How PAF Should Counter the SU-30 MKI

[Kompromat]

Wrote it two years ago , F-16C perspective.

Comparing a Multi role fighter with a heavy air superiority fighter jet simply just does not make any sense to me.

Anyway lets do it.

Radar comparison

As we know F-16c or Block 50/52+ comes with a V(9) version of the AN/APG-68 radar provides both improved air-to-air capabilities and air-to-ground capabilities.

F-16 Radar Features

The AN/APG-68 radar is a long range up to 300 km and a Pulse-doppler radar designed by Westinghouse (now Northrop Grumman) to replace AN/APG-66 radar in the F-16 Fighting Falcon. The AN/APG-68 radar system consists of the following line-replaceable units:
Antenna
Dual Mode Transmitter (DMT)
Modular Low-power radio frequency (MLPRF)
Programmable signal processor (PSP)

The AN/APG-68(V)9 radar is the latest development. Besides the increase in scan range compared to the previous version, it has a Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capability.

Benefits

30 percent increase in detection range.

Improvements in false alarm rate and mutual interference;
Four versus two tracked targets in the Situation Awareness mode (a search-while-track mode)

Larger search volume and improved track performance in Track While Scan mode.

Improved track performance in Single Target Track mode;
Two-foot resolution in new Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) mode, which allows autonomous delivery of precision, all-weather, standoff weapons

Increased detection range in Sea Surveillance mode;
Improved target detection and map quality in Ground Moving Target Indication mode.

Su-30mki radar

The forward facing NIIP N011M Bars (Panther) is a powerful integrated passive electronically scanned array radar. The N011M is a digital multi-mode dual frequency band radar.The N011M can function in air-to-air and air-to-land/sea mode simultaneously while being tied into a high-precision laser-inertial or GPS navigation system. It is equipped with a modern digital weapons control system as well as anti-jamming features.

N011M has a 350 km search range and a maximum 200 km tracking range, and 60 km in the rear hemisphere. The radar can track 15 air targets and engage 4 simultaneously. These targets can even include cruise missiles and motionless helicopters. The Su-30MKI can function as a mini-AWACS as a director or command post for other aircraft. The target co-ordinates can be transferred automatically to at least four other aircraft. The radar can detect ground targets such as tanks at 40–50 km.

F-16 Engine:

One Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229 turbofan, rated at 17,000 lb.s.t. dry and 28,500 lb.s.t. with afterburning or one General Electric F110-GE-129 turbofan, rated at 17,155 lb.s.t. dry and 28,984 lb.s.t. with afterburning.

Performance:

Maximum short-endurance speed: Mach 2.05 (1353 mph) at 40,000 feet. Maximum sustained speed Mach 1.89 (1247 mph) at 40,000 feet. Tactical radius (hi-lo-hi interdiction on internal fuel with six 500-lb bombs) 360 miles. Maximum ferry range 2450 miles with maximum external fuel (excluding 600gal. tanks or CFT's)

Dogfight capability.

F-16 is meant is the most successful dog fighter ever created it has over a 100 kills without sustaining a single loss ( Lots of them are from PAF)

This video speaks for itself that nothing matches the Viper in a dogfight specially when we take Block 52's Joint helmet mounted cuing system or JHMCS which is simply a look at shoot at capability to fire its infrared guided missiles so the Viper would not need TVC .

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/KWSN-
Men/339/

Introduction video

F-16 Block 52+ Cockpit.

VS

SU30 Mki cockpit.

F16 B-52 A2A missiles

Air-to-air missiles:
2× AIM-7 Sparrow
6× AIM-9 Sidewinder
6× IRIS-T or
6× AIM-120D AMRAAM Range 130+miles!

SU-30 A2A missiles

Air to Air Missiles:

10 × R-77 (AA-12) active radar homing medium range AAM, 100 km
10 × Astra missile active radar homing medium range AAM, 80 km
6 × R-27P (AA-10C) semi-active radar guided, long range AAM 130 There is a difference between Miles and Kms isn't it??

6 × R-27P (AA-10D) Infrared homing extended range version, long range AAM 120 km
2 × R-27R/AA-10A semi-active radar guided, medium range AAM,80 km
2 × R-27T (AA-10B) infrared homing seeker, medium range AAM, 70 km
6 × R-73 (AA-11) short range AAM, 30 km

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So my conclusion is that Tough SU-30 is a whole different class of fighter tough it is Twin engine , Dual cockpit and it can carry a hell load of weapons and has a greater range.

In a BVR fight F-16 Block 52+ with a range of 300kms and SAAB Erie AWACS and AIM-120D will shoot down an SU-30 way before.

But the issue is Pakistan has ordered a AIM-120C variant which has a range of only 105km so Pakistan must buy a D variant or it " could " be on our order already.

In a dogfight.

PAF pilots is one of the Most experienced air forces which has used F-16 . Over 30+ years of Pilot experience with Vipers mean something!!

Su-30 is highly maneuverable but F-16 can beat its TVC advantage by smart electronics and Infrared guided weapons and not to forget JHMCS.

Regards:

 

[Viper0011.]

He said nothing Wrong, Su30 rank in class of F14 (and F15). (By weight, role). You read his post in correct perspective.


I can only say "Lack of knowledge". F15 was made in reply of MiG25 and F22 was totally new philosophy. SU27 series was reply to F15 (Not F14) as Orange-Zeib claims.

Again, folks aren't reading it right and I can't entertain more detail than what's out here. The goal was to counter the F 15. That's what the world knows. BUT, the real challenge was the US Navy.....USAF doesn't go everywhere. It is the NAVY due to mighty career battle groups that is EVERYWHERE...so you REALLY had to deal with the F 14. F 15's are land based and usually within the US and in some remote basis. Chances of them seeing Russian flankers were a LOT less than the F 14 dealing with them. Plus, the F 14's Radar was available through IRAN and through others. It was relatively older tech so you could find it somewhere for money. A couple of countries used that to their advantages and BARS is a result of that.

 

[MilSpec]

Wrote it two years ago , F-16C perspective.
So my conclusion is that Tough SU-30 is a whole different class of fighter tough it is Twin engine , Dual cockpit and it can carry a hell load of weapons and has a greater range.

In a BVR fight F-16 Block 52+ with a range of 300kms and SAAB Erie AWACS and AIM-120D will shoot down an SU-30 way before.

But the issue is Pakistan has ordered a AIM-120C variant which has a range of only 105km so Pakistan must buy a D variant or it " could " be on our order already.

In a dogfight.

PAF pilots is one of the Most experienced air forces which has used F-16 . Over 30+ years of Pilot experience with Vipers mean something!!

Su-30 is highly maneuverable but F-16 can beat its TVC advantage by smart electronics and Infrared guided weapons and not to forget JHMCS

The conclusion by the esteemed moderator very easily states"In a BVR fight F-16 Block 52+ with a range of 300kms and SAAB Erie AWACS and AIM-120D will shoot down an SU-30 way before." erstwhile deliberately ignoring Phalcon Awacs and R77 RVV AE-SD coupled with MKI, all three of them out-range and outgun mentioned pakistani systems. Although the Erieye systems gives teeth to blk 52, i fail to see how Phalcons systems will not be able to see blk52 the other way around, Apart from that, due to sheer numbers of MKI's in the armory, PAF's fewer aircrafts will face multiple salvos of passive seeking and active seeking BVR's launched, even before they begin see the MKI blip on sweedish awacs.

 

[Kompromat]

Hi,

You are on the right track---but fixed assets---even though they are extremely potent are also extremely vulnerable to enemy strike capabilities---. So---you ought to have an x number of air superiority fighter aircraft with potent BVR's to compliment your long range surface to air missiles.

MK , you know quite well that Air combat is dangerous business , too much depends on it. Therefore i believe , when you have an adversary like the Su-30s you need to have secondary measures in place ie a SAM wall.

Flankers produce huge heat and radar signature , according to some sources the ground based AESA radar platform or else air borne AWACs can detect Flankers as far as 400kms. Considering the speed of those flankers you actually don't have much time to react , therefore the fixed assets can minimize the attack capability of a Flanker pilot who are supposed to be aggressors and therefore are prone to take risks.

All of us know what a PAF pilot is , what he is capable of doing the IAF knows that even better. That does not mean we should lodge all eggs in one basket and do not provide our pilots with sufficient and credible Air Defense system to get assisted with.
Even though the days of Kargil when there was a huge imbalance mainly because of the lack of BVR capability with PAF are gone. Still we do need to have long & mid range high tech surface to air missile systems.

I am sure the PAF is aware of that and has been currently looking for such solutions.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...ion-advanced-surface-air-missile-systems.html

First the air space penetration has to be avoided and contained , then we have less to worry about when it comes to WVR combat where any Indian pilot flying anything would not go home so easy.

 

[Mosamania]

The Su-27 family series is an extremely proficient and capable Air-Air platform, however like all jests it has certain weaknesses most notably the large RCS and heat signature and its radar that lights up like a flashlight in the dark due to its enormous power.

So if we are to to put an ancient weapon as an equivalent to the Su-27 series it would be the spear, on the other hand the F-16 behaves much like a sword with a more subtle radar, heat and RCS signatures (I am talking about the BVR capable ones of course). So in Air-Air if the Su-30 sees the F-16 earlier mainly due to the ground based radars it will rely heavily on or the Phalcon AWACs to a lesser degree then the F-16 has too much of a challenge on its hands, however if the F-16s are intercepting an incoming Su-30 with Erieye then the Su-30s are the ones at a disadvantage.

If it came down to a knife fight then both are equally deadly with Su-30 boasting high maneuverability and (In and out) energy and the F-16 combining small size with maneuverability and more of a (hit and run) tactic which it does exceptionally well as demonstrated by Israeli Air Force in the 80s then both are equal footing even if I dare say the F-16 is on a slight advantage but just a very slight one.

So it all comes down on who employs their tactics better and flawlessly in either offensive or defensive operations. And quite honestly the only AirCraft I see that can counter Su-30s in PAF service right now is the Block 52s, maybe the Jf-17 in the future once it has the upgraded radars, EW suites, BVR capability and AWACs interoperability but as of now the Block 52s are the key player here and maybe other F-16s Block 15 MLUs as support to it will give the Su-30 an overwhelming challenge.

How about we go into a deeper analysis?
The Su-27 series is at heart an Air-Air platform because the Soviets when designing it from the get go wanted:
1- a counter to F-14 and F-15 in USAF and USN inventory.
2- a highly agile energy conservative platform ergo the begun designing it from the wings and around the wings (Note the F-15 was designed from its radar and around its radar).
3- a fighter they can send from their base in east Germany to France and back (where the bulk of Air-Air combat would have been in).
4- a fighter that can loggerhead F-15, F-14 in the 360 degrees 3 dimensional tail hunting turn (Hence the very important Cobra maneuver a hallmark of this jet).

Now let's see what the American designed the F-16 for from the get go:
1- a fighter jet capable of taking out multiple ground targets in a single sortie (Hence the large payload proportionate to its relative size).
2- An interceptor (Note: not an Air Supperiority fighter) capable of holding its own against the Migs at the time (Hence the very excellent maneuverability it employs which made it a very attractive jet for US allies and the primary secret to its high sales).
3- High thrust to weight ratio to give it more energy during Dogfights (F-16 pilots always talk about "The kick" they feel when the engine starts running on the runway if you noticed).
4- high loitre time for more time in the air to hunt and locate and Bomb targets.

So comparing the two kind of doesn't make sense to me.

 

[turbo charged]

in order to get rid of BVR's fired from su-30 we should practice low altitude flying....like flying 20 feet from the ground and level so that BVR gets confused and hits the trees or a flying the plane at 20 feet for sometime then a vertical climb at 60,70 degree...i am sure that will take care of the BVR.
we should develop some software like cruise control to be installed in cockpit to control the altitude....making sure it flies lowest possible to the ground without hitting trees or poles...
google maps can used to update the software....sonar signalling can help...sonar getting out of airplane... hitting the ground ...comming back to airplane and then adjusting its altitude.

 

[batmannow]

in order to get rid of BVR's fired from su-30 we should practice low altitude flying....like flying 20 feet from the ground and level so that BVR gets confused and hits the trees or a flying the plane at 20 feet for sometime then a vertical climb at 60,70 degree...i am sure that will take care of the BVR.
we should develop some software like cruise control to be installed in cockpit to control the altitude....making sure it flies lowest possible to the ground without hitting trees or poles...
google maps can used to update the software....sonar signalling can help...sonar getting out of airplane... hitting the ground ...comming back to airplane and then adjusting its altitude.

Sory sir,
By your reasoning , we wouldn't need plannes then, better we get gOod helios?
With better radar,s & AAMs?

Your reasoning , maybe good in some areas bt a whole airwar can't be fought , in this manner!

 

[MastanKhan]

in order to get rid of BVR's fired from su-30 we should practice low altitude flying....like flying 20 feet from the ground and level so that BVR gets confused and hits the trees or a flying the plane at 20 feet for sometime then a vertical climb at 60,70 degree...i am sure that will take care of the BVR.
we should develop some software like cruise control to be installed in cockpit to control the altitude....making sure it flies lowest possible to the ground without hitting trees or poles...
google maps can used to update the software....sonar signalling can help...sonar getting out of airplane... hitting the ground ...comming back to airplane and then adjusting its altitude.

Hi,

Thank you for your post---that is what the paf been doing for the last so many years.

Also a consideration that was mentioned by orangzeb---. The su30 stationed 50 miles to a 100 miles from pak border or bases are extremely vulnerable as well.

The spool up time for the jf 17 is much shorter than that of the su30---. Once the jf17 gets airborne from kamra---the su30 based in srinagar won't even have time for its engine to spool up to take off power before the jf's are right on top of the base---.

I firmly believe that there are those on the indian side---who either out of ignorance or for genuine concern for pakistan ( which means that there are those in india who don't want india to come ahead in a conflict ) have deployed the su30's so close to the pak border---.

Looking at the time that he su30 can stay in the air there was no reason for it to be closer to the border----it is just like the usaf deplying the b2 bomber in qatar to bomb iran.

 

[Harry Potter]

According to US diplomatic cables F-16's will give just a few days breather to PAf before it is destroyed completely:

3. (C) While we understand New Delhi's opposition to the program, the reality is that this program will not degrade India's overwhelming air superiority over Pakistan.

Given India's overwhelming military superiority, this would only be a few days, but these days would allow critical time to mediate and prevent nuclear conflict.
12. (C) India enjoys an almost 2-1 advantage (736 to 370) over Pakistan in advanced multi-purpose fighters.Pakistan's shortfalls in training and tactics multiply India's edge.Pakistan also plans to buy/jointly produce 150 inferior JF-17 fighters from China, but it is unclear how they will pay for them.

13. (C) The sale of new aircraft and 500 AMRAAM missiles would give Pakistan beyond visual range capability, but Pakistan will acquire the ability to employ this capability with either the new buy or MLU aircraft. Canceling the new buy would thus only delay the process by 18 months. Successful employment of this capability by the PAF, however, will take 2-3 years and a significant revision of doctrine and tactics. The Indian Air Force already routinely trains on existing beyond visual range tactics

The author is a very senior US diplomat-Anne W. Patterson.

Cable Viewer

 

[TaimiKhan]

According to US diplomatic cables F-16's will give just a few days breather to PAf before it is destroyed completely:


The author is a very senior US diplomat-Anne W. Patterson.

Cable Viewer

being a senior diplomat doesn't means he/she has authority on defence related matters.

2:1 superiority doesn't means India will be put all its 736 jets in action against Pakistan, plus she has no idea that aerial warfare is not just about dog fights or based on 1 to 1 fights, ground based system also come into action, thus the attrition rates are not left to just dog fighting. She should know in previous wars India had superiority also, but PAF did not got destroyed.

And i don't get pakistan's shortfalls in training & tactics thingy, when did we become inferior in training & tactics, considering the reputation PAF enjoys in the eyes of other air forces. She seriously needs to know about stuff she is talking about.

She is mentioning 150 inferior JF-17s way back in 2009 when we did not even had a single sqd raised, so no idea why she comparing a non existent fighter jet at the time with the IAF fighters.

Her cable is just a justification for the US to give Pak F-16s, while she has no idea about the capabilities of PAF, and her cable has nothing to do with the topic.


So better not to bring in nonsense stuff.

 

[The Deterrent]

Although the thread is about PAF, but another dimension is also present through which Pakistan can effectively encounter IAF. That is, the destruction/disabling of aircraft on ground by attacking the airbases with ballistic missiles.
The formidable Ghaznavi SRBM (range 300 km), which has a larger volume in the warhead assembly, can be effectively armed with Cluster Munitions to attack the key Airbases of IAF, such as the ones housing SU-30s.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Although the thread is about PAF, but another dimension is also present through which Pakistan can effectively encounter IAF. That is, the destruction/disabling of aircraft on ground by attacking the airbases with ballistic missiles.
The formidable Ghaznavi SRBM (range 300 km), which has a larger volume in the warhead assembly, can be effectively armed with Cluster Munitions to attack the key Airbases of IAF, such as the ones housing SU-30s.

Indian members, plz don't bring in your missiles and stuff like that as the thread is about PAF & its countering IAF / Su-30.

 

[Harry Potter]

being a senior diplomat doesn't means he/she has authority on defence related matters

She definitely consulted the Military attache to Pakistan.THat's the Standard Operating procedure throughout the world for writing Defence related cables.Similarly for Intel related Cables the Intelligence Attache is consulted(In the case of USA CIA).

2:1 superiority doesn't means India will be put all its 736 jets in action against Pakistan, plus she has no idea that aerial warfare is not just about dog fights or based on 1 to 1 fights, ground based system also come into action, thus the attrition rates are not left to just dog fighting. She should know in previous wars India had superiority also, but PAF did not got destroyed.

And i don't get pakistan's shortfalls in training & tactics thingy, when did we become inferior in training & tactics, considering the reputation PAF enjoys in the eyes of other air forces. She seriously needs to know about stuff she is talking about.

Read the April 2004 edition of Aviation Week & Space Technology;it mentions that IAF pilots changed their tactics Successfully in the middle of a Dogfight something which even IDF pilots will be not be very confident about.I don't think you know that IAF Su-30MKI pilots fly 250-300 hours a year(One of the highest in the world).
Remember PAF F-16 plots completed 100,000 flyng hours in 2008(After 25 years of Service).Su-30 MKI's itself has flown for 100,000+ flying hours between 2004-2012.

She is mentioning 150 inferior JF-17s way back in 2009 when we did not even had a single sqd raised, so no idea why she comparing a non existent fighter jet at the time with the IAF fighters.

Her cable is just a justification for the US to give Pak F-16s, while she has no idea about the capabilities of PAF, and her cable has nothing to do with the topic.

JF-17's are supposed to be PAF's numerical mainstay in this decade compared to IAF's Su-30 MKI's in the first half of this decade and Rafale's in the second part,now even a Rank 1 noob can tell that Su-30MKI and Rafale score way above JFT's.

 

[The Deterrent]

Indian members, plz don't bring in your missiles and stuff like that as the thread is about PAF & its countering IAF / Su-30.

Whaaaaatt??
Re-read the post Taimi! Don't be in THAT much hurry!

 

[fast and furious]

Indian members, plz don't bring in your missiles and stuff like that as the thread is about PAF & its countering IAF / Su-30.

So,how many Surface to surface missiles are operated by PAF ?