Chengdu J-20's Fifth Prototype Unveiled.

[Skywalker]

Stealth is optimized to work in a BVR dominated environment(provided the adversary has no modern ESM,IRST,VHF/UHF based GCI/early warning),the wars you have mentioned proved BVR combat does not make majority of the kills(approximately only 5 kills were BVR in the gulf and the rest of AMRAAM,Aim-7 engagements were within visual range and most from the rear and all that against an incompetent air force).
BVR combat has not proved to be very reliable and the advantage if any only stays till "merge" and then the IFF problem sinks in and makes the situation worse.Modern RWR's which can detect,locate LPI radars can be relatively easy to design than LPI radars and thus if you keep your radars on you are no more stealthy but if you switch it off then BVR aint possible.
The excercises such as red flag are conducted with assumed Pk of missiles which is astonishingly high,hell even the tests carried out on the BVR missiles aren't realistic in terms of target maneuvering and electronic clutter.
The excercises feather duster,AIMVAL/ACEVAL, red flag proved that air national guards flying inferior planes can take out superior planes,offbore sight missiles are not needed,smaller agile aircraft are still relevant against expensive ones.
Assumptions on certain technology proved wrong in vietnam,kosovo,gulf and it will repeat again and the ones who dont learn from the past are doomed.


Go read about valkyrie bomber, F-X , MBT-70 ,Crusader, future combat systems, airborne laser,F-111,comanche,cheyenne,CG(X),LCS,Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle,F-35.
When you are done lets talk and may be then you will troll less.

Whenever we show you your real capability you blame us for trolling...just keep paying them we have no issue, you couldn't even induct your lca mak 1 have already started talking about mark 2.

 

[holysaturn]

Whenever we show you your real capability you blame us for trolling...just keep paying them we have no issue, you couldn't even induct your lca mak 1 have already started talking about mark 2.

I have no intent in defending the LCA or the DRDO , they have serious management and commitment issues,the same goes for any govt agency not independent of govt hand holding.
But the issue I was talking about was proper application of technology and how stealth and the so called fallacy of "fifth generation" is not such a case,but then you pulled out a pathetic joke out of it.

 

[SQ8]

Stealth is optimized to work in a BVR dominated environment(provided the adversary has no modern ESM,IRST,VHF/UHF based GCI/early warning),the wars you have mentioned proved BVR combat does not make majority of the kills(approximately only 5 kills were BVR in the gulf and the rest of AMRAAM,Aim-7 engagements were within visual range and most from the rear and all that against an incompetent air force).
BVR combat has not proved to be very reliable and the advantage if any only stays till "merge" and then the IFF problem sinks in and makes the situation worse.Modern RWR's which can detect,locate LPI radars can be relatively easy to design than LPI radars and thus if you keep your radars on you are no more stealthy but if you switch it off then BVR aint possible.
The excercises such as red flag are conducted with assumed Pk of missiles which is astonishingly high,hell even the tests carried out on the BVR missiles aren't realistic in terms of target maneuvering and electronic clutter.
The excercises feather duster,AIMVAL/ACEVAL, red flag proved that air national guards flying inferior planes can take out superior planes,offbore sight missiles are not needed,smaller agile aircraft are still relevant against expensive ones.
Assumptions on certain technology proved wrong in vietnam,kosovo,gulf and it will repeat again and the ones who dont learn from the past are doomed.


Go read about valkyrie bomber, F-X , MBT-70 ,Crusader, future combat systems, airborne laser,F-111,comanche,cheyenne,CG(X),LCS,Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle,F-35.
When you are done lets talk and may be then you will troll less.

The wars I have quoted were to show that the progression of technology(rather than over reliance on it prematurely) combined with training and tactics will dominate everytime. Red Flag is carried out with varying Pk of missile systems for different shots. The current red flag with the new simulated environment is rather accurate.. can you come up with the claims you make for Pk and so on? Wherefore does such knowledge reside?

If you are referring to the blog articles written by someone who based their claims of excessive Pk on a lack of understandinf that Time and technology has evolved since sopwiths and Fokkers fought it out over the maginot line.. then its a rather shallow ideal.. do you have a proper peer reviewed publications that writes on the excessive Pk and lack of electronic clutter?

 

[gambit]

Hmmm what makes you think I havent read,I have also read red how many of the results are rigged to keep the money flowing into the USAF darling programs.I dont care if you dont take it seriously, I am a defence technology management student and I think I know what I am talking. Technology and requirement creep is solely responsible for most of the failed multi billion projects,strategy and tactics should drive technology not the other way round and stealth was a technology push with assumptions gone wrong.

You want to talk about 'stealth' ? Talk to me.

Explain to me how does 'stealth' have wrong assumptions ? What assumptions are you talking about ?

 

[SQ8]

You want to talk about 'stealth' ? Talk to me.

Explain to me how does 'stealth' have wrong assumptions ? What assumptions are you talking about ?

Im even more surprised at the spurious claim of Red Flag being akin to a casual combat exersize with kills being judged on radio calls.

 

[Skywalker]

I have no intent in defending the LCA or the DRDO , they have serious management and commitment issues,the same goes for any govt agency not independent of govt hand holding.
But the issue I was talking about was proper application of technology and how stealth and the so called fallacy of "fifth generation" is not such a case,but then you pulled out a pathetic joke out of it.

You are 100% right that this has become a laughing stalk for the rest of the world! every body else is wondering when bride will show her face.

 

[gambit]

The excercises such as red flag are conducted with assumed Pk of missiles which is astonishingly high,...

That is actually a good thing.

For starter, we do not want to really kill our people, do we ? May be the Indian Air Force conduct exercises with live fire with real kills, but the US does not. So the generous assumption here is that if you have radar lock, we are going to give you a virtual kill. The thinking here is that no one should assume that a missile is going to malfunction or that his flares/chaff will definitively distract/seduce the missile, so if your Red Flag opponent have radar lock on you, we are going to say he virtually 'killed' you. That will actually condition you to react better in the event you have to enter real combat.

May be the Indian Air Force trains its pilots to assume %50 of missiles, BVR or not, to malfunction. But not US.

 

[SQ8]

That is actually a good thing.

For starter, we do not want to really kill our people, do we ? May be the Indian Air Force conduct exercises with live fire with real kills, but the US does not. So the generous assumption here is that if you have radar lock, we are going to give you a virtual kill. The thinking here is that no one should assume that a missile is going to malfunction or that his flares/chaff will definitively distract/seduce the missile, so if your Red Flag opponent have radar lock on you, we are going to say he virtually 'killed' you. That will actually condition you to react better in the event you have to enter real combat.

May be the Indian Air Force trains its pilots to assume %50 of missiles, BVR or not, to malfunction. But not US.

It also works the other way around. If the Aggressor scores a BVR shot.. it is kill.

 

[holysaturn]

You want to talk about 'stealth' ? Talk to me.

Explain to me how does 'stealth' have wrong assumptions ? What assumptions are you talking about ?

I don't find a need to clarify to you,you can put up a reply to my post if you want. I have contacts with professionals from the eminent agencies both services and the industry whose identity I don't want to disclose.
There are pros and cons for each technology and how realistically systems are tested(both tactical and strategic capabilities) and I found from their views and my own analysis that many systems are not tested for operational conditions(for example no target drone in the market can simulate threat evasion maneuvers or deploy decoys with the timing a manned aircraft would do combat).
The same way "stealth"(I hate to use the word, as only amateurs,marketing goons and fan boys do that ) has so many considerations like aspect of the aircraft during maneuver,IR emissions,acoustic emissions,electronic emissions,wavelengths used,the processing used,operating environments,human skill,maintenance quality that usefully deploying it in combat is questionable. I believe so and I stand by it, don't agree???????? wait till combat occurs till then none of us are correct because combat is the biggest,nastiest teacher.

 

[gambit]

Im even more surprised at the spurious claim of Red Flag being akin to a casual combat exersize with kills being judged on radio calls.

He was talking about the days when telemetry is nowhere the technology we have today. Yes, in those days, we relied heavily on pilot honesty and integrity. If a pilot calls out 'Guns, guns, guns.' we are going to credit him with a virtual kill. That was all we had and it worked, no matter how flawed the methods and processes were.

 

[holysaturn]

It also works the other way around. If the Aggressor scores a BVR shot.. it is kill.

Again we assume that the aggressor will resort to BVR attrition combat firing at high altitude at long range. What if the aggressor decides to stay really low in valleys,mountains and just pops(which has happened numerous times and ) up with GCI guiding him to the target, then the BVR edge is losts and suddenly the F-35 is facing mushrooms of well directed mig-21's and a lot of them the APG-81 can then f**k itself as the range of radar missiles at such altitudes is in visual range and it will be handicapped by poor kinematic performance,pilot with less hours and huge size.

