Su-30: News and Discussion

sathyaC · Post by **sathyaC** » 07 Jun 2010 21:39

shiv wrote:
rsharma wrote: in my humble opinion, a lot more stands to be jeopardized than the safety of the fighters on such a mission.. given the importance of the MKIs to not just the mission capabilities of IAF but also to the psyche of its Pilots and the Brass, once the force starts losing a couple over enemy territory, the morale does get a flogging and the Brass starts getting a panicky shit-fit.. has happened in the past wars, where the top commanders went on a defensive after taking some losses, even when the brave pilots were roaring to keep having a go at the enemy
Sharmaji you should read Jasjit Singh's book on Air Power. It is a masterpiece. Basically Air Forces (competent ones such as the IAF) do not think the way you have stated.

In a war the early phase is very risky - a time when you are trying to get air dominance. At that time there will be losses. In fact the losses can be so high that they will be unsustainable in the long term. But Air Forces (competent ones such as the IAF) plan for such high losses in the beginning knowing that once you have knocked out enemy air bases and radars, your loss rate will come down. Jasjit Singh has analyses various wars to show how things work, or not work depending on what is done.

It is important for a population that is unaware of the way wars are fought not to lose their morale by seeing the early losses in a war. That is why media control is important. Sorry OT.

Sorry OT

the book is very expansive 2500+ any other options Shiva

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jun 2010 21:40

sgopal thanks. area around cockpit is painted black to reduce glare in the cockpit.

>> ^ Apparently a paint chip over the white angular projection in front of the IRST mount (I think some sort of a drag reducing measure).

dunno, looks like a cheese cube to me, certainly not a paint chip !

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 08 Jun 2010 02:03

Since we are talking about paint, can any one tell as to what is the purpose of this Black coloured patch under the cockpit:-
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_xfMhtd6HdVE/TA1bq ... -F3_lg.jpg

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 08 Jun 2010 02:24

There are a lot of paint inspectors on this board.. how come ??

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 08 Jun 2010 03:02

^^^^^^^^^

Curiosity my friend.... Curiosity.

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 08 Jun 2010 03:53

removing this statement so it doesnt cause more confusion...mea culpa

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 08 Jun 2010 05:14

Srivastav wrote:
Asit P wrote:Since we are talking about paint, can any one tell as to what is the purpose of this Black coloured patch under the cockpit:-
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_xfMhtd6HdVE/TA1bq ... -F3_lg.jpg
This is where the gun of the MKI is, youll also notice that some MKI's do not even have the black paint there. I think this is due to the probable damage caused( or could be caused) to the paint by the firing of the gun. So i guess it was decided not to repaint that area again and again

now you're thoroughly confused and are confusing others too. the black paint near the cockpit has nothing to do with gun gas. That black paint is meant to reduce glare for the pilots inside the cockpit. Its that simple.

The different material used near the gun port is due to the very high temperatures of the gun gas. Aluminium skins will be damaged in no time due to such high temperatures, so titanium is used and copper grease is applied on it as well in some aircraft.

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 08 Jun 2010 05:24

^^ thanks for correcting me saar

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Jun 2010 06:57

Cybaru wrote:There are a lot of paint inspectors on this board.. how come ??

A thought occurred to me. Paint inspectors have their uses in sparking off new thought.

I just wonder if paint does tend to get stripped close to the base of the IRST in every aircraft. Is it possible that airflow is smooth over the rest of the nose but gets turbulent as it flows around the base of the IRST causing increased chances of stripping of paint there. Or does paint merely get lifted off the paint-unpainted interface - i.e where the paint ends and IRST begins. Or is it just a random occurrence?

Reddy · Post by **Reddy** » 08 Jun 2010 08:27

shiv wrote: Or is it just a random occurrence?

I am no paint job on planes expert. However, i did work with some optical systems that needs to be covered when not in use and also that which needs constant cleaning. The area around the lens does gets a bit scratched and discolored over time.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 08 Jun 2010 09:08

Thanks for the answer Kartik.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 08 Jun 2010 09:14

@asit
people should really try and read before asking questions. especially if the question has been answered in a post just above yours.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Jun 2010 16:22

Reddy wrote:
shiv wrote: Or is it just a random occurrence?
I am no paint job on planes expert. However, i did work with some optical systems that needs to be covered when not in use and also that which needs constant cleaning. The area around the lens does gets a bit scratched and discolored over time.

Ah. This might be the real explanation.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 08 Jun 2010 16:46

I am no paint job on planes expert. However, i did work with some optical systems that needs to be covered when not in use and also that which needs constant cleaning. The area around the lens does gets a bit scratched and discolored over time.

its little points like this that makes BR interesting

thanks

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 08 Jun 2010 17:40

Rahul M wrote:@asit
people should really try and read before asking questions. especially if the question has been answered in a post just above yours.

Am sorry Rahul, but my question was different than the one you answered. Please click on the link which I have given, and check the area which I have enclosed with a Red coloured box. I guess I got what I was looking for from Kartik. Nevertheless, I like reading your posts too. Keep up the good work

.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 08 Jun 2010 18:14

I was not looking for a pat on the back !

just requesting people to read, it makes for less noise.

anyway, back to scheduled program, with the discovery of SB303 what can we say about the number of MKI's with IAF ?
the last known situation was
SB 001-018 -su-30k, retired
SB 019 up to 100(or 099?) reserved for russian origin birds.
SB101 and beyond - HAL made birds.

question being, does the 300 series signify a shift from phase II to phase III in the manufacturing process at HAL ?

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 09 Jun 2010 02:49

Rahul M wrote:I was not looking for a pat on the back !
just requesting people to read, it makes for less noise.

Why don't you use the same suggestion on yourself? I guess I did tell you that my question was different than the one you answered.

You had answered a question about the Black paint near the IRST which is used to reduce glare. Whereas my question was about the black coloured patch (highlighted in the link given by me) near the gun port.

How does a different question amount to creating noise? Aren't we all here to share our knowledge and thoughts with each other?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 16 Jun 2010 18:36

Dynamatic delivers first sets of air frame structures for Sukhoi 30 MKI from Nasik facility

Dynamatic Technologies Ltd, the engineering products manufacturer, said it started deliveries of first set of air frame structures for India's largest defense program, Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter bomber, from its new facility in Nasik. The company recently commenced the transfer of assembly work of air frame structures for the Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter bomber from its production facilities in Bengaluru to a new facility provided by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) at Nasik.

The assembly transfer, which is expected to be complete by August 2010, will enable Dynamatic to offer greater production support to HAL due to its strategic location at the customer's doorstep, it said in a regulatory filing. The space freed at Dynamatic's aerospace production facilities in Bengaluru, by the assembly transfer, will be utilised by the company for its export initiatives.

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 21 Jun 2010 18:54

A French Spotter friend just emailed me this link,

The Indians arrive in France - http://www.spottingzone.com/forum/photo ... 02-30.html (Low pass by 3 MKI's in Orléans)

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 21 Jun 2010 21:46

Is it me, or does the SU-303 lack the pylons??? I only see one on each external side of the wingtips?? What happen to the remaining ones??? It seems that these are FRESH of the Production lines???

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Jun 2010 21:53

pylons can be fitted or removed at will. no one fits them unnecessarily and downgrades aerodynamic profile. nothing to do with new built. that said, these aircraft are newer ones.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 21 Jun 2010 22:25

Aaahh, understood.. Not that I didn't know about the pylons (ability to add/subtract at will) but I suppose my question needed to be rephrased correctly... Why is it that these Rambhas don't have their additional pylons?? Unlike RedFlag, where they were pretty much flying with almost maximum load and with all the E-LINT add on's, what's the purpose of these Su's at the French exercise flying with the cleanest of the clean airframe?? It is primarily to test the dog fighting capability against France's latest jets?? or is it to ensure that the RCS stays low and see how well the Frenchman can detect Rambhas???

Also Rahul da, maybe this is not my forte, but If I'm to hazard a guess I don't think that adding the pylons would affect Rambha's aerodynamic capability.. I have seen these baby fly with all her pylons in the SU-30 Waltzing in the sky youtube video and I don't quite understand how not having these pylons would boost it's aerodynamic capability??

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 21 Jun 2010 22:29

I think those pictures are from when they were flying the SUs to the exercise and during ferry, to maximise fuel efficiency, they fly clean?

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Jun 2010 22:30

Yes it reads "The Indians arrive in France" .

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 21 Jun 2010 22:34

^^ AHH HAH Thanks Negi sahab.. You hit the nail on the head.. That answers my question... (less drag)

Also additional videos of Su-30 In Nellis has the same config as well and this is when they were returning FROM an exercise, but Negi Sahab's explanation suffices.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Jun 2010 22:38

craig, appendages affect aerodynamic profile of every aircraft, the question is how much. yes the mki can dance around with a load but it also burns more fuel in that config.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 21 Jun 2010 23:12

^^ True, I stand corrected. Thank you Dada.

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 22 Jun 2010 17:36

In the images at the link http://www.spottingzone.com/forum/photo ... 02-30.html the shape of the "boom" between the engines seems to have changed as compared to this image http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... ukhoi1.JPG

Anything significant here? I dont want to restart the rear facing radar rumour here, but would like to know what such a shape change means?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Jun 2010 18:56

They seem to have made it flat to accomodate the ESM antenna

HariC · Post by **HariC** » 22 Jun 2010 18:58

K Mehta,

No change from what I see

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... 1.jpg.html
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... 1.jpg.html
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... s.jpg.html

and these pictures are really old.. one of the very first that came out (caption says 20 Squadorn - so very first MKIs)

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 23 Jun 2010 16:59

My bad HariC,
I guess different angle!

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 26 Jun 2010 01:40

Rs 15,000 crore Sukhoi deal cleared
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 092315.cms

he Cabinet Committee on Security earlier this month quietly cleared one of the biggest defence orders of recent times.

The almost Rs 15,000 crore order for an additional 42 Sukhoi-30 MKI fighters would add up the total number of these modern Russian fighters for Indian Air Force to 272.

When the entire Sukhoi-30 MKIs, including the 42, are delivered to IAF by around 2018, it would become the single largest type of fighters in service, marking a huge technological transition from the dominance of MIG-21 fighters today.

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 26 Jun 2010 01:49

The almost Rs 15,000 crore order for an additional 42 Sukhoi-30 MKI fighters would add up the total number of these modern Russian fighters for Indian Air Force to 272.

Just a small nitpick here. This deal will take the number of Sukhoi 30 MKI in IAF's arsenal to 270 (and not 272). 2 Sukhois have been lost in accidents.

rahuls · Post by **rahuls** » 26 Jun 2010 02:41

^^^ Quoting from the same article.

The present order for 42 fighters was originally supposed to be 40, but two more were added to the order book to make up for the two crashed fighters. A senior official said that HAL is expected to complete all the SU-30 MKI orders by 2016-17 period.

So, I guess it should be 272 again.

rahuls · Post by **rahuls** » 26 Jun 2010 02:50

Again quoting from the same TOI article which Asit posted above,

HAL has been steadily stepping up its Sukhoi-30 MKI delivery schedules. While last year it delivered 23 of these fighters, this year it is expected to produce 28. HAL has already supplied 74 of these fighters.

So, HAL has orders of 140+40+42 = 222, of which 74 are delivered.
I don't know what is the max production rate HAL is targeting, but if we take 28 to be the max, then it should take another 5 years 3 months to complete the rest of the order (148).

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 26 Jun 2010 03:02

Asit P wrote:Rs 15,000 crore Sukhoi deal cleared

AoA...

thats Approx $84 Mil each, seems too costly

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 26 Jun 2010 05:34

rahuls wrote:So, I guess it should be 272 again.

Rahul, its 230-2+42. This makes it 270.

230= initial order
-2 = attrition
42 = New order

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 26 Jun 2010 08:29

Asit P wrote:Rs 15,000 crore Sukhoi deal cleared

Any ideas if these newbies would come with any upgrades?? Radar upgrades, Brahmos equipped,..?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jun 2010 08:32

toi report says HAL has delivered 74 locally made mki so far. 23 last yr and 28 is the target this year. 28 is just enuf for 2 squadrons.

being new build, I am sure the centerline pylon will come pre made for brahmos. no point not having that capability on new a/c...as a standby even if only 40 might be tasked for maritime strike initially and HAL new builds could have it too.

Mayuresh · Post by **Mayuresh** » 26 Jun 2010 14:15

Rupesh wrote: AoA... thats Approx $84 Mil each, seems too costly

It seems to me that the inflation is too much since the first a/c were less than $30 mil each... I guess it is the newer technology that the newer airframes shall have that are responsible for bulk of the increased cost. Can someone estimate how much the initial configuration would cost if ordered today (the initial MKI config, after the initial batches of K and MK) Considering a 5% inflation (a higher side estimate) we would have the cost to be $60 Mil. Are we including more than $20 Mil worth of upgrades from the initial configurations?