Vietnam Defence Forum

[Carlosa]

we pay $60 million per SU-30, MK2 variant. weapons not included. $35 million per MIG-35 sounds too good to me.

‘Lair’ of Vietnam’s ‘King Cobra’ fighter jets – Conclusion: Dedicated caretakers


supersonic jet SU-30

amazing: 8 technicians are working to install a bomb. a typical procedure?

assisting pilots in putting on emergency parachutes before take off.

It actually makes sense because the SU-30 is a much bigger plane, the engines are also much bigger and expensive. The price for MIG-35 is an incentive price, the Russians need to get export orders to get the production line going. That price is probably for a basic version without the 3D engine vector control. I don't know what features are included in that price.

 

[Aqsuperman]

Current issued Mp-5 of the Mobile Police

 

[Viet]

It actually makes sense because the SU-30 is a much bigger plane, the engines are also much bigger and expensive. The price for MIG-35 is an incentive price, the Russians need to get export orders to get the production line going. That price is probably for a basic version without the 3D engine vector control. I don't know what features are included in that price.

here is what I read:

"the Su-30MK2 is a further improvement to the Su-30MKK with upgraded avionics and maritime strike capabilities. Su-30MKK is a modification of the Sukhoi Su-30, incorporating advanced technology from the Sukhoi Su-35 variant.

Vietnam´s Su-30 is configured as a heavy class, all-weather, long-range supersonic strike fighter. especially as strike maritime missions. Having powerful N-001VEP radar, Kh-31A ramjet supersonic anti-shipping missile, and radar seeker equipped variant of the Kh-59. so the basic mission of our SU-30 is patrolling the eastern front, if necessary, striking enemy aircraft, surface warships and ground installations."

 

[Carlosa]

here is what I read:

"the Su-30MK2 is a further improvement to the Su-30MKK with upgraded avionics and maritime strike capabilities. Su-30MKK is a modification of the Sukhoi Su-30, incorporating advanced technology from the Sukhoi Su-35 variant.

Vietnam´s Su-30 is configured as a heavy class, all-weather, long-range supersonic strike fighter. especially as strike maritime missions. Having powerful N-001VEP radar, Kh-31A ramjet supersonic anti-shipping missile, and radar seeker equipped variant of the Kh-59. so the basic mission of our SU-30 is patrolling the eastern front, if necessary, striking enemy aircraft, surface warships and ground installations."

Yeah, that sounds right, good description.

Yesterday I was reading a lot about the Eurofighter and also read a few comparison articles that compare the Eurofighter against Gripen and SU-30, etc and comparing Gripen NG against those aircraft also.

My take is that the SU-30SM compares nicely with the Eurofighter. There is no need to get the expensive Eurofighter and a whole new logistical chain. Of all the European fighters, the Gripen NG would be the best one for Vietnam, but the big issue there is the American engine.

To get a European aircraft just because of the Meteor missile is not a good idea long term. The Russian jets are currently using the R-77 as the air to air long range missile. The Meteor is better, but the Russians are upgrading the R-77 to version R-77M1 and that one will have a range of 175 km and a much improved AESA radar seeker, so at that point there is no advantage to having the Meteor.

My conclusion is that Vietnam will do well staying with Russian fighter jets, although the Gripen NG is also a nice option.

Just imagine the power of a SU-30MK2 using the R-77M1 missile and later an upgraded radar.

 

[Viet]

Yeah, that sounds right, good description.

Yesterday I was reading a lot about the Eurofighter and also read a few comparison articles that compare the Eurofighter against Gripen and SU-30, etc and comparing Gripen NG against those aircraft also.

My take is that the SU-30SM compares nicely with the Eurofighter. There is no need to get the expensive Eurofighter and a whole new logistical chain. Of all the European fighters, the Gripen NG would be the best one for Vietnam, but the big issue there is the American engine.

To get a European aircraft just because of the Meteor missile is not a good idea long term. The Russian jets are currently using the R-77 as the air to air long range missile. The Meteor is better, but the Russians are upgrading the R-77 to version R-77M1 and that one will have a range of 175 km and a much improved AESA radar seeker, so at that point there is no advantage to having the Meteor.

My conclusion is that Vietnam will do well staying with Russian fighter jets, although the Gripen NG is also a nice option.

Just imagine the power of a SU-30MK2 using the R-77M1 missile and later an upgraded radar.

think of different perspective. 90% of VPA military weaponry come from Russia. so the question is, whether or not continue relying on Russia, or do we want to reduce the percentage?

sure, Russia (on paper, and the reality on the ground speaks for it) is a close friend, the most important geostrategic partner. her weaponry is not bad at all, in terms of performance and affordability. though I don´t think of another reason than geopolitics speaking against Russia weaponry. we have TPP as joker on economic front, I believe, as some western reports hint, the army explores the option if there are something similar on defence front line. Acquiring western weaponry is a way to go, isn´t it?

yes and yeah, also, I vote for Gripen NG. the bird can take on most of her opponents. and it is cheaper to buy, maintain and operate. about the issue with the US engine. has the US government lifted ban of weaponry if it is for maritime defence purposes?

 

[Carlosa]

think of different perspective. 90% of VPA military weaponry come from Russia. so the question is, whether or not continue relying on Russia, or do we want to reduce the percentage?

sure, Russia (on paper, and the reality on the ground speaks for it) is a close friend, the most important geostrategic partner. her weaponry is not bad at all, in terms of performance and affordability. though I don´t think of another reason than geopolitics speaking against Russia weaponry. we have TPP as joker on economic front, I believe, as some western reports hint, the army explores the option if there are something similar on defence front line. Acquiring western weaponry is a way to go, isn´t it?

yes and yeah, also, I vote for Gripen NG. the bird can take on most of her opponents. and it is cheaper to buy, maintain and operate. about the issue with the US engine. has the US government lifted ban of weaponry if it is for maritime defence purposes?

They can lift the embargo if the aircraft if for maritime purpose, but its a bit of an stretch to see the Gripen just for that, so I don't know. I think it depends on USA seeing some further political opening, but it seems like Dung got sidelined, although the process is not over yet.

Great video of the SU-30MK2

 

[Nike]

Gripen NG will not available very soon. The fighter is still on development phase, and once it made clear for production, the assembly line is already full for Brazil and Sweden order. At least you must wait till 2022 to getting the very first plane fot your country

 

[Viet]

Gripen NG will not available very soon. The fighter is still on development phase, and once it made clear for production, the assembly line is already full for Brazil and Sweden order. At least you must wait till 2022 to getting the very first plane fot your country

we are not talking about replacing 10 jets, but 144 Mikoyan MiG-21 Fishbeds and 38 Sukhoi Su-22 Fitter of the Vietnam Airforce. so some 182 jets in total. I know of sceptical voices here and there, VN is not ready yet for jet assembly and production and so forth. but I´m convinced we can do it. if we never start it, nor try it, we won´t have anything even in 10 or 20 years. how is it if we start from somewhere?

if we add the fleet of L-39 Albatros, that is used as trainer aircraft today, then the number will get bigger. economy of scale. sure, first and foremost, transfer of technology must be acquired, and that is not an easy task. and second, I know what you want to say: money must come from somewhere. we will get Gripen NG if we produce the jet. I know I´m a dreamer.

They can lift the embargo if the aircraft if for maritime purpose, but its a bit of an stretch to see the Gripen just for that, so I don't know. I think it depends on USA seeing some further political opening, nut it seems like Dung got sidelined, although the process is not over yet.

Great video of the SU-30MK2

from what one reads, it is not decided yet who will win the race and lead VN into the future: the conservatives around Trong or the reformers around Dung? if Dung wins, he will cement the pro West course, increasing VN ties to the United States. we are at a crossroad. where to go?

