Sukhoi Su 30MKI

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
New Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
It seems the news is real. This is just phase one of the upgrades for the first 80 aircraft we inducted.

Eventually, there may be phase two and phase three which will see upgrades happening all through next decade once the next 80 or so are old enough. I suppose most of the 270 aircraft will be upgraded at least twice between now and 2050.
This news is false and I will tell you why. One of the two reasons MiG-35 was cut is because of its failed Zhuk AE. IAF would be fools to request this radar when there is a better option... the NIIP AESA of PAK FA. If that doesn't pan out it will certainly be Irbis-E.
 

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
This news is false and I will tell you why. One of the two reasons MiG-35 was cut is because of its failed Zhuk AE. IAF would be fools to request this radar when there is a better option... the NIIP AESA of PAK FA. If that doesn't pan out it will certainly be Irbis-E.
Firstly the info is from SIPRI.

Secondly, you have the false assumption about Zhuk-AE. The Zhuk-AE that was brought to India was on a 575mm dia antenna with 650 odd modules. It had a peak power of less than 4KW. Of course it won't be a match for IAF requirements. That's what even the Russians said, it is merely a prototype. Heck even the Mig-21 Bison has a 5KW radar.

The Mig-35's Zhuk-AE was actually the FGA-29 with a 575mm dia. The one that is on offer and offered to VVS is a 650mm dia with 1100 modules. That's effectively twice the capability as what was brought to India. In case of MKI, it will be a 900mm array with anywhere between 1500 and 2000 T/W modules. IAF is no fool or even their Rafale purchase should be considered foolish.

Irbis-E is not planned for MKI, it is planned for PAKFA. What NIIP has offered is the Bars AESA which is not ready as of today. Meaning they plan to finish work on Irbis AESA for PAKFA before beginning work on the AESAization of the Bars radar. That is supposed to take at least 3 years. So it could be a possible upgrade option for future MLUs of MKI after the first 80 are upgraded. Meaning we might even end up seeing both Zhuk and Bars on MKIs over the next decade. Bars AESA is not necessarily a "better" option.
 

Shirman

New Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
697
Likes
411
Country flag
@p2prada can you confirm/provide link of external Weapon Pod on Flanker proto........ @gadeshi Sir Hi Your thoughts on EWP on Su-30mki...........:thumb:

The Photoshop photo is from Paralay.......but i wanna know such test did took place in the 80s...........
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gadeshi

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
These are silent containers project mockups.
No real hardware were made, however they are sparely designed, calculated and blowed in wind tunel of SibNIIA.

All of these projects are descripted in details in the book that I've reported in Su-35 tread.
@Payeng
I have no access to secret inside data or sacred knowledge :laugh: And if would I have those, I'll never post anything from those secret data for obvious reasons.
I only can gather and compile data from official open sources and non-secret insiders info from KNAAZ / NAZ / IAPO that are available in Russian and global internet. I just can gather and analyse them because I have technical education and Russian / English languages knowledge and speaking practice. So I can get them from the 1-st or at least 2-nd hands without dumb translations and western rivals "corrections".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
EWPs would have increased costs at the time. Even today, EWPs are mostly concept work.

It would be interesting if IAF MKIs are upgraded with it in the current set of upgrades or even the next set of upgrades.
 

Neil

New Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
2,818
Likes
3,546
Country flag
Award Citation Details Phenomenal Escape From Doomed Su-30

On Feb 19 this year, an Indian Air Force Su-30 crashed in the deserts of Western India ahead of the 'Iron Fist' war game. Both pilots punched out safely, and the weapon systems operator in the rear cockpit has now been recommended for gallantry decoration. We now have the details of why. This detailed description of what happened has been released for the first time by the IAF. Amazing stuff:

On 19 Feb 2013, Wing Commander Gaurav Bikram Singh Chauhan was tasked to fly an Air to Ground strike mission over Pokharan Range. He was authorised to fly as a Weapon System Operator (WSO) onboard a Su-30 MKI aircraft laden with 18X100 kg bombs. The objective of the mission was to showcase the immense fire power and accuracy in weapon delivery of the Su-30 MKI in 'Ex Iron Fist'. The mission which was undertaken by night was a part of the Full Dress Rehearsal for the final event.

The mission was executed by Wing Commander Gaurav Bikram Singh Chauhan where he was the WSO assisted his pilot in carrying out a flawless strike and made good the 'Time on Target' to employ his formidable weapon load. Subsequent to the trigger press by the most dramatic chain of event witnessed in recent aviation history.

The release of bombs from the aircraft was almost instantaneously accompanied with a loud explosion in the vicinity of the right wing. This was followed by the aircraft being engulfed in a large ball of fire and breaking up into several parts in mid-air. The explosion on the right wing caused it to be ripped off at the root and the aircraft viciously spiralled downwards in an uncontrolled trajectory with a very high rate of descent. Wing Commander Chauhan was hit in the face by shards of the canopy that shattered with the first explosion. This caused him to sustain several lacerations and wind blast injuries. Despite negligible vision in the darkness of the desert sky which was further obscured by facial bleeding caused by his injuries, he made a superhuman effort to push himself against the burning railing of the cockpit, accessed the ejection handle and successfully operated it. This resulted in both the pilots ejecting safely.

Eye witness accounts and video footage of the incident indicate the undeniable presence of a large explosion near the wing. In face of such a unprecedented situation wherein the aircraft bursts into flames with no warning of impending failure Wing Commander Gaurav Bikram Singh Chauhan displayed exceptional courage, situational awareness, uncommon reflexes, in extricating himself and crew member from a distressed aircraft.

For his act of exceptional courage and presence of mind in the face of potentially catastrophic and life threatening situation, Wing Commander Gaurav Bikram Singh Chauhan is recommended for the award of Vayu Sena Medal (Gallantry).

This was the fourth crash of an IAF Su-30 MKI. The previous three were on 13 Dec 2011, November 2009 and 30 April 2009.


http://www.livefistdefence.com/
 

mikhail

New Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
1,438
Likes
1,189
Country flag
A newly built Su-30SM for Russian AF:
hey mate can you please explain why the R.C.S. of the Su-30MKI is much loarger than that of the Su-35BM?i mean from what i have read in the internet its R.C.S. is somewhere near 10^sq. metre while that of Su-35BM is around 1-1.5^sq. metres(i am talking about the clean configuration only).is it due to the lack of usage of composite materials in Su-30MKI and if true then can we reduce its R.C.S. significantly during the upgradation of the Su-30 MKI?
 

gadeshi

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
1 - Su-30 is older and has less composites in airframe body.
2 - Su-30 is older and has almost no RCS reducement measures like special air intake internal shaping or RAMs embedded into the construction materials.
3 - Su-30 has canards - this is even more anti-stealth feature then anyone else excluding intakes.
4 - Su-30 is 2-seater with larger Middel cross-section.

Simple.
 

dealwithit

New Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
371
Likes
305
hey mate can you please explain why the R.C.S. of the Su-30MKI is much loarger than that of the Su-35BM?i mean from what i have read in the internet its R.C.S. is somewhere near 10^sq. metre while that of Su-35BM is around 1-1.5^sq. metres(i am talking about the clean configuration only).is it due to the lack of usage of composite materials in Su-30MKI and if true then can we reduce its R.C.S. significantly during the upgradation of the Su-30 MKI?
It is not simple..
 

gadeshi

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
It is almost impossible and have no sense due to external weapons loads, which makes all the stealth measures useless.
 

Decklander

New Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2012
Messages
2,654
Likes
4,111
The RCS figures being quoted here are wrong to say the least. The RCS of an ac which carries its weapons on pylons varies based on configuration. The figures for SU-30MKI and SU-35 vary only due to second seat and the diff is only 20% in RCS. I will not share how I have arrived at these figures but just remember that I am doing tons of research on this aspect.
 

p2prada

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
The shaping differences between MKI and Su-35 is not very high. The reason why Su-35 is quoted to have many times lesser RCS is by the use of new RAM coatings, on the body and the inlets.

The canard disadvantage may exist when it comes to RCS, but inlet emissions are far, far higher.

The new Super MKI upgrade may bring RCS figures on par with Su-35.
 

gadeshi

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
9,223
Likes
6,636
More Su-30SM for Far East Command (Japanese and Chinese border regions):
 

drkrn

New Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
903
The RCS figures being quoted here are wrong to say the least. The RCS of an ac which carries its weapons on pylons varies based on configuration. The figures for SU-30MKI and SU-35 vary only due to second seat and the diff is only 20% in RCS. I will not share how I have arrived at these figures but just remember that I am doing tons of research on this aspect.
but still 20% is large
 

Articles

Top