What's new

Why Su-35 wouldn't pose any serious threat to India's Rafale

China may get 24 Su-35s as a symbol of China-Russia strategic partnership. Indians are so narrow minded and actually your worst enemy is just yourselves. Go and buy more Rafales...:smitten:
 
Russia, China Sign 9 Deals, Including on Rabbits | World | RIA Novosti

China signs 9 new deals with Xi Jipings visit.

No Su 35 but we do get delicious rabbits for our pilots :)

MOSCOW, March 22 (RIA Novosti) – Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yang signed nine economic agreements in Moscow on Friday, including on cooperation in banking, energy and rabbit husbandry.
The Kostroma Region-based company Russky Krolik (Russian Rabbit) now has a new partner in Beijing, and the agriculture ministries of both countries will be working together to develop the fine art of cuniculture, or breeding rabbits, according to the deal package.
Russian petrochemicals company Sintez Group signed an agreement on cooperation with State Grid Corporation of China, while En+ Group, controlled by Oleg Deripaska, agreed to work with China Development Bank and the state-run Shenhua Overseas Development and Investment Co. Ltd in the coal industry.
China Development Bank also signed an agreement with MBC Corporation managing company on principles of financial cooperation.
Russia and China will also launch joint production of heavy drilling rigs, according to a deal between Russia’s Uralvagonzavod corporation and VTB Leasing company and China’s Honghua Group.
VTB Leasing’s owner, the state-run VTB bank, will be working with China Construction Bank, and Rosgosstrakh insurer with China’s Chengdong Investment Corporation.
Finally, Export Insurance Agency of Russia and China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation signed a deal on facultative reinsurance.
The deals were signed ahead of the new Chinese President Xi Jinping’s three-day visit to Russia, which begins on Friday and will be his first foreign trip since assuming office on March 14.
 
Which is the problem, because taking capabilities under consideration that one fighter might get in future, is not a fact. Similarly, one could say the Su 35 will get the Pak Fa AESA the next upgrades, which even increases the long range detection advantage..., but that's as much speculation as including Rafales CFTs in a comparison today right?
TO be honest some speculations is indeed there i have to admit
But still Chinese getting Pak-fa AESA radar on SU35 is more speculative than Rafale's getting CFT

Well we can still stress on present thing






First of all, these figures are speculation only, secondly they still proves you wrong about Rafale having a clear advantage in A2A, since even if the RCS would be 2m 2, the IRBIS-E would detect the Rafale earlier than the RBE 2 the Su 35.
Btw, when you look at AWACS detection ranges for cruise missiles, you will often find a RCS of 1 or 2m 2 for them, just a hint what RCS those 2 fuel tanks might have.

See those Detectection values can also be called as Speculative as IRBIS E radar have never come face to face with Rafale & we all forget that it is for ideal conditions not under electronic warfare conditions like Jamming & also pilot flying skill (i.e) flying low

Stealth doesnt gurantee invisibilty everytime u still have to rely on Electronic jamming no matter how stealthy u make a plane .

Meanwhile SPECTRA is already omni directional AESA jamming capable menwhile IRBIS -E is PESA radar

IF u think RCS of fuel tank can add 1m2 then may god bless F 22
800px-F-22_fuel_tanks.jpg
















Actually from quiet some talks with French forumers, even French professionals, but the point is, you made your conclusions too fast, or based on the wrong points, see FSO NG now. That again is a possible future upgrade (which is not even fixed and mainly unknown yet) and can't be taken into a comparison now, because it's only a claim and makes you look biased as ptldM3 said.

But actually SU 35 has the advantage have u noticed the mistake i made

even if FSO may be longer detection range but it MICA IRmissiles have atbest 60 km range meanwhile SU 35 's IRST may be having less range but it has R 27 Et which has 100 km range

So advantage shifts to SU 35 again regarding IRST detection




As said, it's most likely the otherway around, since the RCS in A2A configs are similar, while the Su35 has longer detection range. In WVR instead, Rafale might be equal or even superior in maneuverability and has the better close combat missiles as well (higher offbore sight, LOAL and data link capabilities).

