Su-30: News and Discussion

nitinr · Post by **nitinr** » 03 Oct 2009 13:33

Below link talks about 105 Su30-MKI inducted so far. That will be about 6 Squadrons. Any idea where they are placed as of now..

http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/200 ... unter.html

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Oct 2009 17:00

nitinr wrote:Below link talks about 105 Su30-MKI inducted so far. That will be about 6 Squadrons. Any idea where they are placed as of now..

Well my cousin returned from pune this AM and said he saw an MKI take off in Pune. So there's one - now if others can report about the remaining 104 ....

sorry - couldn't resist that - it's meant to be a joke.

Joype · Post by **Joype** » 03 Oct 2009 18:03

Below link talks about 105 Su30-MKI inducted so far. That will be about 6 Squadrons. Any idea where they are placed as of now..

http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/200 ... unter.html

You won't get such info here, also it is not allowed.
You know why...

nitinr · Post by **nitinr** » 04 Oct 2009 13:29

I knew I was pushing it...

Anyways there was talk of 98 odd SU 30-MKI a few months back. Its 105 now. Its the local build which are coming in or imported ones.

I know I am again pushing it but maybe somebody heard something from some doodhwala or paanwala...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 Oct 2009 13:54

nitin, it's not that classified. all one needs to do is read the newspapers.

anyway, this might answer your question :
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Units ... drons.html

nitinr · Post by **nitinr** » 05 Oct 2009 13:30

Thanks Rahul for the heads up.. The link you provided has 8 squadrons. Are some of the squadrons in the process of being raised with full compliment (i.e. about 18 per sq.)

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 05 Oct 2009 14:16

I say this again, if its to counter China that we need additional Made-n-Russia 50 MKIs, then we should evaluate the Su-34 as a contender.

Benefits:

* Longer legs (IIRC around 400 Km more than MKI)
* Armoured cockpit
* Better aerodynamics for low level flight
* 'Bomber' type cockpit configuration with better facilities for pilots
* Different set of auto pilot modes for low level strike
* already integrated with AL-31FP
* 'stealthy' forward fuselage
* Higher payload
* Stronger landing gear to accomodate higher weight
* Ready for maritime strike. Imagine Navy Su-34 based out of A&N
* Tail radar like in Canberra
* Already inducted in Russian AF - its going to replace Su-24 and even Tu-22

Issues:

* Not a multirole fighter - will need fighter escort (which in anycase will be required for a MKI with PGM load)
* Shorter range of main radar
* Will require development period to suit IAF/IN specifications esp with Brahmos

It is a good replacement of Jaguar-IM.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 05 Oct 2009 14:28

nitinr wrote:Thanks Rahul for the heads up.. The link you provided has 8 squadrons. Are some of the squadrons in the process of being raised with full compliment (i.e. about 18 per sq.)

it has eight ? sqn names please !

nitinr · Post by **nitinr** » 06 Oct 2009 13:55

Sorry Rahul.. its 6

.. got confused with the search option and being too trigger happy... Thanks again for your patience..

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 06 Oct 2009 16:09

Aditya G wrote:I say this again, if its to counter China that we need additional Made-n-Russia 50 MKIs, then we should evaluate the Su-34 as a contender.

Benefits:

* Longer legs (IIRC around 400 Km more than MKI)
* Armoured cockpit
* Better aerodynamics for low level flight
* 'Bomber' type cockpit configuration with better facilities for pilots
* Different set of auto pilot modes for low level strike
* already integrated with AL-31FP
* 'stealthy' forward fuselage
* Higher payload
* Stronger landing gear to accomodate higher weight
* Ready for maritime strike. Imagine Navy Su-34 based out of A&N
* Tail radar like in Canberra
* Already inducted in Russian AF - its going to replace Su-24 and even Tu-22

Issues:

* Not a multirole fighter - will need fighter escort (which in anycase will be required for a MKI with PGM load)
* Shorter range of main radar
* Will require development period to suit IAF/IN specifications esp with Brahmos

It is a good replacement of Jaguar-IM.

We are planning to buy apples ( Su 30 MKI) and so oranges(Su 34) may not help us.

We have MMRCA to replace Jaguar, even LCA may also help.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Oct 2009 17:31

A agree with Aditya,having recommended SU-24 buying much earlier,as we do not possess a strategic bomber,barring out TU-142 LRMP Bears,which can be used for that role and are still in service with Russia's strategic bombing fleet.In fact,the IAF should have around 400 Flankers,including about 60 SU-35s and two sqds. of SU-34s for ths strategic and long range strike using LR stand-off missiles as well.What is also needed are two sqds of MIG-31 high-alt interceptors/AWACS destroyers with the 400km range LR Russian AAM being developed,for use against both Chinese and Paki AWACS/AEW aircraft.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 06 Oct 2009 17:43

^^ Couldn't+ agree more. I would have rather seen induction of 6-7 squadrons of Su-35s than this MRCA competition ( though I cannot deny the advantage of TOT factor of MRCA).

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 06 Oct 2009 17:50

Philip wrote:A agree with Aditya,having recommended SU-24 buying much earlier,as we do not possess a strategic bomber,barring out TU-142 LRMP Bears,which can be used for that role and are still in service with Russia's strategic bombing fleet.In fact,the IAF should have around 400 Flankers,including about 60 SU-35s and two sqds. of SU-34s for ths strategic and long range strike using LR stand-off missiles as well.What is also needed are two sqds of MIG-31 high-alt interceptors/AWACS destroyers with the 400km range LR Russian AAM being developed,for use against both Chinese and Paki AWACS/AEW aircraft.

Philip, I will disagree. We need to wait for further order of additional flankers (SU 35). Even if ordered, they will be delivered only by 2013/14 at the earliest. Till then Pak Fa / FGFA would be in advanced user trials.. There is not point in investing in 4.5 Gen aircraft when we can get 5th Gen in near future.

With respect to Su 34, I agree but with some difference. I think we need 4/5 squadrons of them for effective bomber force which can also replace Jaguars and Mig 27 from their ground attack role. Replacing them with more capable fighter bomber is better option rather than Multirole fighter (MMRCA)

-Nitin

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Oct 2009 18:38

Rahul M wrote:nitin, it's not that classified. all one needs to do is read the newspapers.

anyway, this might answer your question :
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Units ... drons.html

I have converted this into an excel document and now it is possible to sort alphabetically each of the sections by aircraft type, squardon number, location, raising date etc.

Perhaps this feature can be incorporated in the webpage itself by some it vity guru. It'll be really helpful.

Converting this into an excel document is easy. Just select the table as a whole > Open excel > Select the same number of rows and columns as the table (In this case 9 x 108) > paste special > Text.
Lo and behold the excel sheet is ready, and you can sort all of them alphabetically as you like it to understand it better!

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 07 Oct 2009 01:33

Su-34/35/37/39/XX or any new designation air-frame even though similar will need to get fully qualified again for all operations. Not worth the effort esp for 400 km difference. Adding a few more Air-tankers to fuel once birds are in air, will compensate any such deficiencies, while building on commonality. Keep it common, keep it simple, build off massively to support one type in all conditions.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 07 Oct 2009 02:54

The only way India would induct the Su-34 is if Russia goes ahead with the EW/Electronic attack version of the Su-34. Otherwise the SU-30MKI is more than capable of matching the Su-34 in the A2G role once it is upgraded. The Su-34 does look cooler than the MKI though

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Oct 2009 03:09

I agree we should get an upgraded MKI rather.. perhaps a more capable LPI AESA radar, with more advanced functionality that some of the pakfa might field. Perhaps, that would have been a right way to pakfa entry.. we need to use upgrade pather to next generation.

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Oct 2009 04:41

SaiK wrote:I agree we should get an upgraded MKI rather.. perhaps a more capable LPI AESA radar, with more advanced functionality that some of the pakfa might field. Perhaps, that would have been a right way to pakfa entry.. we need to use upgrade pather to next generation.

Look for MLU of MKIs around 2020. By 2020, most of the PAK-FA technologies and weaponry will be available for integration into the MKIs.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 07 Oct 2009 11:12

Wha! Whats the need for Su-34s or 35s? Damn isn't the MKI precisely the jet that combines the two? you have two pilots like the 34 (only the wizzo has greater control), plus plenty of A2A ability. Need more range - give it a couple of EFTs or 5 even (like the MiG-29K) and it'll not only be a long legged bomber, but probly do ltd IFR duties as well. Hook up a tail radar (or better still conformal arrays), increase composite %age, and the MKI will do all the roles of the 35 and 34 except for a few v.niche parts perhaps.

naah, keep the focus on the MKI - it provides more than enough potential for the future as well.
make it an exclusive bird - maximize indian input - get an EW variant running with indian/israeli gizmos - master the engine + radar tech.

CM.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 07 Oct 2009 12:54

besides any other technology gap would be filled with the PAK FA in the future.

Small question about MKI squadron placement , was there any announcement from the Govt. / MoD about basing MKI in Halwara ,Jodhpur or Car Nicobar or is this still speculation.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 07 Oct 2009 13:21

Cain Marko wrote:Wha! Whats the need for Su-34s or 35s?

Perhaps not Su-34, but I feel there is room for S-35. Not because of any deficiency in MKI, but because Su-35 is a single seater. And apparently, it would put much strain on IAF to support many 2 seater a/cs. And I would like India to have as many Sukhois as possible.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 07 Oct 2009 13:39

Parijat Gaur wrote:Perhaps not Su-34, but I feel there is room for S-35. Not because of any deficiency in MKI, but because Su-35 is a single seater. And apparently, it would put much strain on IAF to support many 2 seater a/cs. And I would like India to have as many Sukhois as possible.

I think 280-300 is a good number we MAY not buy more. Remember 30 years down the line Su30 MKI will become another Mig 21.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Oct 2009 13:47

guys, please take the su-34/35 discussion to newbie and misc. thread.
as long as IAF doesn't show any official interest those have nothing to do with su- 30.
I'll move the above posts to that thread.
thanks.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 07 Oct 2009 20:48

b_patel wrote:The only way India would induct the Su-34 is if Russia goes ahead with the EW/Electronic attack version of the Su-34. Otherwise the SU-30MKI is more than capable of matching the Su-34 in the A2G role once it is upgraded. The Su-34 does look cooler than the MKI though

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/de ... d=blogDest

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Oct 2009 22:45

a escort jamming MKI could cart around 3 huge pods for EW and another two fitted at wingtips. the WSO would need some specialized SW to control and monitor these pods functions. sounds like a good idea to me - atleast unlike prowlers and growlers this bird will still have room for a few AAMs and enough speed and fuel to make a quick escape if threatened. it can also use its high speed to reach positions quicker.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Oct 2009 22:48

Chipanda is aid to have around 200+ S300 launchers in the inventory. a battery would be few such launchers, command & reload trucks and radars. they are going to surround all vital targets in tibet, yunnan, east turkestan with radar bubbles from these batteries.

we need all the standoff EW and ARMs we can get to shut down this scam and open paths for jaguars and Mig27s to do their work.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 08 Oct 2009 01:11

Singha wrote:a escort jamming MKI could cart around 3 huge pods for EW and another two fitted at wingtips. the WSO would need some specialized SW to control and monitor these pods functions. sounds like a good idea to me - atleast unlike prowlers and growlers this bird will still have room for a few AAMs and enough speed and fuel to make a quick escape if threatened. it can also use its high speed to reach positions quicker.

Yeah, the only problem is power. It didn't seem like the Ruskie Jammer had a RAT or APU like AL-99Q has. Which means large power draws. The USAF doesn't use these systems as abundantly due to the same reason. They load up B-52's which have lots of juice ( converted ) and lots of goodies in that carbo bay and attempt complete blackout of every thing they can block off.

Jammers need Juice - Ruskies if serious need to come up with a APU that they dump on the MKI. Or atlernatively, we need the MTA to fill this role urgently. Two engines and two APU's with lots of goodies loaded in.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 08 Oct 2009 01:36

Cybaru wrote:
Singha wrote:a escort jamming MKI could cart around 3 huge pods for EW and another two fitted at wingtips. the WSO would need some specialized SW to control and monitor these pods functions. sounds like a good idea to me - atleast unlike prowlers and growlers this bird will still have room for a few AAMs and enough speed and fuel to make a quick escape if threatened. it can also use its high speed to reach positions quicker.
Yeah, the only problem is power. It didn't seem like the Ruskie Jammer had a RAT or APU like AL-99Q has. Which means large power draws. The USAF doesn't use these systems as abundantly due to the same reason. They load up B-52's which have lots of juice ( converted ) and lots of goodies in that carbo bay and attempt complete blackout of every thing they can block off.

Jammers need Juice - Ruskies if serious need to come up with a APU that they dump on the MKI. Or atlernatively, we need the MTA to fill this role urgently. Two engines and two APU's with lots of goodies loaded in.

su30 has enough power to use 3 high powered jammer, such systems already been tested on su34

previously su27,30 had two jammers on wingtips which will be replaced by new ones and one more jammer SAP14 is added to center line for which su30 has enough power

there are lots of specialized aircraft conversion programs around the world not just in US,
e.g IAI has several programs for special purpose aircraft conversion like SIGNINT aircraft,ELINT aircraft,COMINT aircraft etc

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 Oct 2009 02:46

Nihat wrote:...

