What's new

Boeing Wants Washington To Clear F-15EX Pitch To India

US is trying very hard to sell its fighters to India, even though the latter has shown little or no interest. What has been offered so far: F-16, F-18, F-21, F-35, etc? Given India's defense procurement process, just picking a fighter can take years. Still, India is keen on diversifying its defense procurement to many as countries as possible while, at the same time, build up its defense industry. If India does pick a US a fighter, it will demand local manufacturing and even ToT. Will US give it to India?
This is good point.

F-15EX variant is housing 5th generation American sensor fusion architecture and components within the F-15 airframe. Therefore, I doubt that American government will allow ToT to India. At most, partial assembly in India.
 
.
The problem of having too much "breaking" is that there is not much left in one piece.
 
.
Russia has never been able to match it's electronics to US levels which is primarily led by private companies. Russia hasn't seen that level of participation by its own private companies and in a way hasn't been able to match US avionics for decades. US dominance has actually rubbed off on its NATO countries which too make significant systems.
What is the relevance of private companies? The funding comes via US government itself anf private companies have no risk. So, what are you trying to say? Russia never came upto USA in semiconductor technology but as of now when semiconductor has saturated and even planes like F35 designed & developed in 2003 uses 180nm of older chipset, Russia has caught up well in such areas. Russia can't compete in civilian semiconductor but has reached high levels in strategic electronics

Russia won't allow India to touch avionics of Su30 considering its their best selling aircraft. It's different from Russia of 90's where they were ready to sell almost anything. It's different now. Even if India were to do super Sukhoi upgrade I am not sure if India can match F15 avionics. Remember the US scientists have realtime war data to fine-tune their hardware and software over decades which Indians could only dream off.
India will upgrade on its own. Russia need not allow. India upgraded Su30 to carry Brahmos on its own too. USA has real time data for some time as it has first mover advantage but that does not mean others can;t catch up and refine. Moreover, no real world BVR or 5th gen war took place to have combat data. So, the only missing component is "time" which can be covered up. India can easily match F15 avionics with feedback and refinement over time. After all, feedbacks are just about updating codes, not hardware itself

I have never seen concrete evidence of Sukhoi being superior to American options in true combat-applicable aspects of maneuverability. Russian aircraft airframe designing capability is absolutely inferior to American. Just look at the airframe of Su-57 and compare it to that of F-35 and F-22 - big difference. Americans are also far ahead in the aspect of developing avionics.
F22 is the best but F35 is a flying truck which is too fat and poorly maneuverable. Su57 is better than F35. F35 has too big an engine which makes it too fat to be fast and maneuverable.

Older F-15E is already 4.5th generation.

F-15EX feature 5th generation sensor fusion architecture and technologies onboard minus VLO which is compensated with cutting-edge EA-18G type EW capabilities.

In short, F-15EX is fusion of EA-18G Growler and F-35 based warfighting concepts into a single platform in compliance with the emerging American MOSIAC warfare doctrine.

While F-35 will cruise above contested spaces without being noticed, F-15EX will rather bulldoze through the same.
Even basic gadget like mobile phone has sensor fusion. Now, 4th generation means that there is no VLO and there is no AESA radar and AESA EW suite. 4.5 gen means AESA radar & EW is added. F15 is 40 year old plane and it is impossible for it to have 4.5 gen originally as there was no AESA back then. It is now 4.5 gen with upgrade. Su30 will also be 4.5 gen with upgrade.

In all wars India has lost more fighters then PAF despite having much superior fleet. In recent stand off IAF could not cope with high stress and crashed a lot of planes in 2019. So no, IAF does not have rigorous training but they do have high tech fighters.
And also, when you buy a new platform your air force is also trained by that country. So if IAF acquires F-16 or F-15 then US trains your air force to adapt to that platform.
Which war did India have superior planes compared to PAF and India lost more planes? in 1965, PAF has better planes. In 1971, India won decisively and lost less planes than pakistan. In 1998, India did not fight PAF but only the stinger missiles and AAA guns shot down Indian planes. For that matter, even Turkey shot down Russian plane. But we can't call Turkish air force as better than Russian air force

India has obsolete planes like MiG21, Jaguar, Mirage 2000 and hence loses planes but that does not mean India needs training from USA>
 
.
india first country to have planes from every other country but are too incompetent to actually use them.

I guess the sellers knew that, thus allowing sales.
 
.
Which war did India have superior planes compared to PAF and India lost more planes? in 1965, PAF has better planes. In 1971, India won decisively and lost less planes than pakistan. In 1998, India did not fight PAF but only the stinger missiles and AAA guns shot down Indian planes. For that matter, even Turkey shot down Russian plane. But we can't call Turkish air force as better than Russian air force

Lets see....

In 65

PAF

120 F-86 ( 2 sqd were equipped with AIM-9B which had 10% accuracy and was designed to shot slow moving soviet bombers)
12 F-104 ( even though this plane was the most advance in the region but what is 12 going to do?)

IAF

100 Ouragan (inferior to F-86)
110 Mystere-4A (minus AAM it was French equivalent of F-86)
144 Gnat (superior maneuverability in comparison to F-86)
160 Hunter (a generation ahead of F-86)
12 MiG-21F-13 (par with F-104 however they never saw any action because they were destroyed from PAF F-86 strafing run)

So thats 120 vs 500+ and IAF still got its *** kicked.

In 1971 their was no comparison since IAF was even more better equipped with Mig-21 and Su-7 and numerous neutral defence sources supports PAF narrative that IAF lost alot more planes then PAF.
Heck IAF could not even destroy the lone F-86 sqd in East Pakistan even after many air raids attempt. If we dont take captured F-86 in account then kill to death ration is even more higher for PAF.

India has obsolete planes like MiG21, Jaguar, Mirage 2000 and hence loses planes but that does not mean India needs training from USA>

All the mentioned planes are technologically superior to PAF fleet.
Bison > F-7PG
Jaguar > Mirage-III
Mirage-2K > F-16
 
.
What is the relevance of private companies? The funding comes via US government itself anf private companies have no risk. So, what are you trying to say? Russia never came upto USA in semiconductor technology but as of now when semiconductor has saturated and even planes like F35 designed & developed in 2003 uses 180nm of older chipset, Russia has caught up well in such areas. Russia can't compete in civilian semiconductor but has reached high levels in strategic electronics


India will upgrade on its own. Russia need not allow. India upgraded Su30 to carry Brahmos on its own too. USA has real time data for some time as it has first mover advantage but that does not mean others can;t catch up and refine. Moreover, no real world BVR or 5th gen war took place to have combat data. So, the only missing component is "time" which can be covered up. India can easily match F15 avionics with feedback and refinement over time. After all, feedbacks are just about updating codes, not hardware itself


F22 is the best but F35 is a flying truck which is too fat and poorly maneuverable. Su57 is better than F35. F35 has too big an engine which makes it too fat to be fast and maneuverable.


Even basic gadget like mobile phone has sensor fusion. Now, 4th generation means that there is no VLO and there is no AESA radar and AESA EW suite. 4.5 gen means AESA radar & EW is added. F15 is 40 year old plane and it is impossible for it to have 4.5 gen originally as there was no AESA back then. It is now 4.5 gen with upgrade. Su30 will also be 4.5 gen with upgrade.


Which war did India have superior planes compared to PAF and India lost more planes? in 1965, PAF has better planes. In 1971, India won decisively and lost less planes than pakistan. In 1998, India did not fight PAF but only the stinger missiles and AAA guns shot down Indian planes. For that matter, even Turkey shot down Russian plane. But we can't call Turkish air force as better than Russian air force

India has obsolete planes like MiG21, Jaguar, Mirage 2000 and hence loses planes but that does not mean India needs training from USA>

There is an aft repeated word even inside India. We Indians are good at bragging. And you are just proving it again.

How do you even know F35 is using 180nm chipsets from 2003? Production started in 2018 and Americans aren't like Indians. The companies here generally provide an hardware/software update before an design is locked in probably every 2 years. Compatibility testing is also done before even considered. I don't think F35 design was locked in before 2013 anyway.
First let's learn to walk, then we can run. When Russian equipments triumph American ones in battlefield then you can brag.

As for MKI upgrade, Russians were really pissed off when we considered integrating I derby on MKI and refused to cooperate. Even when BrahMos integration was done only required parts of source codes are provided making integration with Radar possible. You don't get full source codes for any fighters. Thats like the kidney of an fighter.
Without the source code, India has to probably design an new mission computer, new HUD, new radar or existing ones with fresh programming , new weapons bla bla making the programme very expensive. Just like the Chinese J11. Does Indian budget support the disruption now?
 
.
In 1965, PAF Sabres were equipped with Sidewinder missiles. IAF did not have that luxury. @Myth_buster_1
 
.
F22 is the best but F35 is a flying truck which is too fat and poorly maneuverable. Su57 is better than F35. F35 has too big an engine which makes it too fat to be fast and maneuverable.
Have you been living in a cave lately?

FYI: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-3...hows-stunt-turns-older-jets-cant-touch-2019-1

F-35 was officially subject to 'maneuver restrictions' in earlier years during the course of its trials. These restrictions are lifted in the Block 3f update for each F-35 unit.

[1] Maneuver Restrictions
Under previous versions of software, the JSF was restricted in maneuvering based on fuel weight and, under the best of conditions, the F-35A was limited to seven gravitational force equivalents (G-forces), simply called “Gs.” This forced pilots to artificially pad or limit their turns, so as not to “over-G” the aircraft. In a defensive engagement for example, pilots looking over their shoulder at the aircraft prosecuting them would underplay their “G” loading to ensure that they did not place too much stress on the jet (“over-G”) and force an untimely end to their sortie.

Those restrictions are now completely gone, and even with a full internal weapons load-out and fuel, pilots can pull back as far as the stick will go and let the jet limit loadings to nine Gs anytime the jet is capable of generating that kind of turn. As discussed below (under “The Weapons School Standard”), that same finesse is what fighter pilots have always referred to as energy management, and it can only be learned through multiple, regular air-to-air training repetitions—which are currently not taking place.


Maneuverability output of any combat aircraft is not fixed but variable - subject to numerous conditions.

[2] F-35A Dogfight Performance
The energy maneuverability (EM) performance of fourth-generation fighters is very often exaggerated by the idea that these fighters fly combat missions in absolutely clean “airshow” configurations. No fourth-generation jet in the U.S. inventory (or any other) goes into combat that way, and most will carry significant external stores (bomb racks, munitions, fuel tanks, and targeting pods) in order to accomplish their mission. When pilots know they are about to enter a dogfight situation requiring the best EM their jets can deliver, they will jettison fuel tanks and unexpended bombs, but almost every pod, rack, or missile rail is permanently affixed, adding significant weight, drag, and radar cross section (RCS) that cannot be jettisoned in flight.

If weapons are jettisoned prior to hitting air-to-ground targets, pilots will fail in their primary (multirole) tasking. Even post-jettison, the G-restrictions associated with targeting, forward-looking infrared (FLIR), and HARM Targeting System (HTS) pods will remain and generally restrict jets to eight Gs or less. While most fighters still perform adequately in those post-jettison configurations, air combat EM performance suffers considerably.


That is why demonstrations of maneuverability in Airshow(s) are merely 'publicity stunts' with "clean configurations" to create an impression on audience.

[3] A Direct Comparison.
Fifty-one experienced pilots currently flying the F-35A were asked to rate the energy and maneuvering characteristics of their previous fourth-generation fighters in a combat configuration throughout the dogfighting maneuver envelope in a combat configuration after jettisoning their external stores. They were then asked to rate the performance of the F-35A using the same scale, with fuel and internal munition loads associated with a combat loadout. The F-35A compared well to the four other fighters (F-15C, F-15E, F-16C, and A-10) in most every regime. (For the total results and responses from the pilots of each respective fighter, see Chart 1.)


BG-F35-2019-CHARTS-page1.gif


Each pilot was then asked to select which fighter he would rather fly in combat if he were to face a clone flying the other jet in six different air-to-air situations. (See Chart 2.) If the pilot selected an F-15C in a short-range set-up, for example, he felt he could outperform a pilot of equal abilities in the F-35A. Former fourth-generation pilots selected the F-35A 100 percent of the time in beyond-visual-range situations, and more than 75 percent of the time in visual dogfights where energy and maneuverability are critical to success. The number one reason pilots selected their previous fighter over the F-35A in any one of the four visual fight scenarios was the fact that their previous fighter had an AIM-9X missile for those fights, and the F-35A did not. The scenario that each pilot was given included aircraft configurations for the early stages of a war where stealth was required for the F-35A. There, the jet has no external stores, and since the AIM-9X missile can only be carried externally, that missile was not available.

BG-F35-2019-CHARTS-page2.gif


Source for [1], [2] and [3] above: https://www.heritage.org/defense/re...nd-lethal-multi-role-weapons-system-the-world

Airframe of F-35 is a generational leap from earlier designs in terms of design and construction materials - optimized for supermaneuverability in VLO format - exceedingly difficult task to accomplish.

As for F-35 being fat:-

images


Because F-35 have it all internal including "fuel tanks" - important stealthy characteristic and consideration.

Su-57 feature a standard Sukhoi airframe with RCS reduction treatments - nothing revolutionary in this design. Boeing did a better job with its F-15SE Silent Eagle proposition, and very easily (mature variant demonstrated in a span of just 1 year).

images

silent-eagle-media-briefdoc-17-728.jpg

silent-eagle-media-briefdoc-15-728.jpg


Su-57 is not a true 5th generation combat aircraft but fit in the 4.5th generation class as per American parameters. Substantial achievement for Sukhoi but nothing significant for Americans.

Even basic gadget like mobile phone has sensor fusion. Now, 4th generation means that there is no VLO and there is no AESA radar and AESA EW suite. 4.5 gen means AESA radar & EW is added. F15 is 40 year old plane and it is impossible for it to have 4.5 gen originally as there was no AESA back then. It is now 4.5 gen with upgrade. Su30 will also be 4.5 gen with upgrade.
There are different levels of sensor fusion.

combat-systems-fusion-engine-for-the-f35-5-728.jpg

combat-systems-fusion-engine-for-the-f35-6-728.jpg


F-15EX also have true 5th generation sensor fusion architecture.

The modern F-15E shows how neatly compartmentalizing fighters into “generations” can be misleading and subconsciously shape our perceptions. Consider the fifth-generation F-35’s much-lauded sensor fusion. This is enabled by computing power, software, sensors, and algorithms; all items with high potential to scale to other platforms — and they have. Despite the hype, the reality is that almost all current fighters have had some form of sensor fusion for the better part of a decade. In fact, the newest, largest, and most capable radar and the highest computing power on a U.S. aircraft aren’t on a fifth-generation fighter — they’re on the F-15E.

In the time I’ve flown the F-15E I’ve seen it progress through seven major operational software updates (called suites) and various hardware upgrades, each more integrated and potent than the last. When the next software upgrade arrives it will have even more sensors and hardware. In fact, the only limitation keeping it from achieving sensor fusion on par with the F-35 is its cockpit displays. As an example of how sequestration and funding instability drive incoherent budget choices, nearly $12 billion in aforementioned F-15E sensor upgrades are still stubbornly pushed through 1980s displays that use cathode-ray tubes to produce low-quality analog video that aren’t even all color, let alone digital, touchscreen, or high-resolution. The impressive F-35 cockpit has all of this, and that makes all the difference. The F-15EX enhanced cockpit displays mirror the newest displays coming to both F/A-18 Block III and F-35 Block 4, mostly because they are all made by the same company.


Benitez-6-3-19-figure-3-768x457.png

Figure 3. F-15 cockpit over time. Cockpit displays are the limiting factor in achieving full sensor fusion. (Image: Boeing/Author/U.S. Air Force.)

Link: https://warontherocks.com/2019/06/f-15ex-the-strategic-blind-spot-in-the-air-forces-fighter-debate/

F-15EX is not a 40 years old combat aircraft - this is ridiculous assumption. It is 5th generation class with a caveat - VLO design aspects substituted with exceedingly powerful EW capabilities.

Now every modern-era combat aircraft have EW capabilities but these are not uniform. Some are weak in this area, and some are potent in this area. F-15EX feature EW capabilities* in the class of F-22A and F-35 variants - understand the difference.

*identified as EPAWSS.

From BAE:-

"Providing both offensive and defensive electronic warfare options for the pilot and aircraft, EPAWSS offers fully integrated radar warning, geo-location, situational awareness, and self-protection solutions to detect and defeat surface and airborne threats in signal-dense contested and highly contested environments. Equipped with advanced electronic countermeasures, it enables deeper penetration against modern integrated air defense systems, providing rapid response capabilities to protect the aircrew.

An all-digital system, it requires a smaller footprint than previous systems, allowing it to seamlessly integrate new capabilities and remain current. A platform-level solution, it provides the F-15 with improved reliability and maintainability, helping reduce long term life cycle costs to keep the aircraft fielded now and into the future."
 
.
In 1965, PAF Sabres were equipped with Sidewinder missiles. IAF did not have that luxury. @Myth_buster_1

Less then 2 sqd were modified to carry Sidewinder and the B model had only 10% accuracy and was designed to shoot soviet bombers and only couple of IAF fighters were destroyed with sidewinder so its still not a decisive factor in PAF air dominance.
 
