Su-30 for Russian Air Force #2

That is epic. The canards are leveled with the horizon. I wonder if a non canard Flanker could do this.

MiG-29 and Su-27 can do this... it is just a very high AOA low speed flyby... in fact I think that is the manouver being performed when the MiG-29 crashed at that western airshow...

A couple of birds flew into an air intake and because he was flying so low and so slow with such a high angle of attack he didn't have enough airspace to recover...

#RuAF #Su30SM #AtomicBomb
Su-30SM with imitator atomic bomb, #IAB_500. There are also versions of the #Kh_58 & #Kh_59 missiles with nuclear warheads that the Su-30 can carry.


https://twitter.com/Cyberspec1/status/1340852710053007362

Wut? I heard over a squadron of them being developed into sm2's.

https://twitter.com/SlavaTheThird/status/1359203616721149958

The first Su-30SMD — it is a modification of the Su-30SM with the new AL-41F1S engines

One nice aspect of the shorter lifespan of Russian engines, is they can swap out the whole fleet when the engines time out.

I think that in the R&D phase it's called SMD, when in combat duti SM2

One nice aspect of the shorter lifespan of Russian engines, is they can swap out the whole fleet when the engines time out.

I would argue that.... they gave all sorts of airframe lifespan guarantees for teh C-17 but once they bought them in Australia in the contract the guarantees of airframe life became null and void if the aircraft was used for Short takeoffs..... in other words the amazing airframe and engine life promises were based on staying well clear of the aircraft flight envelope edges... no rough field operations and now high payload ops either... and I rather suspect western engine lifespan promises become void if you go supersonic often or operate from rough airstrips....

GarryB wrote:

One nice aspect of the shorter lifespan of Russian engines, is they can swap out the whole fleet when the engines time out.

I would argue that.... they gave all sorts of airframe lifespan guarantees for teh C-17 but once they bought them in Australia in the contract the guarantees of airframe life became null and void if the aircraft was used for Short takeoffs..... in other words the amazing airframe and engine life promises were based on staying well clear of the aircraft flight envelope edges... no rough field operations and now high payload ops either... and I rather suspect western engine lifespan promises become void if you go supersonic often or operate from rough airstrips....

Yes you are probably right. Russian operating conditions are much more difficult then the west typically. They have to train to take of and fight in any weather. So its pointless to have an engine with 8000 hours life if you are ingesting ice and snow quite regularly. You have to take the engine out and inspect it anyway. Getting them to last longer would not be hard to do but since the operating environment will affect that, its really not a good investment. Its less of a problem for Helos and the newest Russian helo engines have over 9000 hrs life. They tried to reduce FOD on the early mig 29's but seem to have abandoned the air intake covers. I guess it was not effective.

Dunno if they've been shared before, some vids regarding the Su30 including one on integrating the Kh32 missile.

No it can't carry the kh-32.

Isos wrote:No it can't carry the kh-32.

But are they not planning to... that's what I mean.

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/russia-s-su-30-could-soon-become-the-world-s-top-ship-hunting-fighter-with-deadly-new-kh-32-missile

That's bullshit. Kh-32 is 12m long. That's impossible to carry it on a fighter.

Some dipshit in the PLA said that the J-16 is better than the su 30. And the anti Russia dipshits at Alert 5 tweeted about it

https://twitter.com/alert5/status/1374914051650764801?s=19

lancelot wrote:

Backman wrote:Some dipshit in the PLA said that the J-16 is better than the su 30. And the anti Russia dipshits at Alert 5 tweeted about it

https://twitter.com/alert5/status/1374914051650764801?s=19

The Chinese pilot was likely comparing the J-16 with the Su-30MKK which is the variant used in China.
Russia has much more modern variants of the Su-30 family at its disposal like the Su-30SM2. The Su-30MKK originally came out two decades ago.

The J-16 is basically a twin seat Su-30 clone with an AESA radar, Chinese avionics, weapons, and Chinese WS-10 engines.
Russia nowadays has more powerful engines than the Al-31F originally used on the Su-30. They also have the radar and avionics of the Su-35.

Yeah thats understandable. It just comes out as a cheap shot on Twitter

Shouldn't come as a surprise that China will claim theirs is better.  If they didn't, the guy would have no job.

It probably is better than China's Su-30MKK.  Wouldn't surprise me.

Guarantee the AESA radar uses 5W t/r modules. The best it can detect a fighter sized target would be roughly 250km more or less. Which puts it roughly at Bars R level. And that is if all T/R modules work which they don't.

They tried to reduce FOD on the early mig 29's but seem to have abandoned the air intake covers. I guess it was not effective.

The first MiG-29s had solid air intake doors to prevent FOD entering the engine intakes on landing or take off and sucked air in the upper wing root via louvres.

More modern MiG-29s replaced the solid intake doors and upper wing intake with a mesh grid door that allows air flow through the intake but deflects heavier material and prevents it going into the engine as used on the Su-27.

That's bullshit. Kh-32 is 12m long. That's impossible to carry it on a fighter.

It is also the better part of 6 tons.

The J-16 is basically a twin seat Su-30 clone with an AESA radar, Chinese avionics, weapons, and Chinese WS-10 engines.
Russia nowadays has more powerful engines than the Al-31F originally used on the Su-30. They also have the radar and avionics of the Su-35.

The Su-30 they are talking about is essentially an Su-27UB, which is rather simple and basic... and not in Russian service any more I suspect.

It just comes out as a cheap shot on Twitter

It is a cheap shot, but it is the best they can muster so that is a good thing.

At least they are being honest... if it was a guy in the USAF he would be saying the F-35 is better than the Su-57 or some such rubbish he could not be in any position to judge on really.

This PLA person probably has flown both aircraft in question and I would expect a new plane developed from an older plane to be better... there would be something seriously wrong if that was not the case... but lets wait and see what sort of lifespan these new Chinese planes have in operation.

...I have doubts about Chinese aesa radar capabilities. China was asking Russian electronic firms for help in developing the radar system for the j-20 less than ten years ago. Now it certainly could be the case that they have been massively funding the progress in that field. I get the feeling that PESA offers similar abilities at lower cost and that Russia is holding off until the change in capabilities is enough to warrant the cost.

lancelot wrote:The Chinese also have one of the best semiconductor industries.

That's quite a stretch. Which companies? Unless you think TSMC is Chinese.
The semiconductor industry is actually one of the areas where the Chinese are lacking.