Talk:Sukhoi Su-30
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Regarding the picture legend: it says "Indian Air Force Su-30MKI"; however, the flag the jet carries seems to be ITALIAN?
No, Italy isn't listed as one of the operators. The confusion lies in the fact that the Indian Air Force uses a flag that is very similarly to the Italian National Flag.User:gelato 04:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
This article seems to violate NPOV. Much of it seems intend to convince the reader that the Su-30 MKI, apparently one of the best operational fighters in the world, is the equivalent of the Typhoon and F-22, even though the only widely published comparison rated it on par with the Rafale, better than F-15, but lagging Typhoon and F-22, apparently because of the lack of supercruise, poorer integration of avionics, and acceleration / climb rate due to thrust-to-T/O weight.
Randall rnicameron@yahoo.com
Randall, You are implying the Rafale itself lags behind the Typhoon. That in itself is highly ambiguous at best. Can't see how you can complain about this article violating NPOV then.
- Asking for NPOV on anything to do with a boy's toy like the Su-30 is asking too muc. They are all like that. The most you can hope for is to tone it down. After all there are no neutral sources. The only evidence you are going to get is going to come from the employees of one or other plane producer and/or user. Lao Wai 12:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
I did some minor grammar editing and I removed the part where it said the Su-30 could engage ballistic missles. No fighter aircraft in the world can do this. DarthJesus 23:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thats true. There were a lot of inaccurate stuff in this article but thanks to your edits, the article is more factual now. --Spartian 06:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'll be rewriting significant portions of the article so as to include data on all variants of the MKI and have it conform to a NPOV and Wiki's quality standards-- Archerblack.
[edit] Bunk comparison
The Su30 mki is being further modified to carry atleast 2 and atmost 3 Brahmos air launched cruise missiles with a range of 300 km. Jakes.
A reasonable comparison between the Su30mki and the F22 and/or the Typhoon can be made only after the USAF and RAF decide to put up these fighters in mock combat against the IAF's Su30mki's. I do know that the USAF's F15s and F16s were whipped by lesser variants of the mki like the Su30k of the IAF in mock combat, and RAF Tornados were mauled by the MKI. Perhaps at some point in the future, the Raptors and Typhoons would meet the MKI, but i doubt it because the results could be disapointing. It is also not conducive to economic wisdom as far as the future of these aircraft are concerned especially that of the Typhoon, therefore, diminishing export prospects. Jakes
I removed the comparison as it's bunk. The original source for it is [1], a submission by an Australian representative in Parliament (or whatever their title is), pushing to buy the MKI, and naturally it exaggerates the MKI's abilities and shortens its competitors.
Point by point:
- nuclear weapons - this is interesting and unique; moved it up to the description
- combat radius - the source actually says the F-22 and MKI have the same range (it's a wash anyway), whereas the Eurofighter is less by some 40%. It is also the only source claiming that the F-22 is speed-limited by stealth factors (which is how I found the piece), which I judge to be nonesense without a technical source for the claim.
- the DRDO avionics are discussed above; and no indication is given to whether or not it's superior to alternatives. It'd be difficult for any outsiders to discern anyway.
- per/unit costs are very misleading due to the low purchase number. The various SU-27 derivative prototypes probably have an extremely high per/unit cost as very few were ever built. Indications were that if exported, the /unit cost would have been closer to $168 million.
Even this piece admits it's a 4th generation aircraft; the heading attempted to imply otherwise.
Hey, it's a nice piece of kit; a good example of an export user modifying an aircraft beyond what i could originally do. But it's no super-jet, which is what Mr. Jensen was trying to sell it as. --Mmx1 00:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- The DRDO avionics were found to be superior to the import alternatives at the point of time, the MKI was developed, and were indeed better in performance to what the Russians themselves fielded. For instance, the Indian radar data processors on the MKI have been retained in the MKM variants and are part of the package. It is true that some of the assertions made by Carlo Kopp are debateable, but then again, there can be no single authoritative source on the MKI as the data would be classified. - Archerblack
[edit] The Cobra and stall
I found this "The design incorporates a straked delta wing, with strake and body blending, also seen in the American F-16 Falcon. This allows the airplane to fly at extreme angles of attack without stalling -- illustrated in the so called "cobra maneuver"." passage rather disturbing. I think most would agree that a stall is either the condition that arises when angle of attack has been brought beyond the angle that gives maximum lift coefficient, or the condition that arises when airflow around the wings has separated from the wing. Both conditions are true during the cobra (as shown by numerous vidoes on the internet), so I don't quite understand what the passage I quoted is on about. --81.233.90.182 09:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes it is true wing blending does infact increase the angle of attack. But in the case of the Su-30 MKI there are other factors also responsible for the superior aerodynamics. The aircraft as a whole is odf very efficient aerodynamic design. I am an aerospace engineering student at British University renowned for computaional fluid dynamics and have been told by a competent source in the department(who of course I won't name) that CFD is overrated; i.e. you still have to experimentally test to know exact performance charecteristics. So, as far as the Su-30 MKI is concerned its capabilities are well known as it is almost similar to the Su-37 in performing manuoevers, and we all know what that can do! It might not have the high level of avionics integration of Western aircraft since they are multisourced and may not all be bespoke. But I wouldn't put too much importance on that(only it might not look as attractive a package),it does the job and anyway most systems are modular nowadays.137.44.1.200 21:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Tarun Khanna 7/02/2006
[edit] MKM variant
How about adding an MKM variant entry? - --124.82.15.15 14:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- As in a seperate page, or a section? If you are willing to do the work yourself, you can give the section a shot. (USMA2010 19:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC))
[edit] MKK/MK2 Variants
The Su-30 MKK and Su-30 MK2 were developed by KNAAPO for the People's Republic of China.
[edit] Su-30MKI Article
I moved Su-30MKI info to the Su-30MKI Article as the Su-30 article was exceeding 32kb which was warned by wiki.Moreover Su-30MKI is most modern version and Most Advanvced Russian Fighter in active Service and is much different from other any other Su-30 Variant. The Aircraft came into news , primarily due to its capabilities compared to American Counterparts. All this leads to Su-30MKI dominating the whole Su-30 article.
[edit] Assessment of Su-30MKK/MK2 section
Assuming that this is a Su-30 article, I don't understand why we're citing JH-7/JH-7A and J-11? Also, the only J-11B exists in models. Production of J-11 has been cancelled after ~100 aircraft, and we have yet to see even 1 real J-11B prototype. Isn't it a bit too quick to assume that it exists (or will be produced)? -- Adeptitus 22:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Map
The map shows Angola and Ethiopia as users of this Sukhoi-family. Can you comfirm that?--Arado 08:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cobra and maneuvers
Most experts will agree that the cobra and varients of it are worthless in combat. It would not allow a pilot to "dominate in a dogfight" as someone previously put under the article.
- Since the F-22 has thrust vectoring and can perform a wide variety of maneuvers as well, is it still true that the Su-30 can perform many unique ones? I doubt that. --itpastorn 11:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Actually the unique maneuvers is due to its unique design of combining canard and thrust vectoring control, nonetheless, the wing span too an important factor. You may want to see videos if you still think it is hard to believe. Regards ChowHui 13:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Actually I've seen maneuvers by both. The F-22 does the cobra, kulbit, tailslide, etc. This Video should put an end to any argument that the Su-30 does "many maneuvers" that are unique! I see one, and that is multiple "somersaults". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_za3KfMFKLk What recent source reliably claims that the Su-30 can perform many maneuvers that no other plane can? Maybe one or two, but not many!--itpastorn 16:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Now that's just totally weird...
While it shows up "current" logged in, earlier I looked at the page w/out logging in, and the text in the "Pugachev's Cobra" section that was changed yesterday was showing the old version.
- looks around for where that Twilight Zone music is coming from*
- Aerobird 22:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge requests
I have initiated a series of merge requests. You will note that some of them have practically no content at all (Su-30MKM), and the whole series either overlaps with themselves or the main article. I realize the MKI article seems long, but I don't think there's a huge amount of non-redundant text. The precedent for this should be the integration achieved at F-15E Strike Eagle. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 22:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- The MKI is the only one on which there would likely be enough information for a breakout; the others, agree totally. - Aerobird Target locked - Fox One! 00:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- The MKI is definitely deserving of a separate article. A case can be made for the MKK as well, but it will require more research than has been applied to that article to date — until that's been done, you can flip a coin IMO. Askari Mark (Talk) 03:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Let it stay as it contains a lot of information on this particular one. Expand it with more information. Chanakyathegreat 14:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the MKM article contained practically nothing, and has already been "merged" in. It's clear that the MKI is pretty different. However, how different is the MKK from the standard Su-30? —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 15:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I don't have the time to go into it much right now, but off the top of my head, the MKK has been the main version the Russians have working on to add and improve precision-guided munitions capabilities, including antiship missiles and a range of recce and targeting pods. It also has some external feature changes based on the Su-35, principally the tailfins, retractable in-flight refuelling probes, and (according to some sources) radomes. As I said, I have no problem merging the MKK back into this article pending someone researching just what open source material is out there on the MKK's differences. BTW, since the MKI has its own article, the baseline aircraft used for the specs on this page should not be the MKI. Askari Mark (Talk) 17:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Good point. (I'd just entered MKI as the variant not thinking about it...fixed). - Aerobird Target locked - Fox One! 20:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- For most, support. For MKI, I clearly don't think it should be merged. It's a pretty extended version; the article also describes MKI, not just Su-30. MKK also, probably, deserves own article, considering there are at least two of them, but could be merged as well, due to lack of content. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 20:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistency with dates
Someone fix the dates. The article says it was developed in 1996 but the inset says the maiden flight was 1989 and the development was 1992. This makes no sense at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.4.12.97 (talk) 11:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Ukraine?
At the bottom of the su-30 template it says Ukraine is an opperator of the su-30, yet nowhere on the page is that mentioned...any ideas? Bogdan 00:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see the Ukraine mentioned — and I'm unaware of it having any Su-30. Recently the head of the Ukrainian Air Force said the country is going to fund development of an indigenous Gen-5 aircraft instead of buy Gen 4+ aircraft like the Su-30. (Good luck.) It may have been confused with Belarus' announcement a year ago that it was going to buy India's 18 Su-30K and upgrade them locally to the "Su-30KN" standard. I haven't heard anything more about them since. Askari Mark (Talk) 17:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rumored Japanese Su-30s
I removed an uncited (and probably uncitable) note added by 87.74.21.193 regarding rumors of Japan having Su-30s and am filing it here. It reads (with some editing):
- "Notes: There has been unconfirmed claims on the internet about Japan owning about 150 Su-30MKJ for enemy simulation roles; however, both KNAAPO and Sukhoi deny selling any to the JASDF."
The possibility of Japan "hiding" such a large number of Su-30s should make it obvious that this is untrue. This internet rumor apparently conflates current reports of the Su-30 being offered for Japan's forthcoming F-X competition and a 1997 offer by Russia to sell Japan Su-27s for dissimilar air combat training. Japan sent two pilots to Russia to train on the Su-27, but declined to place an order. Japan is in the process of planning to acquire replacements for its F-4s and later its F-15s; this could amount to ca. 150 aircraft, but only "up to 40" are currently being contemplated to replace the F-4s and a selection is expected to be made in the next couple of years. Askari Mark (Talk) 17:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cruise speed: 870 mph (1,300 km/h)
The SU-30 supercruises?
- Only in Wikipedia. The max Mach number (2.35) appears to come from Jane's, but the conversions are wrong. The cruise speed entries come from no source I have at hand, but do not appear to be dry thrust. The spec data all need a good combing through – and citing. Askari Mark (Talk) 04:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Someone probably mistook sealevel top speed for cruise speed, since that one actually is at 1350 km/h. - Dammit 08:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
[2] 2135km/h in 11km is only 2,0 Mach. [3] 1,9 Mach with canard and 2 Mach without canard.--HDP 16:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Comparable to F/A-18E/F ???
There is not much problem to evaluate this statement in this way:the Su-30 is comparable to USA's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. But in the other way, I don't think "the Super Hornets are comparable to Russian Su-30" is suitable to say. They are not even in the same class. Regards ChowHui 02:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] High-Bypass AND Afterburning??
I don't think so. The article for the Saturn AL-31 gas turbine engine lists the BPR at 0.59:1. Hardly the 3:1 or so that would be the minimum to call a turbofan ``high-bypass--18.47.5.63 04:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] IRIAF Su-30s
Several conservative Israeli media outlets have posted articles on internet sites confirming Iran's acquisition of 250+ Su-30s recently yet agencies like Jane's, GlobalSecurity.org and various government agencies are only reporting that Iran is still looking for a long range multirole platform and that the Su-30 (or a derivative) is on the shortlist. Considering the heat manufacturers are taking from Western nations (particularly the US) for selling weapons to Iran, it seems very unlikely that a deal of this magnitude which would almost double the number of IRIAF's combat aircraft, could take place without any previous mention, not to mention without a peep from the US government considering the ramifications of such a deal. 31/07/07 2:32pm (+9:30GMT)
- Is just an INTENTION, why bother to list it in the variants? Regards ChowHui 05:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- I don't even think it should since it's really just conjecture at the moment anyways. But someone else put it there, I just edited it. 31/07/07 3:56pm (+9:30GMT) Bobbo9000
- Why is Iran high-lighted as a user of the SU30 when they havn't even commited to buying any yet?
- I removed Iran (dunno who entered it, it wasn't attributed) from the list of users. Until some hard evidence is released of them being in IRIAF service, it's just conjecture IMO. 07/08/07 11:43am (+9:30GMT) Bobbo9000
This news was spread by the Israeli gouvernment so that American will give them F-22s. The Honorable Kermanshahi —Preceding comment was added at 08:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
