Is that true about chinese SU-30MKK upgrade?

the folowing text is taken from volume 8 of International Air Power Review


The Su-30MKK is virtually the only (and, incidentally, the first in Russia) mass-produced generation 4+ fighter whose combat capabilities will almost fully meet the requirements of a variety of potential customer in the next 10 to 15 years.

In contrast, the Su-30MKI fighter currently being produced in Irkutsk for the Indian Air Force has one major drawback, outstanding maneuverability notwithstanding: because of the requirements of a particular customer, its avionics suite integrates multiple foreign-made components and does not allow the aircraft to be exported to other countries.

The Su-30MKI development experience graphically shows that it is much more labour - and time-consuming - to redesign an avionics suite than to come up with new airframe and power plant design solutions.

At the customer’s request, the Su-30MKK can have an improved aerodynamic configuration with canards, an upgraded fly-by-wire system and more sophisticated thrust-vectoring engines.

These features make the Su-30MKK virtually identical to the Su-35, which is also being offered for export. However, it will be a few years before the Su-35 reaches the market, while the Su-30MK - which has successfully completed all tests and boasts debugged and fine-tuned avionics and weapons, with provisions for further upgrades - is actually a player in the world market of modern fighters.

Interestingly, although initially planned as an export aircraft, the Su-30MKK has recently been selected is a standard for upgrading in-service Su-27s and Su-27UBs of the Russian Air Force

what do u guys thing about it

It is quite old, but it's true in most respects. However, China is not following up on the upgradability of the Su-30MKK. I would think that canards are redudant once you have TVC, and this is not likely to be applied as an upgrade to older planes. Simarly, the idea to add canards to convert India's Su-30K to MKI looks to me it has been abandoned, so might only have a radar upgrade.

I am likely to think that a TVC upgrrade is not likely to be applied too, even for an MKK upgrade. Super maneuverbility is a bit of superflous once you get into helmet sights and missiles like the R-73. In that sense, it really does not matter if you're in an Su-27, MKI or Su-35. I see you, I lock and I shoot.

Russia did use the MKK as the template for its RuAF Su-27SM upgrades. Basically the planes end up like single seater Su-30MKKs. This was also proposed for China as an upgrade, and the Russians were quite confident that China would bite. So it surprised them greatly that China turned around and didn't, even back in 2004. It was clear even then China was comitted to the J-11B project and the project was already in its advance stages.

hi, this is my first post


you are wrong about manouverability not being an important part of the plane.
a Su30MKI is capable of out manouvering any single missile fired from BVR

americans have indicated that it takes 2 of their AMRAAMS ,fired in a few seconds gap, to take down the MKI


it is not always that planes have to fight only long range, dog fights are only a little less important than BVR
dog fights will happen cause of advancements in radar and anti missile systems like jammers etc to stop BVRs
if a BVR missile is stopped, then the planes have to meet head on

I would think that canards are redudant once you have TVC, and this is not likely to be applied as an upgrade to older planes. Simarly, the idea to add canards to convert India's Su-30K to MKI looks to me it has been abandoned, so might only have a radar upgrade.


the canards are already in place and project has green light

p2prada said:

hi, this is my first post


you are wrong about manouverability not being an important part of the plane.
a Su30MKI is capable of out manouvering any single missile fired from BVR

americans have indicated that it takes 2 of their AMRAAMS ,fired in a few seconds gap, to take down the MKI

Click to expand...

Lol. It is standard practice to ripple fire 2 missiles against any target, and not just the MKI.

it is not always that planes have to fight only long range, dog fights are only a little less important than BVR
dog fights will happen cause of advancements in radar and anti missile systems like jammers etc to stop BVRs
if a BVR missile is stopped, then the planes have to meet head on

Click to expand...

You are not making sense. Usually when a plane has successfully outmaneuvered the first missile, its not particularly going to be in a head on position.

p2prada said:

I would think that canards are redudant once you have TVC, and this is not likely to be applied as an upgrade to older planes. Simarly, the idea to add canards to convert India's Su-30K to MKI looks to me it has been abandoned, so might only have a radar upgrade.


the canards are already in place and project has green light

Click to expand...

The canards are not in place, and the last piece of news is that they're trying to sell the Su-30Ks instead to another country.

Its a horrible idea in the first place, trying to install moving canards on an airframe originally not designed for it. It means completely cutting and disrupting the stress lines of the airframe to put the canards, and that means sacrificing structural integrity.

A lot of people I see are saying carnards with TVC is redundant. But doesn't it reduced "stress" on the airframe so you don't have all the energy being forced all in one end of the fighter? That's if it really matters.

I think its just complicated to have two very different control systems on each end of the aircraft trying to interact with each other. This one just throws a whole slew of new behavioral variables into the system. KISS is always a principle you should follow.

One thing about missiles. It does not need to actually "hit" a plane to kill one. Even if it misses, so long it can come close enough for its proximity fuse to detonate, and the blast radius, often with shrapnel, can take down a plane.

As for complicated, Super Flanker with TVC, and you got 9 control parts all over the plane---2 canards, 2 ailerons, 1 rudder, 2 elevators and 2 TVC nozzles. MiG-29 OVT has 7, Super J-10 with TVC has 6 (2 canards, 2 elevons, 1 rudder, 1 TVC nozzle).

all the other new variants of sukhoi use canards
read the list

Su-30MKI aerodynamic configuration is an unstable longitudinal triplane. The canard increases the aircraft lifting and deflects automatically to allow high angle-of-attack flights. The canard notably assists in controlling the aircraft at large angles of attack (AoA) and bringing it to a level flight condition. The wing will have high-lift devices featured as deflecting leading edges and flaperons acting the flaps and ailerons.


read aerodynamics



the 18 su30k (note 'k' ) bought initially by the indian airforce uses no canards
there are no plans for upgrading it to MKI. so, belarus( i think) wants to buy all 18


the su-30MKI at its max is atleast 8 tons heavier than the chinese model mkk
the mki can go 8000km with only 1 refueling compared to chinas 2 refueling
can somebody throw more light on why the canards are used on mki and other versions like 33,35,37,47 etc

missile jammers can be employed by future planes to "fool" enemy BVR missiles

with the creation of anti ballistic missiles possible........maybe an anti air to air missile can be made to make BVR obsolete (we can see that in the hollywood flick "stealth" )

along with advances like stealth( the russian plasma tech will sure be handy ), it will be difficult for a fighter to lock on to a target plane over long distances forcing them to come head to head in a dogfight
it is almost impossible to lock the F-22 unless u are pretty close

so i believe dogfights will remain.

p2prada said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

all the other new variants of sukhoi use canards
read the list

Su-30MKI aerodynamic configuration is an unstable longitudinal triplane. The canard increases the aircraft lifting and deflects automatically to allow high angle-of-attack flights. The canard notably assists in controlling the aircraft at large angles of attack (AoA) and bringing it to a level flight condition. The wing will have high-lift devices featured as deflecting leading edges and flaperons acting the flaps and ailerons.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

read aerodynamics



the 18 su30k (note 'k' ) bought initially by the indian airforce uses no canards
there are no plans for upgrading it to MKI. so, belarus( i think) wants to buy all 18


the su-30MKI at its max is atleast 8 tons heavier than the chinese model mkk
the mki can go 8000km with only 1 refueling compared to chinas 2 refueling
can somebody throw more light on why the canards are used on mki and other versions like 33,35,37,47 etc

Click to expand...

The Su-33 uses canards for a more different sense; it helps them take off faster from a carrier deck.

The newest versions of the Su-35 no longer have canards.

As much as the rationale for canards on the Su-30MKI/Su-37, improvements in TVC have caught up and made it superflous. Besides, you can still get high angle of attacks using fixed mechanisms like LERXs, something both the standard Su-27 design still have. Let us not forget that the F-18 achieves high levels of angle of attack with only the help of LERXs.

For what its worth triplane is a very draggy configuration. That's the reason no one else is trying it. Just about every canard outside of Russia is a much more aerodynamically efficient biplane design with steeply ranked deltas. Coupled with parasitic thrust losses from the TVC nozzle, the problem of a draggy wing configuration is further compounded. Hence the rush to put stronger engine cores into the TVC engines to make up for it.