What's new

Su-30MKI & JF-17 Air Fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
JF17 in its current configuration is a fairly basic plane. when compared to modern 4th generation fighters.

ie

No composites, all alluminium build.
NO CANARDS or TVC
Standard Russian RD93 engine comparable to that on MIG29.
Chinease KLJ radar which is inferior to Bars Pesa radar.
Very limited range of weapons ie variety/MIX is minimal as china is stil behind Russia and the West in this respect.

BUT PLUS points are massive.

BVR capability for first time in PAF.
Very low cost can BE acquired in LARGE nos.
Great upgrade potential
WILL BE LICENSE built in PAC. SO NO embargos...

JF17 is far more successful than LCA tejas which will flop because the indians kept moving goal posts.

BUT JF17 in current block cannot live with SU30MKI without AWACS and
F16/52.. IN SUPPORT. Thankfully jf17 will have both as back up...
 
Would really like to get news about a war game simulation between Su-30 Mki and JF 17.... hmmm......some thing like cope india or the red flag... hehehe....that will answer most of the questions and emotions over here.
 
I think this thread is for MKI v/s JF-17 "Air fight". So I'm quoting my questions here.

Assuming JF-17 datalinked with AWAC

1.) What type of data link JF-17 will use for connect to AWAC?

2.) How many Aircrafts can be able connect to a single Erieye?

3.) Normally AWAC is used to find out ground based targets. So what is the azimuth of an Erieye?
 
If you read between the lines then there is no difference where they get it. Mostly with foreign input. Pakistani products rely on China (and some others) while India gets its tech from Russia and Israel. The difference is that Pakistan starts with less then best concept and gradually alters it locally to better. India jumps to f22 level and it fails... Unless you provide me info where Indian products are surpassing the original concept we can keep this as a basic fact.

Your option would be that India sets higher goal but then again takes more risks and maybe gets more tech input... Pakistan cannot afford the same risk, hence it goes from well known and tested ideas with tot towards Pakistan products...

well these are the indian inputs to the MKI program...

Sukhoi Su-30 MKI
read about the avionics and the 'Tarang mkII' self defense system...
the Bars radar uses an Indian Radar controller, under the Project Vetrivale (Lance of Victory). The project also has developed the mission computer and the display processors for the aircraft....

samtel is an indian company developing avionic displays for the Mki...
Samtel to produce Avionics Display Systems for HAL's star programmes - SU-30MKI, Light Combat Aircraft and Jet trainers

read about the indian contribution...
The Su-30MKI Info Page - Vayu Sena

and the guidance system of the Brahmos is indian.
 
Last edited:
ok here is a 1-5 scale of some of the features of both planes which i have compared using global security, fas, and other sites (not wikipedia).

rating meanings: 1. crap, 2. poor, 3. decent, 4. good, 5. very good

and for 5th generation fighters the ratings can go above 5 so this scale is only for 4th generation.

mki

avionics: 4.5
ew: 4.25
endurance: 5
radar: 4.5
maneuverability: 5
weapons load: 5
rcs: 2.75
reliability: 3.75

overall: 35/40 86% effectiveness

jf-17

avionics: 3.75
ew: 3.5
radar: 3.5
endurance: 3.5
maneuverability: 4
weapons load: 3
rcs: 4
reliability: 3.75 (due to chinese/Russian engine reliability is same as mki)

overall: 28/40 70% effective

i can do other fighters as well

j-10

avionics: 4
ew: 3
radar: 4
endurance: 4
maneuverability: 4
weapons load: 4
rcs: 3
reliability: 3.75

overall: 30/40 or around 75% effective

lca

avionics: 4.5 (they are good at avionics due to their IT industry)
ew: 3.5 (imported ew systems)
radar: 5 (elta 2052 built specifically for it)
endurance: 3
maneuverability: 3
weapons load: 3
rcs: 4
reliability: 4

overall: 29.5/40 or 74% effective

lca scores over jf-17/j-10 in terms of avionics already being there and access to better sources of technology. jf-17 scores in endurance and maneuverability. reliability is about the same but lca's is a bit higher due to better engine, it could be 4.5, but i decided 4 because composites are a new technology and we dont know maintenence stuff about them yet.

all percent numbers are off top of my ahead so not 100% but very close 1-2% error.
 
EW in lca is not imported arent they using the tarang mkII being used in the mki or is it israeli?
 
well guys as from your talk it is clear that there is no counter for sukhois with paf. what will it do in case of war as we have no c/d version of f-16 is pakistan is going to invest in 5th gen stealth aircraft with china like JSF and F-22. J-F 17 doesnt look smart to me with current avionics but as for as it manuerability and main design is concerened it is a real 4th gen aircraft as i have seen a video in which thunder and falcon 360 degree turn rate is compared in which both are equal. we should make its avionics better. and one more question. is it possible that a j-f can beat a flanker by its better in one to one fight by better pilot training and using full potential of thunder.
 
Its completely farcical to compare the MKI to the JF-17. They are a class apart, MKI is a heavy air-superiority fighter, the JF is more a a backbone to the older F-15s PAF. So far, I have not seen any substantial stats that favour the JF over the MKI. Any person with a miniscule knowledge about military aviation would completely back the MKI.

A fair fight is only possible if the MKI is put against multiple JF's at a time. Other than that, MKI reigns over in literally everything, leave alone dogfighting.
Infact even the LCA would be a toughnut for the JF. Especially because of its avionics, and capability to carry more weapons, since is much lighter.

Again a conflict wouldnt be just a JF vs MKI. It would be PAF vs IAF. That means, everything that flies needs to complement everything on the ground supporting it.
 
well guys as from your talk it is clear that there is no counter for sukhois with paf. what will it do in case of war as we have no c/d version of f-16 is pakistan is going to invest in 5th gen stealth aircraft with china like JSF and F-22. J-F 17 doesnt look smart to me with current avionics but as for as it manuerability and main design is concerened it is a real 4th gen aircraft as i have seen a video in which thunder and falcon 360 degree turn rate is compared in which both are equal. we should make its avionics better. and one more question. is it possible that a j-f can beat a flanker by its better in one to one fight by better pilot training and using full potential of thunder.

actually i dont think the mki's are flown by inexperienced pilots...
 
It would be PAF vs IAF. That means, everything that flies needs to complement everything on the ground supporting it.
Right- which means that direct comparisons of the JF-17 to the MKI are pointless, and the 'on paper' advantage of the MKI to the JF-17 does not automatically imply that the MKI would come out tops against the JF-17 in combat.
 
ok here is a 1-5 scale of some of the features of both planes which i have compared using global security, fas, and other sites (not wikipedia).

rating meanings: 1. crap, 2. poor, 3. decent, 4. good, 5. very good

and for 5th generation fighters the ratings can go above 5 so this scale is only for 4th generation.

mki

avionics: 4.5
ew: 4.25
endurance: 5
radar: 4.5
maneuverability: 5
weapons load: 5
rcs: 2.75
reliability: 3.75

overall: 35/40 86% effectiveness

jf-17

avionics: 3.75
ew: 3.5
radar: 3.5
endurance: 3.5
maneuverability: 4
weapons load: 3
rcs: 4
reliability: 3.75 (due to chinese/Russian engine reliability is same as mki)

overall: 28/40 70% effective

i can do other fighters as well

j-10

avionics: 4
ew: 3
radar: 4
endurance: 4
maneuverability: 4
weapons load: 4
rcs: 3
reliability: 3.75

overall: 30/40 or around 75% effective

lca

avionics: 4.5 (they are good at avionics due to their IT industry)
ew: 3.5 (imported ew systems)
radar: 5 (elta 2052 built specifically for it)
endurance: 3
maneuverability: 3
weapons load: 3
rcs: 4
reliability: 4

overall: 29.5/40 or 74% effective

lca scores over jf-17/j-10 in terms of avionics already being there and access to better sources of technology. jf-17 scores in endurance and maneuverability. reliability is about the same but lca's is a bit higher due to better engine, it could be 4.5, but i decided 4 because composites are a new technology and we dont know maintenence stuff about them yet.

all percent numbers are off top of my ahead so not 100% but very close 1-2% error.

by the time your lca will come into the picture, paf would be inducting jf17 block 2 with western avionics+composites
secondly j10a and j10b are atleast half a generation apart... so if u want to compare, u dont have the stats of these 2 upgraded birds.
..
and plz dont compare your lca , its nowhere in picture.secondly its an interceptor not a multirole jet.
youve said
''lca

avionics: 4.5 (they are good at avionics due to their IT industry)
ew: 3.5 (imported ew systems)
radar: 5 (elta 2052 built specifically for it)''

its just as far fetched as if i told u the stats of block2 jf17 with french avionics! infacts its amusing!
..
for defensive roles at the moment, eyree helps a lot.. for offensive we have cruise missiles /awacs killers missiles as a stopgap measure
..
dont underestimate the f16 radar that we have, its not the standerd block15 radar.. plus the jf17 radar is supposedly better than the f16 one, so couple it with eyree and u do have a good combination for defence.
.
 
Last edited:
Leave LCA out please - this thread isn't about LCA, and until the LCA is actually inducted there is no point in comparing it to any aircraft.
 
actually i dont think the mki's are flown by inexperienced pilots...

well after the repetitive defeats during red flag the indians said the totally opposite thing.. they said 80 percent of their pilots were totally inexperienced!again very amusing!
 
Last edited:
well after the repetitive defeats during red flag the indians said the totally opposite thing.. they said 80 percent of their pilots were totally inexperienced!again very amusing!

It is actually true. Fresh pilots are being trained to fly the Su-30 MKI for the sole purpose that old school doctrines of the IAF conflict with the newer ones. Its far easier to train fresh hands in new tactics than for experienced pilots to first unlearn old tactics and then learn newer tactics! Thats why even the F-22 raptor pilots are fresh graduates rather than experienced pilots.

The sole purpose of red-flag for IAF was to let these new pilots learn new tactics which the USAF pilots were practicing against the tvc Raptor. What the pilots learnt will be evaluated, imporved, polished, and assimilated in the new IAF doctrine.

The typical response of pilots in a TVC plane in a dogfight was to go in a post stall maneuver and then aim the nose of the a/c in the direction of the enemy. Raptor pilots were doing that, and the F-15 and F-16 pilots of USAF came up with new tactics to counter that advantage of tvc. IAF pilots too did the same maneuver but learnt that there was already a counter maneuver to that. It was quite a learning experience for these novices. It will surely help them to come up with new tactics and adapt them in future scenarios.

So you see, for all the hulla bulla about USAF trashing IAF, both sides came out of the exercise learning lots of new things! It will go a long way in developing new strategies in aerial warfare for both sides involved.
 
It is actually true. Fresh pilots are being trained to fly the Su-30 MKI for the sole purpose that old school doctrines of the IAF conflict with the newer ones. Its far easier to train fresh hands in new tactics than for experienced pilots to first unlearn old tactics and then learn newer tactics! Thats why even the F-22 raptor pilots are fresh graduates rather than experienced pilots.

The sole purpose of red-flag for IAF was to let these new pilots learn new tactics which the USAF pilots were practicing against the tvc Raptor. What the pilots learnt will be evaluated, imporved, polished, and assimilated in the new IAF doctrine.

The typical response of pilots in a TVC plane in a dogfight was to go in a post stall maneuver and then aim the nose of the a/c in the direction of the enemy. Raptor pilots were doing that, and the F-15 and F-16 pilots of USAF came up with new tactics to counter that advantage of tvc. IAF pilots too did the same maneuver but learnt that there was already a counter maneuver to that. It was quite a learning experience for these novices. It will surely help them to come up with new tactics and adapt them in future scenarios.

So you see, for all the hulla bulla about USAF trashing IAF, both sides came out of the exercise learning lots of new things! It will go a long way in developing new strategies in aerial warfare for both sides involved.


Plus, newly trained pilots will serve the IAF for a longer time compared to experienced pilots who will be retiring early and training the new joinees. :tup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom