Sukhoi Su-30MKI

[Rajput Lion]

How much is MKI's RCS?

Lol, do you really think if I were to know 'the exact figure'(which I don't!), I would actually share it on an open public forum which is viewed by everyone? No way, mate. Just remember this, it ain't barn door, and in future even going to reduce more. If we go the whole hog and try to make it 5- gen with EWP and CNT composites(the same we've developed for AMCA), then you're looking around -20dBSM clean frontal. And with EWP, that RCS will remain the same with 6 missiles.

With 4++ gen standards, they will go with better RAM which should put clean frontal around 0.5m2 to 0.9m2(my educated guess). Let's wait. With upgrade road map, we shall definitely know some details based on which we may make an educated guess. Exact figures will remain classified as long as Su-30MKI remains IAF's backbone.

 

[Hydra]

Lol, do you really think if I were to know 'the exact figure'(which I don't!), I would actually share it on an open public forum which is viewed by everyone? No way, mate. Just remember this, it ain't barn door, and in future even going to reduce more. If we go the whole hog and try to make it 5- gen with EWP and CNT composites(the same we've developed for AMCA), then you're looking around -20dBSM clean frontal. And with EWP, that RCS will remain the same with 6 missiles.

With 4++ gen standards, they will go with better RAM which should put clean frontal around 0.5m2 to 0.9m2(my educated guess). Let's wait. With upgrade road map, we shall definitely know some details based on which we may make an educated guess. Exact figures will remain classified as long as Su-30MKI remains IAF's backbone.

So you have zero knowledge about mki RCS. But done enough tantrum on RCS reductions in this forum. FYI MKI RCS cannot be reduced to usefull level,& MKI no need to reduce its RCS for the role it is playing.

 

[Rajput Lion]

So you have zero knowledge about mki RCS. But done enough tantrum on RCS reductions in this forum. FYI MKI RCS cannot be reduced to usefull level,& MKI no need to reduce its RCS for the role it is playing.

Did you understand the RCS reduction chart I posted? MKI's RCS with 6 missiles is already comparable to smaller fighters with equivalent missiles and drop tanks. So it's already useful. USAF reduced B-1B's RCS from B-1A's 100m^2 to 1m^2. They also reduced the RCS of F-16 from 5m2 to 1m2 through Have Glass project.

Once again, you've no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Hydra]

Did you understand the RCS reduction chart I posted? MKI's RCS with 6 missiles is already comparable to smaller fighters with equivalent missiles and drop tanks. So it's already useful. USAF reduced B-1B's RCS from B-1A's 100m^2 to 1m^2. They also reduced the RCS of F-16 from 5m2 to 1m2 through Have Glass project.

Once again, you've no idea what you're talking about.

Why would I believe you ? You even don't know the RCS of mki, but will tell B1 RCS

 

[randomradio]

AL-51(Type-30) actually. If we want to reduce the RCS of MKI then AL-41F-1S can take it only that far. The biggest RCS spike source of MKI is those podded engine inlets and directly visible fans.

Type-30 not only has better power, lighter weight, but its inlet fans are made of such compounds which absorb most RF waves and bouncing effect is much reduced. That along with RAM coating of the inlet shall reduce MKI's RCS by multiple times over now.


Along with the above, if we replace the metallic skin with the new Carbon Nanotype Fibre Mat composite skin and External Weapons Pod, you are not only looking at a 4++ gen fighter but literally a 5- gen fighter.

Lets see how far we go with MKI upgrade and hope for the best.

Type 30 is a decade away from being introduced on a Flanker. It's actually quite useless for the MKI due to its airframe limitations.

 

[randomradio]

There is absolute no way IAF will change the engine imo.

MKI will see upgrades like the Jaguar. Even if they don't go for it in the first 84, it can come up later. If there are 4 squadrons being upgraded now, it's natural the next 4 will see next gen avionics and the last 4 will see a different set. When power limitations creep up, an engine upgrade will start making sense down the line.

Replacing the engine is very high risk business, so it's possible the IAF will wait and watch Russia's own antics with the Su-30SM2 before joining in. Plus we will have to pay for the engines and ToT all over again. And it can possibly divert attention, practically kill, India's own attempts at Indianising the AL-31F, which is probably what HAL is not aiming to do, and a fully "Indian" engine could be a good idea. Indian = Russia has no control over the production, 100% of the engine will be "Indian", including the Russian IP we have access to. It will basically be sanction-proof.

 

[randomradio]

Sometimes back I posted a quote by HVT sir, in which he categorically said that MKI with full fuel(internal) and 6 air to air missiles is detected by radars at the same range as a light fighter with full fuel(with EFTs) and 6 AA missiles. That itself means that MKI's RCS is not that what everyone assumes. It is not LO or even RO by any means but with RAM and powerful jammers, it's still very effective.

I also wrote about RCS reduction measures undertaken by Sukhoi in early 2000s. Found an old article which mentions the same by famous F-35 lover(lol) Mr. Bill Sweetman:



According to him Sukhoi applied these RCS reduction measures on about 100 Su-27s.

The result(of a fully air to air loaded Flanker), left without RAM, right with RAM:

View attachment 27163

OMG! Just look how the spikes are reduced in RAM coated Su-27 vs vanilla one. From 0 to 30 degree frontal arc, the RCS of loaded Su-27 is just barely above 0dbsm(1m2) with RAM treatment. That's what matters in BVR combat. All aspect low RCS is desired in a penetrating platform(like Raptor, Lightning 2 etc.)

Bill Sweetman further says:




Source of the above image and article: Russia's First (Kinda, Sorta) Stealthy Fighters



Our Su-30MKI has much improved RAM and more composites by both surface area and weight than vanilla Su-27. Even the very first version Su-30MKI MK1 had 6% composites by weight. It was supposed to increase with both phase 2 and 3 versions.

Just think what we're going to achieve in the Upgraded version with better engines, better RAM and better/more composites.

As per the figure, 22m2 frontal RCS was brought down to 4m2. The MKI is roughly at this figure now. Su-35 has been reduced to 1-2m2.

So yeah, the MKI or Su-35 with 6 AAMs will have a similar RCS to that of the F-16 or M2000 with 6 AAMs. Rafale's will only be a few times lower without ACT, but still comparable, ie, it won't give the Rafale a tactical advantage in terms of stealth. With the MKI's bigger radar (after upgrade) and its ability to reposition it, the Rafale will be significantly outmatched in fact.

Reducing the MKI's RCS to below 1m2 is possible but could be impractical. It could come with serious maintenance issues that could further ground an already aging jet. For example, it will need a radar blocker in the inlet, and with that thrust could suffer and the engine could run hotter and ground the jet faster while also sucking away at engine life. It can also stress the airframe. All that for no serious tactical advantage. With that said, the Mig-21's 3m2 RCS was reduced to 0.3m2 in a prototype, but the inlets are not as visible in comparison so it was a lot more easy.

Addition of more composites is definitely welcome, but it should be seen from the perspective of improving the MKI's base design rather than giving it an RCS advantage.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Type 30 is a decade away from being introduced on a Flanker. It's actually quite useless for the MKI due to its airframe limitations.

There is some chatter about an upgraded Su-35SM with GaN AESA radar(upscaled Byelka) and Type-30 emgine in near future. There are also heavy rumours about Su-34M2 getting Type-30 as well. Russians could expedite all important defence related things in-light of the current situation.

Type-30 is going to be a game-changing engine for both Su-57 and Su-3X series.

As per the figure, 22m2 frontal RCS was brought down to 4m2. The MKI is roughly at this figure now. Su-35 has been reduced to 1-2m2.

This was way back in 2003. MKI by its design has more composites than legacy Flanker. And just like Russians, DRDO has also done plenty of work on RAM and RAS. Su-30MKI's RCS would be much lower than what we saw in that figure.

So yeah, the MKI or Su-35 with 6 AAMs will have a similar RCS to that of the F-16 or M2000 with 6 AAMs. Rafale's will only be a few times lower without ACT, but still comparable, ie, it won't give the Rafale a tactical advantage in terms of stealth. With the MKI's bigger radar (after upgrade) and its ability to reposition it, the Rafale will be significantly outmatched in fact.

@Hydra ^^

Reducing the MKI's RCS to below 1m2 is possible but could be impractical.

According to the Russians Su-34's clean frontal RCS is that of a cruise missile(0.1^m2).

It could come with serious maintenance issues that could further ground an already aging jet. For example, it will need a radar blocker in the inlet, and with that thrust could suffer and the engine could run hotter and ground the jet faster while also sucking away at engine life. It can also stress the airframe. All that for no serious tactical advantage

Type-30 is designed in such a way that its inlet blades absorb most RF waves. Thus using this engine would be beneficial in reducing MKI's RCS even further.

. With that said, the Mig-21's 3m2 RCS was reduced to 0.3m2 in a prototype, but the inlets are not as visible in comparison so it was a lot more easy.

New age RAM on the intake would reduce bouncing even further.

Addition of more composites is definitely welcome, but it should be seen from the perspective of improving the MKI's base design rather than giving it an RCS advantage.

We need to upgrade MKI with everything we have got. Because Rafale and Upgraded MKI are our last hope against J-20 and in future J-35.

Our stealth fighter is no where in sight and as for the import, well even USAF is crying because of a burden and baggage known as F-35. So it's not an option for us.

What you're saying is the second option I mentioned about upgrading MKI with 4++ gen standard. What I'm arguing is to make it 5- with supercruising engines(Type-30), CNT based skin(that absorbs RF from L band to V band), External Weapons Pod(between both engine space) to make it almost a 5th gen fighter. Lets see what happens.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Why would I believe you ? You even don't know the RCS of mki, but will tell B1 RCS

Okay, if you don't believe or don't "want" to believe me, ask Sweetie aka @Innominate whether B-1A's 100m2 RCS was reduced to just 1m2 during B-1B upgrade or not? He may answer it. Also ask him about "Have Glass" program.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Indianising the AL-31F? It's a substandard engine for crying out loud. That we had to improvise & improve on the original design was an imperative for us not a science project.

As far as learnings go we've been licence mfg the Adour engine for the Jaguars since donkeys yrs. That should have resulted in learnings for our indigenous HTFE project also undertaken by HAL. Did it? It's been nearly 8 -9 yrs the engine's been under development & just when we think it'd be undergoing flight trials for final certification comes the happy news it'd take another 7-8 yrs for full & final certification.

Item 30 is the way forward if it's a drop fit & we get a more than extensive ToT ( which I doubt) . This time the mandate for HAL & GTRE ought "to be to emulate the Chinese. "

 

[Rajput Lion]

Indianising the AL-31F? It's a substandard engine for crying out loud. That we had to improvise & improve on the original design was an imperative for us not a science project.

As far as learnings go we've been licence mfg the Adour engine for the Jaguars since donkeys yrs. That should have resulted in learnings for our indigenous HTFE project also undertaken by HAL. Did it? It's been nearly 8 -9 yrs the engine's been under development & just when we think it'd be undergoing flight trials for final certification comes the happy news it'd take another 7-8 yrs for full & final certification.

Item 30 is the way forward if it's a drop fit & we get a more than extensive ToT ( which I doubt) . This time the mandate for HAL & GTRE ought "to be to emulate the Chinese. "

One integral part of the cancelled FGFA program was to use its engine(Type-30) in the Super MKI upgrade programme. We were supposed to get the IP of this engine too.

 

[Innominate]

Okay, if you don't believe or don't "want" to believe me, ask Sweetie aka @Innominate whether B-1A's 100m2 RCS was reduced to just 1m2 during B-1B upgrade or not? He may answer it. Also ask him about "Have Glass" program.

First of all darling the B1-B is not an upgrade from the B1. Upgrading would mean using existing aircraft the B1-B was a redesign of a similar aircraft.

There's no such thing as upgrading existing platforms to have a lower RCS it has to be a completely new platform just like the F-18E from the F-18c. F-15/Silent Eagle was supposed to be the F-18E version of the F-15 series but instead said Fk-it just put an advanced EW and be done with it and with that came the F-15EX.

Trying to reduce the RCS of existing platforms that are already in service compromises the aircraft in which a sht load of money has to be spent.

The reason why the F-18E blkIII isn't going to have conformal fuel tanks is because the Navy didn't want to spend the money on testing and new software to make the F-18 able to fly with these tanks. You just can't stick them on disturbing the kinematics of the fighter without win tunnel testing and new software.

MKI RCS reduction is nothing but a fanboy wish. You can't significantly reduce the RCS of existing IAF MKI's.

 

[randomradio]

There is some chatter about an upgraded Su-35SM with GaN AESA radar(upscaled Byelka) and Type-30 emgine in near future. There are also heavy rumours about Su-34M2 getting Type-30 as well. Russians could expedite all important defence related things in-light of the current situation.

Type-30 is going to be a game-changing engine for both Su-57 and Su-3X series.

This was way back in 2003. MKI by its design has more composites than legacy Flanker. And just like Russians, DRDO has also done plenty of work on RAM and RAS. Su-30MKI's RCS would be much lower than what we saw in that figure.

Russian avionics shouldn't matter to us anymore.

@Hydra ^^

Gotta point out that it's without ACT.

We need to upgrade MKI with everything we have got. Because Rafale and Upgraded MKI are our last hope against J-20 and in future J-35.

Our stealth fighter is no where in sight and as for the import, well even USAF is crying because of a burden and baggage known as F-35. So it's not an option for us.

What you're saying is the second option I mentioned about upgrading MKI with 4++ gen standard. What I'm arguing is to make it 5- with supercruising engines(Type-30), CNT based skin(that absorbs RF from L band to V band), External Weapons Pod(between both engine space) to make it almost a 5th gen fighter. Lets see what happens.

Most of the benefits of the Type 30 are largely irrelevant to the MKI though. It's basically lipstick on a pig. The 117S upgrade will be enough to take the jet to the next level. In any case, the Type 30 is not a drop-in upgrade for the Flanker family. And Su-34 uses Salyut engines, whereas Type 30 is Saturn's. The 117S (13 stages), 117 (10) and Type 30 (8) are very different engines. If the Type 30 has to be made for Flankers, it requires a new development.

EWP on the MKI is pointless, the jet isn't designed for it, in fact no jet is. CNT or not, a radar blocker is still required.

Outside avionics, any 5th gen or higher capabilities will have to come in via stealth drones.

 

[Hydra]

Okay, if you don't believe or don't "want" to believe me, ask Sweetie aka @Innominate whether B-1A's 100m2 RCS was reduced to just 1m2 during B-1B upgrade or not? He may answer it. Also ask him about "Have Glass" program.

Read you read read

 

[Rajput Lion]

First of all darling the B1-B is not an upgrade from the B1. Upgrading would mean using existing aircraft the B1-B was a redesign of a similar aircraft.

Agreed. But the basic design remained the same. They used RAM in the leading edges and switched to fixed inlet from variable ones.

There's no such thing as upgrading existing platforms to have a lower RCS it has to be a completely new platform just like the F-18E from the F-18c. F-15/Silent Eagle was supposed to be the F-18E version of the F-15 series but instead said Fk-it just put an advanced EW and be done with it and with that came the F-15EX.

Trying to reduce the RCS of existing platforms that are already in service compromises the aircraft in which a sht load of money has to be spent.

The reason why the F-18E blkIII isn't going to have conformal fuel tanks is because the Navy didn't want to spend the money on testing and new software to make the F-18 able to fly with these tanks. You just can't stick them on disturbing the kinematics of the fighter without win tunnel testing and new software.

MKI RCS reduction is nothing but a fanboy wish. You can't significantly reduce the RCS of existing IAF MKI's.

We shall see.

Russian avionics shouldn't matter to us anymore.



Gotta point out that it's without ACT.

MKI upgrade will get a GaN based AESA radar. Any plane that hangs its weapons outside is going to be detected over several hundred kilometers away. ACT won't effectively work against even one upgraded MKI, against 2 or 3, literally impossible.

Most of the benefits of the Type 30 are largely irrelevant to the MKI though. It's basically lipstick on a pig. The 117S upgrade will be enough to take the jet to the next level. In any case, the Type 30 is not a drop-in upgrade for the Flanker family. And Su-34 uses Salyut engines, whereas Type 30 is Saturn's. The 117S (13 stages), 117 (10) and Type 30 (8) are very different engines. If the Type 30 has to be made for Flankers, it requires a new development.

EWP on the MKI is pointless, the jet isn't designed for it, in fact no jet is. CNT or not, a radar blocker is still required.

Outside avionics, any 5th gen or higher capabilities will have to come in via stealth drones.

Time will tell.

Read you read read

I agree with him. Until you go LO(-20dBsm), reducing the RCS is only academic.

The MKI upgrade program is also evolving. As per some recent reports, we are going to turn it into 5- gen fighter(recent plan to counter J-20 head on) and everything I wrote will soon become reality. Just wait and watch.

 

[Lolwa]

How much is MKI's RCS?

Online claims go from 3-5 sqm rcs. Realistically though somewhere around 10sqm rcs. The f-15C's have 25 sqm rcs

 

[Hydra]

Agreed. But the basic design remained the same. They used RAM in the leading edges and switched to fixed inlet from variable ones.

We shall see.

MKI upgrade will get a GaN based AESA radar. Any plane that hangs its weapons outside is going to be detected over several hundred kilometers away. ACT won't effectively work against even one upgraded MKI, against 2 or 3, literally impossible.

Time will tell.

I agree with him. Until you go LO(-20dBsm), reducing the RCS is only academic.

The MKI upgrade program is also evolving. As per some recent reports, we are going to turn it into 5- gen fighter(recent plan to counter J-20 head on) and everything I wrote will soon become reality. Just wait and watch.

Have you seen the words like "RCS reduction of flanker isnt feasible"

 

[randomradio]

MKI upgrade will get a GaN based AESA radar. Any plane that hangs its weapons outside is going to be detected over several hundred kilometers away. ACT won't effectively work against even one upgraded MKI, against 2 or 3, literally impossible.

SPECTRA can use ACT against GaN, but it needs GaN of its own in order to match the fractional bandwidth of the antenna. Both jets could get GaN at the same time, so the Rafale will still have a generation advantage over the MKI.

Have you seen the words like "RCS reduction of flanker isnt feasible"

It's more accurate to say it's pointless, and even if it's done, it will come at a cost that will make the jet useless in other areas.

 

[Rajput Lion]

SPECTRA can use ACT against GaN, but it needs GaN of its own in order to match the fractional bandwidth of the antenna.

While technically it's possible. But to do ACT against future GaN based MKI's AESA radar, SPECTRA needs to have insane agility and pre-knowledge of frequency hopping pattern of MKI's radar. An average AESA can hop its frequency over 1000 times under one second. Doing DRFM jamming or ACT is no easy task against such radar.

Plus, if MKI pilot puts MKI's AESA in random mode, where radar is shifting its frequencies "randomly" SPECTRA is going to get Effed. Period.

Both jets could get GaN at the same time, so the Rafale will still have a generation advantage over the MKI.

MKI will have operational GaN EW suite within next few years. Rafale is supposed to get GaN radar and EW post 2030. MKI UPG. will have substantial advantages over Rafale.

We have had Rafales for the last 3 years. Our scientists will now have full idea about Rafale's cutting-edge SPECTRA and all its discreet modes including its ability to achieve ACT. All our fighters including MKI upgrade are going to get serious benefit from it. In fact, MKI upgrade also may use some sort of ACT.

It's more accurate to say it's pointless, and even if it's done, it will come at a cost that will make the jet useless in other areas.

Any RCS reduction that is within budget and our ability must be pursued, IMO.

 

[marich01]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1643573917292830725