Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20533
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 08 Oct 2019 15:26

nam wrote:Given the need to "respect" the LoC and standoff fights like we had on Feb 27, the way to create a "no fly zone", without firing off a BVR is to use long range jamming.

Also given the dense PLAAF air defence SAM, might require lot of SEAD jamming.

IAF could invest some effort and ask DARE to come up with a suite and prototype it on a Su30 test platform from HAL.

HAL needs to built couple of Su30 test platform to try out AESA, jammers and other kit. I don't understand why they haven't done it already.


why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby srai » 08 Oct 2019 16:11

^^^
Indian Aerospace should be looked at from a more collaborative manner. It should not be us vs them mindset.

Modern combat aircraft upgrades are no trivial matter. HAL has been building Su-30MKI for some 15-years with the ability to build from raw materials. Recently, Brahmos was integrated, which required airframe modifications. HAL is supported by hundreds of Tier-1/2/3 manufacturers and suppliers. Then there is a whole DRDO aerospace cluster supporting with their R&D and tech transfer to the Indian industries. No one is an island ;)

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 58
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Raghunathgb » 08 Oct 2019 16:41

chetak wrote:
nam wrote:Given the need to "respect" the LoC and standoff fights like we had on Feb 27, the way to create a "no fly zone", without firing off a BVR is to use long range jamming.

Also given the dense PLAAF air defence SAM, might require lot of SEAD jamming.

IAF could invest some effort and ask DARE to come up with a suite and prototype it on a Su30 test platform from HAL.

HAL needs to built couple of Su30 test platform to try out AESA, jammers and other kit. I don't understand why they haven't done it already.


why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


Is DARE capable of integration test and certify the entire aircraft for flying? Integration of subsystems is more complex than plug and play. It's HAL which has ensure integration don't create other problems.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18656
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 08 Oct 2019 16:48

Cain Marko wrote:Hmm, I'm not so convinced with that Rajat Pandit article. There have been many speculations so far but nothing has come through. I wouldn't be surprised if the IAF just went for a more advanced Bars derivative with irbis TWT. That should produce equally good range specs, iirc 400km for 3msq, which is ridiculous.


That extreme range is only available in a 10 degree by 10 degree sector, i.e. 100 square degrees. The claimed "standard" range (which of course is likely lowballed and an underestimate) is around 200km. Typically, the radar should be able to divide a sector into slices (such as the 100 degree one above) and then operate in a slow, but long range mode.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2638
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby nam » 08 Oct 2019 16:50

chetak wrote:why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


HAL is the producer and it needs to own the various version and upgrades. We should not restrict ourselves to requirements from IAF. HAL & our aerospace ecosystem should propose and trail out capabilities, to provide IAF the option to apply them in their operational doctrine.

Right now all our tech requirement is based on what US or Russia have come up with. Most of the aero tech development in US is run by NASA, supported by Boeing/LM.

Our tech development is shoe boxed by IAF requirement and GoI approval.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20533
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 08 Oct 2019 17:40

Raghunathgb wrote:
chetak wrote:
why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


Is DARE capable of integration test and certify the entire aircraft for flying? Integration of subsystems is more complex than plug and play. It's HAL which has ensure integration don't create other problems.


DARE is more than capable.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20533
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 08 Oct 2019 17:46

nam wrote:
chetak wrote:why HAL.

Dare can directly deal with IAF, some BRD could modify the aircraft and this would be a faster and more economical route with IAF controlling the timelines.

what exactly would HAL bring to the table that the IAF and it's BRDs don't.


HAL is the producer and it needs to own the various version and upgrades. We should not restrict ourselves to requirements from IAF. HAL & our aerospace ecosystem should propose and trail out capabilities, to provide IAF the option to apply them in their operational doctrine.

Right now all our tech requirement is based on what US or Russia have come up with. Most of the aero tech development in US is run by NASA, supported by Boeing/LM.

Our tech development is shoe boxed by IAF requirement and GoI approval.


IAF owns the aircraft and HAL builds them on contract.

DARE is an independent entity.

nothing wrong with IAF dealing directly with DARE.

The only contribution from HAL is a needless bill for minimal services rendered that would have contributed zilch to the project.

such competencies are best developed in a distributed environment and skills are allowed to proliferate.

The IN and the IAF have in house design capabilities and qualified personnel as good as any in the country and those capabilities are recognized and certified and also, these two services are design authorities in their own right.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests