How PAF Should Counter the SU-30 MKI

[Shadow_Hunter]

And while IAF continues to expand the MKI's detection "range", I am sure PAF would be more interested in acquisition of Jets that "cannot" be detected or locked by conventional radars!

Like JF17???

 

[wakapdf]

Like JF17???

No, Flying carpets They have very low radar signature and cannot be detected by any radar. Guy holding a genie lamp riding the carpet is better than any bvr out there. Very cheap to maintain and could be acquired in large numbers very quickly.

 

[viper1972]

No, Flying carpets They have very low radar signature and cannot be detected by any radar. Guy holding a genie lamp riding the carpet is better than any bvr out there. Very cheap to maintain and could be acquired in large numbers very quickly.

bravo bro no one can come close to this stealth technology.

 

[danger007]

Like JF17???

he doesn't have any Idea.. what exactly he is talking...

cannot be detected? i guess he is talking about 5th gen fighters... well certainly he is forgetting one thing... Even china itself don't offer 5th gen fighter let it be J-20 or any thing unless until PLAAF full fill it's requirement... his arguments is pretty useless..

 

[wakapdf]

bravo bro no one can come close to this stealth technology.

Glad to see someone who also sees this from my pov. .... In the age of BVR's we talk of countering this plane or that plane, but everyone seems to forget the era we are in. Today, whoever detects first, shoots first. No-one would even come close for dog fights. It would be 1 in a 100 thing. BVR and radar is the name of the game. Not plane for plane!

 

[Storm Force]

wakapdf I thank you for making the MOST SENSIBLE POST in over 90 pages of pure fanboyz jingoism

your comment

In the age of BVR's we talk of countering this plane or that plane, but everyone seems to forget the era we are in. Today, whoever detects first, shoots first. No-one would even come close for dog fights. It would be 1 in a 100 thing. BVR and radar is the name of the game. Not plane for plane!

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...hould-counter-su-30-mki-97.html#ixzz2H8DqHbPG

The BEST, RICHIST , air powers in the world train for 80% of their time to fight a WAR IN A BVR SCENARIO

iTS ALL ABOUT

Radar power which includes range and processing power ie AESA PESA at least MSA
dectection = RCS
bvr = range. diffderent seelers for confusion
NEZ = NO ESCAPE ZONE
AWACS support
sophiticated JAMMERS


21st century air war is not about PILOT SKILL and the sooner PDF members realise this THE BETTER

DOG FIGHTING IS DEAD in front of a AMRAAM C5 , MICA, R27/R77 amramski or in the FUTURE meteore bvr

 

[abdulbarijan]

Your facts.. said that JF17 fires Aim120,
PAF ordered Aim120C5.
Singapore AF doesn't allow IAF pilots study their aircrafts.
And many more... which I forgot...

Actually the PAF already possesses the Aim-120 C-5's

And if you wanna compare so that there is no room for doubt then go ahead....

 

[airomerix]

Dog fighting days are over...

The same blunder which was done by Americans during Vietnam war. If there was even a little sense in this statement then Eurofighter, Rafale, Raptor or even the latest F-35 wouldnt be equipped with an inbuilt 20mm cannon.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Dog fighting days are over...

The same blunder which was done by Americans during Vietnam war. If there was even a little sense in this statement then Eurofighter, Rafale, Raptor or even the latest F-35 wouldnt be equipped with an inbuilt 20mm cannon.

Sir with deu respect there's always a plan B

 

[airomerix]

Sir with deu respect there's always a plan B

I would be highly obliged if you can disclose the Plan B of IAF?

 

[GURU DUTT]

I would be highly obliged if you can disclose the Plan B of IAF?

well if we disclose it wont be plan B

but the funny part is that you dont have an escape route fr plan A itself (MKIs with all that elekronik hokus phokus +Israeli, french and russian missiles on board+Indian radar assets-net centrikk warfare-sat cover+Phalcon)..

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

Dog fighting days are over...

