Sukhoi Su-30MKI

STEPHEN COHEN said:
@randomradio @vstol Jockey @Falcon

@Milspec @_Anonymous_

What was the Entire Premise behind Gaganshaakti exercises , where the IAF
Was talking of 5000 sorties in 72 hours
And PAF finished

Were they Not aware of their limitations

How are they going to achieve their missions
Given the fact that PAF has still 495 Amraams still left
Click to expand...
Air warfare, or any warfare for that matter is not unidimensional.

Whilst you are harping on about the greater range of the AIM120 over the R77, you forget that the same SU30 effectively jammed the AMRAAMs fired by the F-16s, thereby allowing them to doge these missiles. If the RoE had allowed crossing the IB, then the next logical step post jamming would've been for the SU30s to get into the merge, thereby bringing the R77s and the R73s into play.

Please remember, IAF has extensive experience with the F-16s, what with the RSAF F-16s regularly exercising in Kalaikunda. Heck those vipers are practically based in Kalaikunda. So lets not write off the IAF planners just yet.

Yes, a more potent BVR missile is always better, but its not like the SU30 is a sitting duck. If anything, the contrary is true. Jamming is the name of the game here.

The Rafale with the Spectra will take this to another level altogether.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TARGET and STEPHEN COHEN
Bon Plan said:
Not space enough under the frame I think (or maybe just for 2)
And under the wings (as Matra Super 530 D/F) you take the pylon for the 2 x 2000L external tanks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is a problem. All 4 wing root pylons are quite useless.

And centre pylon can only carry 1 Meteor. Neither side-by-side nor tandem for two are possible because of the landing gear.

mica-air-to-air-missile-4.jpg


So that leaves only the underwing pylons.

I suppose the outermost pylon is not strong enough for Meteor? Can it not be made stronger?

I guess the only possible way is to use dual racks for one of the heavy underwing pylons, so that the aircraft can carry 2 Meteor and at least 2 fuel tanks, along with 4 MICAs. If even this is not possible, then Meteor on M2000 with 2 fuel tanks is only a dream.

The last option is to only carry the centreline fuel tank leaving the underwing pylons for missiles.
 
randomradio said:
Yeah, that is a problem. All 4 wing root pylons are quite useless.

And centre pylon can only carry 1 Meteor. Neither side-by-side nor tandem for two are possible because of the landing gear.

mica-air-to-air-missile-4.jpg


So that leaves only the underwing pylons.

I suppose the outermost pylon is not strong enough for Meteor? Can it not be made stronger?

I guess the only possible way is to use dual racks for one of the heavy underwing pylons, so that the aircraft can carry 2 Meteor and at least 2 fuel tanks, along with 4 MICAs. If even this is not possible, then Meteor on M2000 with 2 fuel tanks is only a dream.

The last option is to only carry the centreline fuel tank leaving the underwing pylons for missiles.
Click to expand...
The rear fuselage points can carry 2xMeteor as shown below provided they do not interfere with the movement of elevons. Even if they do, the problem can be solved by making them hang lower with a slightly bigger pylon.
1559120316183.png
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Bali78, randomradio, Bon Plan and 1 other person
randomradio said:
Yeah, that is a problem. All 4 wing root pylons are quite useless.

And centre pylon can only carry 1 Meteor. Neither side-by-side nor tandem for two are possible because of the landing gear.

mica-air-to-air-missile-4.jpg


So that leaves only the underwing pylons.

I suppose the outermost pylon is not strong enough for Meteor? Can it not be made stronger?

I guess the only possible way is to use dual racks for one of the heavy underwing pylons, so that the aircraft can carry 2 Meteor and at least 2 fuel tanks, along with 4 MICAs. If even this is not possible, then Meteor on M2000 with 2 fuel tanks is only a dream.

The last option is to only carry the centreline fuel tank leaving the underwing pylons for missiles.
Click to expand...

If we can get Even One Meteor per Mirage 2000 , it is enough

The Feb 27 Skirmish has shown the Importance of Long Range Air to Air Missile

We had Two Mirages that day but armed with MICA , 2 Meteors would have caused
2 more F 16s down

PAF will repeat the 24 plane attack , in fact
They will bring More JF 17s with Stand off Weapons instead of Mirage 5
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bon Plan
The one Good thing happening is Brahmos will get Integrated with 40 Su 30 in 2 years time

As soon as PAF attacks we must Send at least 10 Su 30 on their Air Bases Immediately

No warnings , No Negotiations
No Drama , No telephone calls

3 Brahmos on Sargodha , 3 on Jacobabad
And 4 on Masroor , Karachi ( Biggest PAF base )
 
randomradio said:
Yeah, that is a problem. All 4 wing root pylons are quite useless.

And centre pylon can only carry 1 Meteor. Neither side-by-side nor tandem for two are possible because of the landing gear.

mica-air-to-air-missile-4.jpg


So that leaves only the underwing pylons.

I suppose the outermost pylon is not strong enough for Meteor? Can it not be made stronger?

I guess the only possible way is to use dual racks for one of the heavy underwing pylons, so that the aircraft can carry 2 Meteor and at least 2 fuel tanks, along with 4 MICAs. If even this is not possible, then Meteor on M2000 with 2 fuel tanks is only a dream.

The last option is to only carry the centreline fuel tank leaving the underwing pylons for missiles.
Click to expand...
The external pylons were initially studied for 90kg Magic 2. Now 112kg MICA. a 165kg missile is onother beast. So probably NO.

May I suggest a low end solution : 2 x 2000L tanks, 6 x MICA, 1 Meteor on center frame pylon.... Not so bad.

***
PS : After reading you last post, maybe 3 Meteor, 2 x 2000L tanks and 2 MICA.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: randomradio
Bon Plan said:
The external pylons were initially studied for 90kg Magic 2. Now 112kg MICA. a 165kg missile is onother beast. So probably NO.

May I suggest a low end solution : 2 x 2000L tanks, 6 x MICA, 1 Meteor on center frame pylon.... Not so bad.

***
PS : After reading you last post, maybe 3 Meteor, 2 x 2000L tanks and 2 MICA.
Click to expand...
I will suggest 6xMICA + 2x Meteor and one D/T of 2000Ltr on center pylon. We have tankers available to refuel M2Ks. so 2x2000ltr D/Ts are not needed
 
Engine Swap offer for Su-30MKI fleet puts IAF at crossroads

Published June 3, 2019 | By admin SOURCE: RAUNAK KUNDE / NEWS BEAT / ****

Head of Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation has confirmed that 110+ fleet of Su-30SM inducted by Russian Air Force will be swapped with Saturn AL-41F-1S turbofan engines from existing Salyut AL-31FP to maintain commonality with Su-35S fleet and a study to modify and integrate AL-41F-1S engines into Su-30SM fleet already has been approved and AL-41F-1S turbofan engines reportedly also has been offered to Indian air force on Su-30MKI fleet upon which Su-30SM was based on. Russian Air Force has decided that fresh batch of 36 Su-30SM fighter jets will come equipped with AL-41F-1S engines which roughly translates into an additional power of 19kN (4271lbs) thrust per engine opening up the potential for future avionics upgrades such as a new radar, electronic countermeasures, additional weapons load capabilities and boost to the thrust-to-weight ratio of the fighter aircraft. AL-41F1S is heavy upgraded AL-31F engine which entered in service with Su-35s fighter jet which is in service with Russian and Chinese air force and also on offer to India under MMRCA 2.0 tender for 114 units of fighter jets.

According to Industrial sources close to ****, Service issues of AL-31FP which has been notified to Russian engine makers by Indian Air Force have reached a stage that minor fixes no more can fix all the issues raised by IAF and Russia has offered AL-41F1S which they claim faces no such issues and comes with years of reliability while equipped on Su-35S fleet. Swapping AL-31FP engines with AL-41F1S will mean that Su-30MKI will have additional electrical power available for future avionics upgrades such as a new or upgraded AESA radar and also improve overall kinematic performance by some margin. If India ends up buying Su-35S fighter jets then it will also maintain commonality with Su-30MKIs. India and Russia are yet to complete finalization of Super 30 upgrade program under which the whole fleet of 270+ Su-30MKIs fleet in Indian Air Force will get hosts of new improved avionics and weapons package along with new AESA Radar.

**** .Read more at India No 1 Defence News Website Engine Swap offer for Su-30MKI fleet puts IAF at crossroads – Indian Defence Research Wing .
 
Got a thought instead of upgrading Su 30 mki, we should buy new fighters...

When numbers are low, I think old su 30 mki is good enough with new minimal indigenious updates.. Like astra / electronic s..

We should buy new fighters to replace retiring aircraft s. Especially on Forward bases.

That way we ll be able to field more fighters on border.

@randomradio, @STEPHEN COHEN
 
Sathya said:
Got a thought instead of upgrading Su 30 mki, we should buy new fighters...

When numbers are low, I think old su 30 mki is good enough with new minimal indigenious updates.. Like astra / electronic s..

We should buy new fighters to replace retiring aircraft s. Especially on Forward bases.

That way we ll be able to field more fighters on border.

@randomradio, @STEPHEN COHEN
Click to expand...

We are doing all that you're saying.

We want to buy new fighters, Rafale, LCA, MWF etc.

We are upgrading MKI's electronics.

And the new fighters will replace retiring fighters.
 
randomradio said:
We are doing all that you're saying.

We want to buy new fighters, Rafale, LCA, MWF etc.

We are upgrading MKI's electronics.

And the new fighters will replace retiring fighters.
Click to expand...

Why are they delaying Mk1A orders?

After Hal told explicitly first aircraft 3 years from the date of order.
 
Sathya said:
Got a thought instead of upgrading Su 30 mki, we should buy new fighters...

When numbers are low, I think old su 30 mki is good enough with new minimal indigenious updates.. Like astra / electronic s..

We should buy new fighters to replace retiring aircraft s. Especially on Forward bases.

That way we ll be able to field more fighters on border.

@randomradio, @STEPHEN COHEN
Click to expand...

Given our Huge Territory and Air space
We need a certain Minimum Number of Planes

There should be no doubt about that

That is why We are still using MiG 21

For CAPs we need MiG 21s and Tejas

As they say
Quantity has a Quality of its Own
 
Last edited:
Sathya said:
Why are they delaying Mk1A orders?

After Hal told explicitly first aircraft 3 years from the date of order.
Click to expand...

MK1 A will not happen soon because it involves many changes and upgrades

The Real Beneficiary of The Feb 27 Skirmish
Will be the Humble Tejas MK 1

Because it can carry Derby ER

The same missile , which IAF wants on Su 30

Tejas equipped with 2 drop tanks and 4 Derby Missiles will foil any attempt to intrude in our airspace
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom