What's new

Air Superiority fighters comparision and requirement analysis.


Mastan Khan, Thanks for joining in, I opened this thread to learn something from you.

The chinese bvr on hf 17 will have a range of 60 km approx and for a 90% kill ratio---the opponent needs to be in 35---40 km range and coming in.

Well, in the scenario I hypothesized Missiles will be similar, so I don't think this point is valid.

Secondly----the russian system is proven over the years---the chinese is still developing---still learning to walk---little baby steps---. It will mature in due time and will be extremely potent---no doubt about it---but till then you got to fight with what you have----and it doesnopt look good for jf 17.

Again am not really interested in specific of JF-17 AND SU-30MKI, I would like to take more of a generic look of a small fighter and a top dog, even it means F-22 minus its stealth.

Thirdly---su 30 carries 8 bvrs in one load copmared to 2 by jf 17---the su can launch 2 missiles at each of four jf 17 within seconds within a 90 % kill range and then turn around---. Two su 30's can launch 4 missile each at 4 jf 17's at one time.

This is fair point, but again we are talking about a group of 10 each from either side.


Hope we can have some good discussion.
 
Absolutely, Pakistan is small in terms of width, and the Phalcon has a range of 370km, keeping this in mind if Phalcons and MKI's operate on the Indo-Pakistan border then they will vertually have full coverage, or at worst a degree of coverage if they get pushed back.

Of course SAMs will be threat but with good planing SAMS can be eliminated; unfortunately eliminating SAMs can cause causualties in the process.

AWACS and ground radar both make sure there are no surprises of jets popping in from either side. At least each side will look deep in about 300km. If you remember most of the battles were fought by GCI earlier, when fighter jet radar was nothing.

Honestly i'm not sure what kind of SAMS Pakistan operates but if they are short to medium range then awacs can simply climb to an altitude where SAMs will not pose a threat, then again awacs tend to say out of hostile airspace atleast until it is cleared.


Am sure no one want to risk their AWACS by anywhere near the border even if they "think" the other is not having or silenced the SAM. The risk is too great.

They most likely would, even if Indian awac's operate in Indian territory they would still feed MKI's, atleast to a certain point.

No doubt, the scenario is something along those line, each opposing fighter is assumed to have complete picture about others formation.
 
Hi,

The chinese bvr on hf 17 will have a range of 60 km approx and for a 90% kill ratio---the opponent needs to be in 35---40 km range and coming in.

OTOH the su 30 bvr's are at abouit 100 km range and their 90% kill ratio I believe is at about 60--70 km---which means that after launching it bvr's the su 30 can turn away 180 degrees---incidently the jf 17 won't be able to launch its missiles because it is still 20---25 km away from a 90% kill shot.

Secondly----the russian system is proven over the years---the chinese is still developing---still learning to walk---little baby steps---. It will mature in due time and will be extremely potent---no doubt about it---but till then you got to fight with what you have----and it doesnopt look good for jf 17.

Thirdly---su 30 carries 8 bvrs in one load copmared to 2 by jf 17---the su can launch 2 missiles at each of four jf 17 within seconds within a 90 % kill range and then turn around---. Two su 30's can launch 4 missile each at 4 jf 17's at one time.

The su 30's in this scenarios can come within a 100% kill ratio zone of 50 km after launching the first two missiles at one plane and then launch two more at 50 km range and then scoot----the is no plane in the world which can escape 4 incoming missiles----within 90---100% kill range.

In war times MKI will obviously try to enter in pakistani air space, so i think they will be in the range of SD-10s + side winders. And not to forget MBDA spada and 500 AIM-C5.
 
Hmmm...I think , in fact I believe SU-27 is better airframe than SU-30MKM/I/A, as far as air superiority is concerned.

Nice clean airframe, No canards, no unnecessary TVC and its associated weight, Better thrust to weight Looks pure hunting bird.

Just the two seater config of SU-30MKM adds huge drag and curtail its inherent performance.

i really don't quite comprehend your claim.those TVC and canards are there for a reason.Su-30MKM(or I,or A) boasted air maneuvability from these equipment.i'm not quite sure about your claim about air superiority(it's a a long topic to elaborate i think i skip this part for the time being) but Su-30MKM is definitely tasked to achieve air superiority in Royal Malaysian Air Force's doctrine(though Su-30MKM can achieve more than that due to it's nature as MRCA aircraft)

How much of a fighter the Flanker is?well it forced our neighbor south to spend more money to buy F-15SG and dumped the previous competitor(F-16 block 60,Typhoon,Gripen,Rafale,F/A-18F)
 
In war times MKI will obviously try to enter in pakistani air space, so i think they will be in the range of SD-10s + side winders. And not to forget MBDA spada and 500 AIM-C5.

Su 30 MKI had look down shoot down capability and going to be loaded by Brahmosh which had 300 km range so a ground based SAM with 20 km range with a medium altitude dose not give much threat for Su fighters with more then 17000 meters.
 
Hi,

The chinese bvr on hf 17 will have a range of 60 km approx and for a 90% kill ratio---the opponent needs to be in 35---40 km range and coming in.

OTOH the su 30 bvr's are at abouit 100 km range and their 90% kill ratio I believe is at about 60--70 km---which means that after launching it bvr's the su 30 can turn away 180 degrees---incidently the jf 17 won't be able to launch its missiles because it is still 20---25 km away from a 90% kill shot.

Secondly----the russian system is proven over the years---the chinese is still developing---still learning to walk---little baby steps---. It will mature in due time and will be extremely potent---no doubt about it---but till then you got to fight with what you have----and it doesnopt look good for jf 17.

Thirdly---su 30 carries 8 bvrs in one load copmared to 2 by jf 17---the su can launch 2 missiles at each of four jf 17 within seconds within a 90 % kill range and then turn around---. Two su 30's can launch 4 missile each at 4 jf 17's at one time.

The su 30's in this scenarios can come within a 100% kill ratio zone of 50 km after launching the first two missiles at one plane and then launch two more at 50 km range and then scoot----the is no plane in the world which can escape 4 incoming missiles----within 90---100% kill range.

I wouldn't so casually underestimate the capabilities of SD-10.

For one, the Chinese use both R-77 and SD-10.
R-77 is for use on their MKK/MKK2.
SD-10 is to be used on J-10B and J-11B (the top fighters).
That alone should tell you about SD-10 capabilities because China isn't going to handicap their top fighters by using a so-called less capable AMRAAM.

And when you say "the Russian system is proven over the years" what exactly do you mean?

What wars/conflict have they been used?
Do you think that the SD-10 has not been tested to it's absolute limit against maneouvering targets before being placed on frontline fighters?
 
no doubt Eurofighter typhoon is best fighter among them.
it doesn't matter what's your analysis
 
i really don't quite comprehend your claim.those TVC and canards are there for a reason.Su-30MKM(or I,or A) boasted air maneuvability from these equipment.i'm not quite sure about your claim about air superiority(it's a a long topic to elaborate i think i skip this part for the time being) but Su-30MKM is definitely tasked to achieve air superiority in Royal Malaysian Air Force's doctrine(though Su-30MKM can achieve more than that due to it's nature as MRCA aircraft)

How much of a fighter the Flanker is?well it forced our neighbor south to spend more money to buy F-15SG and dumped the previous competitor(F-16 block 60,Typhoon,Gripen,Rafale,F/A-18F)


No doubt SU-30 MKM is a good fighter, but I think I gave the reason, why I consider SU-27, a better airframe than SU-30 MKM/I/A.

Even if you just dismiss that as my opinion, if you observe SU-35BM, they have gone back to original SU-27 philosophy, i.e no draggy two seater, no canards, infact they have made it look slim and mean

a0010769_49e4582ee4527.jpg
 
I would like to learn more about these scenarios !

I will use my limited knowledge to clear your query, you and deckingraj raised some good points on the JF17 thread but i dont want to derail that thread so i wont answer them over there.

Why do you think Phalcon cannot peep into Pakistan more than 200 KM's ? Guestimated detection range for Phalcon is 350 KM's. It can monitor well inside 200 KM's.
Note that i have used guestimated since there are no official sources of Phalcon detection range.
Add Green Pine radar to this logic...you will realize phalcon along with ground based radar's can monitor well into your territory.

Indeed, India has excellent radar coverage even without the Phalcons with their 3D Radars. The Phalcons just add an extra punch to India's Radar Coverage for low flying aircrafts. But if you look at Pakistan's radar coverage; even without the addition of the Erieyes and KJ200, Pakistan's radar coverage is top of the line. We have TPS77 and YL2 3D radars which are operational and can provide ample warning. I would say in terms of detection both countries are fairly even, but that being said PAF will be on the defensive side thus they have an advantage.

What sort of treatment ? IF you are talking of PAF fighters - then they will be detected by Phalcon , if you are talking about SAM, then it will be outside SAM's range.

FT2000

The report was referring specifically to the FT-2000, a Chinese anti-radiation surface-to-air missile system designed to counter electronic jamming aircraft, AWACS aircraft, and other air radiation wave targets.


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

In October 2003, it was reported that China had closed a deal with its neighbor, Pakistan, to supply the latter with an unspecified number of FT-2000 missiles to counter India’s early warning capabilities. The China-Pakistan deal followed India’s own arrangement with Israel and Russia to install three Israeli Phalcon AWACS on Ilyushin Il-76 freighter aircraft, thus giving it an airborne early warning system.(9) According to various news sources, shortly after India announced its acquisition of the Phalcon radars, Air Chief Marshal Kaleem Saadat, the head of Pakistan’s air force, visited China and conveyed Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s wish to purchase an unspecified number of FT-2000s


MissileThreat :: FT-2000

The purpose is not to shoot down the Phalcons, the purpose for this system is to keep the enemy AWACS far away from our territory as possible. The advantage of this SAM is that it is Passive, to knock it out IAF will have to use reconnaissance and PGM's. That would be a lot of effort if you ask me to knock out just one SAM.

IAF is more likely to conduct SEAD mission before doing anything before.

Indeed, but i am quite certain that PAF fighters will intercept the incoming strike package before it can deliver the payload. I am also quite certain that PAF will also send in their strike packages to conduct SEAD missions to neutralize SAMS close to the border, after all the F16 is the King of SEAD missions :lol:.

What is a favored position ? Ever since AWACS has come into picture there are no surprises -- There are no favoured positions. JF 17 will be in the air waiting for MKI and so will MKI.

Dont you realize that the High Command of IAF just shot itself in the foot when they introduced AWACS in the subcontinent. Before the AWACS, we had no answer to MKI's superior PESA radar. But when the IAF signed a contract with the Israelis, we were able to make our case and sign the deal with the Swedes. Balance of Power :D

There are ways to fool both passive and active homing devices on missiles. The ECW that MKI has is Elta pod used in Israeli F15 - which is similar to MKI in almost all mission profiles. The thing is - After JFT fires 2 , and if MKI defeats them then what ?

No pilot goes out alone in combat, if the MKI defeats the missiles of the JF17 than i am sure his escort will take an aim. In todays warfare with all these countermeasures, i wouldnt be surpised the pilots of JF17 and MKI are engaging each other in WVR at the end. One really important factor that your discounting is the skill of the pilot, the more clever pilot is likely to shoot down the other first.


What is HOBS capability ? Can you explain more ?

HOBS(High Off Bore Sight) Missiles. The pilot can engage the target seen on his HMS , means better chances of surviving and the pilot does not has to manuver his plane much. Although i am not sure, maybe somebody can clear it up but i think MKI has HOBS capability.

Another point i would like to raise regarding strikes inside the Indian Territory that deckingraj raised in the other thread. Keep in mind PAF does not has to cross the border to conduct strikes inside the Indian territory, they can launch their stand off weapons close to the border and let them do the job.
 
Indeed, India has excellent radar coverage even without the Phalcons with their 3D Radars. The Phalcons just add an extra punch to India's Radar Coverage for low flying aircrafts. But if you look at Pakistan's radar coverage; even without the addition of the Erieyes and KJ200, Pakistan's radar coverage is top of the line. We have TPS77 and YL2 3D radars which are operational and can provide ample warning. I would say in terms of detection both countries are fairly even, but that being said PAF will be on the defensive side thus they have an advantage.

The radar coverage may or may not be even. We have some decent radars so have you. We Awacs , you have AWECS....so yeah as i said before there will no tactical surprise. Its calling calling up the PAF HQ and saying - 'Hey listen buddy , dont be offended but i am sending some MKI's your way. Try to stop them...and PAF responds --sure 'Try it out, we will see what happens'....Its that kind of situation we are in.... But humour apart --
IAF phalcons dont need to be offensive, they will be purely defensive and yet will have the capability to see in PAF airspace ; not all the way but maybe for most part. IAF phalcons will only be offensive if a Air superiority is achived. -- If that is the case then you might see Phalcons pretty close to border or maybe even inside it.
Also each AWACS has its own escort fighters which it can vector to any threats.

FT2000

The report was referring specifically to the FT-2000, a Chinese anti-radiation surface-to-air missile system designed to counter electronic jamming aircraft, AWACS aircraft, and other air radiation wave targets.


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


The fabled FT 2k. Very interesting weapon. However it is not as fool proof as we think it is.

A passive radar seeker which targets specific electromagnetic signals -- Can be countered. A passive radar seeker can be fooled through chaff's/flares ---- Whenever a threat is looming on the horizon or if a missile is fired at it , the first thing that any AWACS would do is , 'switch of their radars'-- this reduces the so called electromagnetic waves on which FT homs in. Then simply deploy countermeasures , Jam and everything a aircraft is supposed to.

With regards to using its phalcon's own jamming frequencies against it - how will this be done ? A missile jamming an entire AWACS , which is loaded up with Jamming equipment ?
Chalo, if it is able to do that-- we are all forgetting the effect of green pine and swordfish radars -- which themselves cover upto 300KM of Pakistan airspace. These tightly coupled radars , will give ample warning to Awacs that a threat is on its way.

I have further questions on FT, as to how will a FT be triggered ? when will the operators know ? - Just curious, i guess it will triggered as soon as it is seen on erieye awacs screen.


The purpose is not to shoot down the Phalcons, the purpose for this system is to keep the enemy AWACS far away from our territory as possible. The advantage of this SAM is that it is Passive, to knock it out IAF will have to use reconnaissance and PGM's. That would be a lot of effort if you ask me to knock out just one SAM.

As i said above, Phalcons will never operate it your territory. Atleast till air superiority is achieved.
How is Passive sam exactly a advantage ? I cant understand -- please explain.
SEAD missions are especially to know out SAM's. -- There are ways to do this. IAF has dedicated aircrafts to do this.


Indeed, but i am quite certain that PAF fighters will intercept the incoming strike package before it can deliver the payload. I am also quite certain that PAF will also send in their strike packages to conduct SEAD missions to neutralize SAMS close to the border, after all the F16 is the King of SEAD missions :lol:.

This is where numerical superiority comes into play. Since AWACS is in pciture , you know that there are no surprises. So if IAF is undertaking SEAD mission , then either they will have quite a huge number of aircrafts OR once phalcon see's that there are bogies inbound , it will simply vector its own escort fighters towards threats. Enough for it to keep busy till IAF conducts SEAD missions.


Dont you realize that the High Command of IAF just shot itself in the foot when they introduced AWACS in the subcontinent. Before the AWACS, we had no answer to MKI's superior PESA radar. But when the IAF signed a contract with the Israelis, we were able to make our case and sign the deal with the Swedes. Balance of Power :D

True..but on a serious note--There has to be a way too fool awacs. I just dont know how.

No pilot goes out alone in combat, if the MKI defeats the missiles of the JF17 than i am sure his escort will take an aim. In todays warfare with all these countermeasures, i wouldnt be surpised the pilots of JF17 and MKI are engaging each other in WVR at the end. One really important factor that your discounting is the skill of the pilot, the more clever pilot is likely to shoot down the other first.

Escorts will be busy with their own problems. The thing is -- considering the huge payload of MKI, JF 17 will already be on defensive. It would have exhausted its missiles -- plus it would still have to face wave after wave missiles from MKI. In the end IMO , JF 17 will have huge problems in defending itself against MKI....F16 will definetly have better chance. But considering that F16 is a premium aircraft they would be used in a better mission i guess.



HOBS(High Off Bore Sight) Missiles. The pilot can engage the target seen on his HMS , means better chances of surviving and the pilot does not has to manuver his plane much. Although i am not sure, maybe somebody can clear it up but i think MKI has HOBS capability.

Another point i would like to raise regarding strikes inside the Indian Territory that deckingraj raised in the other thread. Keep in mind PAF does not has to cross the border to conduct strikes inside the Indian territory, they can launch their stand off weapons close to the border and let them do the job.

Ooops i didnt know the abbreviation HOBS... Yeah MKI has that ability , so has Mig 29. Adder coupled with HMS gives russian aircraft gives good advantage in that regard. You can read up on DACT excercises between polish and american airforces.

With regards to launch their stand off weapons close to border --- who will guide them , what will be their guidance. Give a scenario - and we can discuss further.
 
And when you say "the Russian system is proven over the years" what exactly do you mean?

What wars/conflict have they been used?

* The first major war was the Korean war, the Koreans and Chinese didn't fair well because they were going up against experienced WWII pilots but when the Soviets brought their aces the results were very different.

* The Vietnam war produced many Mig aces, and there was extensive clashes between US and Soviet aircraft.

* In the Iran-Iraq war the Soviet built fighters flow by crappy Iraqi pilots got a number of kills against Iranian aircraft including some F-14's, F-4's and F-5's.

* Cubans claim they downed a South African Mirage.

* The Indo-Pakistan air wars seen seen extensive clashes between Soviet and US fighters.

* In the Arab Israeli wars dozens of Israeli aircraft were shot down, although the Israelis had the superior combat records due to their superior training.

* During the Soviet Iranian border clashes the Soviets shot down four Iranian helicopters.

* During the Gulf war Iraqi aircraft faced US and coalition aircraft but the Iraqis faired poorly with their old and outdated aircraft flown by poor pilots, although an F-18 was downed.

* During the Ethiopian-Eritrean War SU-27s had 5 kills.

There is also dozens of other small wars or conflicts were Soviet build aircraft where involved.

No doubt SU-30 MKM is a good fighter, but I think I gave the reason, why I consider SU-27, a better airframe than SU-30 MKM/I/A.

Even if you just dismiss that as my opinion, if you observe SU-35BM, they have gone back to original SU-27 philosophy, i.e no draggy two seater, no canards, infact they have made it look slim and mean

A plain SU-27 is not more maneuverable then an SU-30 with conards and TVC, the reason the SU-35BM has no conards is because they wanted to reduce the RCS, However, the aircraft is said to have a better FBW system which would compensate for the loss of conards. Also, The reason the SU-35BM is a single seater is because its main purpose is air superiority. However, the SU-30 is a multi-role aircraft, thus they added an extra seat to distribute the work load.
 
* The first major war was the Korean war, the Koreans and Chinese didn't fair well because they were going up against experienced WWII pilots but when the Soviets brought their aces the results were very different.

* The Vietnam war produced many Mig aces, and there was extensive clashes between US and Soviet aircraft.

* In the Iran-Iraq war the Soviet built fighters flow by crappy Iraqi pilots got a number of kills against Iranian aircraft including some F-14's, F-4's and F-5's.

* Cubans claim they downed a South African Mirage.

* The Indo-Pakistan air wars seen seen extensive clashes between Soviet and US fighters.

* In the Arab Israeli wars dozens of Israeli aircraft were shot down, although the Israelis had the superior combat records due to their superior training.

* During the Soviet Iranian border clashes the Soviets shot down four Iranian helicopters.

* During the Gulf war Iraqi aircraft faced US and coalition aircraft but the Iraqis faired poorly with their old and outdated aircraft flown by poor pilots, although an F-18 was downed.

* During the Ethiopian-Eritrean War SU-27s had 5 kills.

There is also dozens of other small wars or conflicts were Soviet build aircraft where involved.



A plain SU-27 is not more maneuverable then an SU-30 with conards and TVC, the reason the SU-35BM has no conards is because they wanted to reduce the RCS, However, the aircraft is said to have a better FBW system which would compensate for the loss of conards. Also, The reason the SU-35BM is a single seater is because its main purpose is air superiority. However, the SU-30 is a multi-role aircraft, thus they added an extra seat to distribute the work load.

U forgot 10 kills by our Pakistan Air Force, against intruders from Russia and Afghanistan :flame::flame:
 
Transport? F-16 A/B shot down Su-22s, MiG-23s, Su-25, which one is transport? And By the one kill was scored from cannon fire.:flame:

A proven air-combat aircraft of the day, the F-16, against ground attack aircraft Su-22, MiG-23 and Su-25 which are NOT dogfighters! Yup makes perfect sense!
 
Back
Top Bottom