Small question about MKI squadron placement , was there any announcement from the Govt. / MoD about basing MKI in Halwara ,Jodhpur or Car Nicobar or is this still speculation.

Next time I would suggest you read up on the previous posts and you will find your answers:

IAF to up vigil along LAC to counter China

...
As earlier reported by TOI, IAF has already begun to deploy its most-potent Sukhoi-30MKI jets in Tezpur after Pune and Bareilly. "After two Sukhoi squadrons in Tezpur, we will base another two squadrons in Punjab by 2011...they will certainly add to our offensive potential,'' said Air Marshal Browne.

By also basing Sukhois in Halwara (Punjab), followed by Chabua (Assam) and Jodhpur (Rajasthan), IAF wants to cater for any contingency which may arise on the eastern as well as the western front.
...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Oct 2009 07:59

growler was testing a ram air pod with shrouded fan to generate organic power for jamming function. this should be something Russia can make fairly easily given their vast aerospace exp. a couple of dedicated ram air power generators for wing or fuselage pylons. we need to get proactive and fund/try such scams rather than wait for developments to overtake us.

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 08 Oct 2009 12:39

Singha wrote:growler was testing a ram air pod with shrouded fan to generate organic power for jamming function. this should be something Russia can make fairly easily given their vast aerospace exp. a couple of dedicated ram air power generators for wing or fuselage pylons. we need to get proactive and fund/try such scams rather than wait for developments to overtake us.

Singhaji, how effective will be the proposed Wayawi EW suite. We are planning to install in LCA but will it help for this role.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 08 Oct 2009 12:43

its Mayawi

rajeshks · Post by **rajeshks** » 08 Oct 2009 13:53

krishnan wrote:its Mayawi

True... Some Mayavi changed M to W

Is it a pure defensive EW suite or can be used to attack S300/400 radars?

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 08 Oct 2009 19:39

Russian version of el/m 2060p recce pod M400
http://www.spyflight.co.uk/m400.htm

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Oct 2009 20:21

Singha wrote:growler was testing a ram air pod with shrouded fan to generate organic power for jamming function. this should be something Russia can make fairly easily given their vast aerospace exp. a couple of dedicated ram air power generators for wing or fuselage pylons. we need to get proactive and fund/try such scams rather than wait for developments to overtake us.

Interesting. Something similar to the turbines on IL-78MKI pods? (AFAIK supplied by Israel)

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 08 Oct 2009 23:54

Aditya G wrote:
Singha wrote:growler was testing a ram air pod with shrouded fan to generate organic power for jamming function. this should be something Russia can make fairly easily given their vast aerospace exp. a couple of dedicated ram air power generators for wing or fuselage pylons. we need to get proactive and fund/try such scams rather than wait for developments to overtake us.
Interesting. Something similar to the turbines on IL-78MKI pods? (AFAIK supplied by Israel)

Do you have a picture or link to that ?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 09 Oct 2009 15:26

You can see in any of the IL-78MKI photos ... see the pods from the outside.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 09 Oct 2009 18:24

returning su30k was bad idea and several mig21 could be retired instead

N001 radar on su30k could be upgraded.
PERO radar upgrade was available which will replace the antenna of N001 with passive array radar allows air to ground modes and this upgraded radar could be well match for bars

chinese have N001 on their su27 no air to ground modes and only fire semi active R27
chinese su30mkk has N001VE radar which allows air to ground modes and R77 capable

PERO upgrade is very promising and cheaper than BARS in which china is very much interested

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Oct 2009 19:13

panda got their first Su27 around early 90s. we got our first su30k around mid 90s.

if we retired them last yr due to airframe fatigue its quite surprising because with a overhaul by maker, airframes tend to last 30 yrs (Mig21 is proof of that!). even with
just N001 radar , A2A capability they could have been vital gap fillers and
helped against the panda until MRCA comes online.

the chinese are probably still using their earliest su27s after a MLU.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 09 Oct 2009 19:23

baldev, the original flankers were really flogged around AFAIK. add to that the impossibility of the upg path to mki (IIRC) retaining a low performing different type didn't make much sense.

and do remember that we didn't just return it, we got mki's in stead.