Su-30 MKI

Status
Not open for further replies.

notinlove

New Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
466
Likes
23
I would say stating things abt IRBIS - Just reading manufacturer lines .
IF MANUFACTURER;s WORD's are DIVINE- they also claim Spectra is best ,What ever i wrote abt SPECTRA/PIRATE then holds true-
Just look at the performance of retired F14's radar in comparison to BARS



F14 rt that was what atleast 15 years back they matched BARS performance.
Here are some quotes on APG79
There is enough unclassified data available at this time to perform a reasonable estimation of performance bounds on this radar, with the caveat that evolving transistor technology over the life cycle of the design will see shifts in performance. The radar is known to have ~1100 modules, which assuming like per module power rating, cooling and X-band wavelength would result in around 70 percent of the power rating of the APG-77. This puts the radar broadly between 10 kW and 20 kW peak power ratings. Public data comparing the APG-71, APG-73 and APG-79 yields an indication that the radar has similar power aperture product performance to the 10 kW rated APG-71, which for half the antenna area yields a peak power rating of the order of 20 kW. This data supports the proposition that the radar is a 20 kW peak power class design
.
In general, the peak power rating of an AESA is determined by the per module power rating multiplied by the number of elements, with some reduction resulting from the taper function which is used to weight power output per module, so that sidelobes and mainlobe shape can be optimised. A 20 kW peak power AESA with a 15% allowance for taper function yields for instance a per module rating, for 1100 modules, of around 21 Watts. The average power output of the radar is then limited by the duty cycle of operation, and power consumption overheads incurred by drivers, and phase and control elements in the modules
---- MOD EDIT--- those power aperture ratings are in DB a difference of 2.7 is very significant. moreover f-14 was as huge as the flanker so it could manage that kind of power aperture ratings in those days, also do give a look at the LNA NF values :|, dont just post and read random stuff try to interpret it too.

and those 20kw figures are given for the TR modules operating at 21 w per module , which is debatable , due to heating characterstics of these modules

and here is something from the same article from where you posted the above info

Claims that the APG-79 can outrange the Irbis E are very difficult to support given basic radar physics. A claim of a tactically significant range advantage over the extant BARS is also hard to support
its funny isnt it , the degree of hypocrisy you can show , just a couple of posts earlier you were debating about the credibility of carlo kopp and now you are reproducing his article to support your claims and that too by leaving out the parts that don't support your views. way to go!!!!


I believe what i read atleast 100 times that is, Electronics wise MRCA are superior to MKI
You can believe what ever you wish to believe. its a free world :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tamil

New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
446
Likes
13
Country flag
R-77 and R-73 have been off target , you all are forgetting CAG report stating that Russian missile were off target and less reliable.

Secondly there is no way MKI will have advantage in BVR range- cmon we all know its RCS is WAY up 12-15m2 , and all new design have rcs around 1 or less( Just search a bit and you would know), what does it mean - simple MKI bcoz of its large RCS and size will be detected much earlier and believe me if you are downplaying RBE2, CAPTOR bcoz of its power then its totally wrong ( whatever less range it has over BARS - will be compensated bcoz of large size of MKI)

And PLZ donot compare METEOR with R73 - Just read all credible stats from Janes/ FAS you would know
R73 is short-range missile + Meteor will win Hands down in all aspects Anti-jamming,Range,Maneuver etc.

And the most imp thing i was talking - was EW equipement on MRCA jets
SPECTRA,PIRATE are generation ahead - Fusion tech which tightly integrates with these aircraft's heart was built from start to be a Flanker specific during cold war.
Su30MKI has been given a optional EW pod from DARE and RWR from TARANG (su30 never had a countersystem like this what we have in MKI are makeshift/ optional Israel DARE pod) and till MAYAWI comes out it will never be at par with Rafale/Eurobird .
We already have a decent discussion in BR forum abt rafale,Eurofighter TEch analysis only - I can give a link plz follow that(it will just give all information regarding electronics of MRCA jets and their class+Dominance
How can one even imagine A SU30 matching F18 esp GROWLER
Thats why i said PAKFA can have a descent EW suite bcoz Russian have been saying to give it tightly integrated EW suite - being reffered as AI artificial intelligence, not before it.

RAFALE cockpit


Sukhoi30MKI cockpit


Gripen's cockpit


Su-35 cockpit
The Gripen & Refale are cutting edge made fighters they are costly

Not Su-30 MKI & Su-35 BM
 

mk911

New Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
4
Likes
0
hi everybody,
this is mine 1st post on the forum. you may find this link of interest.

Flightglobal Insight's Fighter Radars Special Report 2010

ps: the system doesn't allow me to post links? help pls..
 

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
@sunny

I agree with you POV that the MKI is not as advanced as the MRCA candidates. The MKI electronics is a decade older than any MRCA candidate being offered to us. The current MRCA candidates will beat its own variants that exist in the MRCA candidates' own airforce. If you really want to make a comparison then you will need to wait for the MKI MLU in 2014.

However, even with the difference in technology the MKI will break even due to a large number of other advantages the MKI provides. The MRCA is no substitute to the Flanker. MRCA is for a Hi-Low configuration that will only support the MKI's air superiority objectives. The MLU will only push the MKIs limitations beyond what the MRCA can offer.
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
New Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
http://sify.com/finance/hal-sunabeda-unit-gets-new-facility-for-sukhoi-30-news-news-kdzcvphhcge.html

HAL Sunabeda unit gets new facility for Sukhoi-30


The engine division of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) at Sunabeda in Orissa's Koraput district has got a separate overhauling department for Sukhoi-30 MKI fighter aircraft.

The facility was inaugurated by Union Minister of state for defence, M M Pallam Raju on Saturday.

The people of the state must be feeling proud for having a division of HAL at Sunabeda, Raju said. He also visited the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation at Jeypore in the same district.

The minister, who reached Sunabeda in a special helicopter, also reviewed the performance of the engine division of HAL, a public sector undertaking of the Government of India.

The engine division of HAL has a long term plan to undertake manufacture of AL-31FP engines for Sukhoi-30 KLI aircraft under license, sources said. The division has a unique distinction of manufacturing almost all types of components required for the manufacture and overhaul of engines and spares for service exploitation.

Sukhoi-30 MKI is a twin-engine military aircraft developed by Russia’s Sukhoi Aviation Corporation and is overhauled at the HAL’s engine division at Sunabeda before being supplied to the Indian Air Force (IAF).
 

Agantrope

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,247
Likes
77
Su-30MKI To Go Stealthy

After the F-15 Silent eagle it’s time for Su-30MKI to disappear out of the radar. There have been reports that Russia’s UAC (United Aircraft Corporation) and India’s HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) are developing the new Su-30MKI.

By 2014, UAC together with HAL will begin upgrading the first 100 IAF Su-30MKIs by modifying their airframes to make them stealthy, converting the existing ‘Bars’ into an active phased-array radar, enhancing the situational awareness by incorporating active electronically scanned transmit/receive arrays on the aircraft’s wings and pumping up the defensive-aids suite by installing a combined radar/laser warning system and a missile approach warning system.

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2009/07/su-30mki-to-go-stealthy.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: RAM

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
New Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,309
http://www.brahmand.com/news/Su-30MKI-The-frontline-of-the-IAF/3631/1/15.html


Indian Contribution to Su-30 MKI

The Su-30MKI contains advanced avionics which were developed by DRDO under a project code named "Vetrivale" in close collaboration with the PSUs and the Indian Air Force.

The following are the significant components developed from the Indian side:

Mission Computer cum Display Processor - MC-486 and DP-30MK (Defence Avionics Research Establishment - DARE)
Radar Computer - RC1 and RC2 (DARE)
Tarang Mk2 Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) + High Accuracy Direction Finding Module (HADF) (DARE)
IFF-1410A - Identification Friend or Foe (IFF)
Integrated Communication suite INCOM 1210A (HAL)
Radar Altimeter - RAM-1701 (HAL)
Programmable Signal Processor (PSP) - (LRDE)
Multi Function Displays (MFD) - Samtel/DARE

The other DARE-developed product, the Tarang Mk2 (Tranquil) radar warning receiver, is manufactured by state-owned BEL at its Bangalore facility. It alerts the pilot to all surrounding "threats" such as radar-controlled guns and missiles for initiating evasive action or counter-measures.

DRDO also brought into the limelight a new design of the Core Avionics Computer (CAC) which is basically made for the Su-30MKI aircraft but with a single module adaptation can be used across many other aircraft platforms.

The Su-30MKI equipped with a phased array radar and an engine with thrust vector control is currently the only aircraft of this level in the world.
 

nandu

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,913
Likes
163
http://www.brahmand.com/news/Su-30MKI-The-frontline-of-the-IAF/3631/3/13.html

Su-30MKI: The frontline of the IAF

Su-30MKI at a glance

The SU-30MKI multi-role fighter is a two-seat highly-manoeuvrable aircraft designed for air-superiority and for strikes on ground and naval targets. These aircraft have significantly enhanced the combat capabilities of the Indian Air Force.

Su-30MKI is a tailor-made aircraft for Indian specifications. It has an "international" avionics portfolio, including sub-systems and units made by 14 foreign firms from 6 countries. The aircraft features state of the art avionics developed by Russia, India and Israel which includes display, navigation, targeting and electronic warfare systems. Other key avionics used in the aircraft were sourced from France and South Africa.

The Su-30MKI avionics suite features have a number of advanced components, including integrated radar sighting system capable of detecting and tracking up to 15 air targets, while simultaneously attacking four of them, optronic sighting–and-navigation system with laser gyro navigator. The aircraft is provided with an ECCM facility intended to subvert hostile electronic and electro-optical countermeasures and etc. The superiority of the Su-30MKI's radar in terms of target detection range, scanning sectors and jamming immunity makes it highly effective in long-range air combat.

The aircraft also features helmet-mounted displays, head-up-display, multifunction colour LCDs with image mixing capability including hi-tech GPS system (GLONASS/NAVSTAR compatible).

Engines with thrust-vectoring nozzles enable the Su-30MKI to perform such manoeuvres as "cobra", "vertical reverse", "roll in bell", "turn in cobra", etc. In these manoeuvres, the angle of attack can reach 180 degree. The Su-30 MKI's super manoeuvreability gives it 30% superiority over its competitors in close air combat. This super manoeuvreability can be effectively used in combat.

The fighter aircraft has a co-pilot to improve the crew's performance, weapon employment efficiency and blend perfectly for group missions.


Indian Contribution to Su-30 MKI

The Su-30MKI contains advanced avionics which were developed by DRDO under a project code named "Vetrivale" in close collaboration with the PSUs and the Indian Air Force.

The following are the significant components developed from the Indian side:

Mission Computer cum Display Processor - MC-486 and DP-30MK (Defence Avionics Research Establishment - DARE)
Radar Computer - RC1 and RC2 (DARE)
Tarang Mk2 Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) + High Accuracy Direction Finding Module (HADF) (DARE)
IFF-1410A - Identification Friend or Foe (IFF)
Integrated Communication suite INCOM 1210A (HAL)
Radar Altimeter - RAM-1701 (HAL)
Programmable Signal Processor (PSP) - (LRDE)
Multi Function Displays (MFD) - Samtel/DARE

The other DARE-developed product, the Tarang Mk2 (Tranquil) radar warning receiver, is manufactured by state-owned BEL at its Bangalore
facility. It alerts the pilot to all surrounding "threats" such as radar-controlled guns and missiles for initiating evasive action or counter-measures.

DRDO also brought into the limelight a new design of the Core Avionics Computer (CAC) which is basically made for the Su-30MKI aircraft but with a single module adaptation can be used across many other aircraft platforms.

The Su-30MKI equipped with a phased array radar and an engine with thrust vector control is currently the only aircraft of this level in the world.

IAF in combat exercises over the period

In military exercises, military resources are employed for combat training and for testing strategies in simulated combat. Joint air combat exercises are meant for strengthening of military cooperation between the participating countries and also for the enhancement of interoperability and mutual understanding between military pilots of the two countries.

IAF has participated in many air combat military exercises with friendly nations.

Cope India 2004 saw India and the United States engaging in a series of mock combats, in which the top pilots from the two countries matched their skills against each other. This was the first bilateral dissimilar air combat exercise together conducted by the IAF and USAF after a gap of more than two decades, mainly to enhance relations and to understand each other's mutual capabilities.

USAF pilots found that IAF pilots were of superior quality who outperformed US pilots in beyond visual range air combat engagements by simulated launching of medium-range missiles from Su-30K and Mirage 2000H against USAF aircraft. The US aircraft lost in 90% of within visual range air combat engagements.

After its triumphant success in Cope India 2004, IAF also participated with its primary Su-30K fighter-interceptor in SINDEX 2004 with Singapore and in Garuda II with France. Garuda I was the first-ever joint exercise between India and France which was held in 2003 in Gwalior, India. Co-operative Cope Thunder 2004 was also another air exercise in 2004 where IAF's six Jaguar deep-penetration strike aircraft and two IL-76 transport aircraft flew to Alaska in US to participate in the multi-national exercise. Sukhoi aircraft was not part of the IAF contingent during these two exercises.


Su-30MKI in air combat exercises

Su-30MKI, for the first time took part in joint war games with foreign air forces, in Cope India 2005.

During the air combat mission, Su-30MKI protected AWACS aircraft against F-16 attacks and also intercepted large group of strike aircraft. The US aircraft lost nearly 50% of dogfights, even after E-3 AWACS aircraft provided all the information support. The two sides performed 300 sorties, including aerobatic flights, single type dog fights and mixed type group flights. It was the first-ever exercise where AWACS came into limelight on the Indian territory.

Indra Dhanush 2006 was the first ever joint exercise between Royal Air Force (RAF) and Indian Air Force. Su-30MKI tested its waters with RAF Tornado F3. The RAF pilots were of the viewpoint that the Su-30 MKI combat capabilities surpassed those of the Tornado F3 fighter-interceptor.

Again Su-30MKI aircraft was far more superior and impressed France with its super manoeuvreability during the Garuda III military exercise held in Kalaikunda Air Force Base in India. For the first time IAF got a chance to operate on board the AWACS aircraft to familiarize itself in AWACS operation. This experience became a sort of training to operate the customized built Indian AWACS with a Russian aircraft fitted with Israeli Phalcon radar.

Indra Dhanush 2007 saw the first deployment of Su-30MKI fighter aircraft outside India and first ever participation of the European Typhoon in joint exercises with foreign air forces.

Red Flag exercise is considered to be the most demanding the mother of all military exercise conducted anywhere in the world. The Red Flag exercise normally host only NATO member-countries and close US allies. But on rare occasions a non-NATO member is invited to participate.

A typical Red Flag exercise involves a variety of attack, fighter and bomber aircraft (F-15Es, A-10s, B-1s, etc.), reconnaissance aircraft (UAV - Predator), electronic countermeasures suppression aircraft (EC-130s, EA-6Bs and F-16s), air superiority aircraft (F15s, F-16s, etc), airlift support (C-130s, C-141s), search and rescue aircraft (HH-53s, HC-130s), and aerial refuelling aircraft (KC-130s, KC-135s). The E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft plays a significant role in the training by using its unique radar capability to monitor and support the forces.

Red Flag 2008 saw the active participation of IAF with the USAF. Other nations like France and Korea were also the part of the joint exercise.

The exercise visualised the combat employment tactics of Su-30MKI in strike missions. The fighter aircraft surpassed both the F-15 and F-16 fighter aircraft.

65 aircraft and helicopters and over 1000 multi-national personnel were involved in the exercise.

Su-30MKI also proved its mettle at the Desert Eagle 2008 exercise held at Al Dafra Air Force Base, UAE. The aircraft was engaged in air combat training engagements with the F-16 and Mirage 2000-9 fighters of UAE Air Force and Air Defence.

Su-30MKI didn't participate in the earlier air combat exercises, i.e; Cope India 2004, SINDEX 2004, and Garuda II. It was the Su-30K fighter interceptor alongwith Mirage, MiG and other transport aircraft, which played a key role during these military exercises with other nations.


Conclusion

The inclusion of the Su-30MKI in the Indian Air Force has definitely given an added military strength to India's defence wing. IAF has received immense confidence with such successes in the air combat exercises with various nations. Countries like USA and other NATO nations see Su-30MKI as one of the best combat aircraft in service.

Because of these results, IAF is modifying its infrastructure with modernised Su-30MKI to train its forces in fighting the next generation war.

To enchance combat potential of the Su-30MKI, the modification of this aircraft is currently implemented to integrate the BRAHMOS supersonic cruise missile into its weaponry suite. The Su-30MKI armed with the BRAHMOS missile will attain the deep-strike capability of engaging ground and sea-surface targets at a distance of up to 300 km.

