Sukhoi Su 30MKI

[pmaitra]

Foreplanes are not advantage, but a drawback. It is introduced to compensate significant growth of nose section weight caused by heavy Bars-R radar usage.
But canard is a drawback here because it increases empty weight and creates additional drag. This results Su-30 lesser range and speed comparable to Su-27 and Su-35 which have no canards.

Отправлено с моего XT1080 через Tapatalk

Increase in eight and drag are indeed true. The canards also have some additional advantages:

Yes, increased maneuverability and redundancy are the main benefits of this layout. Another is a wider possible range of the center of gravity.

In the video linked in Federico's comment you can see that the canards reach high negative deflection angles in high-alfa attitudes: This means they will still operate in attached flow when wing and tail are already fully stalled. A canard-less airplane would only have thrust vectoring for control in this situation. Also noticeable in the video is the negative static stability which becomes evident in the lively elevator movements during the landing approach towards the end of the video. When you need agile pitch controls for artificial stability, it helps to have a second pair of them in highly dynamic maneuvers. The small size of the canards might be misleading: Since they will affect the flow over the inner wing, they are quite effective and powerful control surfaces.

A multirole, long-range aircraft will have to deal with a wide variety of ordnance and fuel loads, so the addition of canards will allow to trim a wider range of c.g. positions. Without them, some load configurations, and consequently some missions, might not be possible.

- Peter Kämpf

Be careful of confusing manoevrability and agility. The former describes turn performance (min radius, max sustained turn rate etc), while agility describes how quickly it can change manoeuvre state; depends on stability, handling qualities, control power etc. Given this design is based on a legacy version, the large moments of inertia in pitch demand greater control power to achieve the agility required of modern fighter, especially in the post stall/high AoA regime. Also, as mentioned, better control power at higher AoA facilitates relaxed stability longitudinally, which in turn improves agility and possibly handling qualities, depending on how it is implemented through the flight control system.

In some fighters, one I can think of, differential use of canards can be used to increase directional control power as the pressure differential across the fuselage helps to pull the nose around. This is useful at high AoA where yaw, not roll, is predominant wrt aircraft axes when changing lift vector direction.

- busdrivingtupperware

Source: http://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...h-canards-and-conventional-horizontal-stabili

 

[gadeshi]

@pmaitra, I have posted you an official oppinion of Sukhoi DB engineers, who have participated in T-10 family design and development and who have composed the most detailed and autority holding book about T-10 family - "Su-27 - The Birth of the Legend".

This technical solution was first time introduced on Su-27M (T-10M) prototype to compensate centering and balance issues caused by heavy Bars radar weight. The same was done on Su-33 (T-10K) to compensate the same issues caused by adding extensive amount of naval-specific electronics to the nose section.
And only after that canards were introduced to Su-30MKI/MKM/MKA for the same reasons.

When completely new, much more powerful and thus much lighter Irbis radar had been ready, Sukhoi DB has abandoned canards because it was nothing to compensate on Su-35S.

 

[Yumdoot]

Merging discussions from:

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/su-30sm-flanker-d.57809/#post-1075125

@Yumdoot, it is the most likely that Su-30SM FCS uses canards all the time when the maneuver is possible without using TVC to save the rotating nozzles resources and lifetime.

I don't think this has anything to do with usage hours. I don't know which one of the Sukhois was last designed with a positive static stability. But since nearly all of the modern jets are RSS designs with FBW, my guess is the TVC would theoretically be on at all times, along with all the other control surfaces and all the controls would actually keep doing minor adjustments a lot of the time. Minor enough to not be noticeable in still photography but still significant enough to keep the wear and tear rate high.

There may be some form of prioritization of the controls though, which is the secret recipe and the Russians would kill you if you get to know about it .

Anyhow my guess is somewhat more staid. You see the relationship between 'attitude control requirements' and 'thrust maximization requirements' are, beyond a point going to be an optimization issue. You get the best thrust when the engine thrust is longitudinally directed but that gives no attitude control. OTOH if you do attitude control with your thrust apparatus then you are not in the best of thrust regimes.

Thus attitude control (say Maximization of Angle of Climb) is competing with thrust requirement (say Maximization of Rate of Climb).

In this regard the best would be to use control surfaces to the maximum and put the engine power axially behind the aircraft. This kind of optimization should as shown in picture above (& provided you are not trying to avoid obstacles), actually put you higher + farther, if you are ready to wait a little longer. Which is definitely a better energy state to go into a merge.

At least I would like to believe that it is so.

Regarding your observation that:

When completely new, much more powerful and thus much lighter Irbis radar had been ready, Sukhoi DB has abandoned canards because it was nothing to compensate on Su-35S.

I think again I think the reason Su-35S does not sport a canard is because both the engine and the control laws have been updated substantially. There is more thrust available with AL-41F1S at around 140 KN (compared to AL31FP which I have seen in Indian scientific papers quoted at 120 KN in Indian conditions). Which difference is substantial enough to enable discarding of canards. They would have liked to drop canards because canards in certain conditions will increase the RCS drastically in some directions. Su-35S is supposed to be stealth optimized for its RCS limitations.

 

[gadeshi]

Agreed with the all above except for Su-35S RCS optimisations.

Mikhail Pogosyan in Su-35 observation article has stated the following:
We had considered much more improvements into Su-35 airframe to reduce RCS, but they have been almost all abandoned except for local optimisations to reduce the cost because weapons that attached to external stores will make such a big RCS impact that makes significant airframe changes futile.

Another Sukhoi engineers have stated, that canards and their installation and control structures add almost 1.5t to aircrafts empty weight, occupy valuable internal volumes and create sugnificant additional drug.
So the canards were abandoned with the first possibility has came to be real.

The most sane canards usage you can see on Su-34 tactical bomber, where it compensates heavy nose section and implements FCS algorythms to reduce low-altitude turbulence tremor.

 

[Yumdoot]

But they could have tried Enclosed Weapons Pods. It would fit snug in between the two engines on the lower side. Like this.

For Air to Air low observability capability, this solution should have been good enough.

I don't doubt the rationale regarding extra weight due to canards though, to move all that extra surfaces so radically and in such difficult conditions would require some really good hydraulics actuators. Most of us LCA fanboys also do not like the idea of canards on our smaller LCAs for such reasons.

 

[gadeshi]

Enclosed weapons containers cannot reduce RCS enough to make all the hassle cost effective.
Su-35S designers have place a bid on Irbis radar capabilities and power effectiveness multiplied by advanced signal processing algorythms. This allows Su-35S pilots detect LO/VLO targets at 90-100km distance. In combination with advanced RWR/MAW and ECM systems this allows Su-35 keep VLO fighters on enough distance to prevent them from their AA weapons effective usage thus being capable of using its own.

 

[salute]

A little humor here :

lol smaller comm. antennae hampering communication ???
yeah,
they need to put this on that jet for communication,

.

 

[Anikastha]

@jackprince @ezsasa
Sir I heard about super sukhoi-30mki
It is an upgraded sukhoi of india.
Can anyone tell me what the upgrades will be?

Will the upgrades include replacing the MKI engines with the engines that the SU-35S has?
I am asking this because this will have a +ve impact on MKI's agility.

Will MKI's RCS be lowered to the SU-35S level?
If the RCS is managed to be lowered than it will certainly be detected by enemy radars late and at lesser distances.

I assume that the MKI will be most likely getting a powerful AESA radar and brand new avionics and new Electronic Attack suites, Its air to ground capability is also going to be enhanced ... but is there anything else?

Will appreciate a knowledgeable answer supported with links if possible

 

[ezsasa]

@jackprince @ezsasa
Sir I heard about super sukhoi-30mki
It is an upgraded sukhoi of india.
Can anyone tell me what the upgrades will be?

Will the upgrades include replacing the MKI engines with the engines that the SU-35S has?
I am asking this because this will have a +ve impact on MKI's agility.

Will MKI's RCS be lowered to the SU-35S level?
If the RCS is managed to be lowered than it will certainly be detected by enemy radars late and at lesser distances.

I assume that the MKI will be most likely getting a powerful AESA radar and brand new avionics and new Electronic Attack suites, Its air to ground capability is also going to be enhanced ... but is there anything else?

Will appreciate a knowledgeable answer supported with links if possible

What ever Sukhoi upgrade program is being speculated in the media, will only happen after three years from now. I am saying three years because 65+ MKI's are yet to be delivered.

Whatever media articles are coming out right now are part of sales pitch.

 

[Anikastha]

What ever Sukhoi upgrade program is being speculated in the media, will only happen after three years from now. I am saying three years because 65+ MKI's are yet to be delivered.

Whatever media articles are coming out right now are part of sales pitch.

So, at present we don't have any idea about upgrades..Am I right?

 

[ezsasa]

So, at present we don't have any idea about upgrades..Am I right?

I would rather wait till after modi's trip to Moscow, sales pitch will keep getting louder until then.

 

[NLD]

What ever Sukhoi upgrade program is being speculated in the media, will only happen after three years from now. I am saying three years because 65+ MKI's are yet to be delivered.

Whatever media articles are coming out right now are part of sales pitch.

But Bro dont you think India will take 3 years to sign the deal??
Wt i think is first Modi has to decide…then a committee should be set up…they have to talk with russian counterpart…etc…etc.
I think we have long way to go…So starting now will make us complete everything within 3 years.

 

[ezsasa]

But Bro dont you think India will take 3 years to sign the deal??
Wt i think is first Modi has to decide…then a committee should be set up…they have to talk with russian counterpart…etc…etc.
I think we have long way to go…So starting now will make us complete everything within 3 years.

You have a point, but the question is does airforce feel the need for such a requirement? If airforce really need the upgrade program, we will pretty sure hear it from horse's mouth(IAF top brass) pretty soon. they had a habit of mouthing off their foreign equipment requirements in public forums.

 

[bennedose]

Su-30 MKI and Eurofighter aerobatics side by side comparison

 

[tharun]

What is the Radar cross section of su-30mki?
By upgrading can we decrease RCS and make it sealthy?

 

[gadeshi]

What is the Radar cross section of su-30mki?
By upgrading can we decrease RCS and make it sealthy?

No, Su-30 cannot be done stealthy enough to be worth of money spent on these measures. Like any other 4-gen fighter as well. It is because RF stealth can be done (as Bill Sweetman says) only by giving the plane the right Shape Shape, Shape, Shape and RAM (zic). Also all the RF stealth measures will be scrapped by the weapons on external stores. So, in my oppinion, Super Su upgrade program can contain the following items:

1. New engines (Al-41F-1S - 117S or Al-31FM-1) with 8800/14500 kgs thrust each.
2. FCS and ECS upgrades (software and probably hardware).
3. New radar (probably N035 Irbis-E with or without AESA).
4. New self-defence suit, including RWR/UV MAWS (probably 101KS from Su-35S and T-50).
5. New RF surviallance and ESM/ECM suits.
6. Completely glass cockpit from Su-35S with 2 big MFDs instead of many smaller ones.
7. New weapons including those which have been introduced on MAKS-2015.

 

[Neeraj Mathur]

Maiden tests of air-launched BrahMos from November


India will carry out maiden tests of its air-launched BrahMos supersonic cruise missile from specially-modified Sukhoi-30 fighter planes from November, BrahMos Aerospace CEO Sudhir Mishra told HT.
Four flight tests will be conducted over a period of six months before the missile is declared ready for deployment on the fighter planes towards mid-2016. The actual missile will be tested in April 2016 following three dummy tests.
The Nasik division of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited has modified two Su-30 fighters to carry the 2.5-tonne missile, the world’s fastest supersonic cruise missile. The second aircraft is expected to be delivered to BrahMos Aerospace by September-end.
The BrahMos missile, an Indo-Russian joint venture, provides India the capability to hit targets 290km away at nearly three times the speed of sound. The missile’s land and naval variants — 500kg heavier than the air version — are already in service.
“The missile will give the IAF extended range capability. No other Air Force has such a powerful cruise missile in its inventory,” Mishra said. The BrahMos missile has three existing variants: Block-I (anti-ship), Block-II (land to land) and Block-III (with steep dive capabilities for mountain warfare).
The BrahMos missile is also expected to be deployed on six high-tech submarines to be built in India under the Rs 65,000-crore Project P-75I. Mishra said the joint venture was also pressing the accelerator on the BrahMos NG (next generation) missile project. Once ready, the NG missile, weighing only 1.4 tonnes, can be deployed on smaller warships and medium-weight fighter planes.
“We are in the process of freezing the design and specifications of BrahMos-NG. We are also talking to users to give us an indication of their requirements,” Mishra said.
BrahMos Aerospace is also developing India’s first hypersonic missile. Capable of travelling at a speed of 8,575 kmph, the missile could be ready in five to seven years. BrahMos-II (K) will be capable of taking out hardened targets such as underground bunkers and weapon storage facilities at seven times the speed of sound (Mach 7). As first reported by HT on August 8, the K in it is for Kalam.
http://idrw.org/maiden-tests-of-air-launched-brahmos-from-november/

 

[tharun]

No, Su-30 cannot be done stealthy enough to be worth of money spent on these measures. Like any other 4-gen fighter as well. It is because RF stealth can be done (as Bill Sweetman says) only by giving the plane the right Shape Shape, Shape, Shape and RAM (zic). Also all the RF stealth measures will be scrapped by the weapons on external stores. So, in my oppinion, Super Su upgrade program can contain the following items:

1. New engines (Al-41F-1S - 117S or Al-31FM-1) with 8800/14500 kgs thrust each.
2. FCS and ECS upgrades (software and probably hardware).
3. New radar (probably N035 Irbis-E with or without AESA).
4. New self-defence suit, including RWR/UV MAWS (probably 101KS from Su-35S and T-50).
5. New RF surviallance and ESM/ECM suits.
6. Completely glass cockpit from Su-35S with 2 big MFDs instead of many smaller ones.
7. New weapons including those which have been introduced on MAKS-2015.

Can't we make su-30 mki like this little bit stealthy...

 

[jackprince]

Can't we make su-30 mki like this little bit stealthy...

'We' cannot, since we don't have the right of the original design. Further, instead of that much extensive design change on a platform that was not supposed to be stealthy, it is better to go for a new platform dedicated to stealth fromvthe ground up. The F15 stealth version is nothing but a last ditch effort of boeing to sell more of the machines, as they have lost out on F35 deal. How much of aerodynamics of MKI has to be compromised for such a slap-on job is anybody's guess.

So, trying turn MKI into stealth platform is not feasible.

 

[Yumdoot]

You have to first ask why did Boeing call this modification a stealth design?

Stealth is highly over-rated. A sensible person would never absolutely never expect a cooperative target. And with this presumption as the working rule will come up with solutions and attack plans that fit into this presumption.

About the only time you need stealth is in the frontal axis, while making your move.