Bangladesh Air Force delivery

[Keysersoze]

RCS of SU-30MKI is wrong it is 5 not 10

naah dude the 10m2 figure is from air international.........(apparently it is the low end figure)
As is the figure for the F-16c (which apparently can be lower under certain circumstances)

Bear in mind the figures don't include drop tanks etc

At the end of the day the F-16 is so far 70-0 in A2A

And the current value for the R-77 (RW-AE as quoted by Vympel) is 50 km with its seeker good on a 5m2 target at 16km. These ranges assume a mach 1.5 launch at 30 000 ft with the target closing.
The AMRAAM assumes a launch at .9 mach and uses a lofted trajectory which apparently means better performance in the terminal phase and it also will be looking from a top down angle. Plus the seeker and electronics are better......

 

[Contrarian]

it is just like India and china.

Which is...?

 

[Adux]

Keys,

Although I am very thankfull that you are putting a lot of data on the threads, i would apperciate it; if you could just put links along with this

 

[melb4aust]

Which is...?

How many times i have to clear things for u man,

The difference in the inventory, quality, quantity and technology and so on.......

 

[falcone]

Originally posted by keysersoze:
The AMRAAM assumes a launch at .9 mach and uses a lofted trajectory which apparently means better performance in the terminal phase and it also will be looking from a top down angle.

Yes. The AMRAAM has a ballistic trajectory after launch, which does give it better ability to look down and home in.

 

[Muradk]

How many times i have to clear things for u man,

The difference in the inventory, quality, quantity and technology and so on.......

Thats it , mel gave you my answer.

 

[blain2]

Malay you know it geniunely amuses me the passion with which you believe these things.

I have read a few things about some of the "Superior" systems that we have discussed in other threads and it puzzles me as to where the great superiority is?

Lets look at the big name platforms for both forces
F-16 BLk52 and SU-30MKI
The BVR missiles have been touted (r77 and Aim120) as being an example of this. The distance between the two is a lot smaller then most think (approx 100km for the C series). And the 120 has been used in combat. To be honest I would opt for the American missile everytime.
Radar. The N011M BARS or the AN/APG68 (v)9 well since the RCS of both aircraft are as follows F-16=1.2M^2 and the MKI= 10M^2. The F-16 will see the MKI at around 125km and the MKI would see the F-16 at approx 140km there are also going to be AN/ALQ-184 or AN/ALQ-131 jamming pods which would reduce the range for the MKI.

So basically using the two examples above I don't know where you get Qualitative from? Why the purchase of the mk2005 from Qatar if there was such a qualitative difference?

Bear in mind please that there are smart cookies on both side of the border....The Pak airforce isn't run by idiots and they will buy what they need in order to remain a viable force against the main potential opponent.

Excellent post Keyser

 

[Keysersoze]

Ok for an Infantryman I have managed to learn quite a bit about Avionics recently....and what I have learned has made me smile (As well reawakened some of my physics knowledge) I have been asked to provide some of my sources (which is a little hard as some of them are either magazine or book based or in some cases are personal sources) But I will try!

Ok lets start with missiles!! When people refer to ranges of missiles they generally refer to Kinematic ranges rather than whats known as the NEZ (or "NO ESCAPE ZONE") which is generally a LOT smaller. Now for example the range of the dreaded (In South Asia) R-77 missile. The listed range is 54 NM (nautical miles) or 97.2 KM which is quite long for a BVR missile. HOWEVER the range listed is the KINEMATIC range which means it is the maximum distance the missile can travel in a straight line (In fact my understanding is that the R-77 distance is based upon a aircraft traveling a 1.5 mach speed.The AIM-120's is .9 the speed of sound. and uses a lofted trajectory)
Now the problem that I have encountered is that the REAL distances of the AIM-120c (It won't be on any public forum) but the hints given by several confirmed insiders in the industry (on other forums) are that they exceed the R-77 easily in both NEZ and KINEMATIC range (with a possible exception of the R-77m in Kinematic range.) The seeker and guidance system is generally regarded as being superior on the AIM.
Here are some of the sources I used for this....(as I am sure some of you will bleat about "lack of sources" unfortunately some are impossible for me to cite)
http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/aam/aa10.html has the R-27 range and details from a Mig-29 manual. Also there is a chart collated from open sources which I cannot seem to be able to attach to this page but if you want it I will be happy to forward it anyone who wants a look.
BUT I think it fair to say that the AIM120 wins here.

Next issue! short range AAM's!

 

[Contrarian]

Allow me to re-iterate what i have said before Key. You are comparing F-16 blk 52 which Pakistan does not even have yet to the Su-30MKI we have had for 7/8 years now. And STILL i say that Su-30MKI is superior to the F-16 blk 50/52.

R-77 has had upgrades dude, it is not the old R-77.


Now i ask you, do you know what is the scheduled MLU for the Su-30MKI?

Allow me to say: The Irbis(Snow Leopard) radar. is a beastly radar, far far better than Bars(Leopard). It has HUMUNGOUS tracking ranges, one of FINEST radars ever made. It is expected that the last 40 MKI's ordered from Russia will already have this radar. If you thought Bars made MKI a mini AWACS, then this will make it into a complete AWACS.Period.

The 'NEW' R-77, will obviously have a different name. LONGER RANGE, Lofted Trajectory. BTW we already have upgraded our R-77's with different seeker, etc, etc, etc.Will be a straight counter for AIM-120D.

It is expected that R-74 will also come by then(and i dont know this, but i have been told so by some one has knowledge in this area) and will be installed, again, even if R-74 does not come, there is the R-73AE, for intermediate use. Even if we dont use R-74, you know that India has bought SPYDER systems for the Army. SPYDER uses Python 5 and Derby. Python 5 will be there, which is arguably the BEST WVR missile in the market, the main competitors are Python 5 and AIM-9X. So IAF will almost certainly get Python 5, either buy more, or just take from the Army.

 

[Regal]

thankyou i guess


You tell me where did you come across the RCS of an F-16. I believe the RCS of Rafale is around 1 m2, im not sure, but that is what i read. Is F-16's design of the same stealth level as Rafale??

Keyser is right about the RCS of F-16, as well as the detection range. His analysis is right on spot when comparing the C series with R-77. The only thing that I would like to add to his post is that the 140km detection range of MKI is against F-16 a/b (only those that have not been upgraded) with RCS of 4m^2, hence further reducing the detection range of MKI against F-16 C/D models With a reduced RCS of 1.2m^2.

MKI is extremely good weapons platform but When comparing it with F-16 block 5o/52 one should not get delusional by its size, stream lined aerodynamics, TVC, or for that matter huge radar. Not to say these things are not important as they are, but one should never make a mistake by calculating the data from these features individually.

Lets just look at the radar of MKI its almost twice as powerful as the radar of an F-16, and technically should be able to detect it with twice the distance as well. Well that’s not the case. F-16 will only get detected at 69% radar range as compared with a “generic fighter”. To put it simply while MKI might be able to detect Mig-21 with an RCS of 3m^2 at a distance of about 135km will have further reduced detection range against F-16 with an RCS of 1.2m^2. On the other hand F-16 will be detecting the MKI at its full radar range which is about 130km with its AN/APG68 (v)9.

What all this means when comparing the two fighters is that even after having a humongous radar there is much probability that F-16 will end up detecting the MKI first. I know this might surprise most of you who don't have enough knowledge about the two platforms. Also when comparing C series with R-77 (“which I think Keyser has done a great job and I am not going to go in detail&#8220 you will find out that American BVR missile has the edge. Time and again American weapons have performed well against the Russian hardware not because the people using it were superior but simply because they make them better.

F-16 block 50/52 with its complete electronic package is no less of an adversary even against the mightiest of the Russian fighter platform. :army:

 

[niaz]

Ok for an Infantryman I have managed to learn quite a bit about Avionics recently....and what I have learned has made me smile (As well reawakened some of my physics knowledge) I have been asked to provide some of my sources (which is a little hard as some of them are either magazine or book based or in some cases are personal sources) But I will try!

Ok lets start with missiles!! When people refer to ranges of missiles they generally refer to Kinematic ranges rather than whats known as the NEZ (or "NO ESCAPE ZONE") which is generally a LOT smaller. Now for example the range of the dreaded (In South Asia) R-77 missile. The listed range is 54 NM (nautical miles) or 86.4 KM which is quite long for a BVR missile. HOWEVER the range listed is the KINEMATIC range which means it is the maximum distance the missile can travel in a straight line (In fact my understanding is that the R-77 distance is based upon a aircraft traveling a 1.5 mach speed.The AIM-120's is .9 the speed of sound. and uses a lofted trajectory)
Now the problem that I have encountered is that the REAL distances of the AIM-120c (It won't be on any public forum) but the hints given by several confirmed insiders in the industry (on other forums) are that they exceed the R-77 easily in both NEZ and KINEMATIC range (with a possible exception of the R-77m in Kinematic range.) The seeker and guidance system is generally regarded as being superior on the AIM.
Here are some of the sources I used for this....(as I am sure some of you will bleat about "lack of sources" unfortunately some are impossible for me to cite)
http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/aam/aa10.html has the R-27 range and details from a Mig-29 manual. Also there is a chart collated from open sources which I cannot seem to be able to attach to this page but if you want it I will be happy to forward it anyone who wants a look.
BUT I think it fair to say that the AIM120 wins here.

Next issue! short range AAM's!

Just to clarify that one has to add aircraft speed at launch to the speed of the missile. For example if the aircraft is travelling at mach 0.8 at the time of launch actual speed of the AAM will be 0.8 plus 1.5 that is mach 2.3.

Your understanding of the trajectory is correct; most missiles therefore have proximity fuses. AAM does not have to actually hit the aircraft, it just has to burst in close proximity. Another factor would be manouverability, higher the speed of the missile, more difficult for the missile to manouvre sharp turns due to inertia or momentum which would take it in straight line, that is why TVC helps in dodging missiles.

Range is not the only thing and only way to know which is better will be when the same are battle tested; else a squadron of aircrafts such as Tomcat armed with Phoenix missile with 100 mile range would have been enough to destroy the whole airforce from far off. Most BVR missiles are not battle tested against 4th generation aircraft and any debate about which one is better is purely hypothetical.

 

[Contrarian]

Keyser is right about the RCS of F-16, as well as the detection range. His analysis is right on spot when comparing the C series with R-77. The only thing that I would like to add to his post is that the 140km detection range of MKI is against F-16 a/b (only those that have not been upgraded) with RCS of 4m^2, hence further reducing the detection range of MKI against F-16 C/D models With a reduced RCS of 1.2m^2.

MKI is extremely good weapons platform but When comparing it with F-16 block 5o/52 one should not get delusional by its size, stream lined aerodynamics, TVC, or for that matter huge radar. Not to say these things are not important as they are, but one should never make a mistake by calculating the data from these features individually.

Lets just look at the radar of MKI its almost twice as powerful as the radar of an F-16, and technically should be able to detect it with twice the distance as well. Well that’s not the case. F-16 will only get detected at 69% radar range as compared with a “generic fighter”. To put it simply while MKI might be able to detect Mig-21 with an RCS of 3m^2 at a distance of about 135km will have further reduced detection range against F-16 with an RCS of 1.2m^2. On the other hand F-16 will be detecting the MKI at its full radar range which is about 130km with its AN/APG68 (v)9.

I would like to see a link about the RCS of F-16 blk 52. I have heard Rafale's RCS is around 1m2. I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that an F-16 will have roughly the same RCS, when Rafale was designed keeping stealth in mind, same as EUFT, and F/A-18E/F whose hallmark is stealth is also around 1m2. F-16 has the same body roughly, whereas all the other planes have been designed keeping some bare minimum stealth requirements in mind. So please clarify.

What all this means when comparing the two fighters is that even after having a humongous radar there is much probability that F-16 will end up detecting the MKI first. I know this might surprise most of you who don't have enough knowledge about the two platforms. Also when comparing C series with R-77 (“which I think Keyser has done a great job and I am not going to go in detail&#8220 you will find out that American BVR missile has the edge. Time and again American weapons have performed well against the Russian hardware not because the people using it were superior but simply because they make them better.

Please check out Irbis, its a beasat of a radar, detection of 2m^2 to 3 is around 300-400kms. It would be the very best radar in PESA or AESA, there are VERY conflicting reports, though most likely its PESA.

BTW do you know when R-73 came out, it was the BEST missile, there was no competition to it from anywhere in the globe. Infact the new side winders were based on R-73, it was the first 4th generation missile. It was a revolution of sorts when it came. Please google and you wil find so, so saying that Russian hardware has not performed well against American because Americans made them better is plainly false.

I would ask the USAF to actually go in a proper combat with the IAF to show how Russian weapons are actually meant to be used. A weapon platform is only as good as the role in which it was designed to be used.Only India apart from Russia uses the weapons the way they were meant to be used. The arabs used recon planes to fight F-15's. Relied on only SAM's to stop USAF flights...stupid. Only India apart from Russia uses them best.

No doubt IAF will lose, but the pathetic scores of Arabs and others that have made a bad rep for Russian inventories will be erased. And for this purposes even China fits the bill.

F-16 block 50/52 with its complete electronic package is no less of an adversary even against the mightiest of the Russian fighter platform. :army:

Sure, its no less, but then again, all you are banking your thesis on is the RCS and having a matching missile. I would like you to clarify the RCS claim, and add that India is changing her missile inventories very soon. There will be Python 5, R-74(not yet released) and AIM-9X(If F/A-18 is chosen) and for BVR the NEW R-77, Meteor(If gripen/rafale/typhoon is chosen, or otherwise also if IAF wants it) and please let me inform you the new R-77 will be a direct competitor to the AIM 120D and i would say going by experience best it, until US comes out with another version of AIm 120 D-1/2/3...whatever.

You base your conclusions on missiles, i have mentioned missiles, radar, there is going to be an even more powerful radar, prolly one thats best in its league. and not to mention more and more RAM's.


NEW INFO FOUND:
This means that the AN/APG68 (v)9 will see the SU-30 in BVR head to head engagement at about 125km. The AN/APG80 would see the SU-30 at about 155km in the same situation.

The N011M BARS designed maximum search range for the F-16 in BVR head to head is 140-160km
Quote by Highsea on WAB.It was not disputed, i take it at face value.

So MKI sees F-16 FIRST. Now it comes down to BVR. Does any one here have comparitive ranges for R-77 and AIm 120 C5?

And not to mention more and newer ram's made for T-50 etc when MKI goes for MLU.

 

[Keysersoze]

I would like to see a link about the RCS of F-16 blk 52. I have heard Rafale's RCS is around 1m2. I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that an F-16 will have roughly the same RCS, when Rafale was designed keeping stealth in mind, same as EUFT, and F/A-18E/F whose hallmark is stealth is also around 1m2. F-16 has the same body roughly, whereas all the other planes have been designed keeping some bare minimum stealth requirements in mind. So please clarify.


Please check out Irbis, its a beasat of a radar, detection of 2m^2 to 3 is around 300-400kms. It would be the very best radar in PESA or AESA, there are VERY conflicting reports, though most likely its PESA.

BTW do you know when R-73 came out, it was the BEST missile, there was no competition to it from anywhere in the globe. Infact the new side winders were based on R-73, it was the first 4th generation missile. It was a revolution of sorts when it came. Please google and you wil find so, so saying that Russian hardware has not performed well against American because Americans made them better is plainly false.

I would ask the USAF to actually go in a proper combat with the IAF to show how Russian weapons are actually meant to be used. A weapon platform is only as good as the role in which it was designed to be used.Only India apart from Russia uses the weapons the way they were meant to be used. The arabs used recon planes to fight F-15's. Relied on only SAM's to stop USAF flights...stupid. Only India apart from Russia uses them best.

No doubt IAF will lose, but the pathetic scores of Arabs and others that have made a bad rep for Russian inventories will be erased. And for this purposes even China fits the bill.



Sure, its no less, but then again, all you are banking your thesis on is the RCS and having a matching missile. I would like you to clarify the RCS claim, and add that India is changing her missile inventories very soon. There will be Python 5, R-74(not yet released) and AIM-9X(If F/A-18 is chosen) and for BVR the NEW R-77, Meteor(If gripen/rafale/typhoon is chosen, or otherwise also if IAF wants it) and please let me inform you the new R-77 will be a direct competitor to the AIM 120D and i would say going by experience best it, until US comes out with another version of AIm 120 D-1/2/3...whatever.

You base your conclusions on missiles, i have mentioned missiles, radar, there is going to be an even more powerful radar, prolly one thats best in its league. and not to mention more and more RAM's.


NEW INFO FOUND:
This means that the AN/APG68 (v)9 will see the SU-30 in BVR head to head engagement at about 125km. The AN/APG80 would see the SU-30 at about 155km in the same situation.

The N011M BARS designed maximum search range for the F-16 in BVR head to head is 140-160km
Quote by Highsea on WAB.It was not disputed, i take it at face value.

So MKI sees F-16 FIRST. Now it comes down to BVR. Does any one here have comparitive ranges for R-77 and AIm 120 C5?

And not to mention more and newer ram's made for T-50 etc when MKI goes for MLU.

Dear oh dear..... Malay if you are gonna post stuff then you should post the rest too! allow me......From highsea again

Estimating first look can be guessed at, if we are willing to ignore ECM/ECCM and supporting assets. In January 2004, Air International estimated the frontal RCS of the F-16 at 1.2M^2, and the SU-27/30 at 10M^2. This is reasonable considering that the F-15 has a frontal RCS of 11M^2, and the SU-30 and F-15 are similar in size and shape. These values are pretty widely accepted. There are rumors that the Russians have made some improvements on this, but not for export- take that for what it's worth.

This means that the AN/APG68 (v)9 will see the SU-30 in BVR head to head engagement at about 125km. The AN/APG80 would see the SU-30 at about 155km in the same situation.

The N011M BARS designed maximum search range for the F-16 in BVR head to head is 140-160km, if you believe http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/info-su30mki.html
Ok the salient points are.......IF YOU BELIEVE that website. And since you want to accept his radar estimation then you should accept his RCS estimation.

2) The detection values for the AN/APG68 (or any American radar) are for a 1M^2 target..............So for a much larger target.......whadda ya reckon? I think against a large target like the SU it will be greater...One estimate puts it at 195KM (for a AN/APG68 v9) or 266km (for a AN/APG80)

Highsea also made a guess at the range of the AIM120 as being approx 90 NM

I have a chart from open sources that lists the range of the R-77 missiles in all variants (unfortunately it is to big a filesize to fit on this page but i will happily e-mail it)

OK now onto the assertion that bad press has created a myth of American superiority. There is a simple reason why Russian kit has always lagged and that is doctrine. Lots of planes firing lots of missiles. But at the end of the day results are what counts.

Malay you like to use superlatives like "beast" and "very best" but I have yet to see panic amongst any of the worlds airforces or governments. WHY oh WHY would the PAF purchase a platform that was inferior to current opposition inventory? Would they not account for future purchases including any new "beasts"

I will get to WVR missiles shortly.(as well as other systems in operation by both sides)

 

[Contrarian]

Dear oh dear..... Malay if you are gonna post stuff then you should post the rest too! allow me......From highsea again

Estimating first look can be guessed at, if we are willing to ignore ECM/ECCM and supporting assets. In January 2004, Air International estimated the frontal RCS of the F-16 at 1.2M^2, and the SU-27/30 at 10M^2. This is reasonable considering that the F-15 has a frontal RCS of 11M^2, and the SU-30 and F-15 are similar in size and shape. These values are pretty widely accepted. There are rumors that the Russians have made some improvements on this, but not for export- take that for what it's worth.

This means that the AN/APG68 (v)9 will see the SU-30 in BVR head to head engagement at about 125km. The AN/APG80 would see the SU-30 at about 155km in the same situation.

The N011M BARS designed maximum search range for the F-16 in BVR head to head is 140-160km, if you believe http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/info-su30mki.html
Ok the salient points are.......IF YOU BELIEVE that website. And since you want to accept his radar estimation then you should accept his RCS estimation.

2) The detection values for the AN/APG68 (or any American radar) are for a 1M^2 target..............So for a much larger target.......whadda ya reckon? I think against a large target like the SU it will be greater...One estimate puts it at 195KM (for a AN/APG68 v9) or 266km (for a AN/APG80)

Highsea also made a guess at the range of the AIM120 as being approx 90 NM

I have a chart from open sources that lists the range of the R-77 missiles in all variants (unfortunately it is to big a filesize to fit on this page but i will happily e-mail it)

OK now onto the assertion that bad press has created a myth of American superiority. There is a simple reason why Russian kit has always lagged and that is doctrine. Lots of planes firing lots of missiles. But at the end of the day results are what counts.

Malay you like to use superlatives like "beast" and "very best" but I have yet to see panic amongst any of the worlds airforces or governments. WHY oh WHY would the PAF purchase a platform that was inferior to current opposition inventory? Would they not account for future purchases including any new "beasts"

I will get to WVR missiles shortly.(as well as other systems in operation by both sides)

Sure, dont i agree that for the current radar, the size makes it equal match HOWEVER the Su still detects F-16 first. I accepted his RCS estimation, however its not that HE has come up with the radar specs, taken out of vayu, and which if you see is a VERY good source of material for the Su-30, and not at all biased or altered. However you posted that F-16's RCS is around 1m^2, so where did you find your info? Bear in mind, this should change soon with the Irbis.

On to missiles, i said R-73 was the best when it came out, Key please chk it out, i am correct, it was the best, the first of its kind and was unmatched for a LONG time to come.

On to the Russian doctrine. You ought to know that India does follow the Russian doctrine, it is only now that that is changing. Too many planes launching too many missiles at too few opponents. That is how it will be.
The arabs did not have the resources nor the sense to use the weapons the way it was INTENDED to be used. Even though taken on an individual value, Russia missile and again i take the example of R-73, outstripped any of its contemporaries. Now there are newer versions, and thus i say R-74 to be acquired along with Python 5 which is there already with the army. And which will be mated with teh Su-30. So definitely a superior missile on teh Indian side.

Now you say that woudl PAF have bought something knowing it is inferior? Well, PAF already had the plane type, all it needed to do was upgrade it, and buy some new ones to shore up the numbers, that it did, and made it a very smart decision. The difference b/w Su-30MKI and F-16 blk 52 is not that great now, which is the opposite of their time frames.the F-16 at its maxmum, matches the Su-30MKI, but never exceeds it however the MKI still has its advantages in many places. Now i ask you what happens when the MKI goes for MLU? What happens when new missiles like Python, Derby, and the new Russian ones come into existance. Do you realise that IAF gets the best that there is at the time, whereas PAF has to wait for USAF to get something better to give its old one.

AIM-120C-5 will be the missile to be used by PAF for a long time to come, its not even gotten them as of yet. And the world has moved far ahead. C-5 effectively nullifies any advantage IAF had in terms of missiles, however that is set to change again.

BTW reply soon Key, i like debating with you!

 

[Keysersoze]

Sure, dont i agree that for the current radar, the size makes it equal match HOWEVER the Su still detects F-16 first. I accepted his RCS estimation, however its not that HE has come up with the radar specs, taken out of vayu, and which if you see is a VERY good source of material for the Su-30, and not at all biased or altered. However you posted that F-16's RCS is around 1m^2, so where did you find your info? Bear in mind, this should change soon with the Irbis.

On to missiles, i said R-73 was the best when it came out, Key please chk it out, i am correct, it was the best, the first of its kind and was unmatched for a LONG time to come.

On to the Russian doctrine. You ought to know that India does follow the Russian doctrine, it is only now that that is changing. Too many planes launching too many missiles at too few opponents. That is how it will be.
The arabs did not have the resources nor the sense to use the weapons the way it was INTENDED to be used. Even though taken on an individual value, Russia missile and again i take the example of R-73, outstripped any of its contemporaries. Now there are newer versions, and thus i say R-74 to be acquired along with Python 5 which is there already with the army. And which will be mated with teh Su-30. So definitely a superior missile on teh Indian side.

Now you say that woudl PAF have bought something knowing it is inferior? Well, PAF already had the plane type, all it needed to do was upgrade it, and buy some new ones to shore up the numbers, that it did, and made it a very smart decision. The difference b/w Su-30MKI and F-16 blk 52 is not that great now, which is the opposite of their time frames.the F-16 at its maxmum, matches the Su-30MKI, but never exceeds it however the MKI still has its advantages in many places. Now i ask you what happens when the MKI goes for MLU? What happens when new missiles like Python, Derby, and the new Russian ones come into existance. Do you realise that IAF gets the best that there is at the time, whereas PAF has to wait for USAF to get something better to give its old one.

AIM-120C-5 will be the missile to be used by PAF for a long time to come, its not even gotten them as of yet. And the world has moved far ahead. C-5 effectively nullifies any advantage IAF had in terms of missiles, however that is set to change again.

BTW reply soon Key, i like debating with you!

I will post the source that I believe that highsea was quoting from f-16.net


"BVR, Head-to-Head:

The Frontal RCS of F-16C: 1.2m2

The Frontal RCS of Su-27/30: 10m2


Maximum effective detective Range:

AN/APG-68 V5: 70~80 km for RCS = 5m2 target

AN/APG-68 V9: 90~105 km for RCS = 5m2 target

AN/APG-80: 130km for RCS = 5m2 target



N-001 (Su-27S): 80~100 km for RCS = 3m2 target

N-001 VEP (Su-30MKK2): 90~110 km for RCS = 3m2 target

N-001 V (Su-27SM): 135~150 km for RCS = 3m2 target

(AIR INTERNATIONAL, 2004, Jan)

NO11M Bars (SU-30MKI): "140~160 km for an F-16 target"
(http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/info-su30mki.html)


Theoretically,

# The maximum effective detective range for AN/APG-68 V5 to detect Su-27/30 is about 85~95 km.

# The maximum effective detective range for AN/APG-68 V9 to detect Su-27/30 is about 110~125 km.

# The maximum effective detective range for AN/APG-80 to detect Su-27/30 is about 155 km.



@ The maximum effective detective range for N-001 (Su-27S) to detect F-16C is about 64~80 km.

@ The maximum effective detective range for N-001 VEP (Su-30MKK2) to detect F-16C is about 70~88 km.

@ The maximum effective detective range for N-001 V (Su-27 SM) to detect F-16C is about 105~120 km.

@ The maximum effective detective range for NO11M Bars (SU-30MKI) to detect F-16C is about 140~160 km."



Air International magazine is where I got the figure from (It was quoted on another site so i went to my local library and checked) I also worked it from a formula I have here, plus a number of postings on f-16 net as well as WAB.

Now we can argue till we are blue in the face but the current USAF f-16 is the BLK 52, So I have full confidence in its ability with the PAF structure to be more than adequate against the main threat across the border.

Now you agree that Soviet doctrine is to use Mass tactics I.e. lots of planes firing lots of missiles. Hence their equipment is based upon this and it can be seen throughout their design (The AK-47 and T-series tanks are examples of this) So their design philosophy is fire lots and eventually one will get through. HENCE their equipment is not designed to be on the same level as their counterparts in western forces which are designed around the idea that you can't keep firing 100's of missiles to take down a enemy (especially as they would be facing the mass tactics of the USSR and or China) So they would have a higher degree of sophistication. Hence my belief in the superiority of most U.S. systems.

Now there is the assumption that whilst India is buying all this shiny new equipment that PAK will sit on it's hands and do nothing......What will happen is that new systems will be inducted. (Actually I feel the Embargo has been beneficial to PAK because it has cultivated new and alternative sources.) There will be an additional fighter source with a new radar so any advance will be matched. It is a bit disingenuous to assume that PAK will not be able to get modern equipment in the future. The U.S. "castoffs" seem to match the shiny new Russian equipment with out too much difficulty.

Now you are correct re the R-73 however as I said i will post more on this shortly as I need to read through a few more things.

This reply is not as detailed as I would wish, as it is a bit hectic here. But there are a few points I would like to cover at a later point.