.
The F15 is an extremely good aircraft with a proven record of air to air kills. It will outmatch anything Europe , Russia and China have. If I was Pakistan I would be extremely worried if India got its hands on the F15EX.

Selling the plane also highlights the hostile attitude the US has towards Pakistan. They wont even sell us their far inferior F16
 
.
i think after failing to get f18 india is now willing to get f15 for face saving,F15 lacks Tvc but f18 has that capability and is more maneuverable,when india has su30 already getting f15 is bad decision as it has nothing new capability
 
.
i think after failing to get f18 india is now willing to get f15 for face saving,F15 lacks Tvc but f18 has that capability and is more maneuverable,when india has su30 already getting f15 is bad decision as it has nothing new capability

F18 SH is also in the race, HAL and Mahindra aerospace are the local partners. I think F15EX is better than both the F21, F18 SH. I doubt F15EX will be approved for local production.
 
.
Lets see....

In 65

PAF

120 F-86 ( 2 sqd were equipped with AIM-9B which had 10% accuracy and was designed to shot slow moving soviet bombers)
12 F-104 ( even though this plane was the most advance in the region but what is 12 going to do?)

IAF

100 Ouragan (inferior to F-86)
110 Mystere-4A (minus AAM it was French equivalent of F-86)
144 Gnat (superior maneuverability in comparison to F-86)
160 Hunter (a generation ahead of F-86)
12 MiG-21F-13 (par with F-104 however they never saw any action because they were destroyed from PAF F-86 strafing run)

So thats 120 vs 500+ and IAF still got its *** kicked.

In 1971 their was no comparison since IAF was even more better equipped with Mig-21 and Su-7 and numerous neutral defence sources supports PAF narrative that IAF lost alot more planes then PAF.
Heck IAF could not even destroy the lone F-86 sqd in East Pakistan even after many air raids attempt. If we dont take captured F-86 in account then kill to death ration is even more higher for PAF.



All the mentioned planes are technologically superior to PAF fleet.
Bison > F-7PG
Jaguar > Mirage-III
Mirage-2K > F-16
In 1965, India faced a surprise attack by Pakistan and hence lost more fighters. It is always natural that element of surprise has a major role.

Secondly, the F86 & F104 were the best in class compared to all the fighters which India had excepting MiG21. This played a major role in causing higher losses. About 140 vs 500 planes, India did not go and destroy entire Pakistan and hence you can't claim that pakistan won. Considering the superiority of PAF in 1965, if the war had gone to a conclusion, PAF would have lost its 140 planes taking about 250 Indian planes due to the superiority of PAF planes. So, higher losses to India in the ratio of 1:2 was expected.

In 1971, India clearly outclassed Pakistan in air front. This was despite PAF attacking IAF first. Neutral sources put IAF losses at 45 while PAF at 75. India may not have been able to destroy F86 in East Pakistan but that was because Pakistan hid those planes in mountains or underground bunkers. IAF ensured that there was no fly zone in East Pakistan and that is considered as victory.

How do you even know F35 is using 180nm chipsets from 2003? Production started in 2018 and Americans aren't like Indians. The companies here generally provide an hardware/software update before an design is locked in probably every 2 years. Compatibility testing is also done before even considered. I don't think F35 design was locked in before 2013 anyway.
First let's learn to walk, then we can run. When Russian equipments triumph American ones in battlefield then you can brag.
What chipset do you think was used in F22? It went to production in 1996. Don't talk nonsense that Indians are known to brag. Known according to whom? Don't others brag at all? You just have low IQ and hence bring nonsensical topics instead of talking with facts.

Software update is provided every 2 years but not hardware. Hardware change requires complete upgradation and refit. Who told you that F35 was not locked before 2013? It has been under production since 2006. Secondly, the reliability of older generation of semiconductor is higher due to larger node size and hence higher tolerance to fluctuations. The thinner nodes tend to get affected more severely by variations in temperatures and jerks caused in accidents or wear and tear. This also means that semiconductor below 65nm will never be used in strategic application where reliability matters most.

As for MKI upgrade, Russians were really pissed off when we considered integrating I derby on MKI and refused to cooperate. Even when BrahMos integration was done only required parts of source codes are provided making integration with Radar possible. You don't get full source codes for any fighters. Thats like the kidney of an fighter.
Without the source code, India has to probably design an new mission computer, new HUD, new radar or existing ones with fresh programming , new weapons bla bla making the programme very expensive. Just like the Chinese J11. Does Indian budget support the disruption now
Derby requires Israeli integration which Russia did not like due to close Israeli affiliation with USA. India makes the radar and its codes and hence does not need Russian codes. The processor of the radar is Indian made in Su30 MKI, not Russian if you did not know. Now, the hardware is indeed Russian TOT and hence India will be betraying Russia if it ever exposes the limit of the hardware to USA allies. So, India needs Russian consent to ensure Russia does not feel betrayed. But when India is doing things by itself, there is no need for asking Russian consent. If you don't understand things, don't talk like a genius

F-35 was officially subject to 'maneuver restrictions' in earlier years during the course of its trials. These restrictions are lifted in the Block 3f update for each F-35 unit.

[1] Maneuver Restrictions
Under previous versions of software, the JSF was restricted in maneuvering based on fuel weight and, under the best of conditions, the F-35A was limited to seven gravitational force equivalents (G-forces), simply called “Gs.” This forced pilots to artificially pad or limit their turns, so as not to “over-G” the aircraft. In a defensive engagement for example, pilots looking over their shoulder at the aircraft prosecuting them would underplay their “G” loading to ensure that they did not place too much stress on the jet (“over-G”) and force an untimely end to their sortie.

Those restrictions are now completely gone, and even with a full internal weapons load-out and fuel, pilots can pull back as far as the stick will go and let the jet limit loadings to nine Gs anytime the jet is capable of generating that kind of turn. As discussed below (under “The Weapons School Standard”), that same finesse is what fighter pilots have always referred to as energy management, and it can only be learned through multiple, regular air-to-air training repetitions—which are currently not taking place.


Maneuverability output of any combat aircraft is not fixed but variable - subject to numerous conditions.

[2] F-35A Dogfight Performance
The energy maneuverability (EM) performance of fourth-generation fighters is very often exaggerated by the idea that these fighters fly combat missions in absolutely clean “airshow” configurations. No fourth-generation jet in the U.S. inventory (or any other) goes into combat that way, and most will carry significant external stores (bomb racks, munitions, fuel tanks, and targeting pods) in order to accomplish their mission. When pilots know they are about to enter a dogfight situation requiring the best EM their jets can deliver, they will jettison fuel tanks and unexpended bombs, but almost every pod, rack, or missile rail is permanently affixed, adding significant weight, drag, and radar cross section (RCS) that cannot be jettisoned in flight.

If weapons are jettisoned prior to hitting air-to-ground targets, pilots will fail in their primary (multirole) tasking. Even post-jettison, the G-restrictions associated with targeting, forward-looking infrared (FLIR), and HARM Targeting System (HTS) pods will remain and generally restrict jets to eight Gs or less. While most fighters still perform adequately in those post-jettison configurations, air combat EM performance suffers considerably.


That is why demonstrations of maneuverability in Airshow(s) are merely 'publicity stunts' with "clean configurations" to create an impression on audience.

Fifty-one experienced pilots currently flying the F-35A were asked to rate the energy and maneuvering characteristics of their previous fourth-generation fighters in a combat configuration throughout the dogfighting maneuver envelope in a combat configuration after jettisoning their external stores. They were then asked to rate the performance of the F-35A using the same scale, with fuel and internal munition loads associated with a combat loadout. The F-35A compared well to the four other fighters (F-15C, F-15E, F-16C, and A-10) in most every regime. (For the total results and responses from the pilots of each respective fighter, see Chart 1.)

BG-F35-2019-CHARTS-page1.gif


Each pilot was then asked to select which fighter he would rather fly in combat if he were to face a clone flying the other jet in six different air-to-air situations. (See Chart 2.) If the pilot selected an F-15C in a short-range set-up, for example, he felt he could outperform a pilot of equal abilities in the F-35A. Former fourth-generation pilots selected the F-35A 100 percent of the time in beyond-visual-range situations, and more than 75 percent of the time in visual dogfights where energy and maneuverability are critical to success. The number one reason pilots selected their previous fighter over the F-35A in any one of the four visual fight scenarios was the fact that their previous fighter had an AIM-9X missile for those fights, and the F-35A did not. The scenario that each pilot was given included aircraft configurations for the early stages of a war where stealth was required for the F-35A. There, the jet has no external stores, and since the AIM-9X missile can only be carried externally, that missile was not available.
Just look at the comparison of F15C vs F35. F15E is a strike aircraft and hence not to be compared with F35 which is mainly for air superiority. The turn performance or maneuverability of F15C was always better than F35. F35 has better response at slow speed because of its huge engine but the maneuverability is low.

Secondly, f35 does not have massive in built space for attacks either. The number of missiles which can be fit are minimal at 4 BVR missiles and 2 WVR missiles. Since WVR is not really advantageous for F35 as its main role is stealth BVR, having merely 4 BVR is insufficient. Su57 for example, has wing pattern where BVR is kept in internal bay and yet has enough maneuverability and huge internal fuel tank. F35 hardly has any real advantage over Su57. Coming to planes like Su30/Su35, both these planes also have huge internal fuel tank. Also, the carrying of BVR externally does not affect maneuverability much as the weight of BVR missiles is negligible compared to massive weight of aircraft and the BVR missiles are shaped to reduce drag. Since fuel tank is not needed, Su30/Su35 does not have any additional burden in maneuvering. Only element lost is the VLO but these planes were never meant to be 5th generation VLO planes. The maneuverability of Su30 with 4 BVR missiles is higher than that of F35 with missiles in internal bay. This maneuverability problem is what I am emphasising.

Airframe of F-35 is a generational leap from earlier designs in terms of design and construction materials - optimized for supermaneuverability in VLO format - exceedingly difficult task to accomplish.

As for F-35 being fat:-

images


Because F-35 have it all internal including "fuel tanks" - important stealthy characteristic and consideration.

Su-57 feature a standard Sukhoi airframe with RCS reduction treatments - nothing revolutionary in this design. Boeing did a better job with its F-15SE Silent Eagle proposition, and very easily (mature variant demonstrated in a span of just 1 year).

images

silent-eagle-media-briefdoc-17-728.jpg

silent-eagle-media-briefdoc-15-728.jpg


Su-57 is not a true 5th generation combat aircraft but fit in the 4.5th generation class as per American parameters. Substantial achievement for Sukhoi but nothing significant for Americans.
Su57 is a stealth plane with maneuverability and USA does not like to admit that its F35 is inferior and hence belittles Su57. F35 is inferior to Su57 due to poor maneuverability. Russia is not inferior when it comes to avionics and electronics as we can see from its advanced defence systems like S400, Su35 etc.

F is better than current Su30 because of electronics upgrade. But with Super Sukhoi upgrade, that superiority will end.

F-15EX also have true 5th generation sensor fusion architecture.

The modern F-15E shows how neatly compartmentalizing fighters into “generations” can be misleading and subconsciously shape our perceptions. Consider the fifth-generation F-35’s much-lauded sensor fusion. This is enabled by computing power, software, sensors, and algorithms; all items with high potential to scale to other platforms — and they have. Despite the hype, the reality is that almost all current fighters have had some form of sensor fusion for the better part of a decade. In fact, the newest, largest, and most capable radar and the highest computing power on a U.S. aircraft aren’t on a fifth-generation fighter — they’re on the F-15E.

In the time I’ve flown the F-15E I’ve seen it progress through seven major operational software updates (called suites) and various hardware upgrades, each more integrated and potent than the last. When the next software upgrade arrives it will have even more sensors and hardware. In fact, the only limitation keeping it from achieving sensor fusion on par with the F-35 is its cockpit displays. As an example of how sequestration and funding instability drive incoherent budget choices, nearly $12 billion in aforementioned F-15E sensor upgrades are still stubbornly pushed through 1980s displays that use cathode-ray tubes to produce low-quality analog video that aren’t even all color, let alone digital, touchscreen, or high-resolution. The impressive F-35 cockpit has all of this, and that makes all the difference. The F-15EX enhanced cockpit displays mirror the newest displays coming to both F/A-18 Block III and F-35 Block 4, mostly because they are all made by the same company.


Benitez-6-3-19-figure-3-768x457.png

Figure 3. F-15 cockpit over time. Cockpit displays are the limiting factor in achieving full sensor fusion. (Image: Boeing/Author/U.S. Air Force.)

Link: https://warontherocks.com/2019/06/f-15ex-the-strategic-blind-spot-in-the-air-forces-fighter-debate/

F-15EX is not a 40 years old combat aircraft - this is ridiculous assumption. It is 5th generation class with a caveat - VLO design aspects substituted with exceedingly powerful EW capabilities.

Now every modern-era combat aircraft have EW capabilities but these are not uniform. Some are weak in this area, and some are potent in this area. F-15EX feature EW capabilities* in the class of F-22A and F-35 variants - understand the difference.

*identified as EPAWSS.

From BAE:-

"Providing both offensive and defensive electronic warfare options for the pilot and aircraft, EPAWSS offers fully integrated radar warning, geo-location, situational awareness, and self-protection solutions to detect and defeat surface and airborne threats in signal-dense contested and highly contested environments. Equipped with advanced electronic countermeasures, it enables deeper penetration against modern integrated air defense systems, providing rapid response capabilities to protect the aircrew.

An all-digital system, it requires a smaller footprint than previous systems, allowing it to seamlessly integrate new capabilities and remain current. A platform-level solution, it provides the F-15 with improved reliability and maintainability, helping reduce long term life cycle costs to keep the aircraft fielded now and into the future."
Anyone can get sensor fusion. It is just about having semiconductor technology and software to do that. India has semiconductor technology made in SCL and DRDO. So, talk of real hardware which is irreplaceable, not about electronics which can be replaced
 
.
In 1965, India faced a surprise attack by Pakistan and hence lost more fighters. It is always natural that element of surprise has a major role.
The surprise attack inflicted fraction of total loss in which entire Mig-21 fleet was destroyed because they never saw any action during 1965 war.
Secondly, the F86 & F104 were the best in class compared to all the fighters which India had excepting MiG21.
This is not banglore call center where you can get away with blatant lies because here the end user has access to internet and can actually catch your lies easily.
F-86 was only superior to Ouragan and Mystere but Hunters and Gnat was almost a generation ahead and infact many of western air force replaced F-86 with Hunters. You can not even prove how F-86 was superior even with Side winder which had only 10% accuracy and could not even engage in head on encounter. get this in your thick head.

This played a major role in causing higher losses. About 140 vs 500 planes
You are trying to justify the losses as if PAF was flying F-16s in 1965.
, India did not go and destroy entire Pakistan and hence you can't claim that pakistan won
makes no sense. So Pakistan was not destroyed so they cant claim victory? indiotic logic.
. Considering the superiority of PAF in 1965, if the war had gone to a conclusion, PAF would have lost its 140 planes taking about 250 Indian planes due to the superiority of PAF planes. So, higher losses to India in the ratio of 1:2 was expected.
What ever makes you feel better but at the end of the day IAF got its *** kicked in 65.
In 1971, India clearly outclassed Pakistan in air front. This was despite PAF attacking IAF first. Neutral sources put IAF losses at 45 while PAF at 75. India may not have been able to destroy F86 in East Pakistan but that was because Pakistan hid those planes in mountains or underground bunkers. IAF ensured that there was no fly zone in East Pakistan and that is considered as victory.

Show us which neutral sources support your figures pulled out of modi g's gaand?
And since when Dhaka air base has mountains and underground bunker?
Btw in 71 India had over 500 SA-2 and Mig-21 and SU-7 were a generation ahead of anything PAF had and still got its *** kicked in air by a smaller air force.
 
.
This is not banglore call center where you can get away with blatant lies because here the end user has access to internet and can actually catch your lies easily.
F-86 was only superior to Ouragan and Mystere but Hunters and Gnat was almost a generation ahead and infact many of western air force replaced F-86 with Hunters. You can not even prove how F-86 was superior even with Side winder which had only 10% accuracy and could not even engage in head on encounter. get this in your thick head
Gnat is half the size of F86 and could hardly fight against F86. It had poor range and was slower than F86. Hunter was equal to F86 but that was all India had which matched PAF. Except for hunters, all other planes were inferior (except MiG21 which were destroyed by surprise).

In 1960s-1970s, all AAMs were having poor accuracy and were mostly using their guns to fight. There was no plane which has any higher accuracy with any other country.

Show us which neutral sources support your figures pulled out of modi g's gaand?
And since when Dhaka air base has mountains and underground bunker?
Btw in 71 India had over 500 SA-2 and Mig-21 and SU-7 were a generation ahead of anything PAF had and still got its *** kicked in air by a smaller air force.
India imposed no-fly zone of East Pakistan. This is a fact. This means that if India could not destroy fighters, it was because Pakistan hid it in hardened shelters, not because India did not have access to East pakistan air space.

India never got its *** kicked by PAF in 1971. India always had the upper hand from day 1.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom