What's new

Best BVR Capable Fighter in South Asia

Status
Not open for further replies.
How do you plan to do that as most bvr missiles have ranges around 100 Km so how can your MKI-ni Kanth :P can fire before others even detecting it? And one more thing BVR missiles are never launched at max range because max ranges are for non-maneuvering target, at a high altitude, and head-on aspect.

RCS also plays a role in detection range.The detection range quoted by manufacturers is for a certain RCS. Aircrafts with smaller RCS will be detected at a lower distance and planes with higher RCS will be detected at a higher distance. Su-30 MIKI is big plane with big RCS

oh!mi mi! !do urself a RnD About R77M range and maneuvers....then we going to discuss about and yes!please go through my point ,i never ignored about su 30mki RCS BT i stressed about its powerful radar which mask its size disadvantage too.
 
I have few question if any senior member can help in this regard

1)What is difference between search range and track range?
My understanding is that search range is range in which aircrafts only be detected but to lauch a BVR missile a enemy aircraft needs to be within track range of the radar.

2)What is the search range and track range of APG-68 v9?
The article at the start quoted 80 Km track range.But on Internet in many websites around 300Km is quoted.Is this search range?

3)Various sources put the tracking range of N011M Bars at 140Km or 200Km.Which one of the is correct?

This article concluded that
Mig 29K will detect F-16 JF-17 at 120 Km
F-16 JF-17 will detect Mig 29K at 105 Km
Su-30MKI will detect F-16 JF-17 at 140 Km or even 200Km if the 200Km range is assumed true.
F-16 JF-17 will detect Mig 29K at 138 Km

assuming a very theoretical scenario i.e. Head-on and same altitude.Assuming speed of both aircrafts to be around 900Km/h under mach 1
((120-105)/((2*900)/60))=0.5 min or 30 sec
((140-138)/((2*900)/60))=4 sec
((200-138)/((2*900)/60))=2 min or 240 sec

4)will these times make any significant differences as all operational BVR missiles have range around 100 Km and will be fired under 100 Km so does it matter if you see enemy around 2 min earlier?

I
know this is very theoretical scenario but it will be good for understanding.

regards,
taha
 
How do you plan to do that as most bvr missiles have ranges around 100 Km so how can your MKI-ni Kanth :P can fire before others even detecting it? And one more thing BVR missiles are never launched at max range because max ranges are for non-maneuvering target, at a high altitude, and head-on aspect.

RCS also plays a role in detection range.The detection range quoted by manufacturers is for a certain RCS. Aircrafts with smaller RCS will be detected at a lower distance and planes with higher RCS will be detected at a higher distance. Su-30 MIKI is big plane with big RCS

Not only RCS but the altitude also count,bvr missiles have different range for different altitudes,yes no one will fire from the maximum rage,because it is easy to escape,MKI had a large RCS,so also have a very powerful radar.
 
oh!mi mi! !do urself a RnD About R77M range and maneuvers....then we going to discuss about and yes!please go through my point ,i never ignored about su 30mki RCS BT i stressed about its powerful radar which mask its size disadvantage too.

R-77M

Like the R-77 but with a different Rocket motor and more weight. It is still under developement and is expected to be in service not earlier than 2007. According to official sources it will have a 50-60 % larger launch range.

Launch range: upto 60km at high altitude head-on setup

Waffen der MiG

AA-12 ADDER R-77

AA-12 AMRAAMski / R-77 RVV FAMILY | Russian Arms, Military Technology, Analysis of Russia's Military Forces

So widely its reported to be around 60-80 Km
 
how would these two very similar war planes compared? they are both twin engined and medium sized, multi role, reduced RCS 4.5 gen air planes...

The MiG-29K's design relies on a combination of low-observable technology, advanced electronic-warfare capabilities, reduced ballistic vulnerability, and the use of standoff weapons to enhance the fighter's survivability.[13] It has a reduced radar signature according to Mikoyan from the extensive use of radar-absorbent materials. Special coatings reduce the MiG-29K's radar signature 4-5 times over the basic MiG-29.[13] Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) is provided by Israel. The alignment of the leading edges of the engine inlets is designed to scatter radiation to the sides.[citation needed] RD-33MK turbofan engine contains systems that reduce its infrared and optical visibility.[23][2


wiki said:
The F/A-18E/F's radar cross section was reduced greatly from some aspects, mainly the front and rear.[5] The design of the engine inlets reduces the aircraft's frontal radar cross section. The alignment of the leading edges of the engine inlets is designed to scatter radiation to the sides. Fixed fanlike reflecting structures in the inlet tunnel divert radar energy away from the rotating fan blades.[35]

