What's new

First Sukhoi-30 overhauled at Nashik, highlights HAL’s growing capability

TimeTraveller

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Aug 9, 2014
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
1
Country
India
Location
India
Sukhoi-Su-30-MKI-Indian-Air-Force-IA[113].jpg



Next week, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Nashik will complete the
first ever overhaul of a Sukhoi-30MKI fighter. HAL’s test pilots will
now test-fly the aircraft to ensure it has emerged from the overhaul as
good as new. Indian Air Force (IAF) chief, Air Chief Marshal Subir Raha,
has been invited to Nashik next month to accept the overhauled fighter
back into his combat fleet.

HAL’s new overhauling facility will save the IAF hundreds of crores of
rupees, while giving leases of life to its Su-30MKIs. Not even Russia
overhauls this fighter, a process that involves stripping it to its bare
bones, checking every system and sub-system, replacing numerous
components, and then reassembling the fighter anew.

A Su-30MKI is overhauled after flying 1,500 hours or 14 years, whichever
is earlier. Over its total service life of 6,000 flying hours or 30-40
years, each fighter undergoes three overhauls. Eventually, the IAF’s
fleet of 272 Su-30MKIs will undergo 816 overhauls – three per fighter.

HAL officials say overhauling in India costs far less than what
“original equipment manufacturers” or OEMs, charge – typically 35-40 per
cent of the cost of a brand new fighter.

“OEMs usually price new fighters reasonably, but make their money by
charging heavily for repair and overhaul. Establishing overhaul
capability in India defeats this pricing strategy,” says Wing Commander
Neelu Khatri, a former IAF logistics specialist.

HAL Nashik also stands to benefit from business from other air forces
that operate the Su-30. Says a MoD official; “Nashik is the world’s only
overhaul facility for the Su-30MKI. Potentially, it could get overhaul
orders from countries like Vietnam, Malaysia, Algeria, etc, which fly
variants of the Su-30″.

Through years of building the Su-30MKI, HAL Nashik has gradually
mastered the expertise that makes it one of the world’s most feared
fighters. Says the chief of HAL’s Nashik facility, S Subrahmanyan: “More
51 per cent of the Su-30MKI by value is currently made in India, a
little more than the 49 per cent agreed with Russia in the contract
signed in 2000 to build 140 fighters in India.

Of the 43,000 components that go into a Su-30MKI, 31,500 components – or
73 per cent – are now being built in India.

Further indigenisation is blocked since the Indo-Russian contract
mandates that all raw material that goes into the Su-30MKI – including
5,800 titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates, etc –
must be sourced from Russia. The contract also stipulates that another
7,146 items like nuts, bolts, screws and rivets must be sourced from Russia.

HAL has also partially indigenised the Su-30MKI’s giant AL-31FP engines,
which are built in Koraput, Odisha. Fifty-three per cent of the engine
by cost has been indigenised, with the remaining 47 per cent consisting
of high-tech composites and special alloys – proprietary secrets that
Russia will not part with. Even so, HAL builds 87.7 per cent of the
engine’s components in India.

Given HAL, Nashik’s growing expertise, it is surprising that the
overhaul facility at Nashik has taken 14 years to overhaul its first
fighter. This is because the initial contract, signed in 2000 for
building 140 fighters in India, did not include provisions for overhaul
– a mistake, say contract lawyers.

The delay was compounded because Russia itself has no Su-30 overhaul
facility (the Russian Air Force did not buy the fighter until well after
India). Only in 2008 did New Delhi and Moscow sign an overhaul contract.
Until last year, aircraft parts and systems were going to Russia for
overhaul.

In 2010, the first IAF Su-30MKI fighters, which had joined the fleet in
2000, were due for overhaul, in accordance with the original schedule,
which was 1,500 flying hours or 10 years. Since the fighters had flown
far less than 1,500 hours, Sukhoi was approached to extend the time
period between overhaul. After numerous inspections and “accelerated
aging tests”, Sukhoi revised the overhaul schedule to 1,500 flying hours
or 14 years, whichever comes first.

“The MoD has sanctioned an overhaul capacity of 15 fighters per year;
next year, we will overhaul 10-12 fighters and then stabilise at 15
fighters annually. We have already approached the MoD to step up
capacity to 30 fighters per year, which will cater for our requirements
into the 2030s” says Subrahmanyan.

Of the 30 Su-30MKIs that will be overhauled each year, HAL will do 20,
while an IAF base repair depot will overhaul the other 10.

Source : First Sukhoi-30 overhauled at Nashik, highlights HAL’s growing capability | idrw.org
 
1500 hrs in 14 years?
Then exactly how do the pilots get the 250hr/year flight hours reported by some sources.

That my friend, is one of the reasons for the recent spate of incidents affecting the Su-30MKI. The Russian doctrine usually calls for 150 flight hours per annum, while we are generating close to 250-275 hours. Unfortunately for us, the manual being followed still follows the Russian schedule of maintenance, with the age of the aircraft getting priority over the flight hours accumulated.

What this has resulted in is increased rate of ageing of the components of the aircraft, and by extension, that of the fleet itself.

By the Russian schedule, our first MKIs are already 33 years old, 10-13 years past the point at which the aircraft are usually ordered for complete overhaul. But as the article points out, overhaul has only just begun on the fleet.

We should've preempted such a situation when the flight hours were raised from the 150 hours a year to 250.
 
That my friend, is one of the reasons for the recent spate of incidents affecting the Su-30MKI. The Russian doctrine usually calls for 150 flight hours per annum, while we are generating close to 250-275 hours. Unfortunately for us, the manual being followed still follows the Russian schedule of maintenance, with the age of the aircraft getting priority over the flight hours accumulated.

What this has resulted in is increased rate of ageing of the components of the aircraft, and by extension, that of the fleet itself.

By the Russian schedule, our first MKIs are already 33 years old, 10-13 years past the point at which the aircraft are usually ordered for complete overhaul. But as the article points out, overhaul has only just begun on the fleet.

We should've preempted such a situation when the flight hours were raised from the 150 hours a year to 250.
A Su-30MKI fighter crashed on 30 April 2009 in the Pokhran region of Rajasthan, at Rajmathai village, around 170 km from Jaisalmer, after it took off from Pune during a routine sortie, killing one of its two pilots. Defence minister A. K. Antony, stated that the likely cause of the crash was "failure of the fly-by-wire system". The Sukhoi fleet was then grounded for around three weeks.[17] However it was found that the crash was caused by the incorrect position of critical switches behind the pilots and outside their field of view. The aircraft crashed when a critical switch was toggled disabling the Flight control system. Wing Commander PS Nara was killed in the mishap, while Wing Commander SV Munje was injured. Critical switches identified by the accident investigators were inhibited.[77]

Another Su-30MKI crashed on 30 November 2009 in Jathegaon, about 40 km from Jaisalmer after a fire warning.[17] Both aircrew ejected safely. As a result the entire fleet of Su-30MKIs was grounded while the cause of the problem was investigated. It was attributed to accidental ingestion of a foreign material in the engine intake.[78][79]

A Su-30MKI crashed on 13 December 2011; both the pilots ejected safely. The aircraft had taken off from the Lohegaon Indian Air Force Base near Pune, crashing at Wade-Bholai village, 20 kilometres from Pune. Preliminary reports said that the crash was due to a malfunction in the fly-by-wire system. Wing CommanderGurkirat Singh Sohal, the pilot of the plane was conferred with the Vayu Sena Medal (Gallantry).[80]

An IAF Su-30MKI crashed at the Pokhran range during the rehearsal of the Iron Fist Exercise on 19 February 2013. The aircraft was on a night flying training mission. Just after completing the mission, the aircraft's right wing exploded, both the pilots ejected safely and there was no damage to any property or life on ground. A Court of Inquiry was ordered to investigate the crash,[81][82] and later, the WSO Wing Commander Vikram Singh Chauhan was awarded the Vayusena Medal (Gallantry) for his act of exceptional courage.[83]

An IAF Su-30MKI which was on a training mission crashed on 14 October 2014 20 km off Pune Lohegaon Air Force Station. Wing Commander Sidharth V. Munje and his co-pilot Flying Officer Anup Kumar ejected safely.[84][85] A court of inquiry has been ordered to investigate the accident
Sukhoi Su-30MKI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So as you'll see, not one accident attributed to overuse/poor maintenance etc. Also nothing to suggest that the accidents are occurring with the first batch either.
 
Why overhaul them, when we are planning a super-30 variant? Doesn't it make more sensee to club these two programs together?
 
The article says 1500 hours or 14 years which one is earlier.
:eek::hitwall:
Missed that one I guess.

BUT BUT BUT
In 2010, the first IAF Su-30MKI fighters, which had joined the fleet in
2000, were due for overhaul, in accordance with the original schedule,
which was 1,500 flying hours or 10 years. Since the fighters had flown
far less than 1,500 hours, Sukhoi was approached to extend the time
period between overhaul. After numerous inspections and “accelerated
aging tests”, Sukhoi revised the overhaul schedule to 1,500 flying hours
or 14 years, whichever comes first.
@Roybot
 
May be they use less initial batch of Fighters due to unavailability of over hauling facility.
They didn't have to overhaul anything uptill 1500 hrs or 10 yrs (RuAF btw does 150hr/year) which they couldn't in the 10 years so your argument doesn't really follow a logical progression.
Not to mention overhauling was available and delayed into the future
 
Why overhaul them, when we are planning a super-30 variant? Doesn't it make more sensee to club these two programs together?

We are planning a Super-30 variant, but still we'd need an operational fleet of MKIs. Maybe the later version will be upgraded to Super-30 instead of overhauling.
 
They didn't have to overhaul anything uptill 1500 hrs or 10 yrs (RuAF btw does 150hr/year) which they couldn't in the 10 years so your argument doesn't really follow a logical progression.
Not to mention overhauling was available and delayed into the future

We didn't have overhauling facility till now, we signed over haul contract with Russia in 2008
 
Today IAF pilots dont fly more than 120 hrs per year .It was during the mig-21,mirage-2000 days that the pilots got 250hrs per year.
 
We didn't have overhauling facility till now, we signed over haul contract with Russia in 2008
The overhauling facility overhauls only 15 aircraft per year which seems consistent with HAL's production rate of Sukhoi's at the moment, meaning even the current batch would do similar Flight hours as the original batch, hence the original batch didn't compromise with its FH due to 'unavailability' of overhauling which seems rather ludicrous considering that RuAF operates (and presumably overhauls) Su 27's not to mention that they made the plane(MKI) in the first place.

It also seems rather absurd that IAF would compromise the combat-readiness of its pilots flying its top-end plane rather than pressurize Russia to make an overhauling facility ASAP.
 
HAL is useless.

If it can't make and get an Indian jet inducted successfully designed by Indian engineers in 55 years, then it should be sold off to some private corporation who know how to get work done from useless freeloaders.
 

Back
Top Bottom