Well in BVR warfare Rafale has the edge thanks to It's PASSIVE detection abilty , superior electronic jamming
capabilty & Meteor ramjet missiles (Longest no escape zone missiles) with superior AWACS support





Though I have a doubt SANCHO

rafale is getting UNILINK version of Meteor missile which is stated inferior to what typhoon & gripen are getting is
it true??


Though in WVR warfar still debatable on manuverurabilty grounds of both planes yes R 74 with upgraded seeker missile can also be handy
 
But still Chinese getting Pak-fa AESA radar on SU35 is more speculative than Rafale's getting CFT

Who said they get Pak Fa AESA? They get IRBIS E if they buy the Su 35, which is a fact, CFTs sadly are not fully developed yet, which is a fact as well. Only because we both would like to see them, doesn't make it a fact somehow.


See those Detectection values can also be called as Speculative as IRBIS E radar have never come face to face with Rafale

No, we have manufacturer sources about the performance of the radar, while we don't have any reliable source about the RCSs of the Su 35 / Rafale. That's why the earlier (although always taken with a pinch of salt) is more reliable than the speculated RCS figures in forums.


Stealth doesnt gurantee invisibilty everytime u still have to rely on Electronic jamming no matter how stealthy u make a plane .

Of course not, but it will make the fighter very hard to detect by radar, which is not the case for normal fighters with external payloads. So stealth can at least reduces one possible detection thread to a minimum, while normal fighters just try to reduce it as much as they can (coatings, design, size, reducing external payloads).


IF u think RCS of fuel tank can add 1m2 then may god bless F 22

Why? It still will have a lower RCS than most current generation fighters, it will have better radar and passive detection capabilities than most current generation fighters, it will have better jamming capabilities than most current generation fighters, so even like this it hardly has anything to fear so far. But the fact remains, external loads increase the RCS and the more, or the bigger they are, the more the increase, which is an advantage for the Flanker again.


even if FSO may be longer detection range but it MICA IRmissiles have atbest 60 km range meanwhile SU 35 's IRST may be having less range but it has R 27 Et which has 100 km range

As I said, I doubt that the FSO IR has effectively more range and the range of the R27 on paper doesn't mean it would be useful in reality, since you have to detect and track the target first. Also the R27 is aimed to...:

engage radio-emitting air targets...and in cases when the enemy targets protect their aircraft with anti-radar active jamming

Tactical Missiles Corporation JSC

So it's more aimed on NATO SEAD fighters, that are actively emiting EM signals, while a Rafale in passive mode, won't be detected, nor can be targed with it right? SPECTRA instead can detect, indentify and localise an emiter and provide this data to it's weapons. MICA (depending on source) has a range between 60 and 80Km and can be launched even without a lock on the target. The missile will be guided by SPECTRA data and mid course corrections via data link and would use it's own seeker only close to the target to get a lock. Especially when you use the MICA IR this will be a problem, since the missile remains to be passive and won't be detected by the SU 35 EW, until it might be too late.
As said, it might depend on the situation which of thise fighters might have an advantage, but generally they are very close.


Well in BVR warfare Rafale has the edge thanks to It's PASSIVE detection abilty , superior electronic jamming
capabilty & Meteor ramjet missiles (Longest no escape zone missiles) with superior AWACS support

:rolleyes: Another biased point don't you think? Why would the Su 35 don't have AWACS support?


rafale is getting UNILINK version of Meteor missile which is stated inferior to what typhoon & gripen are getting is
it true??

Not sure what you mean with unlink, but the difference will be that Rafale can't benefit from the 2 way data link of the missile, so it won't be able to receive data from the missile, unlike Gripen and EF. As far as I understood it, that limits Rafale only in the way that a second Rafale can't re-target the missile to another target, than the launch Rafale initially had chosen.
 
The deal is signed today, and China will buy 24 SU35 from Russia.

Source from www.chinanews.com
 
China to buy Russia

I think this refers to the MOU signed between the countries. BTW China really needs the engines , TVC I have doubts as they could have got it in the mkk only. Nice PESA RADAR ibris e ought to spruce j20.

http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-35/

J16 http://chinesemilitaryreview.blogspot.in/2012/01/chinese-j-16-long-range-strike-fighter.html

j17? next :azn:
 
Who said they get Pak Fa AESA? They get IRBIS E if they buy the Su 35, which is a fact, CFTs sadly are not fully developed yet, which is a fact as well. Only because we both would like to see them, doesn't make it a fact somehow.
Well u cited that SU 35 could also have PAK fa AESA radar i meant u insisted that Chinese could get PAkfa aesa radar .

CFT issue depends upon funding though If IAF are seriously interested then we can see some progress on it



No, we have manufacturer sources about the performance of the radar, while we don't have any reliable source about the RCSs of the Su 35 / Rafale. That's why the earlier (although always taken with a pinch of salt) is more reliable than the speculated RCS figures in forums.

Manufacturer sources can also be taken with a pinch of salt as they mention it under ideal conditions not under
EW conditions like Jamming

They say they could detect F 22 from 90 km range which looks more skeptical as their jamming + stealth capabilty is very superior, even if they claim so in their manufacturer sources



Of course not, but it will make the fighter very hard to detect by radar, which is not the case for normal fighters with external payloads. So stealth can at least reduces one possible detection thread to a minimum, while normal fighters just try to reduce it as much as they can (coatings, design, size, reducing external payloads).

Dude

anti stealth radars are already in development in Russian & even chinese ,

Electronic warfare would never be obsolete







Why? It still will have a lower RCS than most current generation fighters, it will have better radar and passive detection capabilities than most current generation fighters, it will have better jamming capabilities than most current generation fighters, so even like this it hardly has anything to fear so far. But the fact remains, external loads increase the RCS and the more, or the bigger they are, the more the increase, which is an advantage for the Flanker again.

U missed the pun:lol:

Drop tanks can make unstealthy any plane But F 22 's jamming is too good

Regarding Rafale i am not bothered about EDT for stealth reasons but regarding wastage of precious weapon points as it's 2 or 3 weapon points are wasted on it which can be decisive factor against rafale as it is handicapped to carry lesser air to air weapons in comparision to Flanker so advantage FLanker not for stealth reason but for more armament carrying reason







As I said, I doubt that the FSO IR has effectively more range and the range of the R27 on paper doesn't mean it would be useful in reality, since you have to detect and track the target first. Also the R27 is aimed to...
I am talking about R 27 ir guided missile not EM guided missile one
There are many versions of R 27

But yes R 27 is one of most flopped missile in combat history
i



.



:rolleyes: Another biased point don't you think? Why would the Su 35 don't have AWACS support?

plz read again what i have written I said superior AWACS support

Now phalcon is superior to chinese AWACS ,now if u think that is also biased I should quit foruming for good:lol:

BTW Ks 172 novator missile eqn can also be added here but no accurate proof to bring it here



Not sure what you mean with unlink, but the difference will be that Rafale can't benefit from the 2 way data link of the missile, so it won't be able to receive data from the missile, unlike Gripen and EF. As far as I understood it, that limits Rafale only in the way that a second Rafale can't re-target the missile to another target, than the launch Rafale initially had chosen.
I have asked that same question to
@olybrius

@ hallowene

but they say it wont affect kill probability & one more thing that datalink can also be jammed
 
@DrSomnath999 Effectiveness of electronics is something that is very hard to establish.

If my source is correct, the Rafale has a T/W ratio of 1.19 and the Su-35 has a T/W ratio of 1.30.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/air-warfare/72354-thrust-weight-ratios-all-fighter-planes.html

This is even given that the Su-35 has nearly twice the amount of fuel capacity, and weight 19,000 lbs more.

I think that the Su-35 has the performance advantage. It has a higher T/W ratio, along with a higher fuel capacity.

This allows it to have greater persistence, and play dirty games which the Rafale may not be able. This includes turning and running from missiles during BVR fights more often than the Rafale can.

Do we need to even talk about a dogfight?

So survivability is a factor here, and a very crucial one.

Not saying that the Rafale is inferior to the Su-35. The pilot also matters!

In face of a Su-35, the Rafale pilot would have to reach a decision quickly. Or else, he'll be hopelessly overpowered.

It's kinda like comparing a man to a woman. The Su-35 is a man, whereas Rafale is a woman :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Manufacturer sources can also be taken with a pinch of salt

Which would go for both sides again.


U missed the pun:lol:

Drop tanks can make unstealthy

In theory they could be shaped and coated, but with an external pylon they still remain more detectable. Practially this would be way too costly anyway, since the you would loose a lot of money everytime you drop such a tank, guess why the F22 is flying with normal tanks?


Now phalcon is superior to chinese AWACS ,now if u think that is also biased I should quit foruming for good:lol:

:D Then I have to say good bye now, since you again added it to make the Rafale look better, but in a fighter vs fighter comparison, you can't really add external capabilities and then say they are better, so Rafale is better too. It simply has nothing to do with the capabilities of these fighters, just like the Reco NG pod as I said earlier.

but they say it wont affect kill probability

Of course it won't because it's no limitations between the work of Rafale and the missile, but a tactical limitation, that the missile can be guided only to a single target and not to another again.
You remember the active passive tatics of Rafale, where the passive Rafale launches MICA to the target and the active Rafale provides the missile with midcourse correction data of the radar, but still to the same target.
Now an EF combi could do the same, but the active EF could also retarget the missile to another thread, that might be closer, but that's a minor issue only.

If my source is correct, the Rafale has a T/W ratio of 1.19 and the Su-35 has a T/W ratio of 1.30.

That source is not really reliable, since it takes the same ammount of fuel and weapons to account for every fighter and although that makes sense for weapons, it doesn't for fuel, since very fighter needs a different ammount of fuel for a certain mission.
Most single engine fighters for example uses only a single centerline fuel tank in CAP roles, while twin engine fighters uses 1 only for quick reaction interception roles. For LCA that would mean 2400Kg internal and around 640Kg external =3040Kg total. Rafale on the other hand it would be 4700Kg internal only + 2000Kg with 2 external fuel tanks = 6700, btw I have some doubts about the emptyweights as well.

Not to mention that these are paperspecs only, as we know in reality the fighters don't fly with afterburners all the time, but with dry thrust, that's would be the important figure to compare the actual performance, at least one figure to do so, since wingloading and other features must be considered as well.


In face of a Su-35, the Rafale pilot would have to reach a decision quickly. Or else, he'll be hopelessly overpowered.

Just like the F22 and the EF and both had no real advantage in close combats, which shows that once Rafale is far away from beeing underpowered as many believe, but that power isn't enough to win.


Do you have any translation of this, what ecactly have they rated and how?
 
@DrSomnath999 Effectiveness of electronics is something that is very hard to establish.

If my source is correct, the Rafale has a T/W ratio of 1.19 and the Su-35 has a T/W ratio of 1.30.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/air-warfare/72354-thrust-weight-ratios-all-fighter-planes.html

This is even given that the Su-35 has nearly twice the amount of fuel capacity, and weight 19,000 lbs more.

I think that the Su-35 has the performance advantage. It has a higher T/W ratio, along with a higher fuel capacity.

This allows it to have greater persistence, and play dirty games which the Rafale may not be able. This includes turning and running from missiles during BVR fights more often than the Rafale can.

Do we need to even talk about a dogfight?

So survivability is a factor here, and a very crucial one.

Not saying that the Rafale is inferior to the Su-35. The pilot also matters!

In face of a Su-35, the Rafale pilot would have to reach a decision quickly. Or else, he'll be hopelessly overpowered.

It's kinda like comparing a man to a woman. The Su-35 is a man, whereas Rafale is a woman :lol:
The Rafale has more hard-points (meaning that it can carry drop tanks and still carry as many bombs/missiles as the -35) not to mention the Rafale is quite likely to have CFTs if/when the IAF funds it, the TWR difference is negligible and given the Rafale has superior BVR weapons the TWR that will only come into play in a WVR fight the TWR advantage of the SU-35 doesn't mean much.


Additionally the Rafales delivered to the IAF will have Supercruise and the -35 to be delivered to China (if they truly do get some) won't. Add this to the fact the M88s are going to have better fuel efficiency than the AL-31, which means the -35s very well may expend all their additional fuel on afterburner just getting to the fight.



Not to mention the SU-35 is at a serious disadvantage to the Rafale's on board avionics and weapons so I don't see how the " Rafale pilot would have to reach a decision quickly. Or else, he'll be hopelessly overpowered. " utter hogwash IMHO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Su-35 is a way superior aircraft to Rafael...

Su-35 can conduct strategic missions thousands of miles away from the base...

Evn JF-17 thunder is better than Rafael
 

Back
Top Bottom