Malaysia to buy 18 Sukhoi Su-30MKM, delivery by 2006
-
The SU-30 is a very capable plane. On paper. It has no credible combat records and is not proven. Malaysia might very well be another "beta-tester" for the Russians. As someone has pointed out earlier, the super maneuvability of the SU-30 will be severely impeded with a full fuel load.
Another point that we have to look at is the network ability of the planes. RMAF has quite a few types of planes, Russian and American. How they intend to form a coherent fighting force out of these two contrasting types is debatable, if can be done in the first place. If they intend to use the SU-30 like the US is going to with the F-22, a "silver bullet" of sorts, it will get them nowhere. It might sound stupid, but with only 18 jets, it is very possible that that is what they want to do.
Purchasing the "best" fighters from two different countries is not what I call smart. It is quite obvious that they want to show off those planes, and simply win on specs. Just to point out, Russians don't exactly have a good supply chain as well.
I don't understand why the Mig-29s are not going to be traded in as well. It is just going to be an extra burden.
Its not probable that Singapore will get the US jets for the A-4 replacements, although that may happen. The reasons have been widely debated in this forum already.Originally posted by Forever84:Too bad singapore will proly buy from US
typhoons r really good -
I honestly think they should have put in a request for 30 MiG-29's ,upgrade their existing MiG-29's and maybe buy 10 Su-30's instead of 18 SU-30's and maybe even some more F-18's!!!
-
F15 is an old plane but how is that compared to the su-30?
if su-30 is so formitable then what options do we have?
typhoon?
rafale?
F22? -
Originally posted by HARIMAU:
I wonder why most of the boys here just too arrogant to accept the facts.
and F15 in whatever guise aint no match for SU30MKM or FA18F.
Heh heh...I'll have to disagree with you here...there is no denial that in terms of agility the Su-30 is more than a match for any F-15(arguably the Sukhoi is better than any Western design in service or entering service in this area) but your statement of "F15 in whatever guise aint no match for SU30MKM or FA18F" is a little too optimistic about the Russian perhaps?
The Bars radar is indeed a pretty impressive piece of equipment, but do you seriously think this phased-array set is the equivalent of a full-spec AESA radar the F-15 will be fitted with? I seriously don't think so. As for A/G, I'm sorry but I'd rather have an F-15 with JDAM/JSOW/AGM-130/SLAM-ER over the SU with its Kh-31/KAB-1500s TV-guided bombs/FAB-500M62 dumb bombs/S-8 unguided rockets(which were offered to you lot) ANYDAY. To sum up, the Su30 is indeed the better of the Eagle in some aspects, but "in all its guises"? Forgive my language, but you're either hopelessly optimistic or blindingly stupid.
And then theres the F/A-18F. Again, would you prefer a full spec APG-70 AESA for the Eagle or the standard APG-73(same as on the F/A-18Ds) on offer to you for your Super Bugs? Again, hopelessly optimistic or blindingly stupid?
FYI the APG-79 AESA upgrade to the SuperBug comes much later and if your Dear Leader keeps mouthing off as he is now, I wonder if you lot will even be offered the Super Bugs, not to mention the APG-79 upgrade.
Seems like "too arrogant to accept the facts" is not a condition limited to us Southerners eh? -
the purchase has already been widely known. news coming out of KL a couple of days back is widely anticipated i.e in terms of aircraft type and numbers.... there are no surprises...... i do not understand why there all are these excitement and hype about something which is already widely known for months...... judging by the response, are we going to have a big whoohaa in october or lima 03 when the deal is expected to be signed? i think to focus now is when the bush adminstration will go ahead with the super bug sale.....it is widely that 12-18 a/c will be purchase.... but will RMAF buy made in USA a/c or will bush delay the sales for 1-2 years..... emmmmmmm
-
Bush cant delay it too long unless he gets re-electedOriginally posted by kanzer:the purchase has already been widely known. news coming out of KL a couple of days back is widely anticipated i.e in terms of aircraft type and numbers.... there are no surprises...... i do not understand why there all are these excitement and hype about something which is already widely known for months...... judging by the response, are we going to have a big whoohaa in october or lima 03 when the deal is expected to be signed? i think to focus now is when the bush adminstration will go ahead with the super bug sale.....it is widely that 12-18 a/c will be purchase.... but will RMAF buy made in USA a/c or will bush delay the sales for 1-2 years..... emmmmmmm -
I came across the following website that contains interviews of Harry Hillaker - the father of F-16 and Alexander Velovich - a MiG designer.
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/people/people1.html
Seems to me that the F-16 is still a very superior aircraft. However I must admit that I don't know much about aircrafts and I'm basing my thoughts on that website's reports. It may contains bias views anyway, as it belongs to Lockheed Martin.
Just sharing my findings on other websites.
-
is this the plane that they want to use to kill f22s?
-
No , thats the MiG 1.44 or the SU-37 that are design to deal with the F-22.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:is this the plane that they want to use to kill f22s? -
2002 Laureate Awards
ELECTRONICS
Aviation Week & Space Technology
04/21/2003, page 38
Three years ago, the U.S. Navy/ Boeing/Raytheon APG-79 Active Electronically Scanned Array team began developing an advanced radar that would allow the F/A-18E/F to counter the evolving threat beyond 2020. Led by three program managers, Capt. (select) Dave Dunaway, Don Thole of Boeing and Tom Kennedy of Raytheon, the team has met every milestone since contract award in 2000, including 100% on-time delivery.
The APG-79 is the first completely new airborne fire control radar built by Raytheon in more than 25 years. It has an advanced active array, the next-generation receiver exciter and a brand-new fiber channel-based processor.
Top Pentagon officials say Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars eventually will be at the heart of the U.S.' network-centric defenses. These multi-element systems will contribute to many advanced capabilities. For example, AESA will allow stealth aircraft to use radar while still avoiding detection. In various forms, they eventually will be carried by the F/A-22 Raptor, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV), B-2 and the Air Force's new E-10 multi-sensor command and control aircraft.
THE APG-79 PROMISES to be more lethal, survivable and reliable than any airborne fire control radar today. The Navy anticipates never having to open the nose of an aircraft to repair the radar. Its officials say they are putting a 12,000-hr. radar in a 6,000-hr. aircraft.
The APG-79 also provides "limitless choices" operationally, according to Dunaway, making the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet a far more capable precision-strike aircraft than its predecessors. The AESA radar makes the Super Hornet, now on operational duty in the Middle East, "more survivable, supportable and affordable," explained Thole.
During a Nov. 20 exercise, the team demonstrated the first fully integrated engineering manufacturing development model, three months ahead of schedule. The team completed Operational Test and Evaluation Phase IIA earlier this year and is on track for first flight test by June. The "leap-ahead" technology incorporated in the APG-79 is the basis for other major programs including MP-RTIP; the new, long-range ground surveillance radar for the E-10; and next-generation radars for the F-15 Eagle, B-2 and UCAV.
Dunaway is a U.S. Naval Academy graduate who became an F/A-18 pilot with VFA-151 and later a test pilot and test director. He received an M.S. in aerospace engineering from the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. Dunaway is currently the Radar IPT lead and program manager for AESA.
Thole has worked at Boeing on F-4, F-15 and F/A-18 programs since the mid-1980s. Under his leadership, a Boeing/Raytheon team fielded USAF's F-15C AESA. Building on the F-15C radar upgrade experience, Thole is heading up the APG-79 development effort for Boeing.
Kennedy earned his B.S.E.E. at Rutgers University, M.S.E.E. at the Air Force Institute of Technology and Ph.D. at UCLA. Prior to joining Hughes Aircraft Co., he was a USAF captain. Kennedy is the Raytheon program manager for APG-79.
These program leaders are supported by hundreds of professionals who have made the APG-79 a success. -
In any case, I can almost smell that all bids for the Singapore NGF program will offer an AESA radar except probably Typhoon. Funny isn't it that Eurofight consortium market it as the best 4th gen aircraft and yet they are the slowest to introduce AESA - not until the Trenche 3 upgrade sometime in 2010 (I read). In any case, I think they will offer this as an additional options for RSAF.
-
The aircraft is only as good as the man who flies it.
While they are not outright hamburgers (half-baked arab-style pilots), I'm not sure if the talent pool in the RMAF is exactly that promising, for it sure dosen't look that way. They seemed more concerned with getting flashy aircraft, then actually flying them well. -
if AESA is so damn good... why not simply upgrade our dozens of falcons radar instead??
from a web page:
BLOCK 60 UPGRADE
The Block 60 F-16, which is being developed for the United Arab Emirates, features extra payload and range in part due to the new F110-132 engine being developed by General Electric, which produces 145kN of thrust.
New avionics for the Block 60 includes a higher-speed mission computer, a new display processor, 3 large colour LCD displays, advanced data transfer unit with a fibre-optic data transfer network Precision targeting is achieved by the Northrop Grumman integrated navigation FLIR and targeting FLIR system using mid-wave infrared arrays and Northrop GrummanÂ’s APG-80 agile beam active electronically scanned (AESA) radar. Northrop Grumman are also developing a new electronic warfare suite. The 80 Block 60 aircraft for the UAE are scheduled to be delivered between 2004 and 2007.
if all else fail... get the rafale or eurofighter and then get the AESA radar separately lor.... dont tell me SinAero with the full backing of MINDEF and SinTech... cannot do it... -
Originally posted by tripwire:
Hmm , i believe we can upgrade our F-16 seperately , however a new generation aircraft with a capability that the F-16 can never reach to deal with new threats in the region. ( Old dog , new tricks....?)
if AESA is so damn good... why not simply upgrade our dozens of falcons radar instead??
from a web page:
BLOCK 60 UPGRADE
The Block 60 F-16, which is being developed for the United Arab Emirates, features extra payload and range in part due to the new F110-132 engine being developed by General Electric, which produces 145kN of thrust.
New avionics for the Block 60 includes a higher-speed mission computer, a new display processor, 3 large colour LCD displays, advanced data transfer unit with a fibre-optic data transfer network Precision targeting is achieved by the Northrop Grumman integrated navigation FLIR and targeting FLIR system using mid-wave infrared arrays and Northrop GrummanÂ’s APG-80 agile beam active electronically scanned [b](AESA) radar. Northrop Grumman are also developing a new electronic warfare suite. The 80 Block 60 aircraft for the UAE are scheduled to be delivered between 2004 and 2007.
if all else fail... get the rafale or eurofighter and then get the AESA radar separately lor.... dont tell me SinAero with the full backing of MINDEF and SinTech... cannot do it... [/b]
As we know , the SU-30 is a very capable plane . It is not any other fighter but a new one which brings in new technology and capability into the region. This new capability will alter the balance in our regionm, indonesia , singapore , Thailand and Philipine might start purchasing their own 'NGF' , thus spanking an ARM RACE.
Now , Singapore and Thailand show interest in a new fighter , indonesia had start purchasing we small fleet of birds. I believe the SU-30 case cannot be treated easily.
The F-16 cant technologically match the Su-30. It will some how be inappropiate to match the F-16 to the SU-30 too. The SU-30 is an air superiority figther ( all of us should know ) , the F-16 is a multiple role fighter , how to match?? Very much , i believe our NGF will be one that can match the SU-30 ( Of course lah! ). So , F-16 Blk60 , Gripen and SuperHornet should be out. F-15 may be reluctantly in , with Rafale ( i frankly see nth special in that aircraft ) , Typhoon and the Su-30/35 in the selection league.
* I will frankly hope that we select the SU-30/35 together with another western aircraft ( Typhoons anyone? ), upgrade the Su-30/35 and look at the malaysians face. Mr X: ''Look they are trying to be insensitive and unneighbourly again!!!!!'' -
please elaborate on how and why the SU 30 is far better then the falcon...
had the 2 ever fought each other before? wats the score?
can 1 SU 30 take on 3 to 5 Falcons at the same time?
since the falcons have went through so much upgrade over the years... why cant it be upgraded even further to match the SU30?
i heard the americans wanna upgrade the falcons further to meet any challenges beyond 2020...
how well will the SU 30 fair against an RSAF falcon with tons of EW equipment, guided by a hawkeye and possibly armed with python 4 with HMS or Derby?
while i have heard that flanker derivative have been know to be very agile in clean configuration... but how agile is it when it is carry bombs, missiles and burning fuel at high speed with probably as many as 3 falcons hot on his tail? -
aiyo, if we have to repeat our arguments 10,000 times, we're going to get sore throat pretty quickly...
The comparison is between RSAF Vipers and the future RMAF SU 30MKMs are like comparing apples with oranges. However, all things being equal (eg. pilot are equally skilled, etc), our Vipers might not even lose out to the SU-30MKM in a BVR shoot out. As for WVR, the Sukhois do have advantages over Vipers in terms of super manoeuvrability but as many pilot will testifies, what the Sukhois pilot did in the air show (such as the cobra manoeuvre is impractical in ACM or Air combat Manoeuvre – bleeding too much energy in high AoA is a suicidal move especially when the opponent has HMS and off-bore sight missiles). In actual fact before the Sukhois can position itself for a kill, a Python 4 might already be trailing it. Don’t forget that both Python 4 and Sidewinders has head-on engagement capability. Phython 4 has off-bore sight up to 60 degree. Thus, my argument is that in dogfights, Vipers might not necessary always lose. Of course, I will still give a higher kill ratio to the Sukhois. I will give an uneducated guess of a ration between 1:2 or 1:3 in Sukhois favourite.
Secondly, I believe that many of the posters here are young (Sec, JC, NS?) and do not have working experience ? No offence intended. There is always a misconception of measuring equipment purely based on some very specific technical qualities. DonÂ’t forget that air to air combat is a tough business. How good an aircraft is (in todayÂ’s term) is not purely based on their flight characteristics. In the past (WWII, Korean War, many air campaign fought between the IAF, Syrian and the Egyptian AF, and to some extend the Vietnam War), winning air-to-air combats were based on typical dogfight strategy of getting on the six of your enemies. Advancement of AAMs change this dramatically. No longer a more manoeuvrable aircraft will be taking all the winning steaks. It comes down to tactics and pilots skills. That is why fighter academies like Top Gun, teaches Navy pilots how to defeat enemies using the huge and cumberson Tomcats. Tomcats is not very manoeuvrable compared to many of the aircraft they have downed without losing a single plane due to enemies aircraft. Tomcats shot down Su-22s, Mig 21s, etc.
Thus, being the most manoeuvrable aircraft does not always mean winning the air battles. It is only a small part of the equation. My view is the equation of determining possibility of winning Air to Air combat should be based on:
% A2A Win = advantage in agility of aircraft for WVR +
technological advantage in avionics (radar, HMS, electronics, etc) +
skill of pilot (tactics + situation alertness) +
situation alertness in entire battle area (AEW/AWACS/ Peer support) +
advantage in weapons (WVR/BVR) +
“good luck”
___________________________
“bad luck” -
Ha , i think u misunderstand mi.Originally posted by tripwire:please elaborate on how and why the SU 30 is far better then the falcon...
had the 2 ever fought each other before? wats the score?
can 1 SU 30 take on 3 to 5 Falcons at the same time?
since the falcons have went through so much upgrade over the years... why cant it be upgraded even further to match the SU30?
i heard the americans wanna upgrade the falcons further to meet any challenges beyond 2020...
how well will the SU 30 fair against an RSAF falcon with tons of EW equipment, guided by a hawkeye and possibly armed with python 4 with HMS or Derby?
while i have heard that flanker derivative have been know to be very agile in clean configuration... but how agile is it when it is carry bombs, missiles and burning fuel at high speed with probably as many as 3 falcons hot on his tail?
The Falcon is one hell of a potent pack with support from the Hawkeye and of course the technological suit its carrying. The Falcon with EW suit , derby , HMS , Python missile can realli give a bloody nose ( as someone like to say ) to our neighbour's arm force. With unmatchable skills of our pilots , we sure have an upper hand.
However we must know that the F-16 is a multiple role fighter ,while the SU-30 is an air-superiority fighter. Their mission capability are different. As long as im concern , the SU-30 are built to neutralize the F-15E ( the mainstay of US air superiority ). The SU-30 are built to successfully engage any potential allied aircraft BVR or WVR. These objective can be seen by the powerful radar and Infrared sensor carried by the SU-30 , coupled with the R-77. The TVC engine , with HMS and R-73E.
I dare not say that the SU-30 are 100% able to neutralize our F-16 ,however at least the Su-30 are built to neutralize the F-16 , not the other way round.
There have not been any engagement between the F-16 and the SU-30 , and thats wat most of us ( i believe ) are afraid of. We dunno the true capability of the SU-30 ,but atleast with the technological suit of it. Theortically the SU-30 should be more capable than the F-16.
Anyway , our NGF project is a very good example. The SU-30/35 is in our contender list and we are happy abt that. Y would we want a fighter less capable that the F-16??? Of course u can say that the F-16 Blk60 is in the list too , the onli straight logic which i can think out to justify my stand is that there is no country in the world that use F-16 solely to deal with a threat magnitude of a SU-30.
Btw tripwire , dun be negative with my stand on the SU-30 being more capable theortically, however surely there are other transparent factors to be considered . -
NO NO NO, no can do. RSAF cannot afford to purchase 2 different types. Simply bad for logistics. Furthermore, would we seriously want to test our patience with the supply chain issue that plague our northern neighbour?Originally posted by foxtrout8:The F-16 cant technologically match the Su-30. It will some how be inappropiate to match the F-16 to the SU-30 too. The SU-30 is an air superiority figther ( all of us should know ) , the F-16 is a multiple role fighter , how to match?? Very much , i believe our NGF will be one that can match the SU-30 ( Of course lah! ). So , F-16 Blk60 , Gripen and SuperHornet should be out. F-15 may be reluctantly in , with Rafale ( i frankly see nth special in that aircraft ) , Typhoon and the Su-30/35 in the selection league.
[/quote]
Can't see anything special in Rafale? Perhaps this will change your mind:
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/data/sponsor_rafale/index.htm
In fact, if you do more reading on Rafale, you will find that they are the equal most, if not the most, advanced fighter that come out from Europe right now. The growth path is there. The only real disadvantages (2 of them in my view) are:
1. No foreign sales. Very low local sales. Cost per unit is gonna be high. Darn, the Koreans should have gotten this one
2. Very few Yankees weapon integrated to Rafale. RSAF will have to foot any development cost to integrate US and Israeli made weapons or targetting pods. Might not be that bad if Singapore can stomach it. Given the current economic circumstances, maybe not. However, ST Aero, DSTA, DSO will learn heaps in terms of avionics integration from the access to the source code.
On the other hand, Rafale has the advantage of:
1. Non US made, possibly mean RSAF can get the current best BVR (Mica) to go with.
2. Rafale will too be equipped with an AESA. Like the US AESA, it will be very impressive in many aspect which I am not going to dwell in for the time being.
3. Rafale ECM suite - superb. Even the Yankees are impressed. US will never release an equivalent on their Superbugs.
4. Eurofight is still lacking behind in terms of their availability of the latest technologies plus their delivery schedule.
5. agility better than Superbugs - tested and proven in ACM training between French navy and US navy. Supercruise at Mach 1.1, good range with CFT (will be able to travel much further than Superbug, but will compare less favourably against the Eagles).
6. Stealth second to F22 and F35. RCS smaller than Super bugs and Typhoon.
etc.
[quote]
* I will frankly hope that we select the SU-30/35 together with another western aircraft ( Typhoons anyone? ), upgrade the Su-30/35 and look at the malaysians face. Mr X: ''Look they are trying to be insensitive and unneighbourly again!!!!!'' -
I think we're gonna play the israeli game here...
wait till they spend their bucks, then get something more cost effective... leapfrog them but make sure it's their money that's getting less bang for buck.
And of course, maintain superior troop quality at the same time. -
Black , u have ur point dude , but i will frankly find that other aircraft may be a better option for the RSAF.
Let mi be frank with my opinions
* Other sources offer AESA radar too.
* Our F-16D have a matchable EW suit if compare to the Rafale. The EW suit in Typhoon and Flanker is very impressive too.
* the other souces offer a larger range of new weapon and technologies. I will say that the Typhoon offer better weapon and technology.
* other sources too offer training facilities.
If we are to compare wat the Rafale have to wat the other aircraft offer to wat the other aircraft have that Rafale dun offer......i dun find Rafale special even it is a capable plane. -
Actually foxtrout, Rafale vs. the other options have been discussed widely in some of the older threads in Speakers Corner, so I shall not repeat them in detail here, but the nub of the argument for Rafale is:Originally posted by foxtrout8:Black , u have ur point dude , but i will frankly find that other aircraft may be a better option for the RSAF.
Let mi be frank with my opinions
* Other sources offer AESA radar too.
* Our F-16D have a matchable EW suit if compare to the Rafale. The EW suit in Typhoon and Flanker is very impressive too.
* the other souces offer a larger range of new weapon and technologies.
*other sources too offer training facilities.
If we are to compare wat the Rafale have to wat the other aircraft offer to wat the other aircraft have that Rafale dun offer......i dun find Rafale special even it is a capable plane.
- Relatively de-linked arms export policy w/ respect to politics for France. We may be pals with US now and arms export controls are relaxed, but can we say for sure future admiistrations will be so friendly to us?
- Superiority of the MICA vs the AMRAAM
- Rafale is a newer design, more scope for development
- Stealthiness. Rafale wins over all the others in the RSAF NGF competition by a mile.
- A realistic schedule for entry into service vis-a-vi Typhoon, especially for the A/G versions
I'd like to know where did you get your info that the F-16D EW suite is the equal of Rafale. Firstly, no one knows a lot about the RSAF F-16D suite, and secondly, the general consensus(even among Americans) is that the Rafale EW system is the best among all the modern fighters
I think that the general consensus here is that on a head-to-head capabilities fight, the Rafale will beat the Yanks hands down while just shading the Typhoon(I've yet to be convinced by YourFather and the other pro-Typhoon forummites). Unfortunately its never about pure capabilities in competitions like this, and it looks increasingly likely to me that in this post-Sept 11, post-Operation Iraqi Freedom world, our decision would be in favour of a US design(my bet is on the Strike Eagle derivative). Which is a real pity, with all due respect to the Eagle. -
I have nth to say on the Rafale issue. Being pro- Typhoon , i miss out on the Rafale side. ThX on the information.
-
French Rafale EW Suite.
SPECTRA
The SPECTRA system for the Rafale combat aircraft operates in electromagnetic, laser and infra-red domains. Using sophisticated techniques, such as interferometry, digital frequency and active phased-array transmitters, the highly advanced multi-sensors and artificial intelligence data fusion capabilities of SPECTRA provide the Rafale aircraft with the best chance to survive in harsh and lethal environments.
The SPECTRA (Self-Protection Equipment Countering Threats for Rafale Aircraft) system on Rafale is the most advanced electronic warfare system in the class of DASS (Defensive Aids Sub- System) and INEWS (INtegrated Electronic Warfare System). DASS is used on Eurofighter and INEWS on F-22 Raptor. -
MICA superior to the AMRAAM??
Are you sure?
On the other hand, I do indeed observe that the Rafale is much maligned in this forum, seemingly for the fact that it is french rather than it's actual capabilities, which are quite impressive, and cost effective together with that indeed.
As a matter of fact, it is the Typhoon that appears to be the Red Herring here. -
Yes. In terms of max range, AMRAAM wins flat out. But even the Americans acknowledge that AMRAAM kill probability is VERY LOW at max range due to poor agility especially at long range. Case in point, Dutch F-16 kill of Serbian MiG-29 over Kosovo 1999, 3 AMRAAMs were launched, 3rd one hit after MiG ran out of energy to defeat AMRAAMs after first 2 were dodged.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:MICA superior to the AMRAAM??
Are you sure?
Range specs quoted for MICA is range where missile achieves 90%(or 75% I can't remember) PK against a hard-manuvering target.
Reason for poor AMRAAM performance at long range? Look at the missile, to maximise range the missile was fitted with small(ie less draggy) fins, however the corresponding trade off was manuverability, especially at long range where missile energy is already low
BTW I'm happy to continue debating about the missiles, but I agree with foxtrout that the NGF discussion should cease. Done to death liao. Thats why I didn't want to post detailed arguments in my previous post.