star49.
Concerning the MiG-29B against any of America’s “teen” fighters, the MiG-29B is a far closer opponent than any variant of the MiG-23, which would have been the bulk of the WP fighters in any aerial conflict between the WP and NATO.
Adrian
MIG-29B is not close opponent of teen series than any variant of MIG-23 unless it is armed with different set of missiles, radar, datalinks and robust air defence infrastructure that can pin point into right place. Its range is too short to take independent missions. Even MIG-21Bison can be as hard opponent in short fight when armed with right weopons and proper situational awarness is provided. The gap between situational awarness/weopons is far more between 60s and 80s than between 3rd and 4th generation fighters.
star491200 kg -> payload, not additional plane weight. If you check some of the figures for some of the well known fighters like F-16
# 740 nm (1,370 km) w/
2 2,000-lb bombs + 2 AIM-9 + 1,040 US gal external tanks
# 340 nm (630 km) w/
4 2,000-lb bombs + 2 AIM-9 + 340 US gal external tanksThat’s basically a 740 km decrease from having 2000 kg more payload and 700 less gal of gas.
Less fuel means less range. Su-30 fuel is not decreased by external load. and external payload has more effect on Single engine light fighters compared to twin engine fighters which has surplus thrust once it reaches certain height. ur comparsion is clearly wrong.
And you just have no response to the part about your own source saying 2 R-27 + R-73 for a combat radius of 1500 km?
Combat radius of 1500KM with 4 AAM (alteast 750KG with heaveir R-27) does notpreclude combat radius of 1500KG with 4000KG external load. i have already put Su-27 vs Su-30 example.
composites is just one way to decrease the weight, this is so stupid I have to argue with you on this. If you can reduce weight without using composites, you will. Having composite does not necessarily make a fighter lighter. It’s one of the methods to decrease weight.
If u want reduce weight in meaningful way. This is the only way. Boeing/Airbus/Sukhoi/Tupolev are doing the same. Because of these composities that Italian and Japanese got so big share of 787.
star49star49, in your discussion with tphuang, the figure of 4,000/5,200 kgs external load can be corrected to 3,300 kgs external load. This is because Nick had pointed that Su-30 MKI does not carry external pods (so we can’t add the pod’s weight to 3,300 kgs to increase it overall to 4,000 kgs).
I already mentioned 3300/4000 KG external load is not a big deal with Su-30 class fighter. Just canard/TVC/BARs will add alteast 1500KG over the top of Su-30MK2. if u load Su-27SM with 4000KG external load. it will barely reach empty weight of Su-30MKI. I am not even going into frontal x-section with twin seat canards. Top Speed is reduced to Mach 1.9 vs Mach 2 of Su-30. http://www.irkut.com
All in all, the F-18, Rafale and Typhoon would only provide 200-300 kms lesser combat radius and about 1000 kgs lesser warload than Su-30. Tactically, it may make a difference in wartime, but it is not that significant so as to introduce an expensive, unknown fighter type in the IAF.
The Tejas has worst case combat radius of 800 kms in a fighter config. The figure of weapon-load is the only “missing link”. If it is of the order of 2,000-2,500 kgs, then an MRCA would definitely be unnecessary, because as per fas.org referenced previously, that is exactly the interdiction mission profile of the F-18 E/F.
I have already mentioned that F-16/MIG-35/F-18/Rafale/EF are waste of time and money. Putting resources into any of these fighters will decrease IAF capbabilities both in resources/men. IAF should only concentrate on LCA (future derviates like MCA possible take some foreign consultancy) and Su-30 (future derivates like PAK-FA).
India is getting 100% TOT with customization. so the question of overeliance does not arise. and Rafale/F-18E cost $100mn in 2002/03 prices. just look USN 450 F-18E order for $44B. I am sure it will be $200M in a date well into a future.
There is no such thing as medium weight fighter. It is not 1960/70s that u just collect fighters for every role. u make ur current fighters multifunctional aviation complexes.
star49you own source mentionned
Maximum flight range (with rockets 2xR-27R1, 2xR-73E launched at half distance):
– at sea level, km 1,270
– at height, km 3,000
– with one refuelling (at 1.500 kg fuel remaining), km 5,200
– with two refuellings in flight, km 8,000
Does 2 R-27 + 2 R-73 sound like 4000 kg of payload? And that’s assuming maximum internal fuel. I still don’t see where you got 4000/5200 kg range from. That’s a huge difference. 1200 kg extra weight could mean a decrease of 300 to 500 km in combat radius.
Decrease of 300 to 500 KM in combat radiues for 1200 KG extra weight? this thing is laughable. Su-30MKI is heaver than baseline Su-27SK by alteast 4000 KG not mentioning higher frontal X-section of twin seater vs Single seater but range reduction is only 530KM (Not combat radius). 1200KG extra weight does not mean big thing for an aircraft which has superior aerodynamics than other 4.5 generation aircraft. Just compare Su-27SK,SKM and MK2. There is huge difference in Maximum take off weight. Even if u load SK with 4 tons of external weight and MK2 with 8 tons the difference should be only 4 tons but difference is 8 tons in maximum take off weight.
http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/products/military/index.wbp
http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/products/military/Su30MK2.wbp
As for weight, you can achieve lighter weight with more ways than just using composites. But that wasn’t even my original point, A2A mode means normally carrying 2 MRAAM, 2 SRAAM + 3 fuel tanks. Just to give you an idea, the following is what they list in the fighter escort configuration for SH: wo Sidewinders and two AMRAAMs and the range is 410 NM.
withou using composites? tell this to Civillian airlines like Airbus/Boeing/Tuplev/Sukhoi. they are going to 50% figure.
For light aerodynacmically defcient fighters one to two tonnes in extra weight has huge impact.
star49try telling that to plaaf officers. they will laugh at you.
A2A role, exactly. how is 2 R-73 and 2 R-27 4000 kg of external load?
He didnot mentioned 3000KM flight range. he mentioned 4000/5200KG for 1500KM flight range. which is perfectly reasonable. which no other Fighter can match on internal fuel.
Fighter configuration for a fighter of LCA’s size to me means 3 external fuel tank + 2 MRAAM + 2 SRAAM. At least, that’s what they refer to for J-10 and JF-17.
Except that LCA has much greater wing area with lighter weight. So that lighter weight should transform into greater range.
star49Originally Posted by tphuang
there is not a chance a su-30 can carry 5270 kg for a range of 1500 km. Even su-34 can’t achieve anywhere close to that
Flight range of 1500KM is possible with 5200/4000KG external load as it can do 3000KM in Air to Air role.
http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su30mk/lth/
Maximum flight range (with rockets 2xR-27R1, 2xR-73E launched at half distance):
– at sea level, km 1,270
– at height, km 3,000
– with one refuelling (at 1.500 kg fuel remaining), km 5,200
– with two refuellings in flight, km 8,000
star49boss, the figures for the flying costs per hour for the Tornado (23k pounds per hour) and Jaguar (13k pounds per hour) that I quoted are from AFM’s latest issue. they’re accurate. the MKI most likely will be somewhat closer to the Tornado than the Jaguar, and thats pretty expensive.
does Jaguar cost also 13000 pounds per in hour in IAF?. If it is not the case than MKI cost will not be the same as Tornado.
The upfront cost of MMRCA is much more than running+acquisition of additional 126 MKI/Su-35 class fighters for next 40 years. I am not even going into lenght time period of developing pilot training and operationalizing a new type fighter. A new type fighter will set back IAF by alteast 15 years.
star49Oh, and of course Russia didn’t use technology transfers from Western Europe and America in the 19th. and early 20th. century:rolleyes: A good job Russia invented the railway, steam engine, electrical distribution system etc. Basically you’re refusing to accept that what Asia has done in recent decades is exactly the same as what Russia did a hundred years ago. And if you really think Asia has done nothing by itself you have no idea, I mean what would Japan know about semi-conductors and high end electronics:rolleyes:
19th & 20 th century technolgy transfers? . i am sure u know the Pre-1917 revolution immigrants that Went to West and the Laws of thermodynamics, heat transfer were only known in West. What Russians lacks were capitalist sytem like UK (remember Adam Smith Wealth of nations) to put theory into practice. I am sure Japan under 80 years of communism and full Western Embargo will make only Bicycles. I am not going to certain other things that are beyond the capacity of nations in that region.
http://hubpages.com/hub/FROM_THE_HISTORY_OF_THE_RUSSIAN_DRAWING
Russian inventors also did much to develop methods of making mechanical drawings. Ivan Kulibin, the famous Russian inventor (1735-1818), made drawings of his numerous inventions.
The drawings of Russia’s first steam-powered machines, invent*ed by the outstanding Russian mechanic Ivan Polsunov, are likewise modern drawings.Very complex drawings were made by Efim and Miron Cherepanov (father and son), the famous Russian mechanics and engineers who invented the first Russian steam engine.
It is interesting to note that Ivan Kulibin, Ivan Polsunov and many others made their drawings by methods which were first described by Gaspard Monge, the French engineer and scientist, only in 1795
star49exactly, 5th generation SRAAMs + HMD negates quite a bit of the advantages of TVC.
5Th generation WVR only works when all aircraft sensors fails. It is myth circulating that Su-27SM is only related to Su-30MK2. when engine power, FBW, lighter weight and neary 5th generation of avionics make a generational difference.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?p=989611&highlight=su-27sm#post989611
The Su-27SM is close in its combat capabilities to the PAK FA, but it will not reach them, because during these years the margins on the fifth generation airplane will multiply.. But it, this upgraded Su-27SM, meets all the requirements of a new airplane and even, if you will excuse me, spits further than the Su-30MKK and Su-30MKI taken together. Because we put into it all the best of them. And this is the optimal variant of an upgrade.
19.01.05, Voenno-Promyshlennyy Kur’er, Correspondent: Vladimir Dobryshevskiy
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=20107&highlight=su-34
JANE’S DEFENCE WEEKLY – JANUARY 21, 2004
The Su-27SM features a strengthened fuselage, wing and landing gear to allow for a higher weapon load. The aircraft has received “a totally new avionics set” using systems from the Su-30MKK/MKI export models. “The Su-27SM is nearly a fifth-generation aircraft. It needs a lower signature characteristic and new weapons to be one,” Gen Mikhailov said. The RFAF is currently handing over the next batch of 20 Su-27s to Sukhoi for upgrade, with the intention of having one regiment converted to the Su-27SM this year.
star49in my opinion, TVC is a little overrated. I think China has pretty much not taken up that option due to the additional weight and cost issues. The higher thrust and service life of FM series are definitely good selling points tho.
MKI/MKM/MKA has TVC and newer Su-35/MIG-35. and so does F-22/PAK-FA.
So all these are wrong.
The reason could China lack of ability of implementing TVC on single engine fighter. They may need external help which is costly.
star49IF the IAF had been offered the Mirage-2000-5Mk.2+ for the MRCA, then this would’ve been something to chew on..but as it stands the Mirage-2000 production line is closed and there will be no ToT and customization of the kind that you’re talking of.
so, your doubts don’t make any sense at all, since the Mirage IS NOT A PART OF THE MRCA COMPETITION !
I just gave examples of Mirage-2000 that even fighter is fully developed Dassualt is slow to deliver let alone customize it with TOT for India requirement. It will make the process even more slower. and it does not even include newer engines or playing with airframe for increase fuel capacity.
The same can happen to Rafale/EF/F-18E with all added costs of Pilot training. on MKI u have now fully developed infrastructure and price is still half to what comparable fighter from West. Just look at F-18E with 6500 Kg fuel capacity. it will not go more than 2200KM. which is not much different than single Seat Su-27SM/Su-35 that can go 3600KM on 9400KG fuel. or heavier Su-30 upto 3000KM. I doubt ur saving much on fuel.
Best option is just concentrate on LCA and MKi derivatives or better single seat Su-35. It is time to invest in 5th generaton. There is simply no need to add another 4+ generation fighter that will come so slow to induct.
star49Further increase in thrust for Flankers.
http://www.salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=511
30.07.2007
The state aircraft-test center and MMBPE “Salut” will present on Moscow Aero-Space Saloon-2007 a breadboard model of the engine AL-31F with an automatic control system with a jet nozzle and an operated draft vector
The state aircraft-test center (air base Ahtubinsk) and FSUE “MMBPE “Salut” will present on Moscow aero-space saloon-2007 a breadboard model of engine AL-31F (42 series) with an automatic control system with a jet nozzle and an operated draft vector.Today it is the engine AL-31FM1 with draft 13, 5 t and the increased resource which passed all cycle of the state tests and in December, 2006 it is accepted on arms of the Air Forces of the Russian Federation. On FSUE “MMBPE “Salut” a batch production of the given updating is begun.
The following updating of АL-31F-М2 with draft 14t is in a stage of bench tests.
Updating of АL-31F-М3 with draft 15t possesses essentially new constructive and technological decisions. First of all it is a compressor of low pressure which actually being a prototype of the compressor of the engine of the fifth generation, allows to reduce labour input of manufacturing of the engine, to lower its weight, to increase a resource and reliability. On the compressor of a high pressure design works are spent, works on functional working off of the automatic control system 235 (type FADEC) are lead. For today 3 complete sets of units of automatic control system for АL-31F-М3 are made. This automatic control system is a prototype of the automatic control system of the perspective engine for PAC FA.
The chamber of combustion and the vectorable nozzle concern also to essentially new elements of АL-31F-М3.
As a result АL-31FM3 on the parameters comes nearer to requirements of the engine of 5-th generation and it can be considered as the first prototype-demonstrator of the engine of the fifth generation and simultaneously to be used for retooling of significant park of fighters “Su-27/Su-30” for prolongation of their resource and substantial improvement of performance characteristics.
All works are spent due to the enterprise without attraction of budgetary funds.
Source:the organization “the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation”
star49Verbal claim related to guessing. You even missed, that the Flanker is FBW from the start.
Su-27 also had engines and radar from the start.:rolleyes:
star49Ruaf called Su-27SM as been better than any expot variant of Flanker. So alteast flight performance, with new engines, FBW and lighter weight of single seater should help. In Radar i think it will fall a little shorter than BARS but in other areas in avionics like in EW/Communication/Weopons it will surpass it.
http://www.salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=551
07.09.2007MMBPE “Salut” is ready to offer to the Air Forces new modernization of aircraft engine АL-31F each 18 months
MMBPE “Salut” is ready to offer to the Air Forces new modernization of aircraft engine АL-31F each 18 months FSUE MMBPE “Salut” is ready every one and a half year to offer to the Russian Air Forces new modernization of aircraft engine АL-31F for maintenance and increase of fighting capacity of the Air Forces. Such opinion was expressed by the chief engineer of the enterprise Valery Poklad.“The aircraft engine АL-31F modernized by MMBPE “Salut” on the first stage of modernization in updating АL-31FM-1 with the increased take-off draft is accepted on arms of the Russian Air Forces and installed on modernized fighters Su-27SM”, – he reminded.
The expert noted that for АL-31FМ-1 the rotary nozzle of control system of vector draft is created and it has for today a bench operating time of the order of 800 hours.
During modernization of serial АL-31F designers and experts of MMBPE “Salut” developed and produced the sample of the triple compressor of low pressure on which the degree of increase of the pressure is already received and it is equal 4,25. This compressor is tested not only at stand of CIAM, but also in structure of a real aircraft engine. “This work on modernization of АL-31F will allow receiving knowledge and experience of designing of the compressor of a high pressure for a perspective aircraft engine of new generation which is also in plans of MMBPE “Salut”, – V.Poklad emphasized.
star49dude, the Mirage-2k upgrade has nothing to do with newer engines..the M53 is not the most powerful, but its very reliable and the IAF has no pressing need to upgrade these. the numbers quoted were between 10-15 per year once the first 2 Mirages are upgraded in France, 2 years after the contract is signed. so that would mean if the contract was signed in 2008 (likely), then the first 2 would be upgraded by 2010 and the entire fleet (50 or thereabouts) would be upgraded by 2014.
and its a RDY2 radar, not AESA, no TVC, no increased fuel and the RDY2 is already integrated with the MICA-ER/IR. If the IAF does surprise us, it may end up being the Derby/Python 5 in place of the MICA-ER/IR and the 2052, but as of now, its pure speculation, so the French should be easily able to manage the schedule.
I am not referring to upgrades of current aircraft but newer 126 M2K with TOT and customized for India. even that is in doubt.
U have to look at Greek/UAE example how much time it took for them to finally deliver the aircraft. Thats why i have doubts on those 126 aircraft in reasonable amount of time.
Sign In
