What's new

Rafale is not a Game Changer - Senior Analyst Shahzad Chaudhry

Ajay Ghatak

FULL MEMBER
Aug 20, 2020
401
-1
163
Country
India
Location
Canada
Interesting how you completely ignored 270 SU-30 MKI and consider IAF being extremely powerful/potent through induction of French aircrafts.
Su-30MKI is a worthless platform inducted by India due to purely political reasons. Indian Airforce conducts its training for a high sortire rate, through out the year. Indian Gagan-Shakti exercise is an example. Low availability and low engine life of Su30MKI makes these planes a dead weight for India. Why do you think India has such a high rate of accidents? They are using planes never meant for the training and operation regime they apply to. Their training and operation regime is more like what NATO has but their platforms are Russian.


Had they selected western platforms from the beginning, they would be having much easier time.
 

Ajay Ghatak

FULL MEMBER
Aug 20, 2020
401
-1
163
Country
India
Location
Canada
If those are the standards, then only the US -- and maybe, big maybe, Europe -- can develop a true stealth fighter. But what about lowering the bar and working a 'next-gen' fighter using available off-the-shelf inputs (e.g., engine, radar, etc) with an indigenous airframe design, materials, and flight control system?
Thats a Rafale like platform or F-18 like platform. Very much possible but judging that India is already buying those from outside, why they will go for such a platform.

Actually... now you mentioned it, India has somewhat of a similar program(s). Its Tejas MK-2 or as they call it now Tejas MWF. They are going for a higher output F414 engine, an Israeli AESA radar (a compromise, a radar having commonality with say rafale might have worked better OR may be italian Lernado AESA radar might have been better) and from the looks of it, they are even adding canards (LOL!).

There was also chatter on something called TEDBF. Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter for their navy, which was more aligned with F-18. With economy in dumps, that will be pushed by 5-10 years.

AMCA is India's shot at 5th gen but wont be happening anytime soon, if ever.
 

Signalian

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Aug 18, 2015
6,726
219
17,801
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Su-30MKI is a worthless platform inducted by India due to purely political reasons. Indian Airforce conducts its training for a high sortire rate, through out the year. Indian Gagan-Shakti exercise is an example. Low availability and low engine life of Su30MKI makes these planes a dead weight for India. Why do you think India has such a high rate of accidents? They are using planes never meant for the training and operation regime they apply to. Their training and operation regime is more like what NATO has but their platforms are Russian.


Had they selected western platforms from the beginning, they would be having much easier time.
If that is the case for Flankers, then China wouldn't be investing in Flanker J-series for PLAAF and PLAN.
 

Ajay Ghatak

FULL MEMBER
Aug 20, 2020
401
-1
163
Country
India
Location
Canada
If that is the case for Flankers, then China wouldn't be investing in Flanker J-series for PLAAF and PLAN.
Chinese are moving away from Russian design into their own designs like j-10X. Engine is still a big issue for them though.

BTW, Chinese pilots average on about 120 hours of flight time a year. IAF is close to 200 or more. Clearly, someone is doing more intensive training than the other. Once Chinese sort out their engine issues and move to more reliable engines they will also up their training time.
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,445
8
9,913
Country
United States
Location
United States
Su-30MKI is a worthless platform inducted by India due to purely political reasons. Indian Airforce conducts its training for a high sortire rate, through out the year. Indian Gagan-Shakti exercise is an example. Low availability and low engine life of Su30MKI makes these planes a dead weight for India. Why do you think India has such a high rate of accidents? They are using planes never meant for the training and operation regime they apply to. Their training and operation regime is more like what NATO has but their platforms are Russian.


Had they selected western platforms from the beginning, they would be having much easier time.
Complete BS ... blaming the aircraft and not the operators. The Chinese and a lot of other countries in the world have operated flankers without complaint. You guys called it the "Raptor of the East" and now you're calling them trash because you guys don't know how to properly use them??? The reason why the Indian Su-30MKIs are so terrible has to do with HALs assembly techniques rather than the Russian kits or components themselves. It's like blaming Lego because you are too dumb to piece them together. The Russians also operate these in the form of the Su-30SM and I have yet to see anything go wrong for them either.
 

Ajay Ghatak

FULL MEMBER
Aug 20, 2020
401
-1
163
Country
India
Location
Canada
Complete BS ... blaming the aircraft and not the operators.
No, its not blaming the fighter but the fighter is not fit for the scenario India wants to apply to. High Intensity War. Its worthless there. Its useless in the training for such a war. Its a terrible selection of plane for the job.

The Chinese and a lot of other countries in the world have operated flankers without complaint.
Chinese fly 120 hours a year. IAF 200 + hours a year per pilot.

You guys called it the "Raptor of the East" and now you're calling them trash because you guys don't know how to properly use them???
Raptor or whatever, does not matter. Its not the right tool for the job.

The reason why the Indian Su-30MKIs are so terrible has to do with HALs assembly techniques rather than the Russian kits or components themselves.
Naah. Even the MKIs which were manufactured in Russia have issues.

AL31F has a engine replacement of 1000 hours. F16's engine has 5000 or more. AL31F in Indian conditions suffer failures at 700 hours. Most of these failures do not exactly result in crash because MKI is a twin engine fighter.

It's like blaming Lego because you are too dumb to piece them together. The Russians also operate these in the form of the Su-30SM and I have yet to see anything go wrong for them either.
LOL. Leave it dude. You have no idea about what you are talking.
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,445
8
9,913
Country
United States
Location
United States
No, its not blaming the fighter but the fighter is not fit for the scenario India wants to apply to. High Intensity War. Its useless there. Its useless in the training for such a war. Its a terrible selection of plane for the job.
You literally just said the Su-30MKIs were worthless.
Chinese fly 120 hours a year. IAF 200 + hours a year per pilot.
Not true, the Chinese pilots also fly closer to 200 now ... but the Indians certainly do not fly anywhere close to that number given the terrible serviceability of your planes.
Naah. Even the MKIs which were manufactured in Russia have issues.
From what I've seen, the fly away MKIs have do not have the same issues as those manufactured in Russia. Please tell me why other variants of the Su-30MKIs, whether it be for Russia or for Malaysia, do not have the same issues the Indians are referring to. Either Russia is deliberately sabotaging India or HAL is just complete trash which does not even know how to properly assemble fighter jets.
AL31F has a engine replacement of 1000 hours. F16's engine has 5000 or more. AL31F in Indian conditions suffer failures at 700 hours. Most of these failures do not exactly result in crash because MKI is a twin engine fighter.
This is more or less already know that the AL-31FP does not have the service life of an American engine. The Indians knew it when they purchased the MKI too ... but this does not make the MKI a bad plane at all. The Russian air force is still doing fine with these low lifespan engines. As usual, the Indians are finding excuses about why their flankers do worse than everyone elses'.
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,445
8
9,913
Country
United States
Location
United States
Pace Visits Chinese Air Base, Checks Out Su-27 Fighter-Bomber
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

ANSHAN, China, March 24, 2007 – In a move toward openness, Chinese military officials let the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff examine their top-of-the-line combat aircraft and allowed him to speak with pilots and ground personnel here.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace and his party toured Anshan Air Base, home of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force’s 1st Air Division, and he examined a Chinese-built Su-27 fighter-bomber. The base was part of a visit to the Shenyang Military Region.

The 1st Air Division has three flying regiments and has Su-27s, F-8s and F-7Es. The Su-27 is the top of the food chain for the PLA Air Force, and Pace was the first American to get such a close look at the aircraft, senior Chinese officials said.

NATO pilots know the aircraft by the code name Flanker, and former Soviet Union engineers designed it to counter the American F-15 Eagle. The Su-27 was engineered to be an air superiority fighter and the Chinese still use it in that role, but they also can use it as a precision ground-attack aircraft. The Russians licensed the Chinese to build the plane in China.

The Su-27 does have some drawbacks. Some of the avionic packages are Russian, and the “warranty isn’t the best,” said a U.S. military official speaking on background. There is no air-to-air refueling capability for the Su-27, and that limits the Flanker to a range of about 1,500 kilometers.

Pace, Army Command Sgt. Maj. William J. Gainey, the senior enlisted advisor to the chairman, and Air Force Brig. Gen. Ralph Jodice, the defense attaché at the American embassy in Beijing, climbed into the cockpit of the aircraft. In addition, Chinese pilots flew four aircraft around the airfield to give the chairman and his party a small look at what the aircraft can do in the air.


While he said examining the aircraft was good, Pace said he was even more interested in the PLA Air Force personnel. The chairman spoke to pilots and enlisted men about their service, the qualities of their aircraft and their training and experience of the personnel. He said they were highly motivated and impressed him with their professionalism.

Chinese officials said all their pilots are college graduates and that 96 percent of them are capable of handling complex air operations. The officials said pilots average 120 hours of flying time per year with most of their training centered on tactical considerations. Roughly 35 percent of pilot training is at night. They said they had about 130 pilots for the 100 aircraft in the unit.

In comparison, U.S. Air Force pilots average about 250 flying hours per year and there are roughly 120 pilots per 100 aircraft.

Pace thanked the Chinese personnel for their work. He said their efforts are helping to bring China and the United States closer together. Pace told the airmen that the United States and China have many common national interests and that it is in Asia’s and the world’s interest for the two countries to cooperate.

During the visit, the base commander pinned a set of Chinese pilot wings on Pace’s uniform. Pace told the commander, and all the pilots he met, that, “while I did not earn the wings, I will wear them as a compliment to your professionalism.”

The original article is dated 2007. This was at a time when obsolete third generation aircraft was the vast mainstay of the PLAAF, with only very small numbers of Su-27s and no J-10s. Even then, PLAAF pilots equipped with the Su-27 trained over 200 hours per year.
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,445
8
9,913
Country
United States
Location
United States
False.

India does not manufacture those ball bearing neither it manufactures engine.
I'm not saying the Indians manufacture the engines ... I was talking about the purported airframe issues with the Su-30MKI, which likely came from poor Indian assembly methods. The AL-31FP is indeed not too reliable of an engine, even less so than the standard AL-31F due to the thrust vectoring system. But this reliability is not nearly as bad as the Indians make it out to be considering the Russians, Malaysians, and others use them without complaint. You should not expect Rafale quality construction for under a quarter of the price.
 

Ajay Ghatak

FULL MEMBER
Aug 20, 2020
401
-1
163
Country
India
Location
Canada
The original article is dated 2007. This was at a time when obsolete third generation aircraft was the mainstay of the PLAAF, with only very small numbers of Su-27s and no J-10s. Even then, PLAAF pilots equipped with the Su-27 trained over 200 hours per year.
Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighters

Purchased in 2004

The Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighter was the updated version of the Su-30MKK fighter. As of 2004, China had equipped its air force with a total of 100 Su-30 fighters.
Sorry dude, you don't know what you are talking about. China had 100 Su30s by 2004. And Su30 is NOT third gen aircraft.
 

Ajay Ghatak

FULL MEMBER
Aug 20, 2020
401
-1
163
Country
India
Location
Canada
I'm not saying the Indians manufacture the engines ... I was talking about the purported airframe issues with the Su-30MKI, which likely came from poor Indian assembly methods.
Su 30 MKI in India has faced majorly engine issues.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top