Aussies doubt JSF V Flanker Claims

[Contrarian]

do you forgot the chinese SU 30 MKK

It doesnt quite measure up to the Su-30MKI.

 

[paritosh]

So Congratulations to ALL INDIANS here, You got the Best Fighter in the World who can Kill the whole TEEN series of American warplanes and as mentioned above by my Indian Friends Even the F-22 will have some tough Competition if this new Raptor from USA faces Su-30 MKI.

So my dear Indian fellows why don't you just cancel MRCA and Order more 126 Su-30 MKI or Su-35, why to look here and there.

because MRCA stands for multi-role combat aircraft!
su-30 is a strike aircraft and an air-superiority aircraft...and airforce needs to be balanced between bombers,deep-penentration,MRCAs,etc...
you should be knowing that...

 

[realrahulka]

Thanks bro, but even "immensely difficult" is an immense overstatement. These guys simply don't want to face the fact that their MKI can get shot down by ANYTHING with decent missiles.

F-7s with heat seeking (IR) missiles, F-16s and JF-17s with IR and active radar homing missiles, it doesn't matter.

1) MKI can shoot down F-7, Mirage, JF-17, F-16, J-10
2) JF-17, F-16, J-10, even F-7 and Mirage can shoot down MKI

If I can face up to the first fact, why can't you MKI fanboys face up to the second?

Realrahulka the the readers of that magazine don't know jack about jets if they think MKI is a better air superiority fighter than F-22.

hasang theres no need to be as stupid as the MKI fanboys bro, SU-30 is a very good fighter. The Chinese reverse engineered it and build it for themselves!
Check it out: J-11 Multirole Fighter Aircraft - SinoDefence.com

Hi chirag, yup you are damn right, those aussie fools are just wasting time and bandwidth. Must be cos they are upside-down so they go

mr. hj786 as for your information i'm not a fan boy of mki ..i've just posted some 'interesting', which i ve clearly mentioned in tht post.....just read it once again... ok i agreed to ur view of crackin mki with the jf-17 , but clearly the advantage goes to mki.. got my point...

 

[iceman2009]

Can somebody please explain to me HOW an F7 with a radar that tracks at less than 40 miles and carries a 3RD generation WVR missle with range of 15 miles shoots a
SU30 MKI DOWN.

The su30mki will see that F7 from 140 miles away and engage and destroy this F7 or mirage from around 80 miles away..

BVR combat something the IAF have been training for over a decade........

Only the F16/52 can see and engage at around 100km and thus as a 40-60 chance in 1v1 engagement.

A well trained Flanker pilot won,t let a F7/MIRAGE/ A5 within 100 miles of him.

This is why the SU30MKI is fitted withy the NOM11 BARS PESA RADAR...

can,t comment on future PAF JF17 or J10 because as yet we know very little about them.

F16./52 IAF know inside out

 

[mean_bird]

Can somebody please explain to me HOW an F7 with a radar that tracks at less than 40 miles and carries a 3RD generation WVR missle with range of 15 miles shoots a
SU30 MKI DOWN.

The su30mki will see that F7 from 140 miles away and engage and destroy this F7 or mirage from around 80 miles away..

BVR combat something the IAF have been training for over a decade........

Only the F16/52 can see and engage at around 100km and thus as a 40-60 chance in 1v1 engagement.

A well trained Flanker pilot won,t let a F7/MIRAGE/ A5 within 100 miles of him.

This is why the SU30MKI is fitted withy the NOM11 BARS PESA RADAR...

can,t comment on future PAF JF17 or J10 because as yet we know very little about them.

F16./52 IAF know inside out

1. F-7 of PAF do have BVR, so you are wrong here.
2. AWACS will enable them(F-7s and all those that can be linked to the AWACS) to see the MKI
3. Which newbie is comparing F-7s to the MKIs? they are generations apart and not match to each other.

 

[chirag.s]

GUYS YOU ARE OFF TOPIC AGAIN PLEASE DISCUSS IN THE RIGHT THREADS

PLASE DISCUSS ABOUT JSF VS FLANKER

lets speak of the airframe

are four missiles in the internal bay of the jsf enough or is it going to carry stealthy missile pods to increase its payload

none of you have answered my earlier queries senior members please answer my questions

 

[blain2]

Can somebody please explain to me HOW an F7 with a radar that tracks at less than 40 miles and carries a 3RD generation WVR missle with range of 15 miles shoots a
SU30 MKI DOWN.

