Rafale versus Sukhoi 30--which is your favourite?

[sgarg]

SU 30 has maintainability issue, heard 31 engine failures this year. Makes we worried.

It seems the engine issue is tackled. Was discussed threadbare on this forum. Let more information come out from government.

 

[SajeevJino]

It seems the engine issue is tackled. Was discussed threadbare on this forum. Let more information come out from government.

No information about the Engine issues,, Its still open

 

[Khagesh]

Most of the engine failures were originating from outside the engine of Su30MKI and neither were their similar engine failures being reported from other air forces operating the aircraft or its versions.

Besides they have mentioned that post the changes suggested engines were flying as many hours as were promised.

In any case the Russian engines are so cheap and engine change is such a plug and play activity that you can simply begin to stock more engines for sukhoi. Given the price differential it hardly matters.

 

[SajeevJino]

Most of the engine failures were originating from outside the engine of Su30MKI and neither were their similar engine failures being reported from other air forces operating the aircraft or its versions.

Engine problem in Sukhoi caused by outside of the Engine

from Defence Minister

Parrikar attributed the failures to faulty bearings that contaminated the plane's oil supply. It seems that metal fatigue led to tiny pieces of metal shearing off the friction-reducing bearings, which then entered the oil system.

This accounted for 33 of 69 engine failures.

Another 11 failures were the result of engine vibrations, while eight more arose from a lack of pressure in that same lubricating oil. New Delhi has not revealed the cause for the remaining 17 incidents.

India's Mighty Su-30MKI Fighter Jets Have a Big Problem | RealClearDefense

Besides they have mentioned that post the changes suggested engines were flying as many hours as were promised.

In any case the Russian engines are so cheap and engine change is such a plug and play activity that you can simply begin to stock more engines for sukhoi. Given the price differential it hardly matters.

AL 31 Costs - $ 3 Millions link Estimated Value in 2004

GE F414 cost $ 4 millions link Estimated Value in 2014

 

[Khagesh]

Are you sure that the chips in the oil were because of the engines?

If the chips were originating in the engine then why did they accept the solution with regard to better fitment of bearings and better quality oil and changes to maintenance schedule.

Can you simply change the bearings in the engines, so easily, that only general maintenance SOPs get affected and no need arises for major overhaulings?

Regards prices of engines, should you work out the arithmetic in your links you will get the exact differential cost and it is as I claim. The Russian ones are cheaper by almost a margin of 2. Moreover for the whole plane you will have to bump up the cost by a mere 3 million even if we take your erroneous estimates.

Moreover do you realize you are talking about uber expensive French engines and not the American ones which have the benefit of the largest production runs in the universe and yet turn out expensive hour for hour.

 

[SajeevJino]

Are you sure that the chips in the oil were because of the engines?

PROVIDE your Source chips in Fuel/oil

If the chips were originating in the engine then why did they accept the solution with regard to better fitment of bearings and better quality oil and changes to maintenance schedule.

Can you simply change the bearings in the engines, so easily, that only general maintenance SOPs get affected and no need arises for major overhaulings?

oh ..Seems Just like Changing the ball bearings in Motor Cycle

Regards prices of engines, should you work out the arithmetic in your links you will get the exact differential cost and it is as I claim. The Russian ones are cheaper by almost a margin of 2. Moreover for the whole plane you will have to bump up the cost by a mere 3 million even if we take your erroneous estimates.

then provide me a Better source, I'm waiting

Moreover do you realize you are talking about uber expensive French engines and not the American ones which have the benefit of the largest production runs in the universe and yet turn out expensive hour for hour.

provide your source about flight hours and Engine Range ..!!

 

[Khagesh]

PROVIDE your Source chips in Fuel/oil

Sukhoi-30 MKI, Air Force's Most Modern Fighter Jet, Plagued by Engine Trouble

Su-30 Fleet Plagued By Engine Woes, Poor Serviceability
(Source: Hindustan Times; published Mar 17, 2015)

Parrikar said India had resolved the bearing problem by "arranging better lubrication (to prevent wear and tear), better fitment of bearings and better quality of oil."

"Out of total 69 cases in the last three years, 33 cases are due to finding of chips in the oil, 11 due to vibration in the engine (caused by bearing problem) and 8 cases because of low pressure of lubricating oil," Parrikar said in a detailed reply in the House. In all, engines coming in for overhaul will have nine modifications.

Thats 33+11+8 that had only as much to do with "engines" as could have been managed by something as dumb as better lubrication, better fitment of bearings and better quality of oil.

Notice not even better bearings merely better fitment of whatever bearings they were using.

Notice also how no other air force out of several using this engine are reporting problems.

Notice also how Parikar says and Ex. Air Chief Marshal PV Naik concurs:

"Serviceability has improved by 7% in last 8-9 months to reach to 56-57%," he said. The earliest Su-30s were inducted into the IAF in 2000.

"The number of mid-air engine failures is not shocking factoring in the flying hours the fleet has logged. But poor serviceability is a matter of concern. Ideally, it should be around 75% during peacetime," former IAF chief Air Chief Marshal PV Naik told HT.

oh ..Seems Just like Changing the ball bearings in Motor Cycle

Mujhe kya bata rahe ho bhai. If it is a major trouble then everybody would expect a major change in how bearings are manufactured. Did you hear anything of the sort. My claim is that it was all a ruse to get the Rafale in by sabotaging the chances of Su30MKI. Which is to be expected from a system that was bred by the C system.

then provide me a Better source, I'm waiting



provide your source about flight hours and Engine Range ..!!

You did not get it, perhaps so I will repeat.

Do some arithmetical operations on the links you provided. Like additions and divisions.

Also be faithful in reporting instead of playing hanky panky with your own links like in the case of F414 prices where what you say and what the link says differs by around 20%-25% in favour of the Americans.

 

[Zeratul]

I like Rafale, it will be a nice aircraft on india carrier in future. It have more tech than mig29K.

 

[Hari Sud]

Bad comparison of planes above, I suggest that you compare Su-31MK1 and Rafale with Pakistani planes and Chinese planes which can be stationed in Tibet (not mainland China).

See what F-16 (what Pakistan has) or JF (Chinese made) compare with Indian planes.

Chinese airforce is 80% old and outmoded planes only good for training. There are less than 200 modern planes with copied technology with the Chinese Airforce, who can confront IAF. Moreover all these cannot be positioned in Tibet.

Hence, please modify the discussion from comparing IAF internally, compare it with what the adversary has.

 

[Singh]

Bad comparison of planes above, I suggest that you compare Su-31MK1 and Rafale with Pakistani planes and Chinese planes which can be stationed in Tibet (not mainland China).

See what F-16 (what Pakistan has) or JF (Chinese made) compare with Indian planes.

Chinese airforce is 80% old and outmoded planes only good for training. There are less than 200 modern planes with copied technology with the Chinese Airforce, who can confront IAF. Moreover all these cannot be positioned in Tibet.

Hence, please modify the discussion from comparing IAF internally, compare it with what the adversary has.

You are operating under the assumption that PLAAF will be fielding junk to counter IAF. That is a very poor strategy.

 

[santosh10]

both of these 2 are of very different categories, and it just depends what you looking for...

few points i would mention as below:

1st: if India wants full tech transfer, 100% TOT on long run, like how India's policy is to either have home made birds or come with full TOT, then Su30mki win this race. we dont expect more than 75 to 80% tech transfer in case of Rafale ...

2nd; for air superiority role, Super Sukhoi Su30mki clearly wins the race, because of its design for 'primarily' used for air dominance role. even if Rafale has been considered among the high end aircraft for dog fights too, true....

3rd; Rafale won the MRCA (Multi Role Combat Aircraft) tender, after beating its competitors like Super Hornet, Mig35, SAb Grippen, F16 block70 standard, including Eurofighter Typhoon too? as per the evaluation of Indian Air Force, this aircraft emerged as the best Multi Role bird in today's world?

Rafale is clearly the leader of today's Multi Role operation birds, if we dont consider 5th gen aircraft, which are yet to come in operation including F35, true... (as, we generally consider F22 used for 'strategic purpose' only during the 90s, suitable for only those operation where being true stealthy aircraft is the key. hence its limited number in US's inventory is always justified...)

4th; Rafale is one of those aircraft which is manufactured by a single Manufacture, including it engine. similar to Russian and US's defence arms. even EFT Typhoon has legs of 4 EU's nations, along with Germany....

5th; Rafale is the aircraft, which is the Top Gun of this member of P5s of UNSC, France. France is the only among the big economies of EU, who refused to buy F35..... a confidence they show, when they replacing their Mirages by Rafale only, without any foreign aircraft like F35 too.

Rafale, which can work as a high end air superiority aircraft also, along with its leading multi role performance among all the 4++ gen aircraft....
and this does give us a confidence in Rafale. as, France will do everything to keep upgrade its top gun till 2050. which will obviously help its buyers like India, Brazil, Switzerland....

its a "guts feeling" in fact, how much you rely on the arm, you want to sell to others?

the main reasons why i have always been inclined to support Rafale for this MRCA project. :thumb:

(for example. how India currently upgrading its fleet of Mirage2000H to Mirage2000-5mk2 standard at present. while it bought these birds in 80s. the first upgraded Mirage2000-5mk2 is yet to arrive.... an aircraft is a project, which continue to its life, always upgrade is required.)
.

=> i would personally like to see a pool of Rafale, not just 126 for this expected deal, but also IAC 2 must have half of its Multi Role aircraft as Rafale, i sincerely believe... as IAC 2 would hopefully come in operation by 2030, and we can't see any of the 5th gen aircraft, including naval version of Indo-Russian FGFA, would be considered as mature as 4++ aircraft.....

aircraft carriers usually keeps Multi Role Aircraft, only US's ACs includes air superiority once too. and we find only Rafale among all the 4th gen aircraft, "primarily" designed for Multi Role Operations, which can work as a high end air superiority aircraft also.
hence France reliance on Rafale only, without any pool of Air superiority aircraft does state the same...... like how India keeps Su30mki in number 300+ for this A2A operations requirements :thumb:

 

[GUNS-N- ROSES]

Pardon my ignorance but why should this vs. debate be avoided. Is it because it is fashionable to not admit that it is simply too real or is it because it is fashionable.

What would you rather say to the ACM of PLAAF. I am bringing an MKI and you must now bring only the J-11. Otherwise it we will have the Red-flag think tank modelers call a foul - chinese romanchi kha rahe hain.

An unequal fight is the only real way to fight. If that is agreeable then why must we refrain from vs. debates.

it is true in the real war the you pit your strong planes/forces against the enemy's weak planes/forces. it is foolish to do the contrary. you use platforms/aircrafts to achieve certain well defined objectives. The type of platform changes according to the objectives and assets/tactics required to achieve those objectives.

however out here in "Fan World" the "VS" debate is mostly based on half baked knowledge and individual likings. the comparisons are made without any set parameters.

IMHO, the following parameters are required to compare two aircrafts (in no particular order):-

1. Type of avionics and sensors and their capability.
2. Weapon stations, Type and Qty of weapon load.
3. Specialised role like Air Defence or Strike with secondary role
4. Manoeuvrability
5. Handling characteristics and speed range (min to Max)
6. Endurance and range
7. Operating Cost
8. Maintainability (ease of maintenance)
9. Life Cycle cost
10. training considerations both aircrew and maintenance crew
11. Operating aircrew (single or two) - accordingly your manpower requirements change.
12. Maintenance crew - varies from type to type.
13. operating infrastructure requirements.
14. maintenance infrastructure requirements.

and several others ....... (do you really want me to go in details?)

while some of the parameters are obvious and can be easily understood, some others may not have direct bearing and appear very insignificant but have very important considerations during purchase of aircraft. for example the maintainability aspect. it may require 01 Hour to service the aircraft and prepare it for another sortie. some other plane may take 30 min. during war the number of sorties will be greatly affected because of this.

again, an engine change in one aircraft may take 04 hrs, in another aircraft it takes 02 days. Which plane is gonna be available for flight operations for more duration?

another example, a pilot takes 100 hrs to become fully operational on ac. on another ac it might be 125.

another example, if you opt for twin seater ac, the requirement of aircrew increases. so does your induction, training, cost of training, availability of pilots. you need to get the additional strength sanctioned from Govt which any Armed forces Officer will vouch is a time consuming, herculean effort.

Incase there is debate on set parameters like I have mentioned above I will be happy to contribute and participate. sorry, fan boy rhetoric is not really my cup of tea.

 

[santosh10]

I would give the edge to the Rafail, Su 30 has a radar signature 4 times as large as the Rafail and as the ability of radar missiles grow,, the larger signature plane will all ways be the bigger and better target. Dog Fighting has largely been a thing of the past for along time. Its a romanatic vision of air warfare that has not existed for a long time and never did exist to the extent people think. Air warfare 90 is a war of ambushs.

hmm, they are two different type of aircraft, the reason we have MRCA deal for Multi Role aircraft, even if India has over 300+ SU30mki in its inventory for its 'primarily' A2A roles.

also, there are many other factors, other than calculations of technical specifications.....

it takes around 5 to 8 years to master an Aircraft, India is upgrading its fleet of Su30mki to Super Sukhoi standard too, which has been upgraded to to 'reasonable' level of Multi Role operations, reasonable level of A2G operations too. Indian pilots have over 15 years of experience on this bird, a full tech transfer has also occurred to date too, means now the HAL itself is matured enough on this bird, which is still producing the reaming order of SU30mki in India, under full tech transfer from Russia....

if India want to use Rafale on long run, like how i would wish to see IAC2 to be loaded with Rafale, then it must prepare a ground of its transfer of production line, even if only 75%+ tech transfer it gets for Rafale....

we finally talk like a lay man, the end result/final outcome of using an arm/a product, how would its overall performance will be achieved on the ground operations, on war scenario. and here, we find SU30mki as the already top gun of India in operations, with all the good and bad sides of this bird, and this is what we have at present :coffee:

 

[sgarg]

Chinese airforce is 80% old and outmoded planes only good for training. There are less than 200 modern planes with copied technology with the Chinese Airforce, who can confront IAF. Moreover all these cannot be positioned in Tibet.

Your information is incorrect. China has 3 times 4th and 4++ generation fighters. Copied or not is not the issue.

 

[sgarg]

@santosh10, Dassault is NOT interested in technology transfer, this is the reason for so much 'nautanki'. So let us start with calling a spade a spade.

Now the issue is IAF has been clamouring for Rafale like an obstinate child. What is GOI to do with HAL unable to ramp up on Tejas??

So Modi has initiated this "trial" order of direct purchase to see if this can be worked out.

 

[GUNS-N- ROSES]

Bad comparison of planes above, I suggest that you compare Su-31MK1 and Rafale with Pakistani planes and Chinese planes which can be stationed in Tibet (not mainland China).

See what F-16 (what Pakistan has) or JF (Chinese made) compare with Indian planes.

Chinese airforce is 80% old and outmoded planes only good for training. There are less than 200 modern planes with copied technology with the Chinese Airforce, who can confront IAF. Moreover all these cannot be positioned in Tibet.

Hence, please modify the discussion from comparing IAF internally, compare it with what the adversary has.

in a dogfight it is not necessary that a better plane will win.

a less capable plane in the hand of a skilled pilot with right tactics can become pain in the a**.

further if u ask me, it doesn't matter if the plane is positioned in Tibbet or in interiors of china. come war, quite a few squadrons of those positioned in interiors will move to airfields in tibbet. additionally Air to Air refuelling has increased operating range of aircraft considerably.

 

[sgarg]

India has an estimated 210 Su-30 now. Even at 55% availability rate, India can put some 120 Su-30 in the air at any given time.

This is the force that deters Pakistan from engaging in adventures across LOC. A Su-30 can shoot a PAF plane FROM INSIDE INDIAN TERRITORY due to its very long range radar and long range BVR missiles.

I have been told that Su-30s can see PAF planes taking off from PAF bases from Indian territory.

Anybody who talks down Su-30 is crazy.

Rafale is very far from being a valuable asset in IAF.

Su-30 and Rafale are basically same generation planes though coming from two different countries and representing different maturity and technical expertise. This does not make Su-30 a bad fighter. The only "big" downside of Su-30 is RCS as it is a big plane and not designed with RCS reducing techniques. There is no other big downside.

 

[santosh10]

in a dogfight it is not necessary that a better plane will win.

a less capable plane in the hand of a skilled pilot with right tactics can become pain in the a**.

thats what i discussed in my post#33 also, "calculation of technical specifications have limited meaning", we finally look for the "end result", how it is achieved, thats matters, regardless which arm you used....

 

[santosh10]

India has an estimated 210 Su-30 now. Even at 55% availability rate, India can put some 120 Su-30 in the air at any given time.

This is the force that deters Pakistan from engaging in adventures across LOC. A Su-30 can shoot a PAF plane FROM INSIDE INDIAN TERRITORY due to its very long range radar and long range BVR missiles.

I have been told that Su-30s can see PAF planes taking off from PAF bases from Indian territory.

Anybody who talks down Su-30 is crazy.

Rafale is very far from being a valuable asset in IAF.

Su-30 and Rafale are basically same generation planes though coming from two different countries and representing different maturity and technical expertise. This does not make Su-30 a bad fighter. The only "big" downside of Su-30 is RCS as it is a big plane and not designed with RCS reducing techniques. There is no other big downside.

hmmm, if i remember, a total of 230 + a deal of 40 extra for the Super Supkhoi standard for $4.1bil was signed in 2011-12, can someone check?

the first two contract for SU30mki, signed in 1997 and 2003, has already been delivered. (if im not missing the dates/years.) only the latest 40 birds is in the production line. along with upgrading of the old SU30mki too :ranger:

and considering its existing production line in India, having its full infrastructure and trained pilots, we were hoping extra 50+ Super Suphoi too.....

 

[santosh10]

Your information is incorrect. China has 3 times 4th and 4++ generation fighters. Copied or not is not the issue.

@Ray

whats the category of 4++ aircraft? can you please help us get to know? how do you make difference between 4th and 4++ gen aircraft


just to inform you, the '4+', Mirage2000-5mk2 is more capable than any of the Chinese J10s, they have produced to date, their top gun...... and this is the same Mirage2000-5s, France is replacing with Rafale as the 'next gen' option, which will be used by over 2050 in French inventory as their top gun.....

(just to clear bit more, French Mirage2000N of 2000-5mk2 standard, is considered 'too inferior' than the Rafale replacing them as the 'next gen' option for nuclear operations .
this is the same aircraft, India keep for nuclear strikes, if required...... its not SU30mki but the Mirage2000h, India keep for nuclear strikes, for key A2G operations.....)

just check with other members here, Pakistan's F16 block52 is considered as a better bird than any of the Chinese J10s, they have at present. Pakistan with 36 F16s of block52 standard, is considered as the most competent air bird on the Indian border at present. the F16 of block52 standard, which hardly qualify among the '4+' gen aircrafts