I’m who made Air Power Analysis – Russia Part 1 (and Part 2, and Part 3, and Part 4) for IAPR. This, probably, will be re-used in the book later this year [Flanker man is right about rights and decisions]. AIR International’s feature is by somebody else, I don’t know who.
The caption is as follows:
Containers under the fuselage of Su-30MK. The front one (upper picture) contains SPS-161 jammer and SPO-32 RWR while the rear one (lower picture) – APK-9 [AKP-9 is a printing error] data link to control Kh-59M missile.
APK-9 is a standard operational pod combined with Kh-59M. Other one (SPS-161/SPO-32) doesn’t exist, I suppose. It was shown only once in 1993 (I don’t remember, is that picture from Le Bourget 1993 or MAKS 1993) with “Su-30MK” demonstrator being in fact usual Su-27UB coded 321. It was just a canoe-shaped fairing with “SPS-161” and “SPO-32” inscriptions on it.
Algerian contract for 51 MiG-29s wasn’t mentioned by Toryanin because of confidential nature of negotiations with Algerians. As you may see, no one of reports about that question is “official”, with reference to RSK MiG.
RSK is Rossiyskaya Samolotostroitelnaya Korporatsiya = Russian Aircraft(building) Corporation, current name of ex MIG (Military Industrial Group or VPK, Voenno-Promyshlennyi Kompleks) MiG
Once again, MKK has VE radar with no air-to-ground mode. There is no problem with weapons like Kh-29L, Kh-29T and KAB-500Kr (but not L). Targetting (for T) is via missile seeker, TV picture displayed in the cockpit on upper right screen. By the way, Kh-29TE (30 km) version is ANTI-SHIP missile, read specifications.
Now Kh-59M. This missile is to destroy targets with KNOWN COORDINATES (inertial navigation into target’s area plus TV-seeker for terminal homing). So, also no radar needed.
This is the question (radars on MKK and MK2) I made many effords to clarify.
My English knowlege is very scare, so I want to stress, following is a joke and please do not be offended.
“Who is an expert? This is the guy who does not think. He knows.” So, I just know that MKK has VE.
Look at MiG-29SM of approx 1996. Armed with TV weapons (Kh-29T, KAB-500Kr) plus Kh-31P with no modifications in radar (N019M).
Dear crobato, who said air-to-ground options were not introduced in MKK? Of course, they were. But NOT VIA RADAR. Kh-31P supported by Pastel, TV missiles and bombs via separate TV channel and OLS-30.
Rassvet N012 is for Su-27M/-35, I guess IB has bigger rear radar.
I am sure with N001VE for MKK, it has no air-to-ground modes. Ground mapping and Kh-31A missile introduced with VEP only, so MK2.
First, do not forget that Su-27IB has two radars. Maybe, Phazotron made rear-looking one?
Su-30MKK has N001VE radar by NIIP
Su-30MK2 has N001VEP radar by NIIP
Su-30MK3 – there is no such airplane, just words
There is no Su-30MKK2, only MK2. You may be misleaded by small inscription ‘MKK2’ on the air intake cover of ‘502’ aircraft shown at MAKS in Zhukovsky last year. But this only means ‘second aircraft of MKK type’.
Zhuk-MSF = Sokol is fitted to 27KUB only as yet.
You have to remember, that An-70, Tu-330 and Il-214 (IRTA) belong to different niches: maximum payload for An-70 is 47 tons, Tu-300 – 35 tons, Il-214 – 18.8 ton.
The R-27 version designed specially for Su-33 (to operate over the sea) is R-27EM (Morskaya, sea) but no information is that a live program, I suppose not.
Anti-AWACS Kh-31 was mentioned ones by Russians in a brochure of approx 1991-1992.
You’re right, 10 cm are still centimetres. I had in my mind that in Russia, 10 cm is named ‘decametre wavelength’ radar; when they told ‘cm’, they mean 2-4 cm.
I dream of making only so small errors like this “semi-active/active”…
2Vympel: Thank you, you do not believe I made that mistake (R is semi-active and not active version) – that was made during editing.
R-27P is to weak to fight against AWACS – it is designed to destroy enemy fighters; its seeker works in centimetre wavelength (i.e. fighter radar)
Originally posted by google
A question about the ESM antenna placement Pibu. How does placing the antenna on the top of the plane guarantee greater detection of signals than if it were placed on the bottom?
I think, there is no space on the bottom. In front, you have radar bulge. Then, there is weapons bay. Moreover, radar dome make front zone blind for ESM receiver.
Il-38SD towed to take-off position in Khodynka