Sukhoi Su-30MKI
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
Yeah, that upgrade is impossible, but the jets will see a life extension of 10-15 years.
Also, majority of the fleet is still very young, more than 200 jets, so a large number will be in operation even in the 2050s.
Nah..Su-30MKI is way more safe and survivable than Mig-21. Twin engine vs single one is the biggest factor along with much safer RSS FCS.
And IAF won't compromise in airframe quality even in life-extension exercise, period.
Upgrade of 84 in first tranche is well known. But in due course more "should" be upgraded, IMHO.
What's your personal take about engine upgrade during MKI MLU? Should we pursue it or just electronic upgrade shall suffice?
Thats implicitly given. But, Its too far in the future. Is there a point in adding that in any calculations when talking about the fleet?. From now it will take 3-4 years to flight test prototype of upgrade and another 4-5 years to complete actual 84 airframes. At that point we should be inducting AMCA. It wont matter much upgrading the remaining 100 or so MKIs then. Just like DARAN III of Jaguar. Its a good to have.
I dont see that happening. IAF planned the long term future of the MKI like that only. Nothing substantially changed. AL-31 is good enough for them.
But we must at least 'uprate' AL-31FP to meet future electronic enhancement demand? What say?
@randomradio @vstol Jockey
Is 123KN(×2) good enough for future MKI radar/EW and other enhancements planned?
Increase generator power，Usually in the upper casing of the engine
Apparently, the thrust is fine. But the electrical generator definitely needs an upgrade, if that's possible.
Yes, upgrading MKI with modern systems(Radar/IRST/EW etc.) should also overall reduce it weight. By how much? My guess would be minimum 500kgs to 1 tonne. So, 123(×2)KN thrust shall suffice with new electrical generator.
Having said that, I so wish that we develop a full-on indigenous derivative of AL-31FP(of course with Russian go-ahead) and uprate its dry power to 80KN(min) and wet power to 130KN(min) with slightly better materials developed by MIDHANI and with better service life and TBO. That along with lighter and modern avionics shall improve the Thrust to Weight ratio of MKI substantially.
There are no aircraft in the world that get lighter when they upgrade, except the MIG23MLU and J11B
Depends on the upgrade. If there's more space, they will just find a way to add more capability.
A lighter radar is an advantage, 650Kg Bars can be replaced by a 300Kg radar. That's an extra 350Kg. So there may be no weight gain in the end.
The current Bars weighs around 550kgs(+-11kgs) and OLS-30 weighs ~180kgs. That's total of around 730kgs. The new Uttam AESA and QWIP IRST are combined going to weigh half because of their modern design. We can see 200/300 kgs minimum weight reduction here. So, most definitely MKI is going to become lighter minimum by 500kgs and if we use more composites, then over a ton.
I think to make that UTTAM radar you're talking about a reality,Everything you say exists only in brochures and drawing boards, and the exact data is unknown
Any modern AESA is going to be much lighter than Bars, that's a given. Ols-35 weighs just around 83kgs vs around 180kgs of OLS-30. So, even modern IRST is going to weigh less. Do some research of your own, then you'll understand
Long back I had told you that F414 in its present condition is fit to generate about 128KN thrust and about 82KN dry thrust. Its thrust of 116KN for SH blk3 is limited to 76KN dry and 116KN wet is restricted due to air intake size of SH which can allow only 85/kg/sc airflow. It now produces twice the electrical power of the previous version. Now if this engine is given a CMC core, its thrust can easily breach 140 KN. If we are able to take it to 140Kn thrust, it can become a standard engine across all our platfroms. We can have a single engine aircraft in F-16 class and also use this engine to upgrade the Super SU-30 program by replacing the present engine. This will also offset shift in CG of Su-30 due the weight reduction in the nose as this engine is lighter than the present engine so there will be no need to rewrite flight control laws due to shift in CG.
Won't the difference in dimensions cause problems?
Anyway, without 100% ToT, it's politically not realistic. The F414 is said to be 75% ToT for LCA, rumours but realistic. And any AMCA engine development with ToT is at least 15 years away. Plus I doubt the IAF will agree to such a risk, especially with the massive cost of changing the engine. And the Russians may withdraw OEM support for the jet too.
The closest possibility is the AL-31FP's Russian parts replaced by new parts designed by Midhani and BEL. It will upgrade thrust to 132KN, not sure about dry thrust and electrical power, but both will naturally be higher.
no. The best part is that F414 is smaller in dimensions so it can easily fit into the airframe.
F414 is lot more reliable than Russian engines too. But don't think Russia will allow this. I think what Random said is what will happen(indigenised AL-31FP with MIDHANI parts producing more power et al).
We have already placed orders for 250 AL31 engines with HAL,.
? for the first block upgrade of 80 samples.
? Change during overhaul
So whatever engine upgrade / change , it s still a long time away.
? for the first block upgrade of 80 samples.
? Change during overhaul
So whatever engine upgrade / change , it s still a long time away.
Neither HAL nor Russia will give up this cash cow.
Switching to the 117S would halve engine costs immediately. So it's unlikely the IAF will be allowed to upgrade the engine due to pressure from the industry.