 

[Nike]

we are not talking about replacing 10 jets, but 144 Mikoyan MiG-21 Fishbeds and 38 Sukhoi Su-22 Fitter of the Vietnam Airforce. so some 182 jets in total. I know of sceptical voices here and there, VN is not ready yet for jet assembly and production and so forth. but I´m convinced we can do it. if we never start it, nor try it, we won´t have anything even in 10 or 20 years. how is it if we start from somewhere.

if we add the fleet of L-39 Albatros, that is used as trainer aircraft today, then the number will get bigger. economy of scale. sure, first and foremost, transfer of technology must be acquired, and that is not an easy task. and second, I know what you want to say: money must come from somewhere. we will get Gripen NG if we produce the jet. I know I´m a dreamer.

Hmm money aside is one of the most easiest part to setting up an aircraft production line, the infrastructure is same too, the most difficult parts is to accumulate experiences to gaining expertice for human resource to become capable to building such sophisticated flying machine. Indonesia starting it all with producing a license pro of simple trainer from Poland, the Turkish aero starting with licensing a trainer from US, same with South Korea and India. Lately Thailand is mulling about licensing some small aircraft product from PT DI to accumulate experience and expertise in this field. There is no cutting phase for Aircraft technologies because there is no error required to survive in this industry. I suggest Vietnam to do the same with other countries who want to start up in this field, start with small steps, accumulate the experience first before aiming big. Producing trainer like pillatus or grob will be a good and prudent start

 

[Viet]

Hmm money aside is one of the most easiest part to setting up an aircraft production line, the infrastructure is same too, the most difficult parts is to accumulate experiences to gaining expertice for human resource to become capable to building such sophisticated flying machine. Indonesia starting it all with producing a license pro of simple trainer from Poland, the Turkish aero starting with licensing a trainer from US, same with South Korea and India. Lately Thailand is mulling about licensing some small aircraft product from PT DI to accumulate experience and expertise in this field. There is no cutting phase for Aircraft technologies because there is no error required to survive in this industry. I suggest Vietnam to do the same with other countries who want to start up in this field, start with small steps, accumulate the experience first before aiming big. Producing trainer like pillatus or grob will be a good and prudent start

Don't ask me where the money comes from. I have no clue. But fact is money is there. Giving you an example: the government wants to build a brand new airport for $15.8 billions, Long Thanh international airport in southern Vietnam. Another example: we want to become a nuclear power. To achieve that goal, the government wants to invest some $50 billions. That's just one of the 100 projects or more carrying out throughout the country. True. We are a poor country. We are behind of many countries in the region, thus we must work harder.

I wish we have more people with optimism, less with pessimism.

As you mention it. Indonesia has a good aerospace industry, I hardly see any reason why should we not follow?

I'm afraid the chinese will increase their arrogance and aggression. Thinking they will become a reasonable power is very naive. History shows they never have good intentions toward Vietnam.

 

[Mokaman]

Thank you man. I very much like your opinions also. Yeah, its too bad about the old MP forum, there were a lot of high caliber people there.

The truth is, Vietnam is doing great considering the limited resources, it gets a lot of bang for the dollar. The only area where things are not working out is surface ships. Between the debacle of the old programs that got canceled and the never ending delays to get Russian ships and the suspension of the Sigma program, its taking forever to get a decent fleet.

I don't know, just my opinion, but I think the only type of ship that is worth to deploy in the islands would be small but fast missile boats and it has to be in a decent number (anything bigger would be dead on arrival in case of conflict), but I don't see any news on boats like that for Vietnam. I do know Vietnam will buy some fast boats from India, but I don't know if they will carry missiles. What's your take on that? The reason why I say small, fast missile boats is because they are easy and quick to deploy and move in and out. Difficult to detect but packing a decent missile punch, they can do some serious damage. If they get lost, the expense is low.

