One thing I don’t quite understand – how is it going to deal with the vortices coming off its ‘nose’ over the levcon when stabs are set relatively further apart than on the flanker…

I’d expect that at low-speed AoA and high-speed moderate AoA flight regimes the aerodynamic fuselage join where the LEVCON merges with it would form (and behave like) an LE sawtooth flap. Also you see those grooves on the said aerodynamic fuselage join? They’re known as vortices ‘trip spots’ and avoids fence-type VGs- though under certain conditions the LEVCON-fuselage gap itself would act as VG fence. SIBNIA has done a lot of work in this field.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3772/9627453023_7a05ea9eed_o.jpg
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9067/414616.222/0_b2efb_7370bf48_XXL.jpg

Despite the stable growth of the Russian economy*, Indian money is crucial (borderline critical) to the PAK-FA programme, the Indian economy’s recent slowdown will more likely impact MMRCA and others before FGFA/PAK-FA. It doesn’t really matter if the programme moves slightly to the right, it gives more time for ‘Type 30’ validation and brings GaN AESA into the frame.

As for oil prices they are currently quite stable @ US$110 p/b the main problem for Russia is a slowdown in demand from China as the latter winds down it’s capital investment expenditures and tries to rebalance the the economy to one that is more consumption based. Having said that, Indian energy imports from Russia are likely to take up the slack as major capital investment projects are signed off. It also means Russian net imports of oil (initially projected for 2016) will now be delayed- which for them is obviously a good thing. Russian oil exploration joint ventures may have shifted down a gear but certainly haven’t been put on hold.

*http://rt.com/business/russia-gdp-5th-largest-158/

Here you can see Irkut’s Su-30KN is cleared for only 2 KAB1500KRs. The KNs were essentially the developmental forerunners to the Su-30MKI and will have a structurally identical airframe (apart from the canards). It also supports the supposition that the structurally stronger Su-34 & Su-35S can carry only 3 KAB1500s as a load distribution factor.

Hence (imho) it is highly unlikely that the Su-30MKI can accommodate 2 of the 2.5T BrahMos’ and would explain the strengthening of the MKI airframe for the centreline pylon to accommodate it:

http://www.irkut.com/en/services/production/SU30KN/

Maybe, its a valid point but;

[ATTACH=CONFIG]220768[/ATTACH]

Su-34 had no problems carrying Alpha missile, which is just as long as BrahMos…

Those are all valid points, but then, those apply to most payloads, and result in limitations for the aircraft performance. I can easily debate already M2.5+ capable brahmos would have far less effect than carrying 6x FAB-250s on multiple ejector racks but thats not my point. My point is, if we strap two BrahMos on current MKI, and if this limits its pefromance to M0.85 and 2.5Gs, no one would be unhappy about it.

I see where your argument is coming from, but I still doubt the Su-30MKI will be cleared for 2 (let alone 3) BrahMos’, given that the Su-34 may well be cleared for only 3 KAB 1500s (or 6 KAB 500s)*.The pic of ‘blue 43’ with the ‘Alpha’ missile is all very well, but that’s just one of those promo shots for visiting generals, it was never seen on a runway with that ginormous (dummy) weapons load- let alone in the air!

*http://airwar.ru/image/idop/bomber/su34/su34-2.gif

Last thing I heard, the RuAF is not happy with the Leninets B004, but once the Russian MoD and industry reach a decision on AESA component standardisation that problem will be easily addressed. The size, mission flexibility and MLU update potential of the Su-34’s airframe coupled with the ergonomic cockpit layout will ensure it has a long future with the RuAF and the ‘BM’ should shape up into a very capable aircraft indeed. I’d certainly expect dedicated ‘Growler’ type EW and stand-off stealth UCAV ‘mother ship’ variants.

Su-34 cockpit simulator and ‘attack’ on ‘Kuznetsov’:

http://s5.uploads.ru/Okmhj.jpg
http://s5.uploads.ru/z3WtL.png

No way either ‘Super 30’ or Su-34 can carry 2 BrahMos, btw.

Here’s something quite interesting, in the first pic is Phazotron-NIIR’s naval AESA destined for warships such as the Pr.22350 class. The large grey box @ the top is an X-band AESA radar, the smaller, rectangular installation beneath is an L-band AESA radar (probably analogous to a naval ‘Nebo-M’), but the narrow ‘strips’ of antennae framing both AESA’s are described as ‘phased array radar channels for passive radar [signal] detection (i.e. EW):

[ATTACH=CONFIG]220554[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]220555[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]220556[/ATTACH]

Similar passive radar signal detection arrays are installed in a later incarnation of the ZhukAE (pic 2, in blue) and clearly visible on the example shown @ MAKS 2013 (pic3, thin yellow rectangular blocks). Obviously, these arrays are too narrow to be an effective transmitting radar in the conventional sense, hence this is the sort of set-up that could be synonymous with passive receiver based, multi-channel digital phase-frequency evaluation for EW.

I’d highly doubt AN/ALR-94 operates in L-band if it has to cue AN/APG-77 beams with an accuracy of 2° by 2° in azimuth and elevation.

You got the number right, but not the placement. Radar in the nose, N036. Two cheek radars, N036B-1-01L. Then there is L-band radars in the slats, in each of them. So, 1+2+2…

…Now, if there is actually sixth (rear-view) radar, then that is a secret they have been keeping very well.

What is it with people’s IQs recently? First they don’t believe the official words of industry MDs & Chief Designers, and now they don’t believe their own words and deny ever having said them. Not only do you ‘not mean what you say’, but you ‘don’t even know what you mean’! Must be like living in a ‘Salvador Dali’ parallel universe.

As for the need for a rear facing radar, maybe the Russkies don’t underestimate the STEALTH capabilities of their potential adversaries (F-22/35) as, like the Su-27, the T-50 is designed to operate in enemy airspace. From a capability/survivability standpoint, one can always ask the designers of the ‘swashplate’ AESA for Gripen NG and Typhoon MLU if limited coverage is a *good thing*. F-35 fans will tout 360 degree coverage no-end, unfortunately for them, not in the 6-18GHz range.

Radiation warning stickers are used on all sorts of antennas if the transmitting Power is high enough, HF antennes got them i know. hell even my micro oven i think 🙂
My point is, it doesn’t have to be an Radar Array inside those area, but other regular antennas that transmit some form of radiation waves..

Really? I don’t see internationally recognised ‘Danger Radiation’ markings on the SAP 518 or even the monster SAP-14. Your microwave oven must be Norway’s best kept military secret!

Is this somewhat related ?

No, they’re more to do with embedded arrays for RLG navigation, comms, etc. and the associated fibre optic network.

First off, there is plenty, i repeat, plenty, of evidence there will be L-band in stalts, so don’t try to row away here. Neither did i ever argue the stinger isn’t made out of wavelength transparent material. And as demonstrated a few pages back, Indian press are not exactly trustworthy.

That was precisely my point too.

I am ready to change my opinion at any given moments as soon as compelling evidence lands; sticker is no evidence for radar installation for me.

PS: Also gonna point out that change in color =/= radar transparent material. Wingtips on T-50-4 have different color because they are made out of metal instead of the surrounding composites. Same story with leading edge of LEVCON’s. Heck, such thing could be observed even on I-16, different shades on different materials. Yes, i think the stinger is made out of transparent material, wingtips on T-50-4 are most certainly not.

That doesn’t mean there wont be future ECM installation there of course.

Yes, but it ISN’T A RADAR, IS IT?!!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]220502[/ATTACH]
As for the tail stinger, so what happens, God forbid, a threat emerges in the forward sector? Does the pilot fly backwards?!