IAF's Sukhoi Su-30MKI

[shauryaman65]

View attachment 5117
1514 trm in the nose cone and 2 x 400+ trm radars on the wings people

ooo yea forgot the side radars

 

[Vishnugupt]

Same amount of TRM as PESA? You mean 1 TRM?

Yes Su57 does have only 1500 TRMs, lets say su30mki's Uttasm AESA also has 1500 TRMs.
But the difference is su57 uses the more powerful AL41 engines.

Who said to you that Su-30 Bar radar use 1 TRM??

For your knowledge, SU-30 mki radar is a hybrid radar. Means it have features of AESA radar as well. So it use lots of TRMs

 

[shauryaman65]

Who said to you that Su-30 Bar radar use 1 TRM??

For your knowledge, SU-30 mki radar is a hybrid radar. Means it have features of AESA radar as well. So it use lots of TRMs

Oh yea, I forgot about N011M being a hybrid radar. Just read PESA in your comment.
But its still a lot different than a real AESA, for example despite having many TRMs it still uses a single oscillator.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

At airshows we see all popular jets like F-15, 16, 18, 22; Su-35, 57, MiG-29/35, etc taking off within 10 seconds. But from Youtube videos, Su-30MKI seems to take 20-23 seconds with AB from brake release in clean config. Anybody has video of shorter takeoff?

 

[Blademaster]

At airshows we see all popular jets like F-15, 16, 18, 22; Su-35, 57, MiG-29/35, etc taking off within 10 seconds. But from Youtube videos, Su-30MKI seems to take 20-23 seconds with AB from brake release in clean config. Anybody has video of shorter takeoff?

Perhaps they don't want to stress out the engines unnecessarily. Until they get the engine overhaul program on track, they are not taking any more unnecessary risks.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Perhaps they don't want to stress out the engines unnecessarily. Until they get the engine overhaul program on track, they are not taking any more unnecessary risks.

Well, there could be SOP not to pull up before certain speed for easy take-off. But the engine doesn't seem to have more AB stress/thrust than shown. If it is question of stress then better to take-off w/o AB using full runway.
IAF Rafales take-off in 10 seconds. MiG-29UPG with 2 bombs take around 14-15 seconds.
There are many videos of take-off from rear view which show that the AL-31's AB get activated in 3-4 stages, the flame-holder rings get activated in quick interval of around 0.2-0.3 seconds. So it doesn't seem there are more AB stages/thrust/stress.

 

[Kedar]

Perhaps they don't want to stress out the engines unnecessarily. Until they get the engine overhaul program on track, they are not taking any more unnecessary risks.

Don't think so, look at thrust to weight ratio's, operating conditions and apples to apples (empty or loaded) comparisons. There are also other aspects such as age of air frame, engine and so on to reduce stresses. Not much different when you push an old car even if its sports car vs relatively brand new.

These type of comparisons do not make sense when made by non-specialists. If you redline your car engine all the time, yes it will in theory reduce its life. Its common sense to imagine why....there are normal baseline ranges under which service life is noted. Extremes are engineered but comes with side effects whether its car or aircraft.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Well, there could be SOP not to pull up before certain speed for easy take-off. But the engine doesn't seem to have more AB stress/thrust than shown. If it is question of stress then better to take-off w/o AB using full runway.
IAF Rafales take-off in 10 seconds. MiG-29UPG with 2 bombs take around 14-15 seconds.
There are many videos of take-off from rear view which show that the AL-31's AB get activated in 3-4 stages, the flame-holder rings get activated in quick interval of around 0.2-0.3 seconds. So it doesn't seem there are more AB stages/thrust/stress.

View attachment 5418

I forgot to mention AB T/w ratio in clean config, full internal fuel :
Su-30MKI : (2x123 KN)/9.8 /(18.4+11 tons) = 0.85
Su-35-S : (2*137.3 KN) /9.8/(19+11.5 tons) = 0.91
MiG-29 baseline : (2*81.3KN) /9.8/(11+3.5 tons) = 1.14
MiG-29K : (2*88.26 KN) /9.8/(12+4.56 tons) = 1.08
Rafale C : (2x75 KN) /9.8 /(9.9+4.7 tons) = 1.04
F-15E (no CFTs) : (2*129.7 KN) /9.8/(15.7+5.9 tons) = 1.22

If we can get AL-41 engine + good domestic lighter radar & other components, then we can improve performance.
But that's half of the clarity, rest depends on Fd (Drag Force), CL(Coefficient of lift), uMg (ground friction), so we can put a simple equation: F - uMg - Fd = Ma.
where Fd = 1/2 Cd.D.A.V^2 or [1/2 x Drag Coefficient x Air Density x Cross Section Area x Velocity^2]
Beyond this, neither i have data nor am i a "specialist".

 

[saturatedfat]

A question
after seeing how russia is struggling in ukraine to get complete air superiority and with ukraine increasing its capabilities while receiving f16s. So how can india counter or defeat pakistans air force if needed especially with our su 30 MKIs

 

[125mm_Smoothbore]

A question
after seeing how russia is struggling in ukraine to get complete air superiority and with ukraine increasing its capabilities while receiving f16s. So how can india counter or defeat pakistans air force if needed especially with our su 30 MKIs

Cause porkies wont get billions worth "meriki hatiyaar "every 6 months a full scale war is a 80-90% destruction of porky fleets in every sense

 

[shauryaman65]

A question
after seeing how russia is struggling in ukraine to get complete air superiority and with ukraine increasing its capabilities while receiving f16s. So how can india counter or defeat pakistans air force if needed especially with our su 30 MKIs

Its more so of the incompetence of the russians that have failed to achieve air superiority, and failed to conduct successful SEAD/DEAD operations.

Its easy to blame the airframe but the whole command and logistics hub is what wins wars, not shiny equipment.

 

[Kedar]

Its more so of the incompetence of the russians that have failed to achieve air superiority, and failed to conduct successful SEAD/DEAD operations.

Its easy to blame the airframe but the whole command and logistics hub is what wins wars, not shiny equipment.

Wtf are you talking, do you even understand the scale of this war? US lost an avg of 3 planes in Vietnam per day. Just making bs statements seems like a fashion. Air superiority my ass, Israel still ducks behind Lebanon to fire missiles. Hollywood bs doesn't work in real world.

NATO looks more and more paper bs, when real war happens their logistics near Russia won't exist and mostly same with China. They couldn't even achieve proper air superiority in Iraq or Serbia and those two had no support from anyone. Quote some real war of this scale....I challenge you.
Don't think anyone outside Russia can fight a war like this with west, it's experience in military science combined with planning of this scale. Not even China is capable of this feat as they lack experience. Japanese have better odds to plan and prepare going by their foresight per history.

 

[DumbPilot]

Its more so of the incompetence of the russians that have failed to achieve air superiority, and failed to conduct successful SEAD/DEAD operations.

Its easy to blame the airframe but the whole command and logistics hub is what wins wars, not shiny equipment.

In addition to the points you mentioned; the RuAF/VKS in of itself does not exist as an independent arm of the military in practice - it is tied to the army through doctrine.

This means that they are not allowed the freedom to actually plan and execute their own operations/air tasking orders to first create favorable conditions for themselves, which are then shaped as needed for the ground forces - they are treated, and act as extensions of the ground forces.

The initial push during the opening hours of the Russia-Ukraine war severely damaged Ukrainian PSU capability to actually produce and maintain medium to long range air defense cover, but as I have been speaking since 2022, they failed to actually capitalize on that.

There's a lot more to it, still:

Russia’s Military Understanding of Air Power: Structural & Doctrinal Aspects

www.vifindia.org

In my honest opinion the IAF does not have these shortcomings, especially at the doctrinal level. Whatever deficiencies we do have, we're patching them up as quickly as we can, especially after that Balakot debacle.

