What's new

Su-30MKI & JF-17 Air Fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
i think we should compare mki against F-16 or J-10, instead of mki vs jf-17.

jf-17 is better compared with the lca

here's different classes of fighters:

light: Jf-17, LCA, Gripen
Medium: F-16, J-10, Mirage 2000,
Heavy: F-15, F/A-18, Mig-29, Rafael, Eurofighter, Su-30

people here are saying that the size doesn't matter in bvr because all u need in aewacs and missiles. its not as simple as that people. in a bvr fight once you have locked on with a missile at around 70-80 km the other fighter will also lock on to you they will both fire and try to help their missile reach a range (10-15 km) where the missile's radar can take over, then they will turn back, once that happens the fighter with the most fuel and the highest T/W ratio will have an advantage, when it turns the other way and fires flares and chaff like crazy and goes to max speed to avoid the mach 5 missile.

thus a light fighter cannot be compared with a heavy fighter because the heavy fighter has 2 engines instead of one giving it a higher t/w ratio and it also has a lot more fuel giving it more combat time in the air, also in a close combat dogfight the fuel reserves of a light airplane are only enough for 10-15 minutes of combat before they have to break off and run which isn't feasible and for the heavy plane it isn't much higher maybe 5-10 minutes more, but that 5-10 minutes is critical in a dogfight where your enemy is almost out of fuel.

my source? Dogfights on History channel

i think its better to compare mki with f-16 or j-10 because they're a bit larger and a bit more advanced.

i'm asking the moderators to open up another thread comparing mki with f-16 of j-10.
 
.
i think we should compare mki against F-16 or J-10, instead of mki vs jf-17.

jf-17 is better compared with the lca

here's different classes of fighters:

light: Jf-17, LCA, Gripen
Medium: F-16, J-10, Mirage 2000,
Heavy: F-15, F/A-18, Mig-29, Rafael, Eurofighter, Su-30

people here are saying that the size doesn't matter in bvr because all u need in aewacs and missiles. its not as simple as that people. in a bvr fight once you have locked on with a missile at around 70-80 km the other fighter will also lock on to you they will both fire and try to help their missile reach a range (10-15 km) where the missile's radar can take over, then they will turn back, once that happens the fighter with the most fuel and the highest T/W ratio will have an advantage, when it turns the other way and fires flares and chaff like crazy and goes to max speed to avoid the mach 5 missile.

thus a light fighter cannot be compared with a heavy fighter because the heavy fighter has 2 engines instead of one giving it a higher t/w ratio and it also has a lot more fuel giving it more combat time in the air, also in a close combat dogfight the fuel reserves of a light airplane are only enough for 10-15 minutes of combat before they have to break off and run which isn't feasible and for the heavy plane it isn't much higher maybe 5-10 minutes more, but that 5-10 minutes is critical in a dogfight where your enemy is almost out of fuel.

my source? Dogfights on History channel

i think its better to compare mki with f-16 or j-10 because they're a bit larger and a bit more advanced.

i'm asking the moderators to open up another thread comparing mki with f-16 of j-10.

That is really a stupid post. Light, medium and heavy? Ever heard about ECM, ECCM or passive? Ever heard about cone of death which is surely not at bvr max range of anything fired? Maybe watching discovery shows some fancy pics but it is hardly realistic. Just watch the top 10 of X, Y or Z... Mostly stupid movies. Just posting this for a junior posters sounds a bit strange...
 
.
there is nothing wrong in what he said STOP BLOWING UP YOUR NERVES :woot:

and most of the pakistanis here might hate history channel coz it always shows good stuff about israel and its fearless pilots ...and it wont go well with them...but all is not true that is shown in them .....even your ESTEEMED muradk has also accepted that to counter su-30s you need j-11s ...ever seen him say that JF-17 is a match to the MKI and even if you get J-11 youll have no answer to MMRCA winner which obviously will be much more advanced than the MKI .....FACE THE REALITY...if the jf-17 ventures on a 1on1 combat against mki itll loose badly .....only solution is hunt in packs and use the numerical advantage very carefully ...thats all there is nothing in the SANE WORLD that can compare jf-17 to an mki considering the pilots on both the air craft are equally skilled .....JF-17 VS MIG-21 BISON might be a better topic
 
Last edited:
.
^

jf-17 vs mig-21 isn't a good comparison.

mig-21 is 2nd gen (3.75 gen with upgrade)

jf-17 is 4th gen

but still not comparable

oh and munir i've heard of them and they have something to do with ew right?

and the cone of death is the range where u cant escape a bvr missile right?
 
