Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I still have my opinion. I don't necessarily agree even with Oscar, but I don't want to argue this further.@That Guy my friend, hope now after what Oscar has penned down you would Agree with me...
BVR scenario is a very complex one.. Its not like JFT with small rcs finds large rcs MKI and shoot down..
There are many points to note down..
The effective range of a bvr missile is 1/5 th of range stated( this stated range is only an optimal range at most desired envionment).. Example: effective range of AMRAAM is only 20-25km..
The main aim of todays bvr missiles are not range but maximum NEZ( Non escape zone).. Targeted fighter planes can easily overrun( turn 180deg and run) a bvr missile if they finds it outside NEZ cone.. NEZ of all present bvr missiles are within 10 km only.. Example: NEZ of AMRAAM is only 5-8 km..
If the targeted plane is inside the NEZ, still PK ( Probability of kill) is very low as Jets can easily out maneuver a bvr missile.. For example:. AIM-120 travels at Mach 4, and can pull 30 g within its NEZ, yet it would need 768 Gs to reliably hit a modern fighter which is maneuvering at corner speed of Mach 0,5, or 237 Gs if target is still at standard cruise speed of Mach 0,9, giving Pk between 3% and 13%; this fits perfectly with 8% Pk demonstrated against (mostly) maneuvering aircraft without ECM to date. If fighter is maneuvering at corner speed, but is still limited to 9 g by FCS (is not in override), BVR missile Pk is only 5.2%.
Now take the real achievement of aim 120.. 46% pk.. Looks better but all targets are within 20km, no connection to ECM or maneuvering. That is actually out of 46%, there is 93% for chance of miss. Thus BVR missile Pk against aware, maneuvering opponent using modern ECM suite is around 3%..
Bvr capability comparison with respect to RCS makes no sense because of the limits of bvr missiles.... Actually F15 ,SU27 ,F22 are actual bvr fighters.. For better bvr capability..
1. MKI has better radar..
2. Better ECM and IRCM..
3. More maneuverable( thrust vectored)
4. More speed, more missiles, more range
Etc.. Etc..
JFT and MKI are not comparable at all in bvr scenario..
I still have my opinion. I don't necessarily agree even with Oscar, but I don't want to argue this further.
Underestimation of BVRs I must say. The ranges you mentioned is correct (20-25 km) when the fight happens at very low level. There is a high chance of exchanging blows well in higher altitudes which will be the preference of heavy air superiority fighters who gave top cover. Forget the RCS, any shot less than 45 km is a dangerous one, however all good pilot choose to come as close as possible in maximum speed to get the Non escape zone widens. Even the on board radar+ tail chase range of most BVRs will be 10-15 km.
New Recruit
New Recruit
JF -17 is 4 th gen jet ... not 3rd gen jet.. it is cost effective fighter... that doesn't mean It is defenceless. .. Indian doctrine is different to Pak. ... don't under estimate your foe like some fan boys under estimating mki capabilities because of RCS ..
Yeah rightWe got a little Air Force and a little Navy only thing which keeps us going is some of our Tech and Training.
New Recruit
Yeah
ng falcons Blk52 and MLU
and 60~ JF17
Yeah right
190~ interceptors
130~ mirage 3 5 multirole fighters
78 F16 fighting falcons Blk52 and MLU
and 60~ JF17 multirole Fighters and counting
Thats really tiny
PAF not even in top 15 air forces in world let alone USA, RUSSIA, CHINA..
Does this mean that block1 construction is over?
And how many blk 2 will be made by CAC in China?
It's been 10 months since Block-1 production ended.
Blk-2 will be made in Pakistan not in china.
So the 50-50-50 production schedule has not been changed?