 

[shauryaman65]

US lost an avg of 3 planes in Vietnam per day. Just making bs statements seems like a fashion.

Yea and thats when planes used to look like this:They were really old times. US learnt a lot in veitnam after so many air losses due to SAMs. From that point on SEAD/DEAD became a pillar of US air doctrine.

Air superiority my ass, Israel still ducks behind Lebanon to fire missiles. Hollywood bs doesn't work in real world.

Completely uneducated take. Israel often flies uncontested in lebenese airspace.

Israeli jets set off sonic booms over Beirut as Nasrallah warns of response

Israeli jets fly low over Beirut, with sonic booms rattling windows throughout the Lebanese capital.

www.aljazeera.com

They couldn't even achieve proper air superiority in Iraq or Serbia and those two had no support from anyone.

Again, completely uneducated take.
Over the entire kosovo war, NATO allied forced employed over a thousand combat aircraft, as much as the entire VKS inventory. And the Serbians only managed to shoot down a mere 2 aircraft.
and with iraq only 75(half of which not due to enemy) losses , but that was even more of a feat due to their AD network.

Quote some real war of this scale....I challenge you.

Gulf war.
Iraq during that war was definitely stronger than ukraine is now relative to russia.
They had the 4th largest army in 1990, 4000+ tanks, over a thousand aircrafts and the densest SAM network in the world.
And this army wasn't all a paper tiger, they had experience from iran-iraq war and had defeated kuwait in a day prior.

The entire war, though, was such a logistical masterpiece that I can not do it justice with my words.

Don't think anyone outside Russia can fight a war like this with west

I mean if you want to go about this like this, then USA only lost 60k men fighting a USSR/China backed veitnam for over a decade.

planning of this scale

During the iraq war, US coalition employed the use of over a thousand aircrafts conduced over 100,000 sorties and suffered only 75 losses, all in a month.
US coalition deployed and sustained over 300,000 troops, thousand of miles away, supplied them with 4000 ton of supplies per day for the whole war.

No other nation has achieved something like this.
Its fine to admit russians suffered from really bad command structures and ineffective battle doctrine.

 

[shauryaman65]

Also to give this chat an idea on what successful SEAD/DEAD operations look like, we will take the case of serbia during kosovo war.

The crux of a successful SEAD operation is to de capitate the enemy command structure:

• NATO's SEAD operations targeted Serbia's Integrated Air Defense System (IADS). By hitting key nodes in the air defense network—such as communication hubs, radar sites, and SAM command centers—NATO effectively fragmented Serbia’s ability to coordinate its air defenses. That is, they lost the ability to conduct AD operations in a network.
  
  
• This meant that even when Serbian SAM operators managed to launch missiles, their effectiveness was diminished due to a lack of coordinated targeting data and real-time communication with other pieces of the air defense network.

Also, NATO employed significant use of HARMs, Serbian AD operators could not afford to blast their radar and stay at a single spot for long periods, because NATO was successful in maintaining a significant aircraft presence equiped with HARMs (AGM-88) in the region, so when they turned on their radar for more than a few seconds, NATO HARMs locked onto their positions. This is why Serbia had to make use of hit and run tactics. (similar to what ukraine does in this war, but russian HARM presence is not nearly as dominant as NATO's)

EW: EA-6B jets were EW dedicated jets. They continuously jammed Serbian radar systems and made it almost impossible for Serbian AD to get a clear lock on NATO jets.

NATO also used decoys, like the ADM-141 TALD, to mimic aircraft and bait Serbian SAM operators into activating their radars, which were then targeted by HARM missiles.

 

[saturatedfat]

Wtf are you talking, do you even understand the scale of this war? US lost an avg of 3 planes in Vietnam per day. Just making bs statements seems like a fashion. Air superiority my ass, Israel still ducks behind Lebanon to fire missiles. Hollywood bs doesn't work in real world.

NATO looks more and more paper bs, when real war happens their logistics near Russia won't exist and mostly same with China. They couldn't even achieve proper air superiority in Iraq or Serbia and those two had no support from anyone. Quote some real war of this scale....I challenge you.
Don't think anyone outside Russia can fight a war like this with west, it's experience in military science combined with planning of this scale. Not even China is capable of this feat as they lack experience. Japanese have better odds to plan and prepare going by their foresight per history.

i am sorry but leave NATO I think Russia wont even be able to win a war against Poland alone

 

[Kedar]

Yea and thats when planes used to look like this:View attachment 6366They were really old times. US learnt a lot in veitnam after so many air losses due to SAMs. From that point on SEAD/DEAD became a pillar of US air doctrine.

Completely uneducated take. Israel often flies uncontested in lebenese airspace.

Israeli jets set off sonic booms over Beirut as Nasrallah warns of response

Israeli jets fly low over Beirut, with sonic booms rattling windows throughout the Lebanese capital.

www.aljazeera.com

Again, completely uneducated take.
Over the entire kosovo war, NATO allied forced employed over a thousand combat aircraft, as much as the entire VKS inventory. And the Serbians only managed to shoot down a mere 2 aircraft.
and with iraq only 75(half of which not due to enemy) losses , but that was even more of a feat due to their AD network.


Gulf war.
Iraq during that war was definitely stronger than ukraine is now relative to russia.
They had the 4th largest army in 1990, 4000+ tanks, over a thousand aircrafts and the densest SAM network in the world.
And this army wasn't all a paper tiger, they had experience from iran-iraq war and had defeated kuwait in a day prior.

The entire war, though, was such a logistical masterpiece that I can not do it justice with my words.


I mean if you want to go about this like this, then USA only lost 60k men fighting a USSR/China backed veitnam for over a decade.

During the iraq war, US coalition employed the use of over a thousand aircrafts conduced over 100,000 sorties and suffered only 75 losses, all in a month.
US coalition deployed and sustained over 300,000 troops, thousand of miles away, supplied them with 4000 ton of supplies per day for the whole war.

No other nation has achieved something like this.
Its fine to admit russians suffered from really bad command structures and ineffective battle doctrine.

They lost 70 aircraft in 2 months in Iraq. They never destroyed ad in Serbia. Scale is so low...you can believe in Hollywood bs if your brain is not to put work to understand. With all their advantages of financial, economic and geographical presence it's piss poor performance percent picking on small countries. Vietnam is a point in time comparison.

 

[Kedar]

i am sorry but leave NATO I think Russia wont even be able to win a war against Poland alone

Blah blah, they took out entire Ad in thousands. You are a Hollywood believer. They defeated every superpower that fought them and they got 4 new provinces. Keep living fantasies. Hope you aren't a Indian as this level of dumbness is a shame as an Indian. Ask Poland how they did in their wars in history.

Your brain is saturated with density. Couldn't have picked a better name.

 

[shauryaman65]

Blah blah, they took out entire Ad in thousands. You are a Hollywood believer. They defeated every superpower that fought them and they got 4 new provinces. Keep living fantasies. Hope you aren't a Indian as this level of dumbness is a shame as an Indian. Ask Poland how they did in their wars in history.

Your brain is saturated with density. Couldn't have picked a better name.

You literally countered none of my points dumbass.
I don’t even know why mods don’t ban idiots like you on this forum. You said a whole paragraph of NOTHING.
This quality of posting doesn’t suit this forum.

 

[shauryaman65]

They lost 70 aircraft in 2 months in Iraq. They never destroyed ad in Serbia. Scale is so low...you can believe in Hollywood bs if your brain is not to put work to understand. With all their advantages of financial, economic and geographical presence it's piss poor performance percent picking on small countries. Vietnam is a point in time comparison.

Again you said absolutely NOTHING. With ZERO research done.

They destroyed 80% of the AD in Iraq and destroyed 30% of it in Serbia.
They couldn’t destroy more because of hit and run tactics( read above ).But because of that they managed to not be able to hit many aircraft as a result