PAF vs. IAF Analysis- Air Combat Over the Subcontinent

[anoopsaxena76]

The Su-30MKI can fire first given the longer range of its missile, but firing at maximum range is usually discouraged due to the low PK. The Su-30MKI will probably not see the F-16 first though, so the F-16 has some room to play. The F-16 is going to pickup the Su-30MKI at the maximum range of its radar - well before the Su-30MKI can see the F-16.

Okay so what radars are we talking about? Just want to establish all the facts before we proceed to discuss this.

The R-77 is some key aerodynamic advantages over the AMRAAM, but I am willing to bet the digital systems on the AMRAAM are better than the R-77.

And what are the advantages in favour of R-77 and in favour of AIM-120 and why?

Regards,
Anoop.

 

[MaXimMaRz]

The Su-30MKI can fire first given the longer range of its missile, but firing at maximum range is usually discouraged due to the low PK. The Su-30MKI will probably not see the F-16 first though, so the F-16 has some room to play. The F-16 is going to pickup the Su-30MKI at the maximum range of its radar - well before the Su-30MKI can see the F-16.

The R-77 is some key aerodynamic advantages over the AMRAAM, but I am willing to bet the digital systems on the AMRAAM are better than the R-77. It's really quite a close call and would be an interesting battle.

1. No one on earth has the right to discourage any one from shooting at the max range....( It is one of the basic principles of the modern day Air power doctrine)

2. A HOFE shot is always encourage , may it be at the max limits.

3. Why cant the MKI pick F-16 ( the only reason will be that the two pilots in the cockpit might be blind and they for got the state of the art back home)
Su-30 MKI with its Bars or Super Zukh radar can pick it far away, not to mention the slewable modes and the Pencle beam mode.

4. If you r talking about visual tally, then dont talk about BVRs, come down to Archer and AIM-9x (IR both). In that case Archer is no less then a death call

 

[anoopsaxena76]

Oops I had intended to take the discussion one step at a time.. and you shot us down in BVR mode

Regards,
Anoop.

 

[blain2]

1. No one on earth has the right to discourage any one from shooting at the max range....( It is one of the basic principles of the modern day Air power doctrine)

2. A HOFE shot is always encourage , may it be at the max limits.

3. Why cant the MKI pick F-16 ( the only reason will be that the two pilots in the cockpit might be blind and they for got the state of the art back home)
Su-30 MKI with its Bars or Super Zukh radar can pick it far away, not to mention the slewable modes and the Pencle beam mode.

4. If you r talking about visual tally, then dont talk about BVRs, come down to Archer and AIM-9x (IR both). In that case Archer is no less then a death call

On #4, I would put my money on Aim-9x with JHMCS against the archer/HMD combo. The two missiles and the HM systems are a generation apart.

On #3, the reason he is suggesting that the F-16 would detect the MKI first is due to the size of the MKI. Its easily twice the size of the smaller viper. The APG-68 variant can easily track targets at ranges greater than 120NM (I am being conservative here) for a an aircraft the size of F-16. Against MKI, the range would be somewhat greater.

On the hand, while the absolute range of the MKI is pretty decent, against smaller sized targets, it would be somewhat lesser. I would probably say the SA would be about equal.

For #2, not sure what a "HOFE" shot it. Can you expand?

The biggest challenge with shooting at max ranges is IFF and also the ability of the other side to turn back and get out of the no escape zone of the incoming missile. Besides jamming/ECM etc. all play a part in reducing the effectiveness of radars at extended ranges.

 

[MaXimMaRz]

On #4, I would put my money on Aim-9x with JHMCS against the archer/HMD combo. The two missiles and the HM systems are a generation apart.

On #3, the reason he is suggesting that the F-16 would detect the MKI first is due to the size of the MKI. Its easily twice the size of the smaller viper. The APG-68 variant can easily track targets at ranges greater than 120NM (I am being conservative here) for a an aircraft the size of F-16. Against MKI, the range would be somewhat greater.

On the hand, while the absolute range of the MKI is pretty decent, against smaller sized targets, it would be somewhat lesser. I would probably say the SA would be about equal.

For #2, not sure what a "HOFE" shot it. Can you expand?

The biggest challenge with shooting at max ranges is IFF and also the ability of the other side to turn back and get out of the no escape zone of the incoming missile. Besides jamming/ECM etc. all play a part in reducing the effectiveness of radars at extended ranges.

HOFE means Heart of firing envelope

no 3. 120 NM ? wow, lets talk about practical ranges, It doesnt go beyond 60 NM that too on a airliner..... the difference between APG-66 and APG-68 is that 68 is TWS and these Americans they even said Raptor has a 1100 Km radar range....talk about practical ranges ( and i am being unbaised)
APG-68 cant change its beam forms and the raster scan is pretty slower then that of MKI. and if you talk about size then my friend MKI is designed for a 2 meter sq. target. so size dosent count either.

Once u get a lock on and u trigger the launch sequence then that range at that particular instance matters. you have to avoid the launch first , if the launch has been done u are left with the few last ditch maneuvers.

the main game in reducing the range, is rate of clouser and it depends on the aspect of the target, its easy to reduce the range before the launch but after that its a game of guts , face the Missile on a 120 beam, go for a barrel roll, if u miss he hits or if he misses u live

 

[mean_bird]

HOFE means Heart of firing envelope

no 3. 120 NM ? wow, lets talk about practical ranges, It doesnt go beyond 60 NM that too on a airliner..... the difference between APG-66 and APG-68 is that 68 is TWS and these Americans they even said Raptor has a 1100 Km radar range....talk about practical ranges ( and i am being unbaised)
APG-68 cant change its beam forms and the raster scan is pretty slower then that of MKI. and if you talk about size then my friend MKI is designed for a 2 meter sq. target. so size dosent count either.

Once u get a lock on and u trigger the launch sequence then that range at that particular instance matters. you have to avoid the launch first , if the launch has been done u are left with the few last ditch maneuvers.

the main game in reducing the range, is rate of clouser and it depends on the aspect of the target, its easy to reduce the range before the launch but after that its a game of guts , face the Missile on a 120 beam, go for a barrel roll, if u miss he hits or if he misses u live

MaximMarz,

I have asked you before to provide any source for your claims.

I don't know where you keep getting your figures from. Show me one proof MKI has 2m² RCS?

Last time you were telling me a commercial airliner has an RCS of 4m² which is absolutely false.

Secondly, are you talking about the basic APG-68 or the APG-68v9? because the later has a 30% increase over the former in terms of range. PAF new F-16s will have the v9 as will all the other ones after MLU.

So if you have a proof, enlighten us so we can increase our knowledge and discuss in a much more informed way. Just floating numbers without proof leads you nowhere.


added:

Btw, the difference between an APG-66 and APG-68

"The AN/APG-68 is an advanced pulse-Doppler radar with increased range, more modes and better resolution compared to the AN/APG-66 radar. AN/APG-68 exclusive modes include medium resolution mapping, ground target MTI, and ground moving, target track in air-to-ground mode, and track-while scan, ground moving, target rejection, velocity search and medium PRF up-look in air-to-air mode. Development of the AN/APG-68(V) began in 1980 as part of a USAF effort to incorporate new computer processing technologies into the F-16, as well as to adapt it to carry the AIM-120 AMRAAM missile"

 

[Sgt Automatic]

Okay so what radars are we talking about? Just want to establish all the facts before we proceed to discuss this.



And what are the advantages in favour of R-77 and in favour of AIM-120 and why?

Regards,
Anoop.

The AIM-120Chas a range of 105KM, while the R-77 has a range of 90KM. So there the AIM has an advantage.

AIM has some key digital advantages such as the active homing distance is larger than that of R-77. Also the hit % is also a little greater than that of a R-77.

R-77 has an advantage over AIM in manoverability and a little bit extra speed. They are both rated for Mach 4.

 

[Sgt Automatic]

whats the point of carrying SO-CALLED better missiles if the opponent sees you first and takes the first shot

Hi

You are right in the scenario you stated it would be useless. But thats not the case because F-16 Blk50/52 will be able to see the SU30MKI first or if not first atleast at the same time but fire first because the AIM-120C carried by the F-16 has a greater range. 55 miles vs 65 miles.

 

[saiko]

The AMRAAM having a longer range is news to me, but to answer the other queries someone made:

I did these calculations a few months ago for someone and I don't have the time just now to dig out the inputs and show the formula, but the Su-30MKI has the RCS of a flying barn. Do some basic calculations based on manufacturer stated detection capability and you will find that the Su-30MKI will be detectable (assuming no EW) at maximum range of the F-16s radar whereas the F-16 will not be detected until a significantly closer range by the Su-30MKI. I don't remember the exact calculated figure, but it is further than maximum MRAAM range.

The AMRAAM's delta control surfaces are less efficient and will bleed more energy when in high G maneuvers. The R-77's design is superior in terms of maneuverability - body strakes, inverse canards, lattice controls, thrust vectoring, etc.

I wouldn't count on its electronics being better than the AMRAAm, but I am only speculating on that one.

Firing at maximum range is not a great idea unless you have Meteors. Both the F-16 and Su-30MKI are maneuverable enough to dramatically lower PK on the AMRAAM and R-77 when they are fired at the edge of their engagement envelope due to the fact that they are not powered at that point, they are gliding.

 

[Keysersoze]

Bear in the mind the ranges quoted are for lofted launch (AIM120) and for aircraft assisted launch (for the r-77)

 

[blain2]

HOFE means Heart of firing envelope

Thanks.

no 3. 120 NM ? wow, lets talk about practical ranges, It doesnt go beyond 60 NM that too on a airliner..... the difference between APG-66 and APG-68 is that 68 is TWS and these Americans they even said Raptor has a 1100 Km radar range....talk about practical ranges ( and i am being unbaised)
APG-68 cant change its beam forms and the raster scan is pretty slower then that of MKI. and if you talk about size then my friend MKI is designed for a 2 meter sq. target. so size dosent count either.

There are considerable differences in APG-66 and APG-68. TWS is available on the APG-66 (V2s) and certainly on the 66s in use of the PAF. The 66v2 allowed TWS for up to 10 targets. The differences between 66 and 68 are much greater than just the TWS. APG-68 affords much greater range than the APG-66. The number of tracks also go up considerably for the RWS/TWS etc. As far as talking practical, being designed to detect a 2 meter target vs. 1 meter target only results in the range being impacted.

When you talk about changing beam form etc., that is a matter of being susceptible to ECM etc. F-16 will detect the MKI at a pretty considerable range with an APG-68 on. There are no doubts about that.

Once u get a lock on and u trigger the launch sequence then that range at that particular instance matters. you have to avoid the launch first , if the launch has been done u are left with the few last ditch maneuvers.

As I said, the earlier you see the better it is. At greater standoff distances, the possibility exists that the opposing aircraft may simply get out of the No escape zone of the BVRAAM (if the aircraft being targeted has good RWR and MAWS type capability). There are so many other factors that simply going by the absolute ranges of the radars and missiles cannot do justice to this discussion. I also speak from not having been in such situations, maybe you have some experience.

the main game in reducing the range, is rate of clouser and it depends on the aspect of the target, its easy to reduce the range before the launch but after that its a game of guts , face the Missile on a 120 beam, go for a barrel roll, if u miss he hits or if he misses u live

All very possible. I guess the point is that no BVR is perfect and no protection is perfect either.

 

[Sgt Automatic]

Bear in the mind the ranges quoted are for lofted launch (AIM120) and for aircraft assisted launch (for the r-77)

What is the difference between the two and how would they effect the actuall control range?

I am guess the aircrat assisted launch range would be alot more than the lofted launch range for the AIM??

 

[zombie:-)]

Hi

You are right in the scenario you stated it would be useless. But thats not the case because F-16 Blk50/52 will be able to see the SU30MKI first or if not first atleast at the same time but fire first because the AIM-120C carried by the F-16 has a greater range. 55 miles vs 65 miles.

whats the connection between radar detection range and actual missile range in this scenario

N011M:

* For aircraft N011M has a 350 km search range and a 200 km tracking range.
* A MiG-21 for instance can be detected at a distance of up to 135 km. Design maximum search range for an F-16 target was 140-160km.
* A Bars' earlier variant, fitted with a five-kilowatt transmitter, proved to be capable of acquiring Su-27 fighters at a range of over 330 km.
* It can track 20 air targets and engage the 8 most threatening targets simultaneously.
* The forward hemisphere is ±90º in azimuth and ±55º in elevation.
* N011M can withstand up to 5 percent transceiver loss without significant degredation in performance.

Therefore:

1. The effective detective / tracking range of a radar is depended on the RCS of its goal.
2. The tracking range of the radar is about 3/5~2/3 of the detective / searching range of the radar.
3. The N011M should have the longer detective / tracking range than AN/APG-80. However, the frontal RCS of Su-30MKI/35 (10~15m2 class) is also much bigger than F-16E/F (1~2m2 class). According to the basic formula for the relationship between RCS and the detective / tracking range of the radar, I don't think that Su-30MKI/35 with N011M will have significant advantage of "First Look" than the F-16E/F with AN/APG-80 in BVR engagement.

PS: The designer of AN/APG-80 declared this radar's detective range is two times of the detective range of AN/APG-68V7, which means it should be able to detect the target with RCS of Su-27's ckass 160 km away theoretically. The MTBF of AN/APG-80 is more than 500 hours, and it can TWS 20 targets at the same time (Which may be increrased to 50 targets in the future).

Source: <a href="http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/info-su30mki.html" rel="nofollow">VayuSena : A WebSite on the Indian Air Force</a>

found the above posted on f-16.net

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-703-start-60.html

so if an f-16 can be detected earlier or at the same time it can detect the su-30 at 140 kms and 65 miles is 104 kms then you cant take the shot till the plane comes within range

 

[zombie:-)]

you know what guys RCS ALSO DEPENDS ON THE TRANSMITTING RADARS POWER hence term RCS is a grossly mistaken term

Informally, the RCS of a radar target is an effective area that intercepts the transmitted radar power and then scatters that power isotropically back to the radar receiver. More precisely, the RCS of a radar target is the hypothetical area required to intercept the transmitted power density at the target such that if the total intercepted power were re-radiated isotropically, the power density actually observed at the receiver is produced[1]. This is a complex statement that can be understood by examining the monostatic (radar transmitter and receiver co-located) radar equation one term at a time:

P_r = {{P_t G_t}over{4 pi r^2}} sigma {{1}over{4 pi r^2}} A_{eff}

where

* Pt = power transmitted by the radar (Watts)
* Gt = gain of the radar transmit antenna (dimensionless)
* r = distance from the radar to the target (meters)
* &#963; = radar cross section of the target (meters squared)
* Aeff = effective area of the radar receiving antenna (meters squared)
* Pr = power received back from the target by the radar (Watts)

so simply its like holding a torch in a dark alley and things you might see will depend on two things

1 size of the object (target) in front of you
2 power of the torch you are holding

most of you guys simply miss the second point altogether hence it also depends on the power transmitted by the radar .....so MKI radar obviously produces more power than f-16 mlu ones hence f-16 having smaller SO CALLED RCS may not have any significant advantage at all

 

[blain2]

you know what guys RCS ALSO DEPENDS ON THE TRANSMITTING RADARS POWER hence term RCS is a grossly mistaken term



so simply its like holding a torch in a dark alley and things you might see will depend on two things

1 size of the object (target) in front of you
2 power of the torch you are holding

most of you guys simply miss the second point altogether hence it also depends on the power transmitted by the radar .....so MKI radar obviously produces more power than f-16 mlu ones hence f-16 having smaller SO CALLED RCS may not have any significant advantage at all

Yes that logic is correct however #2 compensates to some degree the problem of #1 (being too small). This compensation does not mean that #1 is no longer an issue.

As far as I am aware, this actual detection range is not even the issue right now. Radars see targets at fairly long ranges, however there are no viable standoff missiles available to exploit this range. So the best you can do is to use this information and build up your SA so you can position yourself for kill better than the other side. This being stated without taking any of the other factors such as ECM etc. being employed by the other side.

While there are some pretty deadly WVR AAMs in service right now which may have lethality of upwards of 90% or so, this is not the case with BVRAAMs. AIM-7 Sparrow had a success rate of 40%, AIM-120 in my opinion may be close to 60%. Have absolutely no idea about the Russian hardware but if the past is anything to go with, I have no reason to believe that they can do better than 60%.