know a dime about the program

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 28 Feb 2018 10:49

The main thing is SU-57 will be fire tested in war zone and it shows Russian confidence .

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 28 Feb 2018 11:08

In the meantime, are the uber F22s still dropping bombs on the sophisticated air defences of the talibs

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Feb 2018 12:30

Prem wrote:The main thing is SU-57 will be fire tested in war zone and it shows Russian confidence .

Has to do more with atmospheric and climatic condition to test new platform , there is extreme heat and dust and some of the weapons tested earlier in those condition did not work optimally and they had to be re-caliberated for those conditions , Russians have continental climate they have extreme cold but not the extereme heat of West Asian and fine dust that is unique to some of the west asian coutries even the coarsness and finness differ too

I recollect reading during GW 1 the sand dust of Kuwait was different from Saudi in that in was more fine and the Brits had to develop special filter so that the challenger tanks did not get bogged down when these dust could bypass the existing filter something they found out post operational deployment, small little things but thats what war teaches you and no amount of testing would revel the shortcoming of operational deployment of weapon system in different theater

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 28 Feb 2018 19:56

Indranil wrote:Su-57 is an evolutionary design from the Su-27 family. To say that it is not mature is nothing else but bias.

F-35 wins in two aspects:
1. Large scale production
2. Avionics

Other than that the capability of F-35 vs a Su-57 is a matter of speculation.

You're defending the maturity of a program that is still an year or two away from delivering the first production aircraft. I mean, seriously.. think about it.

With respect to the Su-27, its is the Su-30MKI that was a true descendant of the aircraft and 12 years after the first one was delivered to the IAF, its serviceability rate was still only around 50% and had faced a variety of serious reliability issues over the years (particularly relating to the engine).

And while the Su-27 family's design influence can be seen in the Su-57 - its still a huge step up from existing Russian aircraft, being the first aircraft to field, among other things, an AESA, sensor fusion, an LO design and an advanced EW suite. And that's aside from inevitable issues faced operationalizing a new clean sheet engine.

Just to put that in perspective, the F-22 was equipped with all of that and had declared IOC, before the first F-35 squadron rolled off the production line. That didn't make the F-35 a mature aircraft. Its been a decade of rigorous testing, fixes, retrofits, debugging, all carried out at a massive scale, to reach where it is now i.e. almost at the finish line (few things pending on the aircraft and the support pipeline is still WIP). 130,000 flight hours logged. Nearly 300 aircraft delivered.

So when its ordered today, the customer knows that it'll not be headache when received in 2021. No engines conking out, no screens conking out, no grounded aircraft because of a shortage of spares, no parts requiring upgrading for basic functionality. It'll work from Day 1.

srai · Post by **srai** » 28 Feb 2018 20:30

Viv S wrote:...
With respect to the Su-27, it is the Su-30MKI that was a true descendant of the aircraft and 12 years after the first one was delivered to the IAF, its serviceability rate was still only around 50% and had faced a variety of serious reliability issues over the years (particularly relating to the engine).

...

Only partially true.

Remember to get higher serviceability rates, you also have to invest more resources to make it so. That means signing expensive contracts like PBL with the manufacturer guaranteeing certain serviceability rates. It requires careful fleet monitoring to see usage rates of consumables and stock inventory accordingly. Parts that are not domestically (licensed) manufactured need to be planned well in advance with the foreign OEM. Inventory management needs to be planned with lead-times of 12-36 months. Orders need to be placed that far ahead and not when a plane breaks down. Adequate manpower and facilities need to be set up in order to obtain desired serviceability rates.

India has only started adopting PBL practice with the recent purchase of American (P-8I, C-17, C-103J) and European (Rafale). You can see how expensive a deal is with everything included to achieve 70% serviceability rates. Rafale deal for 36 units costs $8 billion.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 28 Feb 2018 20:32

Design maturity as in a solid, well tested and firmed up configuration has likely been achieved on the Su-57. What you have is a collection of around 10-12 instrumented aircraft all tasked with various development testing requirements, from flight sciences to mission systems, fatigue testing etc etc. I believe 3-4 prototypes are actually kitted with full or most of the current mission system suite. I am not aware of the total number of sorties or cumulative flight hours for the prototypes with the stage-1 engine. Stage-2 engine just recently flew on the aircraft so it will take a little while to put it through its paces. A few prototypes are tasked with weapon testing but it I am not sure where things stand with that in terms of internal and external launch envelopes and the new weapons specifically designed for the aircraft.

Having said that, maturity of any system takes time. In the west overall system maturity for a fighter aircraft type program is considered to be expected at around 80K to 100K cumulative flight hours for a type. Even the F-35 variants aren't expected to be held up to their expected MTBF metrics until iterative find--improve--fix process does what it is supposed to do and each type has met or exceeded 80K cumulative flight hours. Also, design and configuration maturity is only one aspect of a complicated 5th generation program. As was evident on other advanced programs production and investing in a robust supplier base ramp up is very important and critical to the overall quality goals and is something not to be taken lightly. The current prototypes were primarily intended for testing and were fabricated as such. The next phase in the PAKFA is to actually order production aircraft for front line squadrons (not prototypes for testing) and begin laying the investments required to put the thing into serial production. This, not just for the aircraft and its mechanical components but also mass production of sensitive electronic components that go into its radar, communication and EW suit. Challenges that others have encountered, and that Russia surely will as well, will revolve around the higher production quantity, and maintaining yields of the high quality systems. This is no small challenge and will be the next phase for the program as has been for all other similarly complex programs before it.

srai wrote:Remember to get higher serviceability rates, you also have to invest more resources to make it so.

There are two distinct components to readiness and availability rates – Maturity and reliability, and part availability. With mature systems, the component reliability issues are usually less severe as over time most design teams and OEMs iterate and improve performance. So with them PBL contracts work because you peg component availability with readiness and leave the inventory management and procurement to the OEM that has more experience as it does it on a larger scale with other customers. With new systems however, reliability and maturity is also important. A classic example of this is the US F-35 fleet. Older aircraft that are still in early block 1 or 2 configuration have parts that are breaking down more often and as a result drag down the overall fleet readiness to around 50%. However, when you look at the operational units that are on 2B and block 3i or F these squadrons have no problem reaching close to 70% availability because they have many of the issues identified in the earlier blocks, already rectified. Part availability is also leading to readiness challenges but there is a component of the early block aircraft also having parts requiring replacement more frequently than the upgraded aircraft and as such putting a strain on the component production and supply chain (which also has to sustain a 30-50% production increase YOY). This as I said is expected to ebb and flow till each type has reached around 80-100K cumulative flight hours and the OEMs are able to upgrade aircraft to more reliable configurations. For the USAF and USMC fleet this will happen by 2020 when all of the trianing, tactics and test aircraft fleet is upgraded to block 3F configuration and brought on par with the operational units.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 28 Feb 2018 20:56

ramana wrote:India is not getting the F22 or the F35.

Lets wait and see. We've got a $20 bn MRCA requirement out sidelining the F-16 (which the IAF wasn't very interested in to begin with). The FGFA program is in stasis, with critical noises coming from the IAF, which is requesting a formal briefing on the F-35.

Ten years ago, it seemed very unlikely that a still-in-development P-8 would be an option for the IN, today we have 8 in service, 4 on order, and another 8-12 in planning. And strategic ties have evolved rapidly in the years since. So.. lets wait and see.

Its better that IAF gets on board with the PAKFA and not nickel and dime while nit-picking about short comings.

Its not nitpicking so much as it is acknowledging fact that the system just isn't ready for induction. Even the RuAF has ordered only 12 units so far and that lot will be delivered only by 2021-22 and used mostly for testing. The final definitive Izd.30 powered variant will come about post-2025 and it may be 2030 before all the bugs are worked out.

The interim variant might be on offer but cannot be relied upon to be acceptably serviceable & mission reliable when the balloon goes up. The IAF's experience with the MiG-29 in the 80s & 90s is instructive in that respect. As is the IN's experience with the MiG-29K and to some extent with the IAF's with the Su-30MKI. All immature platforms inducted by us and later bought in numbers by the Russians after years of low serviceability and troubleshooting by India.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 28 Feb 2018 21:07

Viv S wrote: You're defending the maturity of a program that is still an year or two away from delivering the first production aircraft. I mean, seriously.. think about it.

With respect to the Su-27, its is the Su-30MKI that was a true descendant of the aircraft and 12 years after the first one was delivered to the IAF, its serviceability rate was still only around 50% and had faced a variety of serious reliability issues over the years (particularly relating to the engine).

The Su-57 is no unproven that it is in combat! Thank about that! By the way, when the right amount of money is spent in maintaining the parts of the Su-30, the availability of the aircraft magically doubled.

Viv S wrote: And while the Su-27 family's design influence can be seen in the Su-57 - its still a huge step up from existing Russian aircraft, being the first aircraft to field, among other things, an AESA, sensor fusion, an LO design and an advanced EW suite. And that's aside from inevitable issues faced operationalizing a new clean sheet engine.

Just to put that in perspective, the F-22 was equipped with all of that and had declared IOC, before the first F-35 squadron rolled off the production line. That didn't make the F-35 a mature aircraft. Its been a decade of rigorous testing, fixes, retrofits, debugging, all carried out at a massive scale, to reach where it is now i.e. almost at the finish line (few things pending on the aircraft and the support pipeline is still WIP). 130,000 flight hours logged. Nearly 300 aircraft delivered.

So when its ordered today, the customer knows that it'll not be headache when received in 2021. No engines conking out, no screens conking out, no grounded aircraft because of a shortage of spares, no parts requiring upgrading for basic functionality. It'll work from Day 1.

What if we want the headache? Because we want to learn! Because we want to modify! Because we want to reuse!

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 28 Feb 2018 21:09

srai wrote:Only partially true.

Remember to get higher serviceability rates, you also have to invest more resources to make it so. That means signing expensive contracts like PBL with the manufacturer guaranteeing certain serviceability rates.

Trouble is even with a guarantees offered on paper, the follow through isn't always there. And since you're dealing with a state-owned enterprise you have no legal recourse without it becoming a diplomatic issue. Case-in-point:

Russians go slow, Sukhoi fleet in trouble

What seems even more worrying is the Russian go-slow, which has severely hit the maintenance and availability of the fleet. Even five years after the signing of contract for the setting up of Su-30 repair and overhaul facilities in India at HAL, there's no progress despite "agreements" and assurances even at the level of the Defence Ministers of the two countries.

"Due to non-availability of facilities for overhaul of aggregates (aircraft parts), the serviceability (availability for flying) of Su-30MKI is slowly decreasing and demand for Aircraft on Ground (AOG) items on the rise," HAL's Nasik division again pleads with Russia's Rosboronexport in a telling letter dated 24 December 2013. Even the revised deadlines committed the Russians to set up the repair-overhaul facility at HAL by December 2013, and overhaul the first aircraft by June 2014. This seems nowhere on the horizon.

Worse, Russia has put on hold the posting of its Sukhoi specialists to India for helping set up repair and maintenance capability. Documents available with The Sunday Guardian suggest that the two sides are haggling over price. This goes against an agreement that posting of Russian specialists would not be disrupted even if price negotiations were not concluded. In the absence of these specialists, HAL has been forced to fend on its own, as Aircraft on Ground (AOG) are piling up.

"Huge quantities of unserviceable aggregates (parts) are lying due for overhaul at various bases of IAF," HAL states, disclosing that the number of Su-30s being grounded for want of quick repair is increasing. The Russians have been informed that five Su-30MKI fighters are already parked at HAL for extensive overhaul, and another 15 will be due for overhaul in the current year. This number is equivalent to an entire squadron.

Lamenting the Russian delays, HAL expresses even more helplessness: "It appears that Rosboronexport and Irkut Corporation (the main parties to the contract) have limited control over other Russian companies (which provide vital parts like engines)." Supplies and deputation of specialists by other companies are even more erratic.

Edit:

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 28 Feb 2018 21:34

Indranil wrote:The Su-57 is no unproven that it is in combat! Thank about that! By the way, when the right amount of money is spent in maintaining the parts of the Su-30, the availability of the aircraft magically doubled.

"In combat"?!! Oh come on, Indranil, you know better. You can fly a few prototypes into a combat theatre but that doesn't make them combat ready. Not that its even engaging in blow-up-a-Toyota type "combat".

It has all the makings of a PR exercise designed for the "Defender of the Fatherland" Day, with even the Russians only claiming that its there for trials. Its very far from being a mature aircraft.

The Su-30 is a mature design having been in service for well over two decades. I'm sure two decades after the first Su-57 is delivered it'll be a perfectly mature aircraft as well. But purchasing it now will more likely to result in a MiG-29K redux.

What if we want the headache? Because we want to learn! Because we want to modify! Because we want to reuse!

We.. want the headache? I don't think the IAF does. I suspect its far more interested in having serviceable aircraft on hand to counter the rapidly growing threat from the PLAAF.

For the learning aspect - there's the Tejas Mk.2 and the AMCA.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 28 Feb 2018 22:17

Indranil wrote: The Su-57 is no unproven that it is in combat!

I have great respect for your informed and well thought out posts on all military topics but with this leaves me puzzled. The Russians have flown two pre-production prototypes to Syria. We do not know the scope of their mission there other than what has been released publicly which is that they are there for testing. How does this magically transform a program that has not yet entered serial production from a developmental effort to a mature and combat proven system? No one would have taken the USAF seriously had they taken the first 2 F-22 prototypes in the early 2000s and sent them to Iraq because folks then were well aware of the laundry list of things that needed to be done in developmental testing, operational testing, training the squadrons on the aircraft, interoperability etc before a credible capability could be fielded.

FSU/Russia has in the past used operational deployments as an opportunity to test developmental systems. This approach, as I mentioned earlier, is different from the West where they usually push systems into operational units, cycle those units through extensive training and then deploy at a different maturity and capability state (unless the capability is absolutely required which was the case in examples I cited earlier). But even those who spend a lot of time studying these would likely agree that these are opportunities to test the aircraft in a different setting and the things to do before it becomes an operational, mature, production program will still need to be done once the deployment is over. Those challenges do not go away and most well informed objective observers would realize that. As far as the program is concerned, they still have to finish stage-2 testing, place an order for the first dozen aircraft, receive those beginning 2019 (2 expected), let the operational pilots put them through testing..further increase system reliability and get to the long hard process of operationalizing a weapon system.

All this will take time. My guess (just a guess) is that a mature, tested ready to deploy with full capability stage-2 Su-57 with frontline squadron (RuAF) would likely not be ready till the mid to second half of next decade. In regards to your earlier comparison of the Su-57 and F-35, the latter is much more mature as a program in an actual and "real-world" sense with operational squadrons routinely cycling through extensive training opportunities and raking up training hours. You have operational units for 2 of the three variants now permanently forward deployed on land, and by the summer at sea. As a program it is training close to 90 pilots a year and expected to grow to 100+ by 2019. Weapons Schools (Top Gun and USAFWS) are cycling the aircraft and developing advanced tactics to be used by operational pilots. These things directly contribute to making a weapon system more mature from an operator's "real world" perspective. I don't think anyone would have taken the claims coming from Lockheed or USAF seriously had they claimed a mature and combat ready platform when all they had to show for the program was a dozen early LRIP aircraft, all of which were to be used and instrumented for developmental testing.

I am not in the camp which believes that the IAF will choose b/w the FGFA and the F-35. In fact, I have been skeptical of the F-35 in Indian colors for a number of years for a whole host of reasons. F-35 as part of MRCA may or may not be offered and may or may not happen if offered. FGFA will likely if not definitly happen and as a program it will likely resemble the MKI effort with significantly higher indigenous content compared to when the MKI was inducted. Having said that, one still needs to understand that this will take time given the current status in the program. The MOD has put in around $300 Million and one has to see what it has gotten out in terms of R&D work and industrial share from that. Taking a baseline Su-57 and turning it into an FGFA is an effort that will realistically take 8-10 years, if not more, from contract signing ( i.e. from signing a contract to actually fielding an operational unit) and a lot of hard work and complex engineering and development.

There is no way around that..and Russia deploying 2 prototypes for testing in Syria does not alter that in any way - It provides Russia an opportunity to put the aircraft in a different environment and test it out as Austin put it, and gives them an opportunity to further test its prototype mission systems or even weapons. It however does not magically transform the WS into a "mature" or "combat proven" one based on any metric relevant from an operator's perspective (something the IAF will likely be interested in as a major stakeholder). That will take a lot more hard work, time and money on part of the Russians and the Indian MOD/taxpayer if they choose to invest the $2-4 Billion required as part of their commitment to the project. As a next step they need to begin investing in the industrial phase of the program, begin serial production and get their producers to begin building the first dozen serial-production aircraft that will be on contract soon. Simultaneously, they need to finish development and operational testing and begin implementing a strategy to start transitioning pilots from their legacy aircraft to the new aircraft which means establishing training and tactics units on top of the operational testing that will be done by the first dozen aircraft which are yet to be ordered.

chola · Post by **chola** » 28 Feb 2018 23:00

We will learn from the AMCA.

Any immediate threat should be met by off the shelf buys. And here, the F-35 by FAR is the more reliable choice.

Not only is Su-57 still in prototype, it is liable to be sold to Cheen whether in numbers or small evaluation batches just lke the Su-35.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Feb 2018 23:32

VivS and NRao, The sequence is PAKFA/FGFA and then AMCA .

It will happen in that order.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 28 Feb 2018 23:33

chola wrote:Not only is Su-57 still in prototype, it is liable to be sold to Cheen whether in numbers or small evaluation batches just lke the Su-35.

While that may apply to the baseline aircraft it is unlikely to apply to the FGFA which will likely be heavily modified.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 28 Feb 2018 23:37

Brar sahab,

1. I know saying that Su-57 being combat ready based on "deployment" of two prototypes is a bit of an hyperbole. I am just trying to even out the statement the Su-57 is an unproven aircraft from day one.

2. Su-57 has pushed the envelop on certain aspects and F-35 on certain others. Which one will win the day? Nobody knows! In fact, I will wager that it will depend on the day. I am just tired of listening to either camps junking the other aircraft.

3. At the moment, IAf's possibility of acquiring the F-35 is far far more remote than acquiring the FGFA. IAF makes the required noise at the required time to get things moving within the Indian Mil-Ind/MoF/MoD/import setup. People getting excited about a solicited presentation need to wake up and smell the coffee.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 28 Feb 2018 23:53

Indranil, I agree completely that the FGFA will most likely happen while the F-35 has still a very small chance of being taken up by the two governments seriously let alone actually being acquired. And I have on multiple occasions pointed out that these are two very different aircraft and programs with very different focus as is evident from the design trades, quantities required, and other requirements that tend to influence weapon systems design and configurations.

To add to my earlier post on where the PAKFA program stands vis-a-vis the "next steps" here is something posted earlier by Kartik (from Tass):

KOMSOMOLSK-ON-AMUR, February 8. /TASS/. Russia’s defense ministry plans to sign a contract for a preproduction batch of fifth-generation Su-57 fighter jets, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said on Thursday.

"We are buying Su-57 jets for test combat use. First stage state trials are over," he told journalists. "This year, we will sign a contract for the first batch of 12 Su-57 fighter jets for the Armed Forces."

According to Borisov, the first two planes of this batch may come into service in 2019. He said that ten out of 12 previously manufactured jets are undergoing flight tests. http://tass.com/defense/988976

So between developmental testing, envelope expansion and weapons testing and finally operational testing using production or "pre-production" representative systems..there is quite a lot of work that lies ahead. Meanwhile, at the back end the industrial wheels have to transition from a prototype build program to serial production that prepares its supplier base and gradually builds capacity all the while obtaining learning_curve efficiencies that only come from building more aircraft. Some of these things are hard and require time even for the best resourced teams and industrial complexes.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 01 Mar 2018 00:02

Agreed.

chola · Post by **chola** » 01 Mar 2018 02:02

brar_w wrote:
chola wrote:Not only is Su-57 still in prototype, it is liable to be sold to Cheen whether in numbers or small evaluation batches just lke the Su-35.
While that may apply to the baseline aircraft it is unlikely to apply to the FGFA which will likely be heavily modified.

How different from the baseline would our modifications be? We won’t change the engine so the flight regime and envelope are the same. We might or might not change the radar. What about the flares and chaff? Same place, same number.

I have no doubt that once the enemy get a Su-57 example they will have good measure of the FGFA.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Mar 2018 04:27

Depend on India to demand all sorts of own sensirs etc that will add more years and costs to its realization. Nothing in the market is good enough.
Example Rafale.

srai · Post by **srai** » 01 Mar 2018 05:52

Viv S,

What you have highlighted in the article regarding Su-30MKI tells more about incomplete contracts signed by India. Maintenance etc are signed many years later as an after thought (subsequent contracts). We see incomplete contracts time-and-time again—P-75, T90S, Arjun, MiG/Sukoi etc. On a side note, yes Russian products, while cheaper, are more maintenance intensive. Russians also have a way of reneging on their contracts but then they also offer far higher ToT/JV than others.

Recently, former ACM talked about the original MMRCA contract did not have all of the whole package that the recent 36 Rafales ordered have (PBL, Maintenance facilities, training, weapons etc). However, it cost $8 billion+ for just 36 units.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Mar 2018 08:26

I think also avionics added. Integration might not be plug and play.
Of $8B one third is offset.

From first jet fighter onwards, buy spares is a big reluctance. Emphasis on the numbers.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 01 Mar 2018 22:00

Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jets successfully tested in Syria

MOSCOW, March 1. /TASS/. Two Sukhoi Su-57 stealth fighter jets have successfully completed a two-day program of tests in Syria, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu told reporters on Thursday.

"Indeed, they were there for a while. Two days. During that time, they completed a program of trials, including combat ones," Shoigu said. "I can say that the trials were success and the planes returned home a week ago."

"There were two planes escorted by flying laboratories and test beds monitoring the parameters of weapons work," the defense minister continued.

Commenting on the satellite images, uploaded on the Internet, allegedly featuring the Su-57 fighter jets, Shoigu said, "As for various satellite photos, I can state that now is not the year of 1995 and such planes are never located side by side."

The Su-57 (PAK FA) performed its maiden flight in 2010. On December 5, it made the first flight with a new engine. Currently, the plane is equipped with the so-called stage-on engine 117C. The new engine has been given no name so far and is conventionally referred to as "stage-two engine."

It was reported in August 2017 that Russia’s the PAK FA fifth-generation fighter jet had received the serial index of Su-57. The experimental design work on the most advanced fighter jet should be completed in 2019 and its deliveries to the troops should begin at that time.

Srutayus · Post by **Srutayus** » 01 Mar 2018 23:43

https://www.myind.net/Home/viewArticle/ ... -air-force

Comparisons related to a hypothetical choice between the FGFA and the F-35 by former IAF pilot, Vijainder K Thakur.