China Deployed J-11B jets in Tibet

[jagjitnatt]

How do you know that Russian aircraft has a crushing advantage over Yankee's aircraft in a dog fight?

Last gen was all about dog fight, then F-15 has absolutely no chance against a Su-27?

I think Su-27 has an edge, but not a crushing advantage over F-15.

If F-22 can outmanoeuvre its predecessors, then it has no problem to outmanoeuvre the last gen Su-27 family. Since the dog fight performance between F-15 and Su-27 isn't that great.

Sir, there are just too many variables in a dogfight.
I think you're new to defense forums, or maybe not so much into these things.

A Su27 > F22 > F15 in a dogfight.

The video you are talking about was an animated video. It was a simulation with very little variable taken into account. A computer program can not simulate the complex amount of variables that are required for the job. It would require a super computer.

 

[below_freezing]

Useless?? I don't think so.
TVC doesn't mean that it will allow aircraft to turn at 12g or something. Most aircraft never exceed 6g in a sustained turn. With TVC we can ensure that we get to 7-8g in a turn.
Also TVC kicks in big time when we need to change direction quickly, like in a dog fight. You see the cobra, how it was before TVC, and now with TVC, we can do a lot more than just cobra maneuvers.

TVS allows for quick turns, and change of directions.

Since when did max speed become a parameter for performance. If max speed is crucial, Mig 25 would trump the J11 any day.

What is more crucial today is how slow can the aircraft fly. What angle of attack can it sustain. And TVS also helps tremendously to increase the angle of attack.

---------- Post added at 11:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 AM ----------



Rather be? You still think you're not up there?

The reason most aircraft don't have over 6g acceleration is because pilots have a very hard time handling higher g forces. Thrust vectoring means you can turn better in the 2-D plane that the thrust vectoring is in, but in the 3-D cube of the real atmosphere, the J-11B has a 70 m/s advantage in up/down shifts relative to the Su-30 MKI. In addition, the J-11B is already "maneuverable enough"; all Su-27 type planes are very manueverable already due to their aerodynamic shape and control systems with comparable engines, the thrust vectoring mechanism just adds unnecessary weight (for Su-30 MKI; it is not wasted on less maneuverable planes such as the F-15) which increases inertia, and negates part of the advantage that the thrust vectoring gives (as well as reducing instantaneous acceleration, because engine thrust gives increased sustained acceleration, but only aerodynamic shape and decreased inertia can improve instantaneous acceleration).

In addition the additional speed is important because even if we can't win, we can outrun the MKI every time and not lose a plane. In fact the J-11B can put on some bombs and ignore the MKIs and just bomb things if they keep a steady distance; with the J-11B's much smaller RCS, it can keep at a safe range far away from MKIs before the MKI can even detect it.

 

[jagjitnatt]

Whoa, sorry for replying the comment without watching the video before.

I think there are 3 reasons why US pilot taunts the MKI and the Russian designed engine.

1. MKI is multirole aircraft not suitable for engaging into a dog fight.

2. American ego

3. The training problem from the Indian pilots.

I can give you better reasons:

1. Indian aircraft did take down a lot of friendly aircraft due to switched off radars.

2. American Ego

3. No one can find out the true score, so they can speak anything.


And once again please stop that multirole thing. These roles are provided to the aircraft by the airforce. A Su30 in India, can be multirole, the same can be ground attack in another airforce, or even air superiority in a third airforce.

 

[jagjitnatt]

The reason most aircraft don't have over 6g acceleration is because pilots have a very hard time handling higher g forces. Thrust vectoring means you can turn better in the 2-D plane that the thrust vectoring is in, but in the 3-D cube of the real atmosphere, the J-11B has a 70 m/s advantage in up/down shifts relative to the Su-30 MKI. In addition, the J-11B is already "maneuverable enough"; all Su-27 type planes are very manueverable already due to their aerodynamic shape and control systems with comparable engines, the thrust vectoring mechanism just adds unnecessary weight (for Su-30 MKI; it is not wasted on less maneuverable planes such as the F-15) which increases inertia, and negates part of the advantage that the thrust vectoring gives (as well as reducing instantaneous acceleration, because engine thrust gives increased sustained acceleration, but only aerodynamic shape and decreased inertia can improve instantaneous acceleration).

In addition the additional speed is important because even if we can't win, we can outrun the MKI every time and not lose a plane. In fact the J-11B can put on some bombs and ignore the MKIs and just bomb things if they keep a steady distance; with the J-11B's much smaller RCS, it can keep at a safe range far away from MKIs before the MKI can even detect it.

Nope.
TVC is being incorporated in Chinese engines also. So the day it is implemented, you'll be all

TVS is being incorporated on every new aircraft. Go tell the engineers that its useless. Why is China implementing it then?


Also MKI has a much bigger radar, which can detect J11B from hundreds of kilometers. How can your J11 detect MKI and keep a safe distance. Please take some technical aspects into account before posting. This is not a comic

 

[below_freezing]

Nope.
TVC is being incorporated in Chinese engines also. So the day it is implemented, you'll be all

TVS is being incorporated on every new aircraft. Go tell the engineers that its useless. Why is China implementing it then?


Also MKI has a much bigger radar, which can detect J11B from hundreds of kilometers. How can your J11 detect MKI and keep a safe distance. Please take some technical aspects into account before posting. This is not a comic

TVC is useless for planes that are already excessively maneuverable. It makes a far bigger difference for a flying brick like the F-22 than it does for the Su-30 MKI. I'm not saying it makes the Su-30 MKI bad. I'm saying it's unnecessary and not worth the additional weight.

Bigger radar? no problem. 1.) just turn to passive radar to listen for indian scans 2.) when they start accelerating towards you, run away with superior thrust:weight ratio.

 

[SBD-3]

Nope.
TVC is being incorporated in Chinese engines also. So the day it is implemented, you'll be all

TVS is being incorporated on every new aircraft. Go tell the engineers that its useless. Why is China implementing it then?


Also MKI has a much bigger radar, which can detect J11B from hundreds of kilometers. How can your J11 detect MKI and keep a safe distance. Please take some technical aspects into account before posting. This is not a comic

I mean TVC is a good toy if fight is one-on-one but this is not likely to happen in a real combat say if MKI dodges one of J-10 or 11 by performing a cobra, it will be a sitting prey for another J-10 hovering around. So its not likely to be adding a lot. Raptor's engine is more than sufficient for its weight so thats why it performs clean manuvering unlike falnker which tends to freefall in post stall indicating insufficient power. So a raptor can recover from a cobra since its engine have the muscle to do this something which falnker still lacks, thanks to tonns of weight and relatively underpowered engines in the back

 

[jagjitnatt]

TVC is useless for planes that are already excessively maneuverable. It makes a far bigger difference for a flying brick like the F-22 than it does for the Su-30 MKI. I'm not saying it makes the Su-30 MKI bad. I'm saying it's unnecessary and not worth the additional weight.

Bigger radar? no problem. 1.) just turn to passive radar to listen for indian scans 2.) when they start accelerating towards you, run away with superior thrust:weight ratio.

Ok. Tell me what amount of extra weight does TVC add to the MKI?

About the second thing, I was just checking your knowledge. Sir, don't you think our ground radars, and AWACS would detect your J11B coming towards the border?

Our aircraