Sukhoi Su 30MKI

StealthFlanker

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
861
Likes
1,167
Country flag
Seethe picture yourself. The exact location is masked but general location is visible. The jammer creates something like a smokescreen. You won't be able to aim and shoot a person who is hiding in smoke screen but you will definitely know that someone created that smoke and someone is hiding behind it. So, you throw a grenade at the smoke.
Similarly, when the jammer trues tr jam the radar, approximate location will be easily visible and multiple SAM with big warheads can be launched at the general direction of the plane which can then be guided more accurately as the plane comes closer and becomes more visible
Here are some facts you need to know first:
a) For beyond visual range engagement, anti air missiles don't fly a direct part toward targets, they climbed up and dive down in a ballistic arc, that is to maximize the time missiles cruising in thin air, therefore conserving the limited fuel and kinetic energy they have. Without knowing distance to the target and its velocity, you can't do this
For example: AIM-120B envelope is much bigger at high altitude


b) Anti air missiles, especially BVR one, doesn't fly directly where target is at the moment but instead will fly toward the location the target will be at. You need to know target heading, velocity .to do this. To make it easier to understand, you can imagine like when you go bird hunting and aim forward of the flying bird.


c) For BVR engagement, the main seeker of missiles are only online at the terminal phase because the battery life is limited for active radar guided missiles and coolant time is limited for IR guided missiles. You need to know the time it takes to target which is impossible to deduce without knowing distance or target velocity.

So what does these all mean? for beyond visual range engagement against aircraft you need to know: distance to target, its velocity, altitude, heading otherwise you have as much chance of hitting an aircraft as throwing a rock.

Besides, the white area on the screen is very massive, assuming the beam is only 10 degrees, your instrumental range is 400 km, altitude from 0-15 km. That means the adversary could be anywhere inside that volume of 209,444.4 cubic kilometers. For simplification let say your aircraft occupied a box with height, width and length = 15 meters. So we have the volume for aircraft = 3.37x10^-6 cubic kilometers. In short, what you are trying to find is 66,007,240,356.08 times smaller than the total volume you are trying to find. This isn't like throwing a grenade at a person inside a smoke screen, it more like throwing a grenade at a forest while hopping that you will kill a mosquito.
btw you can blank the whole screen too



JASM or other cruise missile requires GPS guidance which is also easily jammed. Just INS will not be enough for cruise missiles. So, HARM missiles are used which can target the radar by having sensors to detect radar. HARM relies on specific sensor to detect radar and is not same as other cruise missiles which may have other sensors like IIR, RF etc. As of now, the range of HARM missiles is low. So, longer range attavk is difficult.
Actually, modern cruise missiles have more than just GPS and INS
JSM has IIR seeker, passive anti-radar homing, GPS, INS, 2-way datalink
https://stories.kongsberg.com/content/integrating-rf-seeker-jsm
For comparison: old HARMs has passive anti-radar homing, INS
AARGM has MMW radar, passive anti-radar homing, GPS, INS, 2-way datalink

beside modern cruise missiles are designed to operate in Gps denied enviroment as well
 
Last edited:

WolfPack86

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
10,502
Likes
16,946
Country flag
EXCLUSIVE: As India’s Sukhoi Fighters Flex Muscle Abroad, IAF ‘Open’ To 40 More

As four Indian Air Force Su-30 MKI fighters roar over northern Australia as part of Exercise Pitch Black 2018, Livefist has learnt that the IAF is looking favourably at a proposal to order 40 more such jets from Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), which license-builds the jets in western India. The IAF currently operates over 250 Su-30 jets, with the total order of 272 jets to be completed next year.

In February this year, just as the Indian MoD was beginning work on the IAF’s Make-in-India fighter program, HAL made an unsolicited proposal to the Ministry of Defence offering to supply an additional 40 Su-30 jets to the IAF on financial terms matching the current deliveries. While the IAF is yet to formally record its opinion on the proposal, Livefist can confirm that internal discussions are favourable.

A senior IAF officer at the Air Force Headquarters told Livefist, “The Su-30 is undoubtedly the backbone of the air force strength now. The current lot of fighters will soon enter a cycle of upgrades involving both HAL and Sukhoi. Since we have bet on this very capable fighter, there is a view from a planning perspective that it makes sense to acquire at least three more squadrons of the type.

Internal arguments against the proposal include availability problems that have beset the Su-30 fleet, the aircraft’s footprint and a range of recent technical and maintenance issues that the IAF is hoping to resolve with HAL and Russia. Sukhoi, on its part, has amplified HAL’s proposal for more jets with its own publicity campaign.

The last leg of HAL’s Su-30 production coincides with high turbulence in India’s quest for more fighters. Aside from political warfare over India’s 2016 deal for 36 Rafale jets, the IAF continues to battle dwindling squadron numbers, with a significant number of old MiG-21s to be retired over the next two years. But there’s significant budgetary headwind that has forced the IAF to rejig its purchase priorities. Sources indicate, however, that additional Su-30s would be easier to justify from an expenditure perspective than several other proposals.

While HAL won’t be seeing any ‘action’ in India’s Rafale jet purchase — a bone of political contention now in India’s fraught election season — the company has its hands full. Only days after HAL made its proposal to build more Su-30s for the IAF, the company joined a three-way partnership with Boeing and the Mahindra Group to compete for the Indian government’s Make-in-India fighter program and build the F/A-18 Block III Super Hornet in India. Elsewhere, the company is under pressure to ramp up production rates of the Light Combat Aircraft Tejas to meet IAF order timelines. To be sure, as an HAL executive pointed out, the company’s push to build more Su-30s won’t add any pressure on resources, considering the Nashik production line only builds the Russian jet.

An HAL executive on the Sukhoi build program told Livefist, “Supplying at least three more squadrons of Su-30s from the Nashik facility makes sense in the current circumstances. It is a low risk, low cost option with no variables, with a predictable delivery schedule and existing infrastructure.”

The MoD is likely to take a final decision on HAL’s proposal for 40 more Indian-assembled Su-30s by the end of this year. If the MoD says yes, the IAF will have acquired 312 Su-30s. India has lost a total of eight Su-30 jets in accidents since 2009, the most recent being a brand new jet crashing during pre-delivery trials in June this year.

The Su-30 MKI meanwhile, an Indian staple at war games abroad, is currently flexing muscle at the ongoing Pitch Black 2018 multi-nation exercise in northern Australia. Some pictures from on site:
https://www.livefistdefence.com/201...s-flex-muscle-abroad-iaf-open-to-40-more.html
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,035
This is what I wanted..............................
It's just a try to keep HALs production line alive and convenient for the government to add fighters at low costs, but it's not what IAF wants!
IAF needs MMRCAs in sufficient numbers, not more MKIs, that itself needs upgrades to remain valid for modern combat scenarios. No to mention that the over dependence on MKI is an operational and financial problem too. Any major technical issue and nearly half of IAF is grounded, not to mention the high operational costs.
It is a great fighter and could be even better if upgraded, but we already have enough of them.
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
It's just a try to keep HALs production line alive and convenient for the government to add fighters at low costs, but it's not what IAF wants!
IAF needs MMRCAs in sufficient numbers, not more MKIs, that itself needs upgrades to remain valid for modern combat scenarios. No to mention that the over dependence on MKI is an operational and financial problem too. Any major technical issue and nearly half of IAF is grounded, not to mention the high operational costs.
It is a great fighter and could be even better if upgraded, but we already have enough of them.
You keep derailing threads by saying garbage things which is never backed by facts. Always going by whims and fancies is a very irritating thing.

Su30 is extremely capable fighter, even mre capable than underpowered rafale. Rafale with 50/75kN engine is simply too weak. MKI is made in India and there can be no financial problems. Foreign exchange is the main reason for problems
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
Any major technical issue and nearly half of IAF is grounded
I don't understand why the same logic does not apply to USAF for the F-15 or USN for the F-18 or Armee De L'Air for Rafale and UK Air Force for Typhoons?

If their dominant fighters get grounded, they also lose half or all of their air forces/air wings.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,035
I don't understand why the same logic does not apply to USAF for the F-15 or USN for the F-18 or Armee De L'Air for Rafale and UK Air Force for Typhoons?

If their dominant fighters get grounded, they also lose half or all of their air forces/air wings.
Once because western fighters simply are more reliable than Russian once, but also because most major air forces have a medium / heavy mix, which still leaves them with at least 1 capable option to do all tasks. If the MKI is grounded, what is left to take over the protection of Indian airspace? Mig 21, Jags? Only MIG 29 and M2Ks and that in limited numbers and locations.
That's exactly why the MMRCA deal was so crucial, to give IAF a capable alternative to MKI, spread to bases all over the country.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,035
You keep derailing threads by saying garbage things which is never backed by facts.
Hilarious coming from you. :biggrin2:

India needs about 200 fighter jets to maintain combat edge, says Air Force chief Arup Raha

Raha said India has enough of heavy weight fighters - the Su30 MKI
- which will last for another 30-40 years.
https://m.timesofindia.com/india/in...-chief-arup-raha/amp_articleshow/56221154.cms

IAF not keen on getting more Sukhoi fighter jets

The Russians along with the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), which assembles the planes in India, have offered to sell 40 more of these planes to the Air Force but the Air Force does not seem to be very keen on acquiring them due to the heavy cost of maintanence which makes them very expensive to manage in the long run," government sources told Mail Today.

The Air Force also feels that it has already acquired the required number of fighter planes in the heavy weight category as almost 50 per cent of its fleet comprises the Sukhoi-30s and the plane would be the mainstay of the force in the next few decades, the sources said.
https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/mail-...g-more-sukhoi-fighter-jets-1258923-2018-06-13

Don't blame me for your lack of knowledge!
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
because western fighters simply are more reliable than Russian
This is not meaningful. It is a propaganda.
If the MKI is grounded
India is not insane to ground MKI. It is an old plane and has had about 15 years of experience. Grounding it does not make sense. Moreover, some losses in crashes will always be considered as better than grounding plane. Grounding entire 270 planes is really funny.

No one is saying that MKI is inferior. It is true that India has enough heavy fighters. But it is also true that heavy fighters can perform the role of medium fighters too. So, except for fuel costs, there is no other reason to harp for MMRCA.

Don't give me source based news. Give me proper news with reasoning and cost benefit analysis. feelings, opinions will be considered as garbage, no matter whose it is.
 

Wisemarko

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
1,313
Likes
2,577
Country flag
Any high performance jet can be grounded for variety of reasons: Western or Russian. Usually that is not the reason to opt or not opt for the aircraft. Also, availability rates for Western platforms strongly vary based on age, use, support and supplies. Not all is rosy as people think. Here are some of many examples:

Oregon Base grounds all its F-15
https://www.military.com/daily-news...-all-f-15c-fighters-oregon-training-base.html

F-15 falls apart and grounded
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-f156nov06-story.html

Nearly 62% of US Navy F-18 are grounded
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2...-thirds-of-us-navys-strike-fighters-cant-fly/

https://breakingdefense.com/2017/02/62-of-f-18-hornets-unfit-to-fly-dod-hill-focus-on-readiness/

Rafale availability rate is only 48% with French AF
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/17...French_Air_Force_Is_48_5_Percent#.W22fy6RlDDs

All, except 4 German Eurofighters are grounded or unable to take combat missions
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...mbat-ready-eurofighters-pressure-builds-weak/

If IAF can have upgraded SU-30 with AESA, better A2A missiles and improvements in maintenance, it could very well resolve many of IAF shortages.
 

Sancho

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
1,831
Likes
1,035
If IAF can have upgraded SU-30 with AESA, better A2A missiles and improvements in maintenance, it could very well resolve many of IAF shortages.

Improving maintenance is a key factor for it's future, but that doesn't change the over dependence on that platform for nearly all important tasks. In many roles IAF simply has no alternative and has to take the MKI.
 

arya

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
3,006
Likes
1,531
Country flag
You keep derailing threads by saying garbage things which is never backed by facts. Always going by whims and fancies is a very irritating thing.

Su30 is extremely capable fighter, even mre capable than underpowered rafale. Rafale with 50/75kN engine is simply too weak. MKI is made in India and there can be no financial problems. Foreign exchange is the main reason for problems

No doubt SU30 MKI has upper hand as compare to Rafale , but we should go for 5 th gen planes , IAF dont need to buy more su30 mki . its doest help us
 

Advaidhya Tiwari

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
1,580
Likes
1,448
Rafale will beat su30 any day in a weak .
......
....................
Su30 has unmatched maneuverability, supercruise and TVC. Rafale is overweight and has low powered engines. It is slow and struggles to fly with decent loads.

Typhoon was a better fighter as its engine is bigger than Rafale. Rafale 50/75kN engine is too bad and does not offer much hopes.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top