The Super Hornet also makes considerable use of panel joint serration and edge alignment. Considerable attention has been paid to the removal or filling of unnecessary surface join gaps and resonant cavities. Where the F/A-18A-D used grilles to cover various accessory exhaust and inlet ducts, the F/A-18E/F uses perforated panels that appear opaque to radar waves at the frequencies used. Careful attention has been paid to the alignment of many panel boundaries and edges, to scatter traveling waves away from the aircraft

the Super Hornet employs the most extensive radar cross section reduction measures of any contemporary fighter, other than the F-22 and F-35. While the F/A-18E/F is not a true stealth fighter like the F-22, it will have a frontal RCS an order of magnitude smaller than prior generation fighters.
 
why dont you take it in and do an analysis?

The thread did not say "all weapons to be used in the war" - in that case he should even consider the missiles, the a the intelligence, the code breakers...

the thread was solely to check for the radar performance w r t the radar signature of potential threat aircraft.

The analyst did a very good job and he backed it up with verifiable data too! good job!

it shows that you havent gone through the first 2 links that i posted-- one of them , does take into account AWACS

in case of comparing radar performances , blk52 upgradations , klj10 being incorporated in jf17 etc.. are important aspects==

radar performance , misile range , awacs cover etc go hand in hand---- by just comparing radar statistics and ruling in only 1 'most capable brr' platform , is a folly of fan boys

if it was the case , iaf wouldnt have gone for su30 now , would it?afterall according to this author , radar trumps all other operational requirements

the 'analyst' depicted a 1to1 scenerio , which in all its conceavable practicallity ,will never happen-- that is why i hate these kind of threads---- which have no end result , rather is just a fertile ground for trollers.
129fs238648.gif


i want to congragulate the thread starter for opening yet another brilliant thread - as this thread has the potential to have the greatest input for the next 2months
 
Last edited:
First of all excellent questions....so congratulations....I will be eager to see what experts have to say about it....However a few things on your last question....

4)will these times make any significant differences as all operational BVR missiles have range around 100 Km and will be fired under 100 Km so does it matter if you see enemy around 2 min earlier?

I
know this is very theoretical scenario but it will be good for understanding.

regards,
taha

There is a common saying that attack is the best defense....Who so ever see the enemy first will have high probability of firing the first shot.....Whosoever fires the first shot will have high probability of ending up being the winner because the adversary will be on defensive from the start of battle....

Now please note that i am using the word probability....it is not like the fighter who tracked the other few seconds late is doomed for sure, however yes it will be on disadvantage....Also fighters like MKI have lot of hard points...In short they have the luxury of firing extra shots then some other counterparts in South Asia, so if you see a fighter who will see first and can fire more shots definitely has upper hand...Rest in a real scenario lot of factors can add/negate this advantage. some of those are

- Awacs
- Potency of BVR missile
- Tactics used
- Pilots Training
- Above all Luck
 
Uncle we bought KLJ because it was superior to RC-400 radar, now we are looking for AESA for JF-17, and we will get it from either France or China and may be sweden too.

Only Chinese can provide you with AESA. Sweden have an italian AESA radar on Gripen NG. French would sell u AESA radar only if you buy Rafael from them.
 
Amen to Storm Force ..no one else can create a masala thread. and worse his thread actually spawns multiple pages. :D

Indeed :D; not long ago he claimed that MKI's sheer speed will enable it to out speed a missile, and our MirageIII/V are subsonic :lol:.

True Radar range is a bit over-rated. But so is Range resolution (a very imp factor).

There can be multiple scenarios where range resolution doesnt matter visa - vi MKI. Even if MKI is not able to differentiate amongst no of bogies - it still wouldnt mind firing a salvo of BVR missiles to put the other fighters on defensive; mki IN a2a mode will have plenty of missiles to spare.

But Sir don't you think its important for the pilot to know how many bogies are inbound, the worst thing that could happen to the pilot of MKI would be getting outnumbered. I doubt it if the pilot of MKI would just fire a salvo of BVRAAMS without being in the kill zone, the pilot of the MKI will likely unleash his missiles when he feels confident he has the bogey locked on and in his/her kill zone. But keep in mind with the introduction of AWACS and newer PAF jets having capable radars, both planes are likely to take a shot against each other at roughly the same time. But in the end, i believe the pilot who makes the enemy fight on his/her rules is likely to win the fight ;).

I personally believe MKI will never be used for ingress, it has to be Mig29 or MK2..MKI will follow the these fighters.

I am not sure about that, from what i have gathered is that MKI is India's elite fighter and is likely to punch through enemy's defences. Its a pure air superiority fighter and is expected to clear out enemy aircrafts to clear the way for M2K's to come in and deliver the load.

After the introduction of AWACS - it will be purely a war of attrition- there simply will not be any surprises left. Country which has its AWACS standing after a couple of days war will be the one which controls the skies immediately.

Indeed the introduction of AWACS have revolutionized warfare in South Asia, but in my opinion Pakistan stands to benefit more from it than India. The introduction of MKI with its powerful Bars Radar left PAF scratching their heads, that is why 3D radars were purchased from China and US on urgent basis to plug the gap. Pakistan already has a very extensive radar network coverage, the AWACS are just going to fill out the gaps that were left behind. This will ensure that any preemptive or surgical strike from IAF will be checked right at the border; if you remember post Mumbai the MKI's and M2K's were intercepted right at the border and successfully locked on.

True. But i wouldnt discount Israeli EW's especially since they opted to field their own EW's on Sufa and not the US ones. That tells a volume of confidence that israelis have on their system.

Indeed, Israel is one smart nation. They figured out long time ago that they cannot compete on equal footings against nations with much larger economies thus they focused on niche industries. Result, they produce top quality UAV's, Avionics, Fire Control Systems and Radars. I am glad Pakistan has learned a thing or two from Israel and are focusing on avionics because reality is Pakistan simply lacks the resources to compete with India on equal footing in military aviation.
 
great topic :tup:

got this from aus air power
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html

Russian BVR Combat Philosophy
The Russian paradigm of BVR combat has its origins in the Cold War period, when Soviet operational analysis indicated that the low kill probability of missile seekers and airframes, especially if degraded by countermeasures, would be a major impediment to success. By the 1970s the standard Soviet technique in a BVR missile launch was to salvo two rounds, a semi-active radar homing weapon and a heatseeking weapon. To this effect some Soviet fighters even included a weapons select mode which automatically sequenced the launch of two rounds for optimal separation.

The mathematics of multiple round missile engagements are unambiguous - the size of a missile salvo launched is a stronger driver of success than the actual kill probability of the individual missiles. If the missiles are wholly identical by type, then the following curves may be optimistic, insofar as a factor degrading the kill probability of one missile is apt to have a similar effect on its siblings in a salvo. However, where the missiles differ by seeker type and guidance control laws, then the assumption of statistically independent missile shots is very much stronger.

A question often asked is why are Sukhoi Flanker variants equipped to carry between eight and twelve BVR missiles? The answer is a simple one - so they can fire more than one three or four round BVR missile salvo during the opening phases of an engagement. In this fashion the aircraft being targeted has a difficult problem as it must jam, decoy and/or outmanoeuvre three or four tightly spaced inbound missiles. Even if we assume a mediocre per round kill probability of 30 percent, a four round salvo still exceeds a total kill probability of 75 percent.

su35bvraamloadoutas5609.png

A critical question which must be asked when assessing the effectiveness of Russian BVR tactics is that of Western tactics and the effectiveness of the AIM-120 AMRAAM, the principal Western BVR fighter weapon. The AIM-120A AMRAAM was introduced at the end of the Cold War to provide a "fire and forget" active radar guided weapon with a midcourse inertial guidance system and datalink support provided by the radar on the launch aircraft, allowing multiple concurrent shots. The AIM-120A was followed by the incrementally improved B-model, and then by the "short span" AIM-120C-3 sized to fit the F-22A weapon bay. The AIM-120C-4 has better kinematic performance introducing a larger rocket motor and shorter control section, and a better warhead, while the AIM-120C-6 introduced a better fuse. The latest AIM-120D introduces a redesigned seeker built for better durability in high vibration carriage environments, a two way datalink, GPS to supplement inertial guidance, incrementally improved kinematics, and better seeker performance against high off-boresight targets.
Illustrative examples are the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-35 JSF, the latter armed in an air superiority configuration with two, the former with up to six AIM-120s [3]. Assuming the Flanker driver does not exploit his superior missile kinematic range and shoot first - an optimistic assumption - then the best case kill probability for the AIM-120 shooter firing two to four rounds is better than 90 percent. However, if we assume that hostile jamming and manoeuvre degrade the kill probability to around 50 percent - a reasonably optimistic statistical baseline here - then the total kill probability for a two round salvo is optimistically around 75 percent, and for a four round salvo over 90 percent. Arguably good odds for the four round salvo, only if the missile kill probability sits at 50 percent, but the F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF will have expended all or most of its warload of AIM-120s and be unable to continue in BVR combat. In a "many versus many" engagement, the low speed of both types leaves them unable to disengage and will see both types subsequently killed by another Flanker.

This best case "many versus many" engagement scenario sees the F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF being traded one for one with Su-30MK/Su-35BM Flankers in BVR combat, which is the general assumption made for WVR combat between like opponents, and representative of many historical attrition air campaign statistics. To achieve this best case "many versus many" outcome of trading F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF one for one, we have stacked a series of assumptions against the Flanker - dumb Flanker pilots not exploiting a missile kinematic range advantage, dumb Flanker pilots not exploiting a firepower advantage, Russian BVR missile seekers no better than the AIM-120, and Russian DRFM monopulse jammers achieving a less than 50 percent degradation of AIM-120 kill probability [4].

A competent Flanker driver gets the first shot with three or four round salvo of long burn R-27 variants, with mixed seekers, leaving one or two remaining salvoes of BVR missiles on his rails, and the same Flanker driver will have modern DRFM monopulse jammers capable of causing likely much more than a 50 percent degradation of AIM-120 kill probability. With a thrust vectoring engine capability (TVC), the Flanker driver has the option of making himself into a very difficult endgame target for the AIM-120 regardless of the capability of his jamming equipment. Since all of the AIM-120s fired are identical in kinematic performance and seeker jam resistance, any measure applied by the Flanker driver which is effective against one AIM-120 round in the salvo is apt to produce the same effect against all AIM-120 rounds - a problem the Flanker driver does not have due to diversity in seeker types and missile kinematics.

Currently classified capabilities such as the use of the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar as an X-band high power jammer against the Russian BARS or Irbis E radar are not a panacea, and may actually hasten the demise of the F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF in a BVR shootout. This is for the simple reason that to jam the Russian radar, the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar must jam the frequencies being used by the Russian radar, and this then turns the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar into a wholly electronically predictable X-band high power beacon for an anti-radiation seeker equipped Russian BVR missile such as the R-27EP or R-77P. The act of jamming the Russian radar effectively surrenders the frequency hopping agility in the emissions of the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar, denying it the only defence it has against the anti-radiation missile. A smart Russian radar software designer will include a "seduction mode" to this effect, with narrowband emissions to make it very easy even for an early model 9B-1032 anti-radiation seeker.

The flipside of the electronic combat game is no better. The F-14A/B/D included the AAS-42 Infrared Search and Track set which allowed a target to be tracked despite hostile jamming of the AWG-9/APG-71 radar. It is clear that the addition of the podded AAS-42 to the Super Hornet and "air to air" use of the JSF EOTS are intended for much the same purpose. While this may permit the continuing use of the AESA radar to datalink midcourse guidance commands to the AIM-120s, it does nothing to deny the Flanker its own BVR shot. The notion that the defensive jamming equipment and infrared decoys will be highly effective against late model Russian digital missile seekers can only be regarded to be optimistic.

In electronic warfare terms neither side has a decisive advantage, but the Flanker does have a decisive advantage in aircraft and missile kinematics and in having up to six times the payload of BVR missiles to expend. The simple conclusion to be drawn is that operators of the F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF should make every effort to avoid Beyond Visual Range combat with late model Flankers, as the best case outcome is parity in exchange rates, and the worst case outcome a decisive exchange ratio advantage to the Flanker. Given the evident design choices the Russians have made, this is not an accident, but rather a consequence of well thought through operational analysis of capabilities and limitations of contemporary BVR weapon systems.

su30aams5452220.png

rusbvraams20085494091.png
 
What about radar resolution cells, electronic warfare and the type of missile that is being carried by the aircraft. APG68(V9) radars are going to be installed on our F16's and they have a range of almost 300 km. But range alone is certainly overrated in my opinion and of many other senior members on this forum hold the same view. What sets this radar apart from its adversaries is its radar resolution cell of 30m as compared to Zhuk's resolution cell of 300m. Its extremely important for a pilot to break out individual inbound bogies because 2 airplanes might appear as one.

The 300m resolution is in low resolution mode, the Zhuk-Me has a resolution of 3m in high resolution mode and the Zhuk-AE (aesa) has a resolution of 1m in altra high resolution mode.
 
RCS part comes into play when you see them 1st but what when some beast tracking you all the way,and fire bvrs without even you know you are engaged.... Free advice either you use stealth to dodge su radar or you pocess more powerful radar than su else better you get ready yourself spankd by SU .

Omg...did u even see that is written on the first page of this thread??
Some indian friend opened this thread to show the power of indian fighters, and he himself wrote that JF-17 and F-16 will detect Su-30MKI at 138km, so tell me what missile u have got that can be fired from this range without getting tracked by JF-17/F-16? And pakistan has AIM-120C5 which is better then the indian bvr(debatable), but still its not good to fire it from even 100km, grow up please and stop trolling !
 
There is a common saying that attack is the best defense....Who so ever see the enemy first will have high probability of firing the first shot.....

I'm sorry, with respect, this is simply incorrect. You can detect an enemy LONG before you can launch a missile with any chance of success. Missile range and kinematics trumps radar detection range.

There have been some excellent points made about how altitude, speed, and aspect affects missile range. Let's ignore RCS for a moment.

Let's say the new R672 has a max range of 85km with a mach 1.5 target head on at 50,000 feet. If that same target is at mach 1 at 200 feet, the range will shrink to maybe 40km. In a low altitude tail chase, that same missile might be able to do 15km.

Pilots don't lock someone up, then launch at max range. If the target turns even 45 degrees, the missile will be defeated, as the intercept point will shift dozens of km.

Pilots are trained to seek shots with higher Pk's, more heart of the envelope.

If both opponents are proficient, with similar equipment, both will know of each other's presence long before any missiles are fired. It then boils down to the missiles... who has the fastest, longest range, with available energy to perform an intercept on an agile target.
 
Great anlysis sir but with all due respect you might have missed the context to what i replied...The person i replied to inferred that every other dynamics between two fighters are very much comparable(including missiles)...The only real difference is that indian fighter will see pakistani counterpart few seconds and couple of minutes earlier...Nevertheless as said great analysis, though few questions....

I'm sorry, with respect, this is simply incorrect. You can detect an enemy LONG before you can launch a missile with any chance of success. Missile range and kinematics trumps radar detection range.

There have been some excellent points made about how altitude, speed, and aspect affects missile range. Let's ignore RCS for a moment.

Let's say the new R672 has a max range of 85km with a mach 1.5 target head on at 50,000 feet. If that same target is at mach 1 at 200 feet, the range will shrink to maybe 40km. In a low altitude tail chase, that same missile might be able to do 15km.

Pilots don't lock someone up, then launch at max range. If the target turns even 45 degrees, the missile will be defeated, as the intercept point will shift dozens of km.

Pilots are trained to seek shots with higher Pk's, more heart of the envelope.

If both opponents are proficient, with similar equipment, both will know of each other's presence long before any missiles are fired. It then boils down to the missiles... who has the fastest, longest range, with available energy to perform an intercept on an agile target.

Shall i infer that detecting an enemy is of no use unless and until you are stealthy enough to go close to the fighter so that it can be locked with in missile range????

Secondly it is often said that one who makes enemy fight on his terms has high probabilty to end up winner. Don't you think with detecting the enemy first even though missiles cannot be launched is going to increase the odds???

Thirdly with fighter's like MKI who have around 12 hard points don't you think a salvo can be fired just to put the enemy on defensive and force them to play by your rules????

of-course i am more of talking about 1-on-1 scenario which is not in synch with real-life but then the question i replied to was also theoretical....
 
RCS part comes into play when you see them 1st but what when some beast tracking you all the way,and fire bvrs without even you know you are engaged.... Free advice either you use stealth to dodge su radar or you pocess more powerful radar than su else better you get ready yourself spankd by SU .

So u meant that aircraft with RCS of 20 will detect and kill the opponent without showing its presence to opponent which has RCS of 1.2sqm, and the jet with 20times less RCS will not know the presence of jet whose RCS is 20times bigger!:rofl::rofl:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom