Is it economical? The F-35 that burned on the runway last year suffered even less damage, but it was written off because repair costs didn’t justify it.

Russia is repairing T-50-5 prototype, which also was in fire. They could simply send it to NAPO, where they will replace damaged components.

Doesn’t look that bad to be honest.

This could be quite quickly repaired. Replace the wing, fins, nose section and tires with new ones and it will be flying again.

Su-35 and MiG-35 have russian made MAWS and LWR sensors. MAWS is not necessary to be optical ( UV, IR ), could be radar type.

Why are they getting Su-30SM instead of Su-35? What advantages does the Su-30SM have?

My opinion is, that Su-30SM could be build in larger numbers per year and more quickly replace old planes in combat units. Second thing is, that Su-30SM is second best fighter with TVC engines and powerful PESA radar after Su-35 and third reason could be, that single seater Su-35 and later PAK FA will be mostly RuAF air defense fighters to protect domestic air space, while two seater Su-30SM could be used as heavy multi-role fighter in operations outside of their air space and will not expose too important technology as Su-30SM is based on export Su-30MKI/MKM.

India has close to 200 Su-30MKIs in service, whereas Malaysia has 18 and Algeria has ~30 in service (I may be corrected if I’m wrong here)..the fleet utilization of the IAF’s Su-30MKI fleet is also very high..but there are some other issues, as have been pointed out, so it may not be a design issue alone. However, do note that the OEM did make some design changes to the AL-31F engine after problems were pointed out, and since then the number of engine problems have been reported to have reduced.

Nevertheless, being the backbone of the IAF’s fighter fleet, it is a matter of concern and the IAF will have to take a very close look at these issues.

China have more than 200 flankers with Al-31 engines and 300+ J-10 fighters with the same engine and they fly for longer time in China than in India and they didn’t report to have such problems. Using bad quality of fuel and lubricants bring to a lot of issues, which India would not have if they use proper fuel and lubricants. This is not a problem of an engine itself.

Speaking of Hellduck:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8448/7788139318_a79e262c10_o.jpg

That prominent GLONASS antenna behind the cockpit…does Su-35 have on of its own?

I think Su-35 have similar satellite data link antenna.

The best option for Argentina is to buy Su-30 multirole fighters. Indian Su-30MKI produced in HAL cost 56 million $. If Argentina buy less complex Su-30MK2, like those in Vietnam or Venezuela, they will be even less expensive and they will get new planes from factory with 0 hours on them. Comparing to Gripen, which cost more than 100 million $, they could buy a lot of fuel, spare parts, maintenance and weaponry for the difference in cost.

With ordering new Su-30 fighters, Russia could give retired Su-24M fighter-bombers for free as temporary solution until first Su-30 fighters are delivered.

Many different and contradicting opinions from you both too(you and Trident), makes answering this crazy. :very_drunk:Reason I entered this pointless discussion was reading this explanation to a warping skin on a freshly built Su-35 visible mostly on the aircraft front section.

Please, no offense, it seems you have even less experience with basic aircraft production/assembly technologies, a primary joining methods such as riveting, welding, bonding, or why is the skin on some fuselage areas so prone to get deformed in assembly joining proccesses.
Then some fools have noticed a 50 years old B-52 with a wrinkled skin on the fuselage, automatically thought the new Su-35 has it due to the same reason, fatigue, stress cycles, g-loads, aerodynamic heat and pressure. That is utter bull$hit. Anyway, the B-52 was born with wrinkled skin, bcs it is by its design structure which doesnt include longitudinal stringers, there are frames connected to four extruded beams running the whole length of the fuselage originating from wing torsion box. When sitting on the ground on landing gears, there is a tension in the long fuselage causing bending visualized in the skin wrinkles. Generally they will disappear when aircraft is put on jacks and leveled to an aircraft longitudinal plane or when flying in the air. Of course we can not forget the riveting proccesses as well, they`ve made its own foot print during the B-52 aircraft assembly in 50ies.
You would know that even when working with MRO service, for example a major aircraft repair, e.g. replacing a part of an aircraft frame due to mechanical damage, corrosion,…etc. You have put aircraft on jacks first, then you can tear apart the fuselage bcs of present tensions in the structure when on the landing gears. Not to mention using some special tooling, and assembly jigs.

Now, we all wonder why one year old Su-35S with several flight hours logged, built with a sukhoi state-of the art aircraft production technology is showing some similar skin deformations around rivet rows, frames, stringers. It is bcs it was born with those skin deformations during the hand-made joining proccesses, e.g. riveting a skin structure, 0.8mm thick plates made from Al-Cu-Mg alloy to an aircraft frame. Skin deformations are less visible when the surface is painted with a bright matte color, e.g. yellow zinc-chromate primer. Nevertheless it is still there and is visible unless you provide a good high-angle lighting conditions and paint it with a semi matt to glossy dark paint.
You can also machine self-carrying skin by using chemical milling processes, accuratelly drill countersink holes for rivets with help of laser measuring technologies, using automated riveting machines in the end to make better appearance, build quality. Then the Su-35 will cost a 100mil per piece, not a wise way to replace aging aircrafts in the VVS, do not you think?
Check this site with Sukhoi production line in Irkuts, the last picture is showing the Su-30SM freshly painted just before delivery to a combat unit. Here we go again, decades we hear complains about russian aircraft build quality/issues from the west, now even the far east, China starts to make fun from it, Geez get over it. 😀
http://gelio.livejournal.com/200901.html
[ATTACH=CONFIG]233099[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]233100[/ATTACH]

That’s quite an interesting opinion you’ve got there, taking into account RSK MIG and its associated companies economic misery in past 20 years, uncertain future, leadership crisis and lapses, since 2005 being choked under UAC and Sukhoi holding leadership, their contracts for delivery of aircrafts have been seen as importnant objectives for securing MiG survival only when compared to big money deals what Sukhoi has done within the same period of time. Now starting a low rate production of MIg-29K/KUB with help of India`s funding, you say it already begun to appear with a far superior surface finish than the Su-35S….:rolleyes: The question would be, why Sukhoi is not fielding advanced materials(CFC), joining assembly technologies on the production line Su30,34,35 aircrafts? The Mig always was ahead in aircraft structure and production technologies, remember it pioneered the CFC use in the end of 70ies, then lightweight aluminum-lithium alloys, the whole Mig-29 front section has been spot welded instead of riveted as on Sukhois-27 familly and we can go on….

Finally, we came to a conclusion what does the trick with a “baby” smooth skin on a high-end combat aircrafts. Mostly it is the layer of a RAM paint thick several tenths of millimeters, covering all countersunk rivets, surface scratches, corrugations and imperfections. A regular aircraft paint system is about 0,1mm thick, nicely visible on the Su-35S photos posted. Compare that with the Mig-29K photos for India.
On Maks2007 only the prototype was present, therefore you have to keep statements unbiased. I`ve got a touch experience with the India Mig-29K displayed on Maks2009 and it felt very nice compared what I saw at Su-35 stand.

Mig-29K India on MAKS2009 with a special RAM coatings on the fuselage.
http://deton.lietadla.com/img_0583.jpg
http://deton.lietadla.com/img_0616.jpg

Su-35S RuAF with a regular paint system up to 0,1mm thick.
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/401381/50624xkocpLedht/ygHbG8sHXQ/928672.jpg

funny reasoning at all, so now it is a sign of J-20/31 “half-baked” design and issues with production quality when they painted all prototypes from the beginning? I doubt that, we will see that very soon, but anyway what is the point of showing and flying with a bare airframe in the first place? :rolleyes: How often have you seen to fly the F-22 in bare after being assembled? To me it is opposite and clear as a day that the T-50 is half baked aircraft and each time we see an unpaited prototype, bcs they fight with deadlines, always behind the schedule, we know exactly what they`ve been fixing, repairing, strenghtening and troubled with. I do not think they are much happy about it in Knaapo….:D:D Looking forward to see those mentioned design changes introducted with the T-50-6.

I would beat you if I was your teacher in school for such comments….:D:D

Finally, agreed.

I will not buy your idea, it is because of light or manual assembly. Let say, that skin plates are from aluminium alloys and that inside structure is from steel or titanium. They have different physical carracteristics, what include ductility. If you have in mind, Russia build planes to work in Siberian environment, where half of the year it is -60°C, than they have to have those tolerances in mind, when constructing the plane. If the plane have clear surface at -60°C and than fly to environment with +20°C, it is 80°C of difference. Let assume, than with this temperature difference inside structure become longer for 5 mm and skin plate become longer for 10 mm. Those 5 mm of difference have to go somewhere and you see it as warping. If you design the plane for +20°C and than it operate in -60°C environment, in such case your skin plate will become 5 mm too short (cracks and breaks). For this case, inside structure and skin plates have to be from the same material to have equal carracteristics.