Finally, Su-30MKI gives the Indian Air Force a capability that will remain unmatched by all rivals for the foreseeable future.
 

enlightened1

Member of The Month JANUARY 2010
New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
880
Likes
60
http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/su-30-mki-falls-from-assembly-jig-hal.htmlhttp://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/su-30-mki-falls-from-assembly-jig-hal.html

A Su-30 MKI aircraft that was being assembled at HAL's Nasik division has reportedly fallen from a 'certain height,' causing damage to the body. Though the extent of the damage is not yet known, insiders have confirmed to tarmak007 that an 'unfortunate accident' had happened in the first week of April, 2010. Though HAL managed to keep the matter under wraps for more than two weeks, the details slowly started emerging out, with the first sketchy report appearing in a Marathi daily in Nasik.
PHASE-III AIRCRAFT: According to insiders the incident happened when the Su-30 MKI aircraft, part of the Phase-III schedule, was being moved from one jig to another. Fortunately, no employees were injured as the number of people at the assembly unit was less at the time of the fall.
Though unconfirmed sources claimed that the Sukhoi fell from a height of 20-feet, HAL officials who spoke to tarmak007 on condition of anonymity said that the whole incident was 'really minor' and not worth to be blown out of proportion. "We accept that there was an incident and the aircraft fell from just 3 feet and not 20 feet. No one was injured. There was no avionics on board, nor any power plant," sources said.
FAULTY SLING IS VILLAIN: It is learnt that HAL was quick to set-up an investigation team into the incident and found that the Su-30 MKI fell due to a faulty sling design. The aircraft's fuselage is said to have come from Russia and only an 'empty aluminum shell' was being assembled at the time of the incident. "The aircraft was to go for equipping. We were working on the wings of the aircraft which were to be attached to the fuselage. We have replaced the sling and the aircraft will be retrieved in the next 10 days. We are also planning to change the entire design of the sling," sources said.
Sources had told tarmak007 that close to 50-60 % of work on the aircraft was over and some trolley rods had pierced into the body after the fall. However, HAL officials rejected this bit of information by saying that damage to the body was minimal and still lot of integration work was left behind as the aircraft was scheduled to be delivered only next year.
HAL's BEST DIVISON: Interestingly, Nasik Division is HAL's main bread winner in terms of profits, thanks to the Su-30 MKI program, which will run through the next couple of years following the compressed Su-30 delivery schedule to IAF. Nasik contributed Rs 5,500 crores in the last fiscal (close to 47% of the company's total sales turn over), without which HAL's final FY figures would have told a completely different story. "We have ensured that everything is safe and have assured various employee representatives that the incident of this sort would not happen, nullifying their fear of fatal incidents at the assembly hangars. The Su-30 MKI program is on track and we shall work hard to meet our targets," sources said.
MD (MiG) P.V. Deshmukh, who has been credited with inspiring the work force through a series of proactive steps, could not be contacted despite tarmak007's best efforts, as he was traveling.
With sharp media focus slowly falling on the company following tremors being reported form within – be it at the production, exports and HR fronts -- it will be safe for HAL to put in some fire-fighting tools quickly to avoid such incidents being 'blown out of proportion' for want of authenticate information on time. HAL could borrow a leaf from ISRO in this regard.
A stitch in time saves nine.
 

gogbot

New Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
937
Likes
120
http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/su-30-mki-falls-from-assembly-jig-hal.htmlhttp://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/su-30-mki-falls-from-assembly-jig-hal.html

A Su-30 MKI aircraft that was being assembled at HAL's Nasik division has reportedly fallen from a 'certain height,' causing damage to the body. Though the extent of the damage is not yet known, insiders have confirmed to tarmak007 that an 'unfortunate accident' had happened in the first week of April, 2010. Though HAL managed to keep the matter under wraps for more than two weeks, the details slowly started emerging out, with the first sketchy report appearing in a Marathi daily in Nasik.
PHASE-III AIRCRAFT: According to insiders the incident happened when the Su-30 MKI aircraft, part of the Phase-III schedule, was being moved from one jig to another. Fortunately, no employees were injured as the number of people at the assembly unit was less at the time of the fall.
Though unconfirmed sources claimed that the Sukhoi fell from a height of 20-feet, HAL officials who spoke to tarmak007 on condition of anonymity said that the whole incident was 'really minor' and not worth to be blown out of proportion. "We accept that there was an incident and the aircraft fell from just 3 feet and not 20 feet. No one was injured. There was no avionics on board, nor any power plant," sources said.
FAULTY SLING IS VILLAIN: It is learnt that HAL was quick to set-up an investigation team into the incident and found that the Su-30 MKI fell due to a faulty sling design. The aircraft's fuselage is said to have come from Russia and only an 'empty aluminum shell' was being assembled at the time of the incident. "The aircraft was to go for equipping. We were working on the wings of the aircraft which were to be attached to the fuselage. We have replaced the sling and the aircraft will be retrieved in the next 10 days. We are also planning to change the entire design of the sling," sources said.
Sources had told tarmak007 that close to 50-60 % of work on the aircraft was over and some trolley rods had pierced into the body after the fall. However, HAL officials rejected this bit of information by saying that damage to the body was minimal and still lot of integration work was left behind as the aircraft was scheduled to be delivered only next year.
HAL's BEST DIVISON: Interestingly, Nasik Division is HAL's main bread winner in terms of profits, thanks to the Su-30 MKI program, which will run through the next couple of years following the compressed Su-30 delivery schedule to IAF. Nasik contributed Rs 5,500 crores in the last fiscal (close to 47% of the company's total sales turn over), without which HAL's final FY figures would have told a completely different story. "We have ensured that everything is safe and have assured various employee representatives that the incident of this sort would not happen, nullifying their fear of fatal incidents at the assembly hangars. The Su-30 MKI program is on track and we shall work hard to meet our targets," sources said.
MD (MiG) P.V. Deshmukh, who has been credited with inspiring the work force through a series of proactive steps, could not be contacted despite tarmak007's best efforts, as he was traveling.
With sharp media focus slowly falling on the company following tremors being reported form within – be it at the production, exports and HR fronts -- it will be safe for HAL to put in some fire-fighting tools quickly to avoid such incidents being 'blown out of proportion' for want of authenticate information on time. HAL could borrow a leaf from ISRO in this regard.
A stitch in time saves nine.
why the hell is something so minor being reported and why the hell can HAL even keep such a trivial matter under wraps
 

JAISWAL

New Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
1,527
Likes
1,027
http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/su-30-mki-falls-from-assembly-jig-hal.htmlhttp://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/su-30-mki-falls-from-assembly-jig-hal.html

A Su-30 MKI aircraft that was being assembled at HAL's Nasik division has reportedly fallen from a 'certain height,' causing damage to the body. Though the extent of the damage is not yet known, insiders have confirmed to tarmak007 that an 'unfortunate accident' had happened in the first week of April, 2010. Though HAL managed to keep the matter under wraps for more than two weeks, the details slowly started emerging out, with the first sketchy report appearing in a Marathi daily in Nasik.
PHASE-III AIRCRAFT: According to insiders the incident happened when the Su-30 MKI aircraft, part of the Phase-III schedule, was being moved from one jig to another. Fortunately, no employees were injured as the number of people at the assembly unit was less at the time of the fall.
Though unconfirmed sources claimed that the Sukhoi fell from a height of 20-feet, HAL officials who spoke to tarmak007 on condition of anonymity said that the whole incident was 'really minor' and not worth to be blown out of proportion. "We accept that there was an incident and the aircraft fell from just 3 feet and not 20 feet. No one was injured. There was no avionics on board, nor any power plant," sources said.
FAULTY SLING IS VILLAIN: It is learnt that HAL was quick to set-up an investigation team into the incident and found that the Su-30 MKI fell due to a faulty sling design. The aircraft's fuselage is said to have come from Russia and only an 'empty aluminum shell' was being assembled at the time of the incident. "The aircraft was to go for equipping. We were working on the wings of the aircraft which were to be attached to the fuselage. We have replaced the sling and the aircraft will be retrieved in the next 10 days. We are also planning to change the entire design of the sling," sources said.
Sources had told tarmak007 that close to 50-60 % of work on the aircraft was over and some trolley rods had pierced into the body after the fall. However, HAL officials rejected this bit of information by saying that damage to the body was minimal and still lot of integration work was left behind as the aircraft was scheduled to be delivered only next year.
HAL's BEST DIVISON: Interestingly, Nasik Division is HAL's main bread winner in terms of profits, thanks to the Su-30 MKI program, which will run through the next couple of years following the compressed Su-30 delivery schedule to IAF. Nasik contributed Rs 5,500 crores in the last fiscal (close to 47% of the company's total sales turn over), without which HAL's final FY figures would have told a completely different story. "We have ensured that everything is safe and have assured various employee representatives that the incident of this sort would not happen, nullifying their fear of fatal incidents at the assembly hangars. The Su-30 MKI program is on track and we shall work hard to meet our targets," sources said.
MD (MiG) P.V. Deshmukh, who has been credited with inspiring the work force through a series of proactive steps, could not be contacted despite tarmak007's best efforts, as he was traveling.
With sharp media focus slowly falling on the company following tremors being reported form within – be it at the production, exports and HR fronts -- it will be safe for HAL to put in some fire-fighting tools quickly to avoid such incidents being 'blown out of proportion' for want of authenticate information on time. HAL could borrow a leaf from ISRO in this regard.
A stitch in time saves nine.
A very irresponsible way to handle such important a/c costing more than 60 mil.
 

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
Interesting fact, during Red Flag 2008, the Spectra defence suite protected all Rafales from SAMs while the MKIs were shot down every time they were targeted.
You misunderstood the statements made and you have no idea what the exercise was about.

The Rafales had datalinks that were compatible with the American ones while the MKI was not. Everybody knows that. Secondly, when a SAM "fires" at an aircraft in an exercise, do you really believe there is a missile headed towards you. No. It is all electronic.

The SAM locks on to a target and then signals the command centre confirming a lock. The warning sensors on the Aircraft are lit up after the command centre sends another signal to the aircraft telling they have been locked and they will need to evade. Thus the Rafale pilots will get the time to evade the SAM. Couple that with an active radar and ECM suite the Rafale's chances of surviving are much higher.

But, with the MKIs, once the command centre gets a lock signal, they cannot send it back to the MKI because of non existent datalinks. Couple that with no radar, the MKI has no protection and gets no warning about an impending launch. Since the SAM is not actually fired, the MKIs defensive suite cannot pick up enemy missile signatures. Thus the MKI pilot has no actual real time indicator of a missile lock or a hit.

The AWACS crew simply call up the MKIs and say they were hit by a SAM. So, special rules were laid out by the examiners for IAF in the exercise. IAF were not allowed to use their chaffes and flares to outmaneuver missiles. This way they could calculate the number of hits by assuming the quality of the MKIs self defence suite to get a proper figure about the MKIs actual combat capabilities rather than the fictitious figure during the actual exercise.
 

gb009

New Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
117
Likes
4
Couple that with no radar
@p2p what did you mean by this? I din't get the meaning.

I could not understand this as well :(
IAF were not allowed to use their chaffes and flares to outmaneuver missiles. This way they could calculate the number of hits by assuming the quality of the MKIs self defence suite to get a proper figure about the MKIs actual combat capabilities rather than the fictitious figure during the actual exercise.
 

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
@p2p what did you mean by this? I din't get the meaning.

I could not understand this as well :(
MKI radars were turned off to maintain secrecy. Only training bands were used to prevent accidents. They do not go beyond 15-20kms. In dense electronic clutter, the training bands are next to useless.

Chaffs and Flares are used to fool missiles into following them. Chaffs have emitters that fool radars while Flares are Infrared countermeasures.

So, whenever an aircraft received a SAM lock warning. They would release Chaffs and Flares and fly up or carry out some other maneuver. That way the missile starts to target the Chaffs or Flares instead of the target. For this you need to know the missile is coming towards you in the first place. In Red Flag the MKIs never knew anything. They were just flying around and "bombed" their target when they got the chance.

If they saw a F-15, they would first blow it up and then ask command if they shot a friend or foe. The MKIs were handicapped to the point that they were flying blindfolded.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
You misunderstood the statements made and you have no idea what the exercise was about.
You misunderstand how operations take place at Red Flag. So I will school you on it...

The Rafales had datalinks that were compatible with the American ones while the MKI was not. Everybody knows that. Secondly, when a SAM "fires" at an aircraft in an exercise, do you really believe there is a missile headed towards you. No. It is all electronic.
First of all, the datalinks have little to do with the ability of an aircraft to handle the ground threats. Each aircraft have their own RWR and ECM systems. MKIs being out of the loop are not going to effect their own systems being able to identify and counter those threats. In fact, those SAM sites actually launch dummy rockets to simulate to the pilots what it is like to be under fire and tests their own threat receivers ability to detect a launch. They call them "Smokey SAMs."

The SAM locks on to a target and then signals the command centre confirming a lock. The warning sensors on the Aircraft are lit up after the command centre sends another signal to the aircraft telling they have been locked and they will need to evade. Thus the Rafale pilots will get the time to evade the SAM. Couple that with an active radar and ECM suite the Rafale's chances of surviving are much higher.
Again incorrect, the RWRs are not tied into the command centre's signals waiting on them to give a heads up to them being targeted. It is their own internal sensors detecting the threats. On the range at Red Flag there are SAM Threat Simulators which emit identical RF threat signals to what you would receive from actual SAMs. They are placed there up to a hundred and command isn't going to reveal where most of them are, that wouldn't be realistic training. Speaking of realistic, USAF actually has some real Russian systems out there.

But, with the MKIs, once the command centre gets a lock signal, they cannot send it back to the MKI because of non existent datalinks. Couple that with no radar, the MKI has no protection and gets no warning about an impending launch. Since the SAM is not actually fired, the MKIs defensive suite cannot pick up enemy missile signatures. Thus the MKI pilot has no actual real time indicator of a missile lock or a hit.
Again incorrect, MKIs didn't turn their radars off. They were put in training mode which is still on, it is just greatly reduced in power but it was still strong enough for them to use it in BVR and ground mapping mode. MKIs have their own internal RWRs (Tarang) to detect the Smokey SAMs and their threat simulated radars, or actual Russian ones. The SAM is actually fired as it will ever be in training. It contains three modes, TAR (target acquisition), TTR (tracking), and missile simulation. It emits all the signals the actual threat does and launches a dummy rocket when it fires, the ACMI will determine whether the telemetry is a hit or miss. The MKIs ability to detect the threat is as good as the indigenous Tarang RWR will allow. From the evidence, it doesn't look like Tarang did a very good job.

The AWACS crew simply call up the MKIs and say they were hit by a SAM. So, special rules were laid out by the examiners for IAF in the exercise. IAF were not allowed to use their chaffes and flares to outmaneuver missiles. This way they could calculate the number of hits by assuming the quality of the MKIs self defence suite to get a proper figure about the MKIs actual combat capabilities rather than the fictitious figure during the actual exercise.
The MKIs rely on their own systems and skill just as every aircraft does at Red Flag. They were equipped with ACMI pods so the ATACs know who was killed by what and when to tell the pilots they are dead. Using flares at Red Flag is an exercise in the mundane since the ACMI won't account for it. The real issue is chaff since most of the TSRs on the range are simulating RF kills which is the easiest to do accurately. The only argument you can have is that the AIS system didn't fairly designate a valid kill or a defeated threat. We can use the fact that during the bombing campaign the Rafale's ACMI never registered them killed while the MKIs ACMI did it every time. ACMI is the same for all aircraft so the Rafale's defence suite proved far superior to MKI.
 
Last edited:

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
First of all, the datalinks have little to do with the ability of an aircraft to handle the ground threats. Each aircraft have their own RWR and ECM systems. MKIs being out of the loop are not going to effect their own systems being able to identify and counter those threats. In fact, those SAM sites actually launch dummy rockets to simulate to the pilots what it is like to be under fire and tests their own threat receivers ability to detect a launch. They call them "Smokey SAMs."
Those dummy rockets will not be picked up by MKIs RWR or radar emitting training signals in a dense electronic environment. send out an actual missile and then we will talk.

Again incorrect, the RWRs are not tied into the command centre's signals waiting on them to give a heads up to them being targeted.
There are a hundred and fifty planes flying, some 200 ground SAMs and innumerable targets. The MKIs never received a picture on their radar screens beyond what the training signals provided. The lack of a compatible IFF rendered any information the radar provided mundane. And you actually believe we Indians are some super humans or something to work in such an environment. You also misunderstood the meaning of command centre. The command center was an AWACS. The NATO forces were completely wired up to it. If a SAM took off the AWACS would send the picture to all aircraft in the vicinity except the MKIs. The MKIs only got verbal commands about a SAM shot.

It is their own internal sensors detecting the threats. On the range at Red Flag there are SAM Threat Simulators which emit identical RF threat signals to what you would receive from actual SAMs. They are placed there up to a hundred and command isn't going to reveal where most of them are, that wouldn't be realistic training. Speaking of realistic, USAF actually has some real Russian systems out there.
Whenever a SAM is fired, it can only be picked up if an actual missile is headed towards you. And you need to have a fully working electronics suite. Just turning your RWR on and turning off the radar does not mean your self protection suite is at it's 100%. Also, the confusion in the air and threat from BVR is further compounded by the lack of a display in the MKIs.

Again incorrect, MKIs didn't turn their radars off. They were put in training mode which is still on, it is just greatly reduced in power but it was still strong enough for them to use it in BVR and ground mapping mode.
Can you point out where I said they weren't. Read before you post. The training signals are not what you think they are. The primary bands used for detection and tracking are turned off. Training bands are enough if you are doing a 1v1 or a 3v3. But, not in a 100 v 300 scenario with AWACS and stand off jammers. Training signals emit something like 1 - 2KW of power which is nothing compared to the full power of the BARS.

MKIs have their own internal RWRs (Tarang) to detect the Smokey SAMs and their threat simulated radars, or actual Russian ones. The SAM is actually fired as it will ever be in training. It contains three modes, TAR (target acquisition), TTR (tracking), and missile simulation. It emits all the signals the actual threat does and launches a dummy rocket when it fires, the ACMI will determine whether the telemetry is a hit or miss. The MKIs ability to detect the threat is as good as the indigenous Tarang RWR will allow. From the evidence, it doesn't look like Tarang did a very good job.
Agreed with the method but not with the assumption. We are not even aware if the ECM suite was active. We are certain the radars main combat modes were turned off. You are assuming way too much if you believe training modes on BARS can actually match up with the APG-79s and the AWACS.

Threat detection is fine. Lets say the MKIs knew missiles were approaching. Now how do you counter the threat. Simple. A lot of jamming and usage of chaffes and flares. Now the MKIs were denied the most basic self defense method. It is like in a boxing match where one of the opponents is told not to guard himself.

Most importantly, Rafales were escorts to the MKIs during the bombing runs. So, it can be assumed that the MKIs were the primary targets for the SAMs.

The MKIs rely on their own systems and skill just as every aircraft does at Red Flag. They were equipped with ACMI pods so the ATACs know who was killed by what and when to tell the pilots they are dead. Using flares at Red Flag is an exercise in the mundane since the ACMI won't account for it. The real issue is chaff since most of the TSRs on the range are simulating RF kills which is the easiest to do accurately. The only argument you can have is that the AIS system didn't fairly designate a valid kill or a defeated threat. We can use the fact that during the bombing campaign the Rafale's ACMI never registered them killed while the MKIs ACMI did it every time. ACMI is the same for all aircraft so the Rafale's defence suite proved far superior to MKI.
Ok. mate. Here's a simple way of summing up what the MKIs were doing there. When you reply to this post, type what you need to, but turn off your monitor when you do. You have everything you need. You have a mouse to click. You have a keyboard to type. Your CPU still keeps running. So, your entire system keeps running smoothly. But, make sure your monitor is turned off at all times. Then let's see what happens. That is exactly what the MKIs problem was. Go Figure.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Those dummy rockets will not be picked up by MKIs RWR or radar emitting training signals in a dense electronic environment. send out an actual missile and then we will talk.
The launches should have been detected by OLS-30 and Tarang. The OLS should see the "Smokey" and RWR should detect the tracking radar and the frequency change of the active launch. Apparently it didn't.

There are a hundred and fifty planes flying, some 200 ground SAMs and innumerable targets. The MKIs never received a picture on their radar screens beyond what the training signals provided. The lack of a compatible IFF rendered any information the radar provided mundane. And you actually believe we Indians are some super humans or something to work in such an environment. You also misunderstood the meaning of command centre. The command center was an AWACS. The NATO forces were completely wired up to it. If a SAM took off the AWACS would send the picture to all aircraft in the vicinity except the MKIs. The MKIs only got verbal commands about a SAM shot.
Actually, at Red Flag there are anywhere from 60-100 TSRs, not 200. Those are the only ground threats they will receive. There are never more than 80+ aircraft in a single mission. The ACMI can't handle more than that.

The commande centre is on the ground at Nellis. The ACMI system gives them a complete picture in real time of everything that is going on in the simulation from exact location of fighters to the simulated missile launches. That is why all aircraft carry ACMI pods. The AWACs is not part of that control system, it is a battlefield asset on missions just like all the rest of the planes. If aircraft break the training rules those controllers will intervene. I'm not here to argue about the self imposed handicap of MKIs in A2A combat, I am here explaining why their lack of a Link 16 didn't play much into their poor performance in the bombing campaign.

Whenever a SAM is fired, it can only be picked up if an actual missile is headed towards you. And you need to have a fully working electronics suite. Just turning your RWR on and turning off the radar does not mean your self protection suite is at it's 100%. Also, the confusion in the air and threat from BVR is further compounded by the lack of a display in the MKIs.
Are you deaf or just ignoring what I told you? The TSRs emit all the RF emissions real Russian radars do in every single mode of operation including missile launch. It is as real as it can get. 98% of the SAMs simulated at Red Flag are RH or SARH. The best missile there is 2K12 Kub. The RWR should have no problem detecting where the radar is when it is tracking and if it is locked. An S-75 launch should be detected immediately since it is RH. The Kub, you might not know if it was launched but you sure know if you are tracked. The OLS should detect the Smokies anyway. They make the combustion trail extra large so the opticals can see them, hence the name Smokey SAM. The warning system should be screaming like mad telling you to get the hell out of there. It worked for our fighters, not for yours.


Can you point out where I said they weren't. Read before you post. The training signals are not what you think they are. The primary bands used for detection and tracking are turned off. Training bands are enough if you are doing a 1v1 or a 3v3. But, not in a 100 v 300 scenario with AWACS and stand off jammers. Training signals emit something like 1 - 2KW of power which is nothing compared to the full power of the BARS.
Guy, you have no clue about Red Flag. You aren't fighting 100 v 300. There were 40-60 planes on the Blue Team for certain missions but only 12 F-16s or F-15s on the Red Team. When a Blue Team member gets killed he has to go back to base. The Red Team member gets to regenerate since they only have one squadron in the air. You said...MKI radars were turned off to maintain secrecy. Well they weren't turned off, they were in training mode which is a quarter of their peak power. Considering how big the Flanker radar is that is still a fair amount. It was enough power to engage in BVR combat which the Flankers did and it also includes a ground mapping mode used in target acquisition.

Explained for the second time...

Agreed with the method but not with the assumption. We are not even aware if the ECM suite was active. We are certain the radars main combat modes were turned off. You are assuming way too much if you believe training modes on BARS can actually match up with the APG-79s and the AWACS.
There were no Super Hornets there to bring an APG-79. The best fighter radars there were on the MKIs for range or Rafale for processing. The only radars on the Red Team were that of the F-16s of the 64th Aggressor squadron and the F-15s of the 65th. None of them are AESA. The 65th flies old hand me down F-15Cs passed down from Eglin when they got their F-22s while the 64th flies old F-16 block 32/52. We know from accounts that the MKIs were getting BVR locks so they had their radars turned up high enough to make them, that is a fact. This account of them being blind is a total farce. The MKIs were linked in their own data network. Sure they were at a disadvantage not being linked to the AWACs but having your own links turned on with 7-8 aircraft in the air with enough power output for BVR shots is not exactly wearing a blindfold. Not to mention they had audio vectors from the Bird Eyes. If anything, turning the power down on their own radars helped to mask their positions and levelled the playing field. None of the old radars on the Red Team would compete with a Bars N011M at full power.

Threat detection is fine. Lets say the MKIs knew missiles were approaching. Now how do you counter the threat. Simple. A lot of jamming and usage of chaffes and flares. Now the MKIs were denied the most basic self defense method. It is like in a boxing match where one of the opponents is told not to guard himself.
AIS system doesn't register flares so that is irrelevant. MKIs were barred from using chaff and flares for pollution levels those two weeks over Nevada, so the rest of the Blue Team weren't using them either. Rafale had a clean record, MKI did not. Something went wrong with Tarang Mk2 and OLS-30 that didn't warn them out of danger. There are other ways to defeat these old Russian missiles other than decoy dispensers. The most obvious is pull out of range until a strike team eliminates it. Other ways include pulling hard manoeuvres to defeat the telemetry shot coming into the ACMI or turning on your jammer. Rafale was able to defeat all of these without the use of chaff/flares.

Most importantly, Rafales were escorts to the MKIs during the bombing runs. So, it can be assumed that the MKIs were the primary targets for the SAMs.
Bull, Rafales were bombing on all the campaigns that called for it. Spectra was picking up the TSR emitter locations and dropping simulated AASMs on them all day. In one reported case we dropped 6 AASMs at once. The reasons MKIs are at greater risk is A) their standoff weapons suck, B) the RWR and OLS isn't effective, and C) they didn't bring their jammers.

Ok. mate. Here's a simple way of summing up what the MKIs were doing there. When you reply to this post, type what you need to, but turn off your monitor when you do. You have everything you need. You have a mouse to click. You have a keyboard to type. Your CPU still keeps running. So, your entire system keeps running smoothly. But, make sure your monitor is turned off at all times. Then let's see what happens. That is exactly what the MKIs problem was. Go Figure.
As I already mentioned, the MKIs were far from blind. I will break it down one last time...

1) Radars were turned on high enough for BVR locks
2) MKIs still had their own data links between 7-8 aircraft
3) RWRs and the radars should have been linked together
4) AWACs was still vectoring them
5) MKI has an OLS and bombers were carrying LITENING pods

I don't call that turning my monitor off, I call it turning down the brightness. Go figure...
 

gb009

New Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
117
Likes
4
http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2008/11/su-30mkis-at-ex-red-flag-08-clearing.html

Therefore, even the IAF had to adopt the norm of reciprocity and consequently desisted from putting to use the NCTR mode of the Su-30MKI's NO-11M BARS radar, and decided not to equip the deployed Su-30MKIs at Nevada with EL/L-8222 jamming pod
As per trishulgroup the MKI's were not carrying jamming pods. So may be even though Tarang was detecting the missiles there was nothing the pilot could do!
 

plugwater

New Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
4,154
Likes
1,082
India to arm 40 Russian-built fighters with BrahMos missiles

The Indian Air Force will arm 40 Su-30MKI Flanker-H fighters with BrahMos missiles, the head of BrahMos Aerospace said on Wednesday.

In an interview with RIA Novosti at the Defense Services Asia (DSA)-2010 exhibition, Sivathanu Pillai said that would make India's fleet of Russian-built fighters "absolutely unique" in firepower.

He said the first tests of BrahMos air-launched missiles were set for 2011, while the first fighter test flights with missiles on board are scheduled for late 2012.

The BrahMos missile has a range of 290 km (180 miles) and can carry a conventional warhead of up to 300 kg (660 lbs). It can effectively engage ground targets from an altitude as low as 10 meters (30 feet) and has a top speed of Mach 2.8, which is about three times faster than the U.S.-made subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile.

Established in 1998, BrahMos Aerospace, a joint Indian-Russian venture, produces and markets BrahMos supersonic missiles. The sea- and ground-launched versions have been successfully tested and put into service with the Indian Army and Navy.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20100421/158689040.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Global Defence

Articles

Top