 

[SQ8]

Again we assume that the aggressor will resort to BVR attrition. What if the aggressor decides to stay really low in valleys,mountains and just pops(which has happened numerous times and ) up with GCI guiding him to the target, then the BVR edge is losts and suddenly the F-35 is facing mushrooms of well directed mig-21's and a lot of them the APG-81 can then f**k itself.

And this happens a lot in Red flag.. which is what the whole training is for. However , tell that to the T-38 pilot trying to get an IR lock on the F-22 when he is well in range and still is unable to get a proper tone.
As for the F-35, your flawed argument is standing on the idea that the APG-81 is the ONLY sensor the F-35 has.

 

[holysaturn]

You are 100% right that this has become a laughing stalk for the rest of the world! every body else is wondering when bride will show her face.

Dude am sorry to burst your bubble but HIT taxila and PAC kamra are as inefficient if not more than OFB and the DPSU's here, this management model of ours will never work,we have to take a leaf out of china and the story of NORINCO.

And this happens a lot in Red flag.. which is what the whole training is for. However , tell that to the T-38 pilot trying to get an IR lock on the F-22 when he is well in range and still is unable to get a proper tone.
As for the F-35, your flawed argument is standing on the idea that the APG-81 is the ONLY sensor the F-35 has.

It isnt but the DAS development is going nowhere, believe me, as an ex software developer the development of software for sensor fusion is not a cake walk and the F-35 is in deep trouble trying to go for 360 degree sensor fusion,this single phased approach to software never works.
so everything will come to pilot skill and cockpit visibility,kinematics where the F-35 will score far below existing fighters.The F-35 or any fighter will find difficult to take a BVR shot at low level targets esp with clutter.

 

[SQ8]

It isnt but the DAS development is going nowhere, believe me, as an ex software developer the development of software for sensor fusion is not a cake walk and the F-35 is in deep trouble trying to go for 360 degree sensor fusion,this single phased approach to software never works.
so everything will come to pilot skill and cockpit visibility,kinematics where the F-35 will score far below existing fighters.The F-35 or any fighter will find difficult to take a BVR shot at low level targets esp with clutter.

Sure, I too am an ex embedded systems designer and I can tell you that while not a cake walk it will be done eventually. The F-35 is pushing a lot of envelopes but a lot of these have been solved.

The last part of your argument had ZERO base.. ZILCH. At one point you are trying to show that the APG-81(despite being excellent at sorting clutter out even in heavy ECM enviornments) will fail against a Mig-21 ambush.. and then you are saying that it is not good enough?

Pilot skill has a lot of effect in Air Combat but the one thing that has topped all.. including cockpit visibility is situational awareness. The aircraft with better SA will likely be the victor.. and in this case the F-35 is FAR ahead of any of its competitors.

 

[holysaturn]

Sure, I too am an ex embedded systems designer and I can tell you that while not a cake walk it will be done eventually. The F-35 is pushing a lot of envelopes but a lot of these have been solved.

The last part of your argument had ZERO base.. ZILCH. At one point you are trying to show that the APG-81(despite being excellent at sorting clutter out even in heavy ECM enviornments) will fail against a Mig-21 ambush.. and then you are saying that it is not good enough?

Pilot skill has a lot of effect in Air Combat but the one thing that has topped all.. including cockpit visibility is situational awareness. The aircraft with better SA will likely be the victor.. and in this case the F-35 is FAR ahead of any of its competitors.

You dont get it, the clutter is not only for the APG-81 but also for the missile seeker(now you cannot incorporate such extensive hardware and software for clutter rejection in a missile seeker, its too prohibitive), a well designed repeater jammer can give the data link a run for its money,a modern fuse jammer(proximity,laser),add to it the excessive drag and energy bleed(considering a clipped wing AAM for stealth bay is less maneuverable) of a "look down shoot down" and a maneuvering target trajectory can significantly reduce the Pk to a negligible level.
This is a perpetual state which has nothing to do with the laws of physics or maturing of technology but there are a lot of other ways to improve combat effectiveness and one major one is affordability.It is more like can self navigating jetpacks bet developed for soldiers in the next 5 years ?? Yes , but is there combat relevance ?? Hell no. Instead of chasing the "Video Game" combat lets take combat data ,realistic test results and develop only relevant technology affordably.

Without partial sensor fusion is as good as zero situational awareness,its either this way or that.
I dont see any major improvement in SA compared to other like super hornet considering DAS is not ready propably never be ready in the near future and that is evident from the fact that now USAF is looking at more conservative HMS designs for F-35