104 to 0: The F-15 Eagle Is The Fighter No Air Force Can Beat

[Ultima Thule]

I said none of this.
Only said that neither had AESA and BVR wasn't conducted.
Both have really good passive radars.

Don't argue for the sake of arguing. It was a neutral description of the two exercises.

Then give a those neutral source and do research before you post F-15 were/ was never uses a PESA but a pulse dropler radar AN/APG- 63 and currently AESA AN/ APG-63V3 you think that F-15 is using cold war era avionics/radar don't you

 

[KapitaanAli]

Then give a those neutral source and do research before you post F-15 were/ was never uses a PESA but a pulse dropler radar AN/APG- 63 and currently AESA AN/ APG-63V3 you think that F-15 is using cold war era avionics/radar don't you

1. I made a mistake typing both have really good passive radars in the previous post. My bad. I only meant both didn't have AESA.
2. I'm talking about 2004.
3. I never implied F15 has cold war era avionics/radar.

Again, all I said was that both didn't have AESA and BVR wasn't done in 2004. That is it.
Idk what you're smoking to come up with random points that I didn't even mention.
Have a good day.

 

[Ultima Thule]

1. I made a mistake typing both have really good passive radars in the previous post. My bad. I only meant both didn't have AESA.
2. I'm talking about 2004.
3. I never implied F15 has cold war era avionics/radar.

Again, all I said was that both didn't have AESA and BVR wasn't done in 2004. That is it.
Idk what you're smoking to come up with random points that I didn't even mention.
Have a good day.

Your Su-30 was more advance than F-15 at the that time in the term of radar pulse dropler AN/APG-63 vs BARS PESA

 

[KapitaanAli]

Your Su-30 was more advance than F-15 at the that time in the term of radar pulse dropler AN/APG-63 vs BARS PESA

Yes. Odds were against F15 in 2004. I've mentioned the other ROE that were in favour of Su30.
Otherwise there's no way the kill ratio would be nearby the reported 9:1.

Similarly the odds were against the MKI in 2008.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Yes. Odds were against F15 in 2004. I've mentioned the other ROE that were in favour of Su30.
Otherwise there's no way the kill ratio would be nearby the reported 9:1.

Similarly the odds were against the MKI in 2008.

So what magic thing about if your jets have a PESA against generation old pulse dropler radars on both times

 

[KapitaanAli]

So what magic thing about if your jets have a PESA against generation old pulse dropler radars on both times

Firstly, I didn't take sides. Only noted down what we know since some here were posting biased opinions as if they participated in the exercise.

Secondly, the BARS was put in training mode in 2008. AESA was available for F15, but I'm not sure if they were fielded.
Other handicaps for MKI involved lack of data-links, flares and the R77. Even the USAF guy who criticised the MKI confirms that it was prone to friendly fire due to incompatibility with their AWACS.
(And inexperienced pilots like F15 had in 2004.)

It's normal in exercises for the host to be given/have upperhand.

 

[DJ_Viper]

No one is denying the superior tech USAF enjoys. If there is an official result i'd like to see and of course i heard quite the opposite of what you are saying from Indian members. I have no ways to either verify or deny their claims hence i asked you to share official results, if there are any.

Refer to my post above

 

[gambit]

Are You trying to make Fun of the Creator Allah here.

Since you are unable to reply my remaining post so it means you have nothing more to say or to counter the argument

When it comes to war, do not invoke whatever version of 'god' you believe in. Instead, put your faith in science and in man.

 

[HeinzG]

@gambit

A off topic question. How one calibrate ones RWR for enemy radar emitters? Do these guys steal the info through espionage or is there any technical method to differentiate friend and foe?

Do Russian Radar systems can jam Western systems effectively?

 

[gambit]

@gambit

A off topic question. How one calibrate ones RWR for enemy radar emitters? Do these guys steal the info through espionage or is there any technical method to differentiate friend and foe?

Espionage and signals intelligence ( SIGINT ).

For an excellent example of espionage, look up Adolf Tolkachev. But there are many non publicized activities.

For SIGINT, we conduct electromagnetic ( EM ) provocative flights outside the borders of the targeted country, as their radars becomes active, we record those signals for later analyses. The signals are usually ground stations and often from intercepting fighters.

The technical sophistication of a country inevitably reflects in the pulse characteristics and that is what we want. When a system is certified for active duty, the design is essentially 'locked in', meaning very little modifications are possible. It will take yrs to come up with a variant or a completely new design. In the meantime, we collect as much technical details as possible. Once the latest system is deployed, the whole cycle starts all over.

Do Russian Radar systems can jam Western systems effectively?

A radar system is usually designed NOT to perform electronics warfare ( EW ) operations. Of course, with the latest AESA systems, EW actions are now available. Even so, a radar system's first duty is to detect, not EW.

Regarding EW...If you talk to a Russian, of course it is 'Da'. What else can he say ?

But tactics against enemy EW varies greatly and no one is better than US or even just as good as US. Countering enemy EW is more than just manipulating electronic signals, in the sky or inside a 'black box'. In fact, going against enemy EW signals is considers foolhardy by US. The best countermeasure against enemy EW is to avoid it completely. Sample it, analyze it, and determine if the signal is a radar seeking signal or an EW signal.

If it is an EW signal, do not meet it head on, as in trying to achieve 'burn through'. That is brute force. Spear against shield. This is where Hollywood specializes. Instead, fly below/around the EW field. Deploy another flight that will use seduction/distraction tactics. Constant intelligence and training are necessary and not many countries are willing or afford to do that on the scale like US.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Last time they said something like this about the Titanic!!! And, they sent a space craft called the Challenger....

 

[HeinzG]

Espionage and signals intelligence ( SIGINT ).

For an excellent example of espionage, look up Adolf Tolkachev. But there are many non publicized activities.

For SIGINT, we conduct electromagnetic ( EM ) provocative flights outside the borders of the targeted country, as their radars becomes active, we record those signals for later analyses. The signals are usually ground stations and often from intercepting fighters.

The technical sophistication of a country inevitably reflects in the pulse characteristics and that is what we want. When a system is certified for active duty, the design is essentially 'locked in', meaning very little modifications are possible. It will take yrs to come up with a variant or a completely new design. In the meantime, we collect as much technical details as possible. Once the latest system is deployed, the whole cycle starts all over.


A radar system is usually designed NOT to perform electronics warfare ( EW ) operations. Of course, with the latest AESA systems, EW actions are now available. Even so, a radar system's first duty is to detect, not EW.

Regarding EW...If you talk to a Russian, of course it is 'Da'. What else can he say ?

But tactics against enemy EW varies greatly and no one is better than US or even just as good as US. Countering enemy EW is more than just manipulating electronic signals, in the sky or inside a 'black box'. In fact, going against enemy EW signals is considers foolhardy by US. The best countermeasure against enemy EW is to avoid it completely. Sample it, analyze it, and determine if the signal is a radar seeking signal or an EW signal.

If it is an EW signal, do not meet it head on, as in trying to achieve 'burn through'. That is brute force. Spear against shield. This is where Hollywood specializes. Instead, fly below/around the EW field. Deploy another flight that will use seduction/distraction tactics. Constant intelligence and training are necessary and not many countries are willing or afford to do that on the scale like US.

Well thanks for clarifying my questions. However, after reading your comment I found several other related questions. Hope you would answer this as well.

1) Can SIGINT conduct ops on emitters of fighter type targets such as the upcoming SU 57 or existing fighters like SU 30, SU 35 etc.,?

2) How about the Russian SIGINT response to the US fighter radar emitters? Do they have enough details to differentiate targets like F 22 or F 35?

 

[gambit]

1) Can SIGINT conduct ops on emitters of fighter type targets such as the upcoming SU 57 or existing fighters like SU 30, SU 35 etc.,?

Yes, but only if the other guy made his jets available. By that, I mean send them up to meet us.

Usually, the provocateur is an aircraft that is fully equipped to 'suck in' as much as possible the EM activities in the local area.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signals_intelligence_operational_platforms_by_nation

When you 'intercept' an unidentified aircraft, you want to send an actual 'combatant' aka a 'fighter', not something lumbering like a C-130. So your fighters will be transmitting their radars for headings, approaches, and so on. As your fighters transmit, their signals will be sampled and compared against a 'threat library'. Any signals characteristics that does not match will be flagged for later analyses. What this means is that the latest fighter may not have the latest radar, on the other hand, the current generation may be upgraded to a new radar whose signals characteristics are not in that threat library.

EM provocative flights serves at least two useful functions:

- Keep the other guy on his toes.

- Keep up to date on his advances.

2) How about the Russian SIGINT response to the US fighter radar emitters? Do they have enough details to differentiate targets like F 22 or F 35?

You mean as if whether a radar signal came from a transmitter like an F-22, F-35, F-15, or a Boeing 747 ? We do not underestimate our potential adversaries, despite what many on this forum believes. So yes, better to safe and assume Ivan has his own threat library that is just as good as ours.

 

[Raider 21]

Just a video I thought I'd share...

 

[Last Samuri]

F15 was the finest Air Supremacy Fighter between 1980-2005

Beyond this date with Arrival of Eurocanards , evolved flankers , and low RCS fifth fighters the F15 can be matched and beaten

The RCS of a fully loaded F15 is over 10 metres almost the same as a Flanker

Thus a Typhoon Rafale of other similar fighter would reduce that kill ratio in 2018