Su-30MK2 for Uganda

[Beatmaster]

Because these are expensive heavy multirole fighters whose advantages include decent BVR capability, long range, and large payload. The threats Uganda faces generally stem from insurgencies, or other sub-par African militaries, which do not warrant such resources.

That having been said there is another problem: these are sophisticated and modern aircraft that require up to date regular maintenance, and experienced pilots, something Uganda may not be able to afford. Granted Sukhoi's post-sale support has improved, but I still doubt these birds will all be flying 10 years from now.

Well those Su-30MK2s are nice birds but are they not stripped down to bare basic and usable platform? No offense to Uganda and its people but they are barely able to provide enough food for their citizens, so how on earth are they able to buy and maintain these birds?
Another thing is that they could use older planes which are cheaper to buy, maintain and operate.
As i really do not see which possible aggressor they might face and i also do not see why they require Su-30's to defend them selfs if other platforms can be cheaper and do a even better job considering their economy and their general lack of means to maintain sophisticated hardware.
Unless Russia trows a free Quick fix pitstop around the corner where they can refuel, maintain and rearm these birds lol.
Not to mention the fact that if insurgencies are the biggest problem they face then why not get them selfs a few attack choppers which are a hell of a lot cheaper and when it push comes to shove they can be more practical and more use full while maintain a good mobility - firepower - multi function / defense ratio.

Granted its ALOT of bang for ur bucks.

 

[Comrade69]

Because these are expensive heavy multirole fighters whose advantages include decent BVR capability, long range, and large payload. The threats Uganda faces generally stem from insurgencies, or other sub-par African militaries, which do not warrant such resources.

That having been said there is another problem: these are sophisticated and modern aircraft that require up to date regular maintenance, and experienced pilots, something Uganda may not be able to afford. Granted Sukhoi's post-sale support has improved, but I still doubt these birds will all be flying 10 years from now.

I guess that is overkill

they should of bought Mig-29's.....


question: is the Su-27 and the Su-30 the same plane? on wiki they have almost the same characteristics

 

[Haavarla]

pretty much.
The different is mostly one crew vs two crew cockpit station.
Other than that, the fuel capacity and range are just about the same.
The empty weight tend to get a tad more on Su-30.
As for Flanker export version these days, we got the Su-27SKM(1crew) and the Su-30MK2(2crew).

But what kind of EW, radar, engines etc, could differ sinse there exsist several different version..

 

[T.C.P]

I guess that is overkill

they should of bought Mig-29's.....


question: is the Su-27 and the Su-30 the same plane? on wiki they have almost the same characteristics

There is no point in getting mig-29s as well. Uganda faces no great threat from a powerful air force, for a country that lacks a lot of resources, this whole acquisition seems stupid to me. I agree with Feanor, I am not sure if these will remain operational for long.

Uganda would have been better off, getting close air support air craft for COIN operations like, the Super Tucano or AJTs that could be used for ground attack operations like L-39s or K-8s.

It would also have been more sensible to get F-7s like Nigeria.

 

[Haavarla]

Agreed.
Choppers..
Uganda needs more hellis.
Utility, transport and attack hellis would be much more helpfull.
Particular in supporting civillians in need of evacuation, SAR, supplies corridors, cargo lift in constructions etc etc.

 

[Comrade69]

well i don't know squat about Africa and their conflicts and who has a good army who doesn't, who is rebelling etc...

but of they face no real dangers then they should of got the su-25...

 

[Haavarla]

Is This the Uganda Su-30MK2?

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Uganda---Air/Sukhoi-Su-30MK2/1953037/L/

 

[Feanor]

Used MiG-29SMT would be better. But also overkill.

To be honest I'm not sure they need fighter aircraft at all.

 

[Kasy]

Be prepared!

If you are following events in this region, especially the war on terror you would possibly see the importance of these long range MULTI-ROLE SU 30mk2 birds. Terror bases are shifting from Afaganistan, Iraq to Somalia- yemen area. Uganda and Burundi are at the frontline of this menace. Uganda needs swift & superior air power to withstand not necesarily present but future threats, and also support our boots that are now in Congo, Central African republic, sudan and somalia. Not in quantity of birds but quality is the stategy here. Another threat are the waters of the river nile!.

 

[Todjaeger]

If you are following events in this region, especially the war on terror you would possibly see the importance of these long range MULTI-ROLE SU 30mk2 birds. Terror bases are shifting from Afaganistan, Iraq to Somalia- yemen area. Uganda and Burundi are at the frontline of this menace. Uganda needs swift & superior air power to withstand not necesarily present but future threats, and also support our boots that are now in Congo, Central African republic, sudan and somalia. Not in quantity of birds but quality is the stategy here. Another threat are the waters of the river nile!.

How exactly are a small number of Su-30MK2's supposed to help?

They are advanced heavy multi-role fighters. Given the relative lack of opposing air arms in the region (unless one wishes to engage with Egypt or South Africa...) the air superiority capabilities are going to be largely unused. Are there enough fixed/strategic targets for strike missions to be worthwhile? I would imagine that the most useful capability would be to provide CAS, but a number of other aircraft designs would be better suited to that role instead of an Su-30MK2.

I cannot help thinking that whoever authorized the purchase did so not for their military capabilities or relevance to Uganda's service needs, but for personal or national prestige.

-Cheers

 

[Haavarla]

Could this have something to do with this deal?

For decades, Uganda's economy suffered from devastating economic policies and instability, leaving Uganda as one of the world's poorest countries. The country has commenced economic reforms and growth has been robust. In 2008, Uganda recorded 7% growth despite the global downturn and regional instability.

Uganda has substantial natural resources, including fertile soils, regular rainfall, and sizable mineral deposits of copper and cobalt. The country has largely untapped reserves of both crude oil and natural gas.

A surplus of resources like water and possible oil/gas etc.
In the future it could be tempting for other to steal a piece of the cake..

 

[Kasy]

How exactly are a small number of Su-30MK2's supposed to help?

They are advanced heavy multi-role fighters. Given the relative lack of opposing air arms in the region (unless one wishes to engage with Egypt or South Africa...) the air superiority capabilities are going to be largely unused. Are there enough fixed/strategic targets for strike missions to be worthwhile? I would imagine that the most useful capability would be to provide CAS, but a number of other aircraft designs would be better suited to that role instead of an Su-30MK2.

I cannot help thinking that whoever authorized the purchase did so not for their military capabilities or relevance to Uganda's service needs, but for personal or national prestige.

-Cheers

Possibly prestige to some extent.. But remember in military stategy posturing ones defence with superior weaponary is a deterrrence to any percieved or real, present or future threats. Otherwise in reference to south africa or egypt, why would they have armed themselves with superior air power yet [there is no opposing air arms in the region] all there neighbours, especially in southern africa are not a threat? was it prestige/personal also??? Or is it because 'black africa' should not adequatley defend herself??? Events world over are changing so fast. Who would have imagined last year that the events happening in the arab world would be possible?

In my opinion its not an over kill.

Cheers.

 

[Beatmaster]

Could this have something to do with this deal?

For decades, Uganda's economy suffered from devastating economic policies and instability, leaving Uganda as one of the world's poorest countries. The country has commenced economic reforms and growth has been robust. In 2008, Uganda recorded 7% growth despite the global downturn and regional instability.

Uganda has substantial natural resources, including fertile soils, regular rainfall, and sizable mineral deposits of copper and cobalt. The country has largely untapped reserves of both crude oil and natural gas.

A surplus of resources like water and possible oil/gas etc.
In the future it could be tempting for other to steal a piece of the cake..

good point still there are no countries around in Uganda's region that require such sophisticated hardware, sure the SU 30mk2 is a credible way to boost Uganda's self defense but still they would do allot better AFV's supported by attack heli's which will boost their logistical options greatly and given Uganda's terrain having a few SU's around is imo a waist of money.

 

[T.C.P]

Could this have something to do with this deal?

For decades, Uganda's economy suffered from devastating economic policies and instability, leaving Uganda as one of the world's poorest countries. The country has commenced economic reforms and growth has been robust. In 2008, Uganda recorded 7% growth despite the global downturn and regional instability.

Uganda has substantial natural resources, including fertile soils, regular rainfall, and sizable mineral deposits of copper and cobalt. The country has largely untapped reserves of both crude oil and natural gas.

A surplus of resources like water and possible oil/gas etc.
In the future it could be tempting for other to steal a piece of the cake..

If Uganda is looing at future threats, then shouldn't focus on improving infrastructure, ground based defences and having a good number of AJTs, so in the case of an impending threat, it can quickly acquire fighters.


Also I stand by the idea that if Uganda really wanted fighters, it should have gone for some upgraded F-7s, its an air craft capable of dealing with all threats Uganda curently faces and makes a good ground strike fighter as well.

 

[Kasy]

Swot

If Uganda is looing at future threats, then shouldn't focus on improving infrastructure, ground based defences and having a good number of AJTs, so in the case of an impending threat, it can quickly acquire fighters.


Also I stand by the idea that if Uganda really wanted fighters, it should have gone for some upgraded F-7s, its an air craft capable of dealing with all threats Uganda curently faces and makes a good ground strike fighter as well.

Ground based defences, Air defences, Motorised infantry... and the like is what Uganda has been emphasizing in the past 25 years....thats done and dusted. The current chllenge has been air supiriority inspite of the Mig 21's and Mig 23's currently in operation.
I trust the military plannners of Uganda made a comprehensive threats assesment [SWOT] before these new birds where acquired..

 

[Todjaeger]

Possibly prestige to some extent.. But remember in military stategy posturing ones defence with superior weaponary is a deterrrence to any percieved or real, present or future threats. Otherwise in reference to south africa or egypt, why would they have armed themselves with superior air power yet [there is no opposing air arms in the region] all there neighbours, especially in southern africa are not a threat? was it prestige/personal also??? Or is it because 'black africa' should not adequatley defend herself??? Events world over are changing so fast. Who would have imagined last year that the events happening in the arab world would be possible?

In my opinion its not an over kill.

Cheers.

When making a considered defence purchase, the relevance of the platform in question to the desired force construct is paramount. The desired force construct is in turn based off the threat matrix, an analysis of various defence scenarios covering the who/what/where/why/how of likely defence situations.

Given the costs involved in purchasing the Su-30MK2, and the costs and resources involved in maintaining them in flying/fighting condition, what sort of force construct does Uganda want to have? And by extension, what sort of threat matrix exists to trigger Uganda wanting to have such a force construct?

Given the information a number of us have available to us, it would seem that Uganda would be better served by purchasing a larger number of less expensive and complex combat aircraft for CAS and ground attack roles.

Therefore either Uganda is wasting money purchasing a type of fighter it does not need, or there are things going on which a number of us are unaware of. If you know of additions to the threat matrix beyond what others are currently aware of, please enlighten us.

At present, Uganda is bordered by Sudan, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Which of these nations is hostile towards Uganda, and which nations have air forces (combat and/or transport) which could be engaged by Ugandan fighter pilots? Additionally, which countries have locations of strategic significance which could be attacked by long-ranged strike aircraft? These are questions that people ask to determine what the threat matrix looks like, as that drives what a force construct will be.

-Cheers

 

[Haavarla]

Do we know the content of this deal.
Is it a sweet deal favored in Ugandia eyes, made in the presence by other industrial economical deal like Oil/gas installations between Russia and Ugandian?

 

[Kasy]

Do we know the content of this deal.
Is it a sweet deal favored in Ugandia eyes, made in the presence by other economical deal like Oil/gas installations between Russia and Ugandian?

All we know is it cost $740 million. This includes training, armament, simulator, support and other munitions. And it has all been paid for.

 

[Kasy]

Could this have something to do with this deal?

For decades, Uganda's economy suffered from devastating economic policies and instability, leaving Uganda as one of the world's poorest countries. The country has commenced economic reforms and growth has been robust. In 2008, Uganda recorded 7% growth despite the global downturn and regional instability.

Uganda has substantial natural resources, including fertile soils, regular rainfall, and sizable mineral deposits of copper and cobalt. The country has largely untapped reserves of both crude oil and natural gas.

A surplus of resources like water and possible oil/gas etc.
In the future it could be tempting for other to steal a piece of the cake..

Definately true..
quote,
"Speaking to reporters in Agen, southern France, Mrs. Mitterrand said that war over oil is well on the way to becoming a thing of the past, but that war over water is likely to break out in different parts of the world"

...and as you quoted correctly Uganda is a land of hundreds of rivers, not to mention lake victoria, the largest fresh water lake and rive nile, second longest river.

 

[Kasy]

Real Threat

When making a considered defence purchase, the relevance of the platform in question to the desired force construct is paramount. The desired force construct is in turn based off the threat matrix, an analysis of various defence scenarios covering the who/what/where/why/how of likely defence situations.

Given the costs involved in purchasing the Su-30MK2, and the costs and resources involved in maintaining them in flying/fighting condition, what sort of force construct does Uganda want to have? And by extension, what sort of threat matrix exists to trigger Uganda wanting to have such a force construct?

Given the information a number of us have available to us, it would seem that Uganda would be better served by purchasing a larger number of less expensive and complex combat aircraft for CAS and ground attack roles.

Therefore either Uganda is wasting money purchasing a type of fighter it does not need, or there are things going on which a number of us are unaware of. If you know of additions to the threat matrix beyond what others are currently aware of, please enlighten us.

At present, Uganda is bordered by Sudan, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Which of these nations is hostile towards Uganda, and which nations have air forces (combat and/or transport) which could be engaged by Ugandan fighter pilots? Additionally, which countries have locations of strategic significance which could be attacked by long-ranged strike aircraft? These are questions that people ask to determine what the threat matrix looks like, as that drives what a force construct will be.

-Cheers

Well just read this quote from international inteligence services;
This could pissibly be one of the unknown threats against Uganda.

The prospect of a President Hosni Mubarak sanctioned Egyptian bomb attack on Uganda and Ethiopia over the Nile waters was real before he was toppled by a popular uprising back home in February.

BONE OF CONTENTION: Egypt was to give any prior approval for development projects on the River Nile. (INTERNET PHOTO).
Highly placed sources say Mubarak had put a fleet of fighter jets on standby for attack, the moment Uganda and Ethiopia started talking about reviewing the Nile water agreement and the debate started gaining momentum. Mubarak, sources say, felt threatened.

Insider sources also say Mubarak had assembled eight Special Forces groups for the planned attack. Confidential cables leaked by the whistle blowing website, Wiki Leaks, confirm that Mubarak’s government considered using force against upstream countries as far back as 2009. The intention was reviewed on a yearly basis depending on the threat to the Nile waters.

“The administration was incensed by riparian states’ insistence on using the Nile for irrigation and other water consuming projects,” Wiki Leaks reported.

According to the confidential document written on February 8, 2009, Egypt was very pleased with the six months extension to negotiations on the Nile Basin Initiative’s (NBI) Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA), and its proposal to end the impasse over the Nile Waters debate.

The negotiations saw that upstream countries accept Egypt’s historical water quota and that it (Egypt) would be the only country to give any prior approval for development projects in upstream countries using Nile waters.

The document further indicates Egypt’s determination to having total control over the Nile waters. It says Egypt believes that its Aswan High dam with its 162 billion cubic metre capacity gives it the “upper hand” in negotiations because it changed the geography of the Nile and eliminated any immediate water threat to Egypt.

There are nine countries in the Nile basin and they all claim rights over the Nile waters. The upstream countries include; Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo and Ethiopia, while the downstream countries comprise only Egypt and Sudan.

Cheers.