SU-30's Cobra Maneuvers - A Treat for PAF Shaheen

[Arsalan]

see there is a limit to how many aircrafts an AWACS can data-link...the AIM-120 has a kill range of about a hundred kms...AWACS are indispensable assets for any airforce...our frontline fighter will be data-linked too...and would function in and around the AWACS...it is the duty of the strike a/cs to take out the enemy AWACS...and for that role the MKI wouldn't fit...because of it's big RCS...and hence the vulnerability to a BVR hit....the Bisons would fare better...
so a more realistic scenario would be..JF-17s/f-16s with AIM-120Cs data-linked to Erieye AEW&CS...facing wave after wave of migs...armed with bvrs with data-links to the phalcon(the close proximity of the battle-zones to the borderwould enable elaborate coverage for both the AWACS systems...but the Phalcon has a larger operating radius...the erieye doesn't have a proper radius...it's backward tracking capability is seriously limited)
the SU-30mkis would face your strike a/cs...the mirages and F-7s...till the time your AEW&CS aren't taken out.

so you claim that the bison is going to out smart the F16 blk15 MLU3, F16 blk 52, JF17 and FC20
well dude is this is so i guess we have nothing left to debate on! i mean do you really think that bison will be counter the F16,JF 17 and FC20...
actually to tell you the truth i am really amazed by such degree of spectualtion! i think this post comes direct from the patriotic side of yours more then from any technicall grounds!
let me have the honour to go through a link to support tis claim of your!

regards!

 

[Arsalan]

i know...i was merely considering the JF-17 and the SU-30MKi.

kindly do make such things clear as they creat lot of confusion and misunderstandings!!! i hope you understand and just take it as an offense!

regards!

 

[paritosh]

How many migs? couple of thousands?

and bahi sahib Mirages are going to be phased out as JF picks up induction and F-7s are going to be interceptors not strike ACs.Strike role will be assumed by Falcons and Vanguards so expect to face them not skybolts

see...if a war is forced upon us...you'd see the same mirages operating..and besides haven't they been upgraded to the ROSE std.?
and no...wave after wave doesn't mean a couple of thousands would come for you...a fighter strike element usually consists of 3-7 maybe more fighters..I mean it depends on the importance of the mission.
and as for taking out the enemy AWACS is concerned...numerical superiority would definitely count...an AWACS can data-link only a limited number of planes...and a plane can engage at most 2 targets(most BVR enabled planes track upto 8 targets..but engage only the two most threatening ones)...so the plan would be to engage the fighter escorts of the AWACS and then send another strike element to take down the AWACS.

 

[paritosh]

so you claim that the bison is going to out smart the F16 blk15 MLU3, F16 blk 52, JF17 and FC20
well dude is this is so i guess we have nothing left to debate on! i mean do you really think that bison will be counter the F16,JF 17 and FC20...
actually to tell you the truth i am really amazed by such degree of spectualtion! i think this post comes direct from the patriotic side of yours more then from any technicall grounds!
let me have the honour to go through a link to support tis claim of your!

regards!

no mate...i don't speculate.
the Bison is a strike a/c we have....and one of the more expendable ones...plus we have them in plenty...plus it indeed is a capable a/c...has a small RCS...has a good phazotron radar...a nice Israeli ECM suite...and it's agility is proven(f-16 beats the heck outa it as far as the agility goes)
so it is a good choice for taking out the AWACS...

 

[hj786]

see there is a limit to how many aircrafts an AWACS can data-link...the AIM-120 has a kill range of about a hundred kms...AWACS are indispensable assets for any airforce...our frontline fighter will be data-linked too...and would function in and around the AWACS...it is the duty of the strike a/cs to take out the enemy AWACS...and for that role the MKI wouldn't fit...because of it's big RCS...and hence the vulnerability to a BVR hit....the Bisons would fare better...
so a more realistic scenario would be..JF-17s/f-16s with AIM-120Cs data-linked to Erieye AEW&CS...facing wave after wave of migs...armed with bvrs with data-links to the phalcon(the close proximity of the battle-zones to the borderwould enable elaborate coverage for both the AWACS systems...but the Phalcon has a larger operating radius...the erieye doesn't have a proper radius...it's backward tracking capability is seriously limited)
the SU-30mkis would face your strike a/cs...the mirages and F-7s...till the time your AEW&CS aren't taken out.

no mate...i don't speculate.

The above post proves that you do.

the Bison is a strike a/c we have....and one of the more expendable ones...plus we have them in plenty...plus it indeed is a capable a/c...has a small RCS...has a good phazotron radar...a nice Israeli ECM suite...and it's agility is proven(f-16 beats the heck outa it as far as the agility goes)
so it is a good choice for taking out the AWACS...

Doesn't matter how small you claim the RCS to be, it will be detected from hundreds of miles away. Israelis don't have a monopoly on ECM suites. Its agility is proven to be inferior to the original MiG-21 design, and that wasn't anything special either.
Good choice compared to what? A MiG-19?

 

[SBD-3]

see...if a war is forced upon us...you'd see the same mirages operating..and besides haven't they been upgraded to the ROSE std.?
and no...wave after wave doesn't mean a couple of thousands would come for you...a fighter strike element usually consists of 3-7 maybe more fighters..I mean it depends on the importance of the mission.
and as for taking out the enemy AWACS is concerned...numerical superiority would definitely count...an AWACS can data-link only a limited number of planes...and a plane can engage at most 2 targets(most BVR enabled planes track upto 8 targets..but engage only the two most threatening ones)...so the plan would be to engage the fighter escorts of the AWACS and then send another strike element to take down the AWACS.

ummmmmmmmmm interesting thoughts so bisons will be assuming the strike role but what about MIGs and MKIs? and is it easy to take down escorts and AWACS when they are in home airspace? and what about the sam threat? its not that easy and ratio is 2:1 with IAF not that big to achieve dominence

 

[Arsalan]

see...if a war is forced upon us...you'd see the same mirages operating..and besides haven't they been upgraded to the ROSE std.?
and no...wave after wave doesn't mean a couple of thousands would come for you...a fighter strike element usually consists of 3-7 maybe more fighters..I mean it depends on the importance of the mission.
and as for taking out the enemy AWACS is concerned...numerical superiority would definitely count...an AWACS can data-link only a limited number of planes...and a plane can engage at most 2 targets(most BVR enabled planes track upto 8 targets..but engage only the two most threatening ones)...so the plan would be to engage the fighter escorts of the AWACS and then send another strike element to take down the AWACS.

wow! you seem to be rich in super plans!! i mean all the things that you have said seem to be from an IAF mission instructor/planner ,,,
IAF will be sending bisons! they will engage the fighter escort, then another strike element will come, then it will destroy the AWE&C! it will be bison hunting the F16 blk 52 and FC20! and the list goes on....

intresting what if scenario as you say them!!!

anyway all i want to conclude is,,,,
thankyou !!!!!!!!

regards!

 

[SBD-3]

wow! you seem to be rich in super plans!! i mean all the things that you have said seem to be from an IAF mission instructor/planner ,,,
IAF will be sending bisons! they will engage the fighter escort, then another strike element will come, then it will destroy the AWE&C! it will be bison hunting the F16 blk 52 and FC20! and the list goes on....

intresting what if scenario as you say them!!!

anyway all i want to conclude is,,,,
thankyou !!!!!!!!

regards!

lolz yeah so much for the millitary planning

 

[paritosh]

wow! you seem to be rich in super plans!! i mean all the things that you have said seem to be from an IAF mission instructor/planner ,,,
IAF will be sending bisons! they will engage the fighter escort, then another strike element will come, then it will destroy the AWE&C! it will be bison hunting the F16 blk 52 and FC20! and the list goes on....

intresting what if scenario as you say them!!!

anyway all i want to conclude is,,,,
thankyou !!!!!!!!

regards!

amazing use of smilies and sarcasm.
it seems you don't like being in a defense forum.
:
i guess I have joined the club...high five!

 

[paritosh]

The above post proves that you do.

you relish these one line battles don't you?you chose to pick that one line up and ignore the quoted text or the rest of the posts on the very same page.

Doesn't matter how small you claim the RCS to be, it will be detected from hundreds of miles away. Israelis don't have a monopoly on ECM suites. Its agility is proven to be inferior to the original MiG-21 design, and that wasn't anything special either.
Good choice compared to what? A MiG-19?

what do you want it to be compared to?
I compared it's offensive role to the MKI...if you want to argue on the fact that it's RCS with the non-monopolized israeli ECM suite is larger than that of the MKI...it's all futile then.

 

[paritosh]

ummmmmmmmmm interesting thoughts so bisons will be assuming the strike role but what about MIGs and MKIs? and is it easy to take down escorts and AWACS when they are in home airspace? and what about the sam threat? its not that easy and ratio is 2:1 with IAF not that big to achieve dominence

I agree...but 2:1 is enough for the IAF to pursue an offensive role atleast in the initial phase of a conflict unless thwarted soundly by the PAf.
The Sam threat is there...and it is not easy to take out an enemy AWACS operating in the enemy territory....call it defense planning for the IAF/PAF or whadeva....but under most probabilities the PAf would be in a defensive mode...and the AEW&CS you've got would operate even deeper into your territory...to atleast give the PAF an edge in it's own airspace...and to reverse an IAF offensive.

 

[SBD-3]

I agree...but 2:1 is enough for the IAF to pursue an offensive role atleast in the initial phase of a conflict unless thwarted soundly by the PAf.
The Sam threat is there...and it is not easy to take out an enemy AWACS operating in the enemy territory....call it defense planning for the IAF/PAF or whadeva....but under most probabilities the PAf would be in a defensive mode...and the AEW&CS you've got would operate even deeper into your territory...to atleast give the PAF an edge in it's own airspace...and to reverse an IAF offensive.

so IAF will be on defensive??????
oooh interesting
if IAF is to assume agressive role it will have to bring it AWACS nearer to boarder here FT-2000 may come in Play

 

[paritosh]

so IAF will be on defensive??????
oooh interesting
if IAF is to assume agressive role it will have to bring it AWACS nearer to boarder here FT-2000 may come in Play

I guess you meant PAF in the first line.
the Phalcon has an operating range of a minimum of 700 km radius...which is good enough to cover most of your forward air bases.
As far as the FT-2000 is concerned...it is over-hyped.These anti-radiation missiles seek radiation emitters.The AWACS emits helluva lot of em radiation.The anti-radiation Sams can be countered by shutting down the radars of the AWACS momentarily.The guidance system of the FT-2000 has to be very very complex to be able to home into a target that stops emitting radiation mid-way.
IMO the best way to take out enemy AWACS is by having good AWACS of your own and capable strike A/c that outmatch the ones you'd face.

 

[SBD-3]

I guess you meant PAF in the first line.
the Phalcon has an operating range of a minimum of 700 km radius...which is good enough to cover most of your forward air bases.
As far as the FT-2000 is concerned...it is over-hyped.These anti-radiation missiles seek radiation emitters.The AWACS emits helluva lot of em radiation.The anti-radiation Sams can be countered by shutting down the radars of the AWACS momentarily.The guidance system of the FT-2000 has to be very very complex to be able to home into a target that stops emitting radiation mid-way.
IMO the best way to take out enemy AWACS is by having good AWACS of your own and capable strike A/c that outmatch the ones you'd face.

I meant IAF not PAF.......

700! i guess IAF ACM should have better know how on Phalcon

On its arrival in India, the Israeli-built system mounted on a Russian-built IL-76 transport aircraft was inspected by Indian Air Force chief Fali H Major. The system is used for tactical surveillance of airborne and surface targets and intelligence gathering in a radius of over 400 kilometres. An electronically-steered beam provides a 360-degree coverage around the aircraft and it carries air force personnel on board to analyse data and steer fighter aircraft.

Indian Air Force Gets Israeli-built Awacs - Pakistani Aviation Forum

well it is a reality afterall and its potential will be unleashed

here is something more

Officials here said the Phalcon was a tremendous ‘force multiplier’ in the current situation. “It can help monitor military build-up and troop and aircraft movement nearly 200 kilometres inside Pakistan while flying nearly 100 kilometres inside our own territory,” a news portal quoted Air Marshal ® AK Goel as saying.

The FT-2000 was designed to neutralize and counter these airborne jamming devices. It contains a passive radar target seeker programmed to detect the specific electromagnetic signals emanating from its target. Essentially, the FT-2000 uses its target’s own jamming frequencies against it. In addition, the FT-2000 has a passive homing system that does not transmit electromagnetic waves, thus minimizing the chances that its enemies will detect it in time.(5) The system is equipped with modified HQ-9 interceptor missiles, each of which is 6.8 meters long, 0.47 meters in diameter, and has a launch weight of 1,300 kilograms. The HQ-9 missiles give the FT-2000 a range of 12 to 100 kilometers and an operating altitude of 3 to 20 kilometers. The mobile system is transported and launched on an 8 X 8 cross-country launcher with four canisters that resemble those used by the S-300P.

MissileThreat :: FT-2000

 

[hj786]

you relish these one line battles don't you?you chose to pick that one line up and ignore the quoted text or the rest of the posts on the very same page.

what do you want it to be compared to?
I compared it's offensive role to the MKI...if you want to argue on the fact that it's RCS with the non-monopolized israeli ECM suite is larger than that of the MKI...it's all futile then.

I don't relish internet arguments, I hate them but sometimes I have to say my piece. You said you don't speculate but you are indeed speculating, unless you have access to InAF strategies and tactics.

I want to argue the fact that no matter how stealthy you claim the upgraded MiG-21 is, in the real world it is not stealthy at all and it will be detected from hundreds of miles away. It doesn't matter what that American pilot said, a MiG-21 is the opposite of "stealthy".

As far as the FT-2000 is concerned...it is over-hyped.These anti-radiation missiles seek radiation emitters.The AWACS emits helluva lot of em radiation.The anti-radiation Sams can be countered by shutting down the radars of the AWACS momentarily.The guidance system of the FT-2000 has to be very very complex to be able to home into a target that stops emitting radiation mid-way.

So as soon as the enemy AWACS realises an FT-2000 missile is on its way it will be forced to switch off its radar and move out of range. This means the enemy air force has many minutes of zero AWACS support, enough for a counter-attack to be launched against it. Hell, anything with an active radar or radar jammer can be targeted and either be brought down or forced to retreat. Not only that, because the entire FT-2000 system is passive, the enemy air force cannot target it with anti-radiation missiles.
Overhyped? Not really.