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

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 21 Sep 2015 08:50

Karthik S wrote:^^ Wouldn't that be a win-win for both countries?

My take , if they can really sell those to bakistan , all the best . We should not get scared instead build our own capability.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Sep 2015 13:30

russia's choice - 36 su35 to TSP vs 150 pakfa later to iaf.

let them choose in their own best interest. we can make it clear privately they cannot win both.

we should in any case kill the MTA circus and use the Embraer KC390 as the template.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 21 Sep 2015 13:51

From where Pakis are going to pay for the AC's?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Sep 2015 14:47

Yagnasri wrote:From where Pakis are going to pay for the AC's?

They will print the T Bills

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Sep 2015 14:48

Asad Hashim ‏@AsadHashim ( Reuters/Pakistan ) https://twitter.com/AsadHashim/status/6 ... 2600291328

According to the PAF, reports that Pakistan is getting Su-35's from Russia has no basis in reality. No contracts, no negotiations.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 21 Sep 2015 17:41

^^^So yet another lifafa journalism to put indo-Russian relation in bad light

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Sep 2015 17:45

Military Acceptance of Su-30SM same as our MKI , Nice video . Interesting footage shows 30 mm Gun Fired on Ground and in flight starts after 2:00 , Shiv would find Gun footage interesting , sitting inside the cockpit , Use Translator in the video for english subtitles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3Lfa7dQXh4

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 21 Sep 2015 21:28

When world economy was booming, Russia unilaterally breached all contracts by raising prices, now will they lower prices during recession?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 21 Sep 2015 23:20

RuAF/RuN has deployed Su-30SMs in Syria. Goes to show that for the inventory they have, these birds are the most combat capable and combat ready. Lets acknowledge our contribution to this magnificent aircraft.

IMHO, we should pursue PAK-FA co-operation as we have succeeded with them previously. Sure the degree of Indian contribution may be higher but that should not be the sole go/no-go criteria.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Sep 2015 23:29

Perhasp OT for thsi thread, but ......

we should pursue PAK-FA co-operation

Someone I know happened to mention that the discussions are hung on IP.

Possible?

srai · Post by **srai** » 22 Sep 2015 18:42

Austin wrote:Asad Hashim ‏@AsadHashim ( Reuters/Pakistan ) https://twitter.com/AsadHashim/status/6 ... 2600291328

According to the PAF, reports that Pakistan is getting Su-35's from Russia has no basis in reality. No contracts, no negotiations.

When the PAF is getting American and Chinese fighters at "friendship prices" why would they spend their FOREX reserves on getting a few Russian fighters? At around $75-100 million/unit prices plus infrastructure, lifecycle support and weapons, Su-35s won't come cheap.

It would be more cost effective for them to buy some of the many second-hand F-16s out there along with more JF-17s. If they want "stealthy" fighters in the future, the Chinese have J-20 and J-31 under development.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 22 Sep 2015 21:03

for the puki mind .. the equal equal thing goes very deep in their psyche and they know , they have nothing compared to MKIs.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 22 Sep 2015 21:32

Shaun wrote:for the puki mind .. the equal equal thing goes very deep in their psyche and they know , they have nothing compared to MKIs.

They have the noocleaar bum and apparently that takes care of everything.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Sep 2015 21:51

srai replied here http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 9#p1904319

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 22 Sep 2015 22:16

Point taken. This conversation will continue in the other thread now.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 29 Sep 2015 06:21

IAF Sukhoi to start test flying with BrahMoS in Oct.

In what will provide the Indian Air Force (IAF) with additional lethality, the actual integration process of the BrahMos missile with the frontline fighter jet, the Sukhoi-30-MKI, is set to commence.The integration, including mating of the 2.4 tonne (2,400 kg) missile — a miniature version of the existing 3,000 kg Naval and land-based BrahMos — is slated to commence in October. It would include four stages of testing with progress depending on the validation of each step and is expected to be a six-month process, concluding in March next year.

The Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of BrahMos Aerospace, Dr Sudhir Kumar Mishra, confirmed to The Tribune: “Tests of Sukhois carrying BrahMoS are slated to commence in October. Integration of the missile with the Sukhoi-30-MKI is a complex system.”

Sources said the first test will be with dead weight of 2,400 kg. The second test will be by carrying a dummy missile and firing it from the plane. The third and fourth stages of testing are scheduled with actual missiles — but without the 200 kg warhead — and will validate the guidance system and accuracy. All tests will be carried out over the Bay of Bengal.

The BrahMos missile — a joint venture between India and Russia — is a two-stage supersonic cruise missile that, once fired, skims along the surface at a height of just 3-4 metre, making it impossible for enemy radars to pick it up. The IAF version will include a “free fall” system allowing the pilot to fire the missile from an altitude as low as 1,000 feet and as high as 46,000 feet. The missile is programmed to adjust the “free fall” and strike at the selected target. This adjustment of the free fall will be part of the four-stage test.

The missile has a 290-km range developed for destruction of high value and strategic installation. The missile has mid-course inertial guidance followed by homing guidance.

srai · Post by **srai** » 29 Sep 2015 07:00

^^^

Thinking about how many rounds need to be fired in the third and fourth stages of integration trials?

Pre-trials -> Launch separation and ignition trials
Max G launch
Max altitude -> 46000ft
Min altitude -> 1000 ft
Medium altitude -> ~20000ft
Max range -> 290Km
Min range -> ~50Km
Medium range -> ~180km
Massed group attack -> flight of 2 or more Su-30MKIs attacking a group of targets

The trials would make use of bunch of combinations from above, like max altitude and max range.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 07:17

they will also need to launch at minimum and maximum design release speed. i do not think it can be released at supersonic speed though. only few lighter munitions are designed for that like AAM. the Mig25 also had some supersonic n-bomb release system called "bolomo peleng"

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Sep 2015 13:36

The Russians have also deployed SU-34s to Syria,which flew there direct from Russia! That should give the IAF some ideas about acquiring these bomber variants for use against the Chinese in Tibet.We really lack a dedicated bomber force,whereas China has several dozens.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 29 Sep 2015 15:20

Philip wrote:The Russians have also deployed SU-34s to Syria,which flew there direct from Russia! That should give the IAF some ideas about acquiring these bomber variants for use against the Chinese in Tibet.We really lack a dedicated bomber force,whereas China has several dozens.

Why? Is the IAF also going to Syria? Or does it subscribe to the delusion of the Su-34 surviving in Chinese airspace instead of being chewed up by hostile SAMs and fighters?

The Chinese bomber fleet is intended for operations over the East & South China Seas not for incursions into Indian airspace.

srin · Post by **srin** » 29 Sep 2015 15:31

Do the Syrian rebels have S-300 ? If not, what really is this going to demonstrate ? Who can better pound AK-47 armed guerillas on the ground using Mach 2 capable aircraft ?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 29 Sep 2015 15:52

The only side that has a half decent Air Defense system is Assad and they are being supported by Russia. The Su-34's are probably there for time critical targets while the Su-30's are there to to protect the large Russian presence (and bound to get larger) along with the Air-Defense systems that also accompanied them

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 16:06

where are these Su34 and what value they bring? the Su30 is way more than enough to cover all of Syria unrefuelled and can loiter around. it can carry upto 20 bombs in CCIP mode and has been demoed by IAF in pokhran. it can carry LGBs and their sapsan pod for precision bombing of high value , faraway, time critical targets the Frogfoots cannot take out.

but from the deployment it looks like they want to stay local and clean out the immediate threat to the main syrian cities before even thinking of looking further east at ISIS. there are various Nusra and jihadi tanzeems and ragtag militias in between Assad and ISIS mostly.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 29 Sep 2015 19:12

Russians will be looking to launch a marketing campaign for the SU30s and SU34 the way French were doing for the Rafale in Libya bombing

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Sep 2015 20:34

^ that means Tochkas and Iskanders would be outbound soon...must be loading up on ships in the black sea!

member_24684 · Post by **member_24684** » 30 Sep 2015 09:22

Philip wrote:The Russians have also deployed SU-34s to Syria,which flew there direct from Russia! That should give the IAF some ideas about acquiring these bomber variants for use against the Chinese in Tibet.We really lack a dedicated bomber force,whereas China has several dozens.

Nope they were refueled in Iran ..

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 30 Sep 2015 14:04

SajeevJino wrote:
Philip wrote:The Russians have also deployed SU-34s to Syria,which flew there direct from Russia! That should give the IAF some ideas about acquiring these bomber variants for use against the Chinese in Tibet.We really lack a dedicated bomber force,whereas China has several dozens.
Nope they were refueled in Iran ..

Source?

This indicates a non-stop flight path:
http://theaviationist.com/2015/09/29/su ... -in-syria/

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Sep 2015 14:31

the 6 su34 and 4 Su30 should be able to generate 10 sorties a night with heavy bombloads in the range of 8 tons each given the short distances to target.
these might be used to go after deep ISIS targets while the hinds, alligators, frogfoots and fencers work in the closer ring of targets.

clearly the Rus wants to test and showcase every asset in their inventory for the international clients.

I am looking forward to backfires and blackjacks flying the same route over the caspian, dropping 100s of tons of HE and then U-turn.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Sep 2015 14:45

The delusion is that the Chinese will not use their bombers against India in a spat over Tibet.The Su-34 is supposed to have a greater range than the SU-30 series. If the Super-Sukhoi/30 std. expected for future avatars possess performance similar range/endurance/payload to the 34s,along with new AESA radars,then a 34 buy may not be needed,but the laSU_34 xccpt.ck of a dedicated bomber in IAF roundels is a missing link.

The aircraft can carry 12,100kg of fuel internally in two fuel tanks in the wings and four in the fuselage. Three external fuel tanks, each with a capacity of 3,000l, can also be fitted.

The aircraft can achieve a speed of 1,900km/h (Mach 1.6) at altitude and 1,300km/h (Mach 1) at sea level, and has a flight range of 4,000km.

It's going to be v.interesting to watch the fun. However,the Saudis have expressed their deep opposition to Assad and can be expected to provide ISIS with as much support as they can .

srin · Post by **srin** » 30 Sep 2015 15:12

^^^ The real delusion is that IAF can counter Chinese bombers using its own bombers. The correct response to enemy bomber is long range radars and SAMs and air defence fighters in forward air bases.

The minor delusion is that a fighter bomber is an adequate bomber. I don't see any reason why an MKI can't do what an Su-34 needs to do.
Get an Airbus 330 or Boeing 777 and make that a bomber. Now that's a real standoff range bomber.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 30 Sep 2015 15:41

Philip wrote:The delusion is that the Chinese will not use their bombers against India in a spat over Tibet.The Su-34 is supposed to have a greater range than the SU-30 series. If the Super-Sukhoi/30 std. expected for future avatars possess performance similar range/endurance/payload to the 34s,along with new AESA radars,then a 34 buy may not be needed,but the laSU_34 xccpt.ck of a dedicated bomber in IAF roundels is a missing link.

Use their bombers to do what exactly? Why picture is running in your head right now - share it with the forum please.

Will the PLAAF's H-6Ks cross the LAC? How deep will they come? Tezpur/Leh? Pathankot/Guwahati? Delhi/Kolkata?

Also, when does the IAF return from its vacation in your scenario? Or do you envision it as being present on scene but, just so damn incompetent, that it'll be incapable of shooting down a 50s era warplane?

The aircraft can carry 12,100kg of fuel internally in two fuel tanks in the wings and four in the fuselage. Three external fuel tanks, each with a capacity of 3,000l, can also be fitted.

The aircraft can achieve a speed of 1,900km/h (Mach 1.6) at altitude and 1,300km/h (Mach 1) at sea level, and has a flight range of 4,000km.

Flight range of 4000 km. To go where exactly? Do we plan to bomb Yemen as well? Because Pakistan doesn't have any strategic depth and no conventional aircraft will be able to significantly penetrate PLAAF-controlled airspace without being detected and engaged (and probably downed).

The IAF hasn't integrated EFTs on the Su-30MKI. Why? Ponder over it.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 30 Sep 2015 16:02

What will be MTOW, fuel and weapon payload of PLAAF Su-34 or H-6k taking off from Tibet?

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 30 Sep 2015 16:45

Sukhois in Syria will be a movie IAF will be watching very closely. FIrst time we should see SU-30 in a war scenario.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Sep 2015 20:26

the H6 bombers could base themselves in northern tibet, well out of range of our fighters and release ALCMs from within tibet itself. ofcourse ground based systems like the long sword CJ10 will also be used but H6 can get around faster to the drop off points.

the Engels AFB, Saratov home base of around 50% of the Tu95/Tu160 bomber fleet is a bit due north of the caspian sea.
but unrefuelled combat radius of these birds is huge, the Tu95 is more like a missile truck carrying upto 16 ALCMs, but the Tu160 can cart conventional bombs also. that apart they have lots of Tu22M backfires which can fly freely since unlike ukraine or georgia there are no high level SAMs with ISIS.
like this lone B1 prowling darkly over Kobane and unleashing heavy bombs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW1_p9whkns

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Sep 2015 20:44

Singha wrote:the H6 bombers could base themselves in northern tibet, well out of range of our fighters and release ALCMs from within tibet itself. ofcourse ground based systems like the long sword CJ10 will also be used but H6 can get around faster to the drop off points.

Only in Word war 2 did we see this type of "total war" where the civilized nations of Europe tried to gandphutt the other totally.

There is one problem in China trying that with India or India trying that with China. Yes of course it will entail a great amount of damage and death - but even while that happens - if the Indian army makes deep inroads into Tibet and grabs hold of a lot of territory even as we retaliate on their cities - - all that effort will be useless for China. No mater what the Chinese throw at us - if we can ensure that we grab hold of vast areas in Tibet and hurt the Chinese military in Tibet - what they do with our population centers is secondary. Eventually their effort will have to be to keep us out or throw us out. Hitting cities is vicious but we can do that too.

soumik · Post by **soumik** » 30 Sep 2015 20:55

we do not need to get dedicated bombers like the H-6 at least for any future land war with the PLAAF. what we could do with is a squadron or two of Tu-22M's to use as high speed CBG destroying missile trucks.
For the War over Tibet what we will need is very long range tracking radars capable of looking into Tibetian airspace coupled to around half a dozen batteries of S-400class systems backed up by two dozen AKASH batteries and numerous VSHORAD and AA batteries.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 30 Sep 2015 21:00

Singha wrote:the H6 bombers could base themselves in northern tibet, well out of range of our fighters and release ALCMs from within tibet itself. ofcourse ground based systems like the long sword CJ10 will also be used but H6 can get around faster to the drop off points.

True. Question is, why shouldn't they launch the same missiles from their J-11/16s? Prepositioned TELs with ground forces in the TAR should be able to launch even faster. Perhaps H-6s may allow the PLAAF to relocate its resources faster from its bases in the East. That is to say, PLA forces in Tibet can be supported by H-6 sorties launched from Guangxi.

Even so the same logic doesn't apply to us since most of our air force will inevitably redeploy to forward air bases in the North & East. That basically means the Su-30 can do everything that the Su-34 can as far as the IAF is concerned. The Tu-22 too will provides no additional capability while adding a major logistical headache to an already over-diverse fleet.

The Tu-16/H-6 & Tu-22 are only really useful for operations over the high seas, where they can fly (mostly) unmolested, whether it be a strike on US bases in Japan, Philippines, Guam etc or on a US CBG in the region. Against an adversary with whom a land border is shared, they're all but pointless.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 30 Sep 2015 21:41

soumik wrote:we do not need to get dedicated bombers like the H-6 at least for any future land war with the PLAAF. what we could do with is a squadron or two of Tu-22M's to use as high speed CBG destroying missile trucks.

We face no pressing CBG threat today. The USN is eager to cooperate with the IN on keeping tabs on PLAN ops in the IOR. A PLAN CBG on the other hand can be checked by ANI-based Su-30s, in addition to our three CBGs and assorted attack submarines.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 30 Sep 2015 22:20

srin wrote:Do the Syrian rebels have S-300 ? If not, what really is this going to demonstrate ? Who can better pound AK-47 armed guerillas on the ground using Mach 2 capable aircraft ?

Israel bhaiyyaji, Israel.. it has been busy having fun with Syrian mil infra while the ongoing civil war saps the Syrian armed forces..

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 30 Sep 2015 22:21

Paul wrote:Sukhois in Syria will be a movie IAF will be watching very closely. FIrst time we should see SU-30 in a war scenario.

We used our Su-30Ks in Kargil too..albeit for A2A cover