Vietnam SU-30 locked by J-10, 10 times

[Zabaniyah]

The restrictions that Saddam placed on the IQAF were most clearly demonstrated when Iraqi pilots did fly, particularly in air-to-air combat. The IQAF's tactics generally seemed confused, and its pilots displayed poor situational awareness by frequently allowing coalition fighters to close to within a few miles before taking defensive action.48 Iraqi MiG-29 pilots in particular "appeared not to know how to fly,"49 as demonstrated by an early engagement in which a MiG-29 pilot shot down his wingman and then flew his own aircraft into the ground some 30 seconds later. Iraqi MiG-29 pilots reportedly flew with the air-intercept radar button taped down to lock onto the first aircraft detected and continually depressed the trigger to fire their weapons as soon as they acquired a target.50 Apparently, all Iraqi fighter pilots practiced these techniques, for when they managed to lock onto coalition aircraft, they launched their missiles at extreme ranges and missed every time.

Source: Saddam Hussein And Iraqi Air Power

 

[DARKY]

Others already know quite well, except you and few others.


Again, you have to show how ignorant you are. J-11s are designed from the beginning for air superiority, therefore the air force operates them. China wanted to enhance its maritime strike capability in the mid 1990's and ordered the Su-30s from Russia. They had a heavier airframe for greater payload, but their air to air capability suffered. They are certainly NOT better than J-11, especially the latest models. Oh and did I mention J-10 massacred Su-30s in recent air exercises? The exchange rate was 5:1.


Sure there are things they can improve to even their odds. China probably wouldn't be able to do the same thing had those been American jets. However against Vietnam, we're more than sufficient.


How many planes did Iraqi and Serbians bring down? Did they have any significant obstacles to NATO operations? They were almost as good as nothing.

Su 30MKK's air frame was modified for heavy load carrying.......why didn't they do the same with J-11 which had even better electronics according to you and It would have been a lot cheaper.

Don't tell me about your kill ratios.......I know how flankers are flown in china.

Just in case let me remind you such incidents can force them to buy Su 35BM or pour in american F-16s for Vietnamese airforce......and in such case the whole picture might turn drastically.

Again a for a professional even flying a good sortie is a big concern.......they don't go in battlefield with things in mind that they are no match for us.

 

[SQ8]

There were waves of Iraqi Mig 25 and Mig 23 interceptions that didn't allow USN & USAF.......to use bulky AEW & C planes at closer fronts even F-111 were intercepted and F-15s had to come at rescue.....and about being shot by Aim 7.......there were even incidents of Iraqi planes being maneuvered down to earth by unarmed Yank birds.......which had more to do with poor training and lack of weaponry on part of Iraqi pilots.

Even then I don't see them taking their opponents lightly.

Waves??
Apart from the initial "waves".. most of Iraq's Af fled to Iran.. of which many more were shot down by coalition fighters.
When are the HVAA(or Bulky assets) ever placed on the front lines, if anything, AEW, tankers operate at least a 100 to 150 km out from the FLOT..
The early IqAF interceptors went for the strike fighters.. and even with that they were outmatched.
with F-18''s shooting down interceptors and then continuing the strike run.

What exactly are you on about taking their opponents lightly.. is that even part of the discussion??
I believe the whole topic is revolving on the use of EW assets by the Chinese and their effectiveness.
Which you seem to think matter not since the poor Vietnamese cant do anything about anyway.
Then it shifted to the J-10 which you (now I am starting to agree with the Chinese here about it being natural) think is crap vs the Su-30.
And now we are on the gulf war whose facts you have done "balatkar" with..

What exactly is the argument which you wish to win??

 

[peaceful]

Su 30MKK's air frame was modified for heavy load carrying.......why didn't they do the same with J-11 which had even better electronics according to you and It would have been a lot cheaper.

please stop trolling. your quoted text answers your question very well : air to air capability suffered because of such "modified for heavy load carrying".

 

[rcrmj]

I agree with you. This post on PDF is for joke.

just because they showed the true capability and $hity skills of the vietcon's glorious army``its just pathetic`

 

[DARKY]

Waves??
Apart from the initial "waves".. most of Iraq's Af fled to Iran.. of which many more were shot down by coalition fighters.
When are the HVAA(or Bulky assets) ever placed on the front lines, if anything, AEW, tankers operate at least a 100 to 150 km out from the FLOT..
The early IqAF interceptors went for the strike fighters.. and even with that they were outmatched.
with F-18''s shooting down interceptors and then continuing the strike run.

What exactly are you on about taking their opponents lightly.. is that even part of the discussion??
I believe the whole topic is revolving on the use of EW assets by the Chinese and their effectiveness.
Which you seem to think matter not since the poor Vietnamese cant do anything about anyway.
Then it shifted to the J-10 which you (now I am starting to agree with the Chinese here about it being natural) think is crap vs the Su-30.
And now we are on the gulf war whose facts you have done "balatkar" with..

What exactly is the argument which you wish to win??

My argument were towards the claims made by a Chinese boy about his airforce.......but then you jumped in with Gulf war.......it was he who mentioned about Iraqi and Serb pilots.

The whole topic is just revolving around this false/incomplete news presented in a fanboyish manner.......and on top of that barging about 10/dozen locks being made.......and even claiming that the Vietnamese pilots told Chinese on radio links that they lost their confidence.

I never wanted to bring a Vs debate......vs debates are ann insult to the capabilities of a sophisticated fighter.

And about operating in foward lines I meant using their full coverage area on Iraqi air space and battelzone which they were denied off in early stages of the war.....and American jets had to even indulge in dogfights which might have shown different results if Iraqis had trained their pilots.

 

[Nowaday]

vietcon, u talked about it as Vietnamese Communists. and u should know bout Tau Cong, it is known as Chinese communists

 

[rcrmj]

Waves??
Apart from the initial "waves".. most of Iraq's Af fled to Iran.. of which many more were shot down by coalition fighters.
When are the HVAA(or Bulky assets) ever placed on the front lines, if anything, AEW, tankers operate at least a 100 to 150 km out from the FLOT..
The early IqAF interceptors went for the strike fighters.. and even with that they were outmatched.
with F-18''s shooting down interceptors and then continuing the strike run.

What exactly are you on about taking their opponents lightly.. is that even part of the discussion??
I believe the whole topic is revolving on the use of EW assets by the Chinese and their effectiveness.
Which you seem to think matter not since the poor Vietnamese cant do anything about anyway.
Then it shifted to the J-10 which you (now I am starting to agree with the Chinese here about it being natural) think is crap vs the Su-30.
And now we are on the gulf war whose facts you have done "balatkar" with..

What exactly is the argument which you wish to win??

because his paranoia, some ego thurst india will never accept chinese fighters are much better than their ever dreamed of``they will jump into bashing any opportunity they have to ease their feeling of inferior compleity.

he started trolling by assuming j-10 couldnt have a 'solid' lock (he invented it) on Su-30s, and come to the conclusion chinese AWACs and J-10s are crap`lol```even the chinese section didnt give that much info about the incicdent, but some how he can read the 'un-written' parts``

and he had to change the direction of trolling when got debunked again and again`

 

[DARKY]

because his paranoia, some ego thurst india will never accept chinese fighters are much better than their ever dreamed of``they will jump into bashing any opportunity they have to ease their feeling of inferior compleity.

he started trolling by assuming j-10 couldnt have a 'solid' lock (he invented it) on Su-30s, and come to the conclusion chinese AWACs and J-10s are crap`lol```even the chinese section didnt give that much info about the incicdent, but some how he can read the 'un-written' parts``

and he had to change the direction of trolling when got debunked again and again`

I can understand your situation........apologies that I spoiled your troll parade here.

And yeah the info given by your chinese section can be seen...

 

[Zabaniyah]

I never wanted to bring a Vs debate......vs debates are ann insult to the capabilities of a sophisticated fighter.

You are...

 

[SQ8]

My argument were towards the claims made by a Chinese boy about his airforce.......but then you jumped in with Gulf war.......it was he who mentioned about Iraqi and Serb pilots.

The whole topic is just revolving around this false/incomplete news presented in a fanboyish manner.......and on top of that barging about 10/dozen locks being made.......and even claiming that the Vietnamese pilots told Chinese on radio links that they lost their confidence.

I never wanted to bring a Vs debate......vs debates are ann insult to the capabilities of a sophisticated fighter.

And about operating in foward lines I meant using their full coverage area on Iraqi air space and battelzone which they were denied off in early stages of the war.....and American jets had to even indulge in dogfights which might have shown different results if Iraqis had trained their pilots.

The claims are made by pupu.. whilst an online forum poster..
It was his news on the J-20 two years before we got the picture, it was his news on the J-15 before we saw the shots.
So I would add a level of veracity to his claims.
I need a link to the post saying viet pilots said on the radio to their chinese counterparts in pristine English/Cantonese/mandarin that they lost their confidence.
The only mention is of the way the viet pilots behaved in the air, showing very little aggression after having those encounters.
There were iraqi pilots trained in dogfights.. suggest you read "every man a tiger"..
some did engage US pilots in furballs.. for the most part however, superior weaponry and training prevailed for the coalition.

AEW aircraft follow a racetrack pattern a 100km or so away from the FLOT..
ONLY a complete fool would commit his HVAA's into the front.. a time AEW assets moved into Iqaf territory was when the IqAF was fleeing to Iran... awacs followed way behind F-15's and other assets chasing them down.
Red flag exercises have seen HVAA's(tankers) operating 60km behind the main force.. and using zoom climb tactics red force aircraft were able to reach these in early exercises.. 90's onwards.. red force aircraft don't even get close.

You keep deriding Chinese equipment and tactics without an ounce of logic or proof and refuse to accept the contrary..
how is that not being extremely biased..
You cant accept their argument, you have NOthing to offer in return except poo poohing everything Chinese.. then you on with troll fatwa's??

 

[rcrmj]

I can understand your situation........apologies that I spoiled your troll parade here.

And yeah the info given by your chinese section can be seen...

lol``all my posts are here for everyone to judge, your believe is insignificent``dont u know atm, there are non chinese memebers here arguing with you because they think you are a troller``

so it is very clear who trolls here``and about the chinese section, there has nothing to support your funny conclusion`period

 

[DARKY]

The claims are made by pupu.. whilst an online forum poster..
It was his news on the J-20 two years before we got the picture, it was his news on the J-15 before we saw the shots.
So I would add a level of veracity to his claims.
I need a link to the post saying viet pilots said on the radio to their chinese counterparts in pristine English/Cantonese/mandarin that they lost their confidence.
The only mention is of the way the viet pilots behaved in the air, showing very little aggression after having those encounters.
There were iraqi pilots trained in dogfights.. suggest you read "every man a tiger"..
some did engage US pilots in furballs.. for the most part however, superior weaponry and training prevailed for the coalition.

AEW aircraft follow a racetrack pattern a 100km or so away from the FLOT..
ONLY a complete fool would commit his HVAA's into the front.. a time AEW assets moved into Iqaf territory was when the IqAF was fleeing to Iran... awacs followed way behind F-15's and other assets chasing them down.
Red flag exercises have seen HVAA's(tankers) operating 60km behind the main force.. and using zoom climb tactics red force aircraft were able to reach these in early exercises.. 90's onwards.. red force aircraft don't even get close.

You keep deriding Chinese equipment and tactics without an ounce of logic or proof and refuse to accept the contrary..
how is that not being extremely biased..
You cant accept their argument, you have NOthing to offer in return except poo poohing everything Chinese.. then you on with troll fatwa's??

Here you are about communications part......... and what Papu is being said to be claiming
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/118638-vietnam-su-30-j-10-lock-10-times-11.html#post1920055

Now about aggressiveness If you are locked a dozen times and don't have any idea of your opponent the best thing a pilot can do is turn back and land on base......only a fool would try to be aggressive out there.

Yes Iraqi pilots were trained but poorly compared to yanks.

Modern AWACS have the luxury to operate beyond 200km from FLOT......

I raised a question about the mindless debate based on wrongly presented facts........I know how capable Chinese and Vietnamese jets are.........although it can be said that why twisting and truing......but sometimes direct way is not understood......If I had said that ''Vietnam SU-30 is J-10 lock 10 times'' is wrong......then the results would've been different......hence I raised a question on the capabilities of their machinery which lost lock 9 times to gain it 10 times.......and here we have people claiming that the report is wrongly presented.......look from broader prospective you'll understand what I did.

 

[DARKY]

lol``all my posts are here for everyone to judge, your believe is insignificent``dont u know atm, there are non chinese memebers here arguing with you because they think you are a troller``

so it is very clear who trolls here``and about the chinese section, there has nothing to support your funny conclusion`period

You won't understand what went here.......and that's not your fault.

 

[SQ8]

Here you are about communications part......... and what Papu is being said to be claiming
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/118638-vietnam-su-30-j-10-lock-10-times-11.html#post1920055

Now about aggressiveness If you are locked a dozen times and don't have any idea of your opponent the best thing a pilot can do is turn back and land on base......only a fool would try to be aggressive out there.

Yes Iraqi pilots were trained but poorly compared to yanks.

Modern AWACS have the luxury to operate beyond 200km from FLOT......

I raised a question about the mindless debate based on wrongly presented facts........I know how capable Chinese and Vietnamese jets are.........although it can be said that why twisting and truing......but sometimes direct way is not understood......If I had said that ''Vietnam SU-30 is J-10 lock 10 times'' is wrong......then the results would've been different......hence I raised a question on the capabilities of their machinery which lost lock 9 times to gain it 10 times.......and here we have people claiming that the report is wrongly presented.......look from broader prospective you'll understand what I did.

How did you figure that out from that post??
I mean.. apart from the fact that it is a poor translation.. the only thing it mentions is ten lock on's..
IT DOES NOT SAY LOCK WAS LOST 9 OUT OF TEN TIMES
IT DOES NOT SAY LOCK HAD TO BE DONE TEN TIMES
IT DOES NOT SAY LOCK WAS BY TEN DIFFERENT FIGHTERS.

So how did you reach your conclusion?