The su30mki will see that F7 from 140 miles away and engage and destroy this F7 or mirage from around 80 miles away..

BVR combat something the IAF have been training for over a decade........

Only the F16/52 can see and engage at around 100km and thus as a 40-60 chance in 1v1 engagement.

A well trained Flanker pilot won,t let a F7/MIRAGE/ A5 within 100 miles of him.

This is why the SU30MKI is fitted withy the NOM11 BARS PESA RADAR...

can,t comment on future PAF JF17 or J10 because as yet we know very little about them.

F16./52 IAF know inside out

Your whole post is oblivious of a major factor in today's air combat and that is EW. With electronic warfare in the mix, due to jamming the range of tracks goes down considerably. You also do not have the ability to clearly distinguish the accurate vectors of the aircraft and run into difficulty in parsing targets from clutter (a situation somewhat helped with AESA, however good luck with PESA and PD radars).

Also keep in mind that all of the PAF legacy fighters have fairly decent RWR capability and all of the new ones being inducted are also equipped with MAWS and other advanced self protection suits. So evasive maneuvers can be taken and as such there is no sure shot kills at ranges of 80 km etc. The best one side, with an extended BVR capability, can do is to keep the other side away from it. However depending on how effective the jamming and tactics are, extended radar tracking and detection ranges are not the end of it all.

So leave off absolute ranges in the text books and the periodicals that you read on the blogs.

Secondly, F-7s are considered point defence aircraft. When they are employed, they would get the protection of aircraft with standoff weapons and long range AI radars (All of the PAF F-16s, JF-17s and ROSEI Mirages would fall in this category).

 

[hj786]

mr. hj786 as for your information i'm not a fan boy of mki ..i've just posted some 'interesting', which i ve clearly mentioned in tht post.....just read it once again... ok i agreed to ur view of crackin mki with the jf-17 , but clearly the advantage goes to mki.. got my point...

I know, I did not mean that YOU are a fanboy dude! You are right that MKI can be cracked by JF-17 and you are right that MKI has SOME advantages, but I believe that many of these are too small to make a big difference anyway.

 

[hj786]

Can somebody please explain to me HOW an F7 with a radar that tracks at less than 40 miles and carries a 3RD generation WVR missle with range of 15 miles shoots a
SU30 MKI DOWN.
The su30mki will see that F7 from 140 miles away and engage and destroy this F7 or mirage from around 80 miles away..
BVR combat something the IAF have been training for over a decade........
Only the F16/52 can see and engage at around 100km and thus as a 40-60 chance in 1v1 engagement.
A well trained Flanker pilot won,t let a F7/MIRAGE/ A5 within 100 miles of him.
This is why the SU30MKI is fitted withy the NOM11 BARS PESA RADAR...
can,t comment on future PAF JF17 or J10 because as yet we know very little about them.
F16./52 IAF know inside out

El-nino, quit typing rubbish will you? F-7 can fire PL-9C which is a 3.75 generation missile and can EASILY be upgraded to fire 5th gen missiles.
MKI pilot has to see the F-7 to shoot it down, MKI's radar only looks in front, not sideways or behind. F-7 is a small fighter that can hide from MKI's radar, especially with EW assets helping it as Blain2 said above.
PAF have trained for BVR combat for decades too, so stop saying only InAF knows BVR combat. PAF showed in Anatolian Eagle exercise with Turkey that it has perfected anti-BVR tactics.
Not only F-16 blk 52 can kill MKI from 100 miles away. F-16 MLU, JF-17, J-10/FC-20 and Mirage (reports say ROSE Mirage has BVR missiles integrated, some say South African missile some say SD-10, PAF has not confirmed or denied it) will all kill MKI from 100 miles away, so stop talking that crap.
InAF do NOT know F-16 blk 52 inside out. Why? Because they have never tried to dodge a real life AMRAAM or AIM-9M or IRIS-T. Exercises don't always say who is best, COMBAT does.

I know you can't comment on JF-17 and J-10 because you do not know anything about F-16s or F-7s or air combat, so how can you know anything about JF-17 and J-10? All you know is "MKI RULES BECAUSE IT HAS PESA RADAR AND TWIN ENGINES!!!"

It's funny as hell how this guy thinks the F-7 needs a bigger radar to shoot down MKI. Heat-seeking missiles don't need radars to work. They work just as well with no radar at all, only difference is the missile seeker has to scan the area itself rather than taking instructions on where to look from the radar.

(sorry for the two posts in a row, can a moderator plz fix it, thanks)

 

[iceman2009]

F7 sneaking up on MKI UNNOTICED !!!!!!!!1

I assume this is what the USA Airforce pilot in RED FLAD vedio was talking about wen he said.

" We are very impressed with the MIG21 bisons which can sneak up behind you and take a shot with R77/27 BVR missles"

YES

Its in the same vedio that has much publicised on this forum re SU30MKI in red flag.

 

[imiakhtar]

Guys, I'd take read this article with a huge pinch of salt. Despite this guys technical qualifications, In many professionals' opinion he is nothing more than an over-hyped computer nerd (google him) who has no more than a handful of sim hours under his belt.

Best leave the analysing to the pro's at Australia DoD.

Regards

 

[chirag.s]

El-nino, quit typing rubbish will you? F-7 can fire PL-9C which is a 3.75 generation missile and can EASILY be upgraded to fire 5th gen missiles.
MKI pilot has to see the F-7 to shoot it down, MKI's radar only looks in front, not sideways or behind. F-7 is a small fighter that can hide from MKI's radar, especially with EW assets helping it as Blain2 said above.
PAF have trained for BVR combat for decades too, so stop saying only InAF knows BVR combat. PAF showed in Anatolian Eagle exercise with Turkey that it has perfected anti-BVR tactics.
Not only F-16 blk 52 can kill MKI from 100 miles away. F-16 MLU, JF-17, J-10/FC-20 and Mirage (reports say ROSE Mirage has BVR missiles integrated, some say South African missile some say SD-10, PAF has not confirmed or denied it) will all kill MKI from 100 miles away, so stop talking that crap.
InAF do NOT know F-16 blk 52 inside out. Why? Because they have never tried to dodge a real life AMRAAM or AIM-9M or IRIS-T. Exercises don't always say who is best, COMBAT does.

I know you can't comment on JF-17 and J-10 because you do not know anything about F-16s or F-7s or air combat, so how can you know anything about JF-17 and J-10? All you know is "MKI RULES BECAUSE IT HAS PESA RADAR AND TWIN ENGINES!!!"

It's funny as hell how this guy thinks the F-7 needs a bigger radar to shoot down MKI. Heat-seeking missiles don't need radars to work. They work just as well with no radar at all, only difference is the missile seeker has to scan the area itself rather than taking instructions on where to look from the radar.

(sorry for the two posts in a row, can a moderator plz fix it, thanks)

1 mki can look behind coz it has a radar in its tail go google it

2 yes f-16s can kill su-30mki and vice versa

3 my dear none of the air forces in the world use REAL missiles to practice dodging them not even your beloved PAF nor the so called mighty USAF

4 heat seeking missiles DO need radar to work YOU NEED TO LOCATE THE AIRCRAFT FIRST or else you need to have an IRST device do the f-7s hve such a device on them i am not speaking of pods

PLEASE I KNOW MOST OF US FEEL GOOD IN MAKING FUN OF OTHERS
PLEASE DO SOME RESEARCH BEFORE POSTING

thank you

 

[hj786]

1 mki can look behind coz it has a radar in its tail go google it
2 yes f-16s can kill su-30mki and vice versa
3 my dear none of the air forces in the world use REAL missiles to practice dodging them not even your beloved PAF nor the so called mighty USAF
4 heat seeking missiles DO need radar to work YOU NEED TO LOCATE THE AIRCRAFT FIRST or else you need to have an IRST device do the f-7s hve such a device on them i am not speaking of pods
PLEASE I KNOW MOST OF US FEEL GOOD IN MAKING FUN OF OTHERS, PLEASE DO SOME RESEARCH BEFORE POSTING
thank you

I don't mean to make fun of him, but why does he keep typing crap?
No, heat-seeking missiles DO NOT need radars to work. Cmon man, this is common sense. A heat seeking missile has it's own IRST system, it doesn't need a radar to track a target at all.
From Infrared homing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Most infrared guided missiles have their seekers mounted on a gimbal. This allows the sensor to be pointed at the target when the missile is not. This is important for two main reasons. One is that before and during launch, the missile can't always be pointed at the target. Rather, the pilot or operator points the seeker at the target using radar, a helmet-mounted sight, an optical sight or possibly by pointing the nose of the aircraft or missile launcher directly at the target. Once the seeker sees and recognises the target, it indicates this to the operator who then typically “uncages” the seeker (which is then allowed to follow the target). After this point the seeker remains locked on the target, even if the aircraft or launching platform moves.

So yes, F-7s do have an IRST device on them. It is sitting inside the nose-cone of their missiles.
Yes, I know no air force uses real missiles in exercises. That means what iceman said is stupid. Your beloved InAF does not know what F-16's missiles can do, so how can it "know F-16 inside out" like iceman said?

Also, I know MKI has a small radar in it's tail. How does it tell the difference between an enemy aircraft and friendly? How large is its search cone? Even if it does detect an incoming heat-seeking missile, so what? The pilot can't turn hard enough to avoid it anyway. Does MKI have a radar underneath it or on top? Or a radar for each side? Nope.

So no sir, I think YOU need to do research before you post. Your friend iceman too.

 

[Contrarian]

because MRCA stands for multi-role combat aircraft!
su-30 is a strike aircraft and an air-superiority aircraft...and airforce needs to be balanced between bombers,deep-penentration,MRCAs,etc...
you should be knowing that...

No buddy, your a bit off here.

Most modern planes are Multirole(MRCA's).

Su-30MKI is an MRCA. But to be more precise it is an H-MRCA(Heavy-MRCA).
LCA is multirole as well, but its L-MRCA

What India is actually tendering out for is an MMRCA(Medium MRCA). Here Heavy, Medium and Light imply weight and ordinance carrying capacity along with combat radius.

Su-30MKI is a bloody expensive plane to maintain and even more expensive to operate. Google and find out the per sortie cost of the MKI, you'r in for a shock!

Thats why IAF is going for an MMRCA. Something thats not technologically inferior to the MKI, but has much lower operating and maintenance costs. Result: Has a higher combat fleet readiness and a much lower turn around time with a lower cost per sortie.

Every AF has a hi-med-low. LCA forms the 'lo' compliment to the MRCA and the MKI.

That used to be the old concept of having dedicated deep strike, interdiction planes. Jaguar is our designated DSPA, thats because it cannot perform other tasks like interdiction as efficiently as others would.

The only thing that one can say is still carried over are Dedicated bombers. These however are strategic and heavy bombers. IAF currently does not require them.

MiG 29 used to be purely for interdiction, thats cuz it USED to be pathetic at a2g. I say USED to, because after being upgraded to the Navy's MiG 29K standard, it would become a very effective MRCA.

Since, IAF does not seem keen on LCA(understatement), that implies at a later point of time, MoD in all probability will avail the option for extra 76 MMRCA's chosen now.

 

[Contrarian]

Your whole post is oblivious of a major factor in today's air combat and that is EW. With electronic warfare in the mix, due to jamming the range of tracks goes down considerably. You also do not have the ability to clearly distinguish the accurate vectors of the aircraft and run into difficulty in parsing targets from clutter (a situation somewhat helped with AESA, however good luck with PESA and PD radars).

Also keep in mind that all of the PAF legacy fighters have fairly decent RWR capability and all of the new ones being inducted are also equipped with MAWS and other advanced self protection suits. So evasive maneuvers can be taken and as such there is no sure shot kills at ranges of 80 km etc. The best one side, with an extended BVR capability, can do is to keep the other side away from it. However depending on how effective the jamming and tactics are, extended radar tracking and detection ranges are not the end of it all.

So leave off absolute ranges in the text books and the periodicals that you read on the blogs.

Secondly, F-7s are considered point defence aircraft. When they are employed, they would get the protection of aircraft with standoff weapons and long range AI radars (All of the PAF F-16s, JF-17s and ROSEI Mirages would fall in this category).

Great post mate, your right but i'd point out here that PESA radars arent exactly that easy to jam either. The PD radars are. Lower sidelobes, etc, etc. However you are right in that the missile itself maybe jammed after launch, if its semiguided, etc so absolute ranges dont really matter.