USA did a lot of war games simulating the threat of those Iranian missile boats attacking one of their carrier battle groups in the Persian gulf (very small boats carrying just 2 missiles each and very, very fast). All those war games and simulations always ended up the same way, those missile boats sink the American ships. I think there are good lessons from Vietnam there.

I think fast attack boats is a good idea but with that huge South China sea playground, the attack range is limited for those boats. They will be deadly near the Viet Nam coast but Spratly islands is another story and the conflict will most likely start over there, and we all know building fast boats bases on those island is suicidal and PLA can spot them easily before they reach Spratly. I will like VPA to invest more into small attack subs, they are much cheaper (than Kilo clas) and will give big headaches to PLA and will deploy a lot of resources to track VPA sub fleet. With the actual Kilo subs in operation, VPA will have huge experience in operating subs and it will be just logical to build a big submarine wing... Maybe Vietnam could build those small subs under license to make it cheaper..Vietnam will be the German wolfpacks of Asia...lol...That beauty German Type 212 is good example

 

[yugocrosrb95]

We are going around the definitions of what an aircraft price is: flyaway or full price. Both versions of the price are correct.

This does not justify an unfair comparison.

You say my number is not correct because its 3 years old even that it comes from Saab?

I already knew that it comes from Saab, I suspected that you were using Saab's estimate from 3 years ago that are now outdated and just because it came from Saab does not make it a correct number for last or this year because the estimate made in mind of what would Gripen NG/E/F would cost in 2012 before Gripen NG/E/F development being finished.

[/QUOTE]Show me the numbers from Saab.[/QUOTE]

Translated via Google Translate;
"In these deals, the focus is usually on the plan itself. But, according to Ulf Nilsson, the plan appears only for 25-30 percent of the whole affair when Brazil buys Gripen. The rest of the money goes to ground, tactical support systems, simulators, support, and everything else required for the plan in practice to be used."

I said all along 80 million fully loaded. Your Brazilian guy said 50 million plus subsystems,

It isn't 80 million USD for complete plane, Brazilian guy didn't say 50 million USD plus subsystems.

so you have not showed what the actual fly away price is including everything for the version and features that were bought.

You want to believe that because you're either in denial or you simply didn't bother to do proper research.

You're basically saying that a complete fighter isn't complete despite having being complete in first place.

Its nonsense to expect that the price will drop from 80 million to 50 million in 3 years.

You are still want to believe that an estimate is the actual price despite being an estimate and not actual price of the jet also it is nonsense to expect that technology has advanced considerably in 3 years and that Saab engineers managed to find ways to reduce cost while maintaining the quality in those 3 years?

"We have reduced the number of flight tests by 40 percent and overall had significantly lower development costs. That's probably where we stand out the most compared to competitors, says Ulf Nilsson."

Since when that guy is a credible reference and without details of those subsystems?

What subsystems? He mentioned systems not subsystems, you want to believe that he meant subsystems which ofcourse is thanks to your ignorance because he was talking about Tactical Support System.

"The rest of the money goes to ground, tactical support systems, simulators, support, and everything else required for the plan in practice to be used."

If you knew about Brazl's Gripen NG deal then you would have been aware of Tactical Support Systems which is for example such as this:
AN/SQQ-34 AIRCRAFT CARRIER TACTICAL SUPPORT SYSTEM (CV-TSC)

Did you forgot that Brazil has two aircraft carriers and that they want to develop a SeaGripen?

you just want to avoid admitting a mistake and you go around the bushes, understandable for young kids.

How can I admit that I have made a mistake when I didn't, should I lie to you and myself to satisfy you? So I am a kid despite being over 20 years old? Sure, adults are now kids so you're a kid too if we follow your definition/standards...

You believe that I made a mistake, you didn't consider that the reality is actually the opposite and that you have made mistakes because of your poorly done research involving Gripen and Brazil's deal.

Brazil payed 4.68 billion USD for 36 Gripen NG's, that's full price including what is usually included in those deals. If you want to argue about price definitions, then you have to first specify what price are you talking about, both versions of the price are correct and both are used, flyaway and full price.

Gripen NG deal isn't usual, far from it, its more like those rare ones like Japan, Israel and South Korea...

I am not arguing about price definitions as I am arguing about you continuing to make unfair comparison and you're asking for specify despite I have already done and you ignored it as you continued to make unfair/invalid comparison.

A tactical ground support aircraft will get used to soften up positions assuming that it can survive. You don't want to understand that that type of aircraft can't survive in a conflict with china. By the way, for that role, Vietnam will get the Yak-130 so the one that is speculating with those ideas is you.

I only saw speculations that VIetnam was interested in getting Yak-130.

I know for a fact that the export price of MIG-35 was offered at 35 million because I read it more than once and I can find the articles if I dedicate some time to it.

Fact according to you yet I dedicated time to find it and I find out that it is 35 million USD for Russia in 2013 and 43.5 million USD for Egypt in 2014.

My speculation about Egypt's price is reasonable, the arabs always pay top price.

I love that myth, show's how people are delusional and think Arabs are dumb... hahaha

How the article that says Sweden pays 150 million proves me wrong?

Look at the date of the article, you keep using outdated information.

If you claim that my information is outdated, then show me more recent information that is credible.

You're incompetent.

Saabs flygchef byter strategi | SvD

Saab’s Annual Gripen Seminar 2015

Before using L39 for ground support, you need to control the airspace, which I don't think Viet Nam could do it against PLA.

India and Viet Nam are cooperating with each other since both have territory disputes with China, if China engages Viet Nam then it will need to allocate substantial resources to have a good chance of winning war which would mean allocating/sending three times the force of what Viet Nam has.

The Syrian airforce are using them right now for ground support and they are falling down like pigeons from ground fire (heavy machine guns and some obsolete MANPAD). Those L39 will have zero chance against a well-equipped and modern army.

If you didn't know, Viet Nam is either going to replace or upgrade L39 to NG standard.

The best and cheapest way for VPA is to use the shovel and dig hole & trenches and buy tons of MANPADS and JAVELINS-types, fight a dirty war and forget about those expensive aircrafts and the ground support from air.

So it is your interest that VPA has high losses by using strategy/tactics that you are suggesting.

And the VPA infantry doctrine and training doesn't rely much on air support, they more into ground support fire from artillery, missiles and mortars

Remember Gulf War?

By the way, we all know those European jetfighters are freaking expensive.

Just look how many and which countries in the world operate them. They are few and they are all rich countries

You're ignoring Russia and you're wrong, is Hungary, Czech Republic, Thailand or South Africa rich? No.

My take is that the SU-30SM compares nicely with the Eurofighter.

No, it doesn't and only an uninformed people would have said that.

There is no need to get the expensive Eurofighter and a whole new logistical chain.

If that was the case then Viet Nam would't consider western aircraft nor it would have shown interest in Eurofighter Typhoon if there wasn't some need for it, maybe because its something China doesn't have?

To get a European aircraft just because of the Meteor missile is not a good idea long term.

How is it not a good idea? So according to you, it is good for Viet Nam to depend solely on Russian jets?

Viet Nam doesn't need Typhoon or Gripen NG to use Meteor since Gripen C/D can use it.

The Russian jets are currently using the R-77 as the air to air long range missile. The Meteor is better, but the Russians are upgrading the R-77 to version R-77M1 and that one will have a range of 175 km and a much improved AESA radar seeker, so at that point there is no advantage to having the Meteor.

You're spreading misinformation, R-77M1 aka R-77-PD development stopped in 1999 while longest range R-77 available to SU-30's is R-77-1 which has 110 kilometer range also R-77 that is highly improved and has AESA can only be used on PAK FA.

Just imagine the power of a SU-30MK2 using the R-77M1 missile and later an upgraded radar.

Imagine Su-30MK2 having that non-existent missile and getting shotdown by Eurofighter Typhoon with Meteor missiles from 150+ kilometers away while SU-30MK2 pilot during all that time doesn't know the location of Typhoon that moved away from SU-30MK2 the moment it launched Meteor and still tracking SU-30MK2 and updating each other via dual-link communication..

 

[Carlosa]

@yugocrosrb95

Like I said before, I'm done with this topic and I'm done dealing with you also. If you reply to me again, I'll put you in my ignore list, I'm not going to waste my time with you, go play with the chinese kids of your same age if you like.

 

[Mokaman]

This does not justify an unfair comparison.

India and Viet Nam are cooperating with each other since both have territory disputes with China, if China engages Viet Nam then it will need to allocate substantial resources to have a good chance of winning war which would mean allocating/sending three times the force of what Viet Nam has.



If you didn't know, Viet Nam is either going to replace or upgrade L39 to NG standard.



So it is your interest that VPA has high losses by using strategy/tactics that you are suggesting.



Remember Gulf War?







You're ignoring Russia and you're wrong, is Hungary, Czech Republic, Thailand or South Africa rich? No.










Imagine Su-30MK2 having that non-existent missile and getting shotdown by Eurofighter Typhoon with Meteor missiles from 150+ kilometers away while SU-30MK2 pilot during all that time doesn't know the location of Typhoon that moved away from SU-30MK2 the moment it launched Meteor and still tracking SU-30MK2 and updating each other via dual-link communication..

@yugocrosrb95 you gotta stop insulting people, you have an opinion but not all the true. You cannot push your opinion into people throat

Never compare iraqi troop sitting duck in flat desert with no-where-to-hide and waiting to get wipe out by US B52 and VPA troops. Desert warfare is a totally different ball game than mountain & jungle warfare...Those same B52 have been use massively in Vietnam and they still can't dig out VPA. The Americans during the war lost over 10 000 aircrafts and choppers (and South Viet Nam lost 2500) most by anti-aircraft weapons (AAA and SAM). With a few dozens of modern jetfighters how in the hell VPA will be able to control the airspace? PLA can deploy easily few hundreds jetfighters for the Viet Nam frontline.

Your L39 NG even you boost it with whatever you want, it won't survive against PLA heavy anti-aircraft and missiles and PLA jetfighters. L39 is good for anti-guerilla war but not suitable against a modern army...EVEN for the L39 NG ...!!!

Viet Nam is just like Russia, it soldiers and people can bleed and suffer more than the invading enemy. Just look at the military history of Viet Nam, against bigger opponents the only way to win is fight till your enemy is tire and withdrawn, to achieve that goal you are ready to suffer and bleed more... So yeah, VPA will dig holes and trenches and fight a dirty war to win t just like during the Sino-Vietnam war of 1979...Go read that 1979 conflict.

Your Grippen operators are all richer than Viet Nam and most of them just operate 10-20 planes, that small number already give you a hint how expensive it's... So yeah they are expensive to buy and operate

 

[Viet]

Having aircraft for ground support missions, helping the infantry on battlefields is not necessary a bad idea. I don´t think the chinese belong to a superiour race with nuclear powered brain because they have more weapons than they can carry. I think the overall point yugo wants to make is VPA should develop offensive capability.

the Army won the war against Cambodia in 1978 just a matter of 2 weeks, because the VPA utilized all branches of the armed forces: infantry, tanks, airforce and artillery. Not all people know but especially the two major thrusts by naval landing on the southern coast of Cambodia and the breakthrough by our tank army on the western front were the decisive factors in crushing the cambodian army. a blitzkrieg. our tanks cut through the cambodian army like a hot knife cutting through warm butter.