The same blunder which was done by Americans during Vietnam war. If there was even a little sense in this statement then Eurofighter, Rafale, Raptor or even the latest F-35 wouldnt be equipped with an inbuilt 20mm cannon.

Planes are equipped with cannon for the scenario when it is out of missiles. When was vietnam war fought? Oh yes, 40 years ago. BVR is the everything today. And PAF has nothing in its arsenal to counter the BVR capability of Su30 MKI. And we have the numerical strength as well.

 

[airomerix]

Planes are equipped with cannon for the scenario when it is out of missiles. When was vietnam war fought? Oh yes, 40 years ago. BVR is the everything today. And PAF has nothing in its arsenal to counter the BVR capability of Su30 MKI. And we have the numerical strength as well.

Indeed a very far fetched statement from you as expected. Cannons were NEVER a replacement for missiles even if they run out. It maybe the secondary use of the cannon's but only a fool would think "hey im out of missiles, im switching to guns!".

In WVR combat If the target is less then a kilometer away, then missiles are deemed as in-effective as they cannot reach their terminal performance in that short period. This is exactly what happened in Vietnam war (which was fought 40 years ago and still you donot want to learn anything from it because you are too busy defending your vague and insane statements) when the F-4s lacked inbuilt cannons and the pilots became dependent upon missiles which were largely ineffective due to the small Migs slipping through beneath while they used their own CANNONS to down the large Phantoms. The combat kills of USAF vis a vis Russians/Chinese were reduced to 3:1 from 8:1 only because of some one like you perhaps made a blunder while designing the F-4 Phantom.

Nothing fancy

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

Indeed a very far fetched statement from you as expected. Cannons were NEVER a replacement for missiles even if they run out. It maybe the secondaring use of the cannon's but only a fool would think "hey im out of missiles, im switching to guns!".

In WVR combat If the target is less then a kilometer away, then missiles are deemed as in-effective as they cannot reach their terminal performance in that short period. This is exactly what happened in Vietnam war (which was fought 40 years ago and still you donot want to learn anything from it because you are too busy defending your vague and insane statements) when the F-4s lacked inbuilt cannons and the pilots became dependent upon missiles which were largely ineffective due to the small Migs slipping through beneath while they used their own CANNONS to down the large Phantoms. The combat kills of USAF vis a vis Russians/Chinese were reduced to 3:1 from 8:1 only because of some one like you perhaps made a blunder while designing the F-4 Phantom.

Nothing fancy

You just don't give up do you? Just two days you came stupidly claiming Matra 530 to be a BVR mssile, or was that your compatriot? Anyways, Guns are only effective against agile fighters and "only" in WVR combat. An aircraft with Cannons will have no chance against a BVR capable aircraft. Cannons will only be effective after an aircraft is out of its BVR missiles.

Experience in Vietnam showed that the WVR missile of the phantoms AIM-4 was less effective than cannon. If BVR missiles had been used, the story would have been different. Don't reply without proper context.

 

[danger007]

Indeed a very far fetched statement from you as expected. Cannons were NEVER a replacement for missiles even if they run out. It maybe the secondary use of the cannon's but only a fool would think "hey im out of missiles, im switching to guns!".

In WVR combat If the target is less then a kilometer away, then missiles are deemed as in-effective as they cannot reach their terminal performance in that short period. This is exactly what happened in Vietnam war (which was fought 40 years ago and still you donot want to learn anything from it because you are too busy defending your vague and insane statements) when the F-4s lacked inbuilt cannons and the pilots became dependent upon missiles which were largely ineffective due to the small Migs slipping through beneath while they used their own CANNONS to down the large Phantoms. The combat kills of USAF vis a vis Russians/Chinese were reduced to 3:1 from 8:1 only because of some one like you perhaps made a blunder while designing the F-4 Phantom.

Nothing fancy

40 years ago you don't have BVR option. but you have now... why you need to go just 1km to your foe fighter?.. I guess you can't reach that short distance you might be shot down by the time. when you reach within 1km to your foe... you have lame argument..