.
^

jf-17 vs mig-21 isn't a good comparison.

mig-21 is 2nd gen (3.75 gen with upgrade)

jf-17 is 4th gen

but still not comparable

oh and munir i've heard of them and they have something to do with ew right?

and the cone of death is the range where u cant escape a bvr missile right?

Zombie was talking about MIG-21 Bisons not the older versions. Bisons are much improved and they are way more improved then older versions. :pop:
 
.
^

jf-17 vs mig-21 isn't a good comparison.

mig-21 is 2nd gen (3.75 gen with upgrade)

jf-17 is 4th gen

but still not comparable

oh and munir i've heard of them and they have something to do with ew right?

and the cone of death is the range where u cant escape a bvr missile right?

MIG-21 BIS IS DIFFERENT FROM MIG-21 BISON which is nothing but mig-21-93as the russians call it ...the most advanced mig-21
when they can compare a 4-gen with a 4.5 gen aircraft whats the difference when a 3.75 is compared with a 4 gen one

indian pilots are vastly experienced with the characteristics of the airplane and still the jf-17 has to be inducted and should be built in large numbers and they should also build tactics according to the aircrafts flight performance...its not like a video game where you strap on,take off and start shooting ....they still have to be completely sure about the jf-17s flight profiles at different altitudes with varying payload and velocity.....hence all this stuff about jf-17 putting up a worthy fight even with a mig-21 bison is not foreseeable in the near future (5 years)...hope my points are clear .. i am not trying to put jf-17 or PAF in bad light this is just the reality.
 
Last edited:
.
.hence all this stuff about jf-17 putting up a worthy fight even with a mig-21 bison is not foreseeable in the near future (5 years)

:lol: Reality? Here you are comparing the Mig-21 bison with a jet that is, according to MuradK, amazing the PAF's best F-16A pilots with its agility?
So one moment you will say "MuradK said PAF needs J-11, so PAF needs J-11 to counter Su-30", but THEN you say Mig-21 is superior to JF-17 even though the same MuradK has said it is already scaring the F-16A pilots?
Man you biased people are funny, maybe if you stop the double standards you'll be taken seriously by non-Indians. Until then, we'll just keep laughing at you.

By the way, MuradK never once said PAF needs J-11 to counter Su-30. He said PAF would see a huge boost in capability with J-11.
In fact, MuradK has stated many many times that PAF can counter InAF even with its current fleet of F-7, Mirage and a handful of F-16. Do you believe that too?

Munir, Gucci is right, JF-17 should not be compared to Su-30 because they are in different classes, same with JF-17 and bison. Su-30 will always have advantages over the JF. It is up to the PAF to eliminate those advantages through technologies such as data-linking, EW/ECM suites, etc.
 
Last edited:
.
Its unfair to compare a non operational JF17 to a MKI flanker which is in service with 5 Squadrons of the IAF already.

JF17 wen it arrives will be a massive improvement on wat PAF has today. Even the 44 F16 are onlly basic block a/b and non BVR capable.

Hence i agree with HJ786 JF17 will be the best PAF fighter in atempting to tackle the su30mki

But i also feel that block 52 F16s will surpass JF17 WEN THEY ARRIVE in 2011. That will become PAFs big MKI answer.. But so few nos will be an issue..

APG68 V KLJ 7/10 & Amraam v SD10. i think F16 will win on both accounts
 
.
Its unfair to compare a non operational JF17 to a MKI flanker which is in service with 5 Squadrons of the IAF already.

JF17 wen it arrives will be a massive improvement on wat PAF has today. Even the 44 F16 are onlly basic block a/b and non BVR capable.

Hence i agree with HJ786 JF17 will be the best PAF fighter in atempting to tackle the su30mki

But i also feel that block 52 F16s will surpass JF17 WEN THEY ARRIVE in 2011. That will become PAFs big MKI answer.. But so few nos will be an issue..

APG68 V KLJ 7/10 & Amraam v SD10. i think F16 will win on both accounts

Dude your rampant fandom of the MKI is getting a bit tiresome.... Frankly it is not the be all and end all of fighter aircraft as has been proved.
Simply put it has not yet caused the PAF any big headaches yet when tensions arose over the recent attacks and there was talk of "surgical strikes"

I am getting the inside skinny on the RAF's REAL opinion on the aircraft through a new source I have, and no one is that impressed despite what you have claimed in the past.

The next step would be for you to go and check what has been said NUMEROUS times before......the current set up is only for the first few models of the aircraft and would be upgraded after the first 50.
 
.
:lol: Reality? Here you are comparing the Mig-21 bison with a jet that is, according to MuradK, amazing the PAF's best F-16A pilots with its agility?
So one moment you will say "MuradK said PAF needs J-11, so PAF needs J-11 to counter Su-30", but THEN you say Mig-21 is superior to JF-17 even though the same MuradK has said it is already scaring the F-16A pilots?
Man you biased people are funny, maybe if you stop the double standards you'll be taken seriously by non-Indians. Until then, we'll just keep laughing at you.

By the way, MuradK never once said PAF needs J-11 to counter Su-30. He said PAF would see a huge boost in capability with J-11.
In fact, MuradK has stated many many times that PAF can counter InAF even with its current fleet of F-7, Mirage and a handful of F-16. Do you believe that too?

Munir, Gucci is right, JF-17 should not be compared to Su-30 because they are in different classes, same with JF-17 and bison. Su-30 will always have advantages over the JF. It is up to the PAF to eliminate those advantages through technologies such as data-linking, EW/ECM suites, etc.

You are absolutely right they should not be compared; but one thing i can guarantee is that a JF17 will never face MKI one on one. Unless the Indians work out a miracle and make the MKI into an F22(stealthy), it can definitely be shot down. But one thing Gucci is spot on is that both JF17 and MKI will fire at each other at almost the same time. Yes Yes MKI has a huge detection range but JF17 will also be aware of MKI's existence with the help of an AWAC. Not to mention the Erieye will be able to jam the MKI, so overall it all depends on luck and the skill of the pilot. And all that heavy payload the Indians like to talk about, well that payload is the first thing the MKI will drop when it realizes that an SD10 or an AMRAAM is on its way.
 
.
when you guys accept that there is no point in comparig jf-17 with the mki WHY NOT CLOSE THIS THREAD .....40 pages of pure fanboy stuff

MODS ARE NOT DOING THEIR WORK
 
.
You are absolutely right they should not be compared; but one thing i can guarantee is that a JF17 will never face MKI one on one. Unless the Indians work out a miracle and make the MKI into an F22(stealthy), it can definitely be shot down. But one thing Gucci is spot on is that both JF17 and MKI will fire at each other at almost the same time. Yes Yes MKI has a huge detection range but JF17 will also be aware of MKI's existence with the help of an AWAC. Not to mention the Erieye will be able to jam the MKI, so overall it all depends on luck and the skill of the pilot. And all that heavy payload the Indians like to talk about, well that payload is the first thing the MKI will drop when it realizes that an SD10 or an AMRAAM is on its way.

if erieye can jam the mki the phalcon can jam the jf-17.

and why's every1 talking about jf-17 block 2 when there isn't even an mki block 2? and mki's been around for 10 years.
 
.
if erieye can jam the mki the phalcon can jam the jf-17.

and why's every1 talking about jf-17 block 2 when there isn't even an mki block 2? and mki's been around for 10 years.

we are talking about jf17 block2 because its in the process of evolution. block1 is somewhat equal to block30 f16... and we intend to [gradually]increase its capability [and our production expertese] to block60 level.

su27.. su30k.. su30mki.. =>MLU... SU35... you dont see any evolution here mate? what we call batches, russians come up with different names... same is the mig. series


jf17 block 1 is for point defence... its not for deep penetration [yet].... the erieye has some range and i reckon it would help the jf17 more effectively inside pakistan with some areas of india depending upon erieye mobility presence.


pakistan is looking for aesa radar for the subsequent jets for the deep strike function.. even the allmighty su30 does not have aesa so it might feel the brunt of pesa and huge rcs, at the moment
 
Last edited:
.
if erieye can jam the mki the phalcon can jam the jf-17.

and why's every1 talking about jf-17 block 2 when there isn't even an mki block 2? and mki's been around for 10 years.

MKI itself is a block 2 or a block 3 and it is not 10 years old. The original Su-30 even for India were not MKIs but were later upgraded to be so.

The Su-30 itself is a variant of the Su-27. Its goes like this:
-Su-27
-Su-30
-Su-30K
-Su-30MKI

India started getting from the Su-30, then Su-30K and then Su-30MKI.
 
.
ya true...

but mki capability has been the same since 2001 almost 8 years. and there still isn't talk of a mki upgrade, except for rumors of the supercruse al-41 3d tvc engine, and the ibris aesa radar. but they are just rumors and are most likely 3-5 years away.

my point is...

i dont think it makes economic sense to upgrade the jf-17 so fast. aesa radars and French avionics are very expensive my friend they are charging 1.5 billion to upgrade 50 mirage 2000s just for a new engine, new radar which isn't even aesa, and new avionics, if we minus the cost of the engines i estimate it'd be 700 million for the radar and the avionics.

and buying aesa from china isn't possible as their technology hasn't matured yet, the first chinese aesa will probably fly by 2015-2017. remember only 1 country has mastered aesa, while other countries (Israel, France, and Russia) are 2-3 years away from 1st generation aesa.

France will offer aesa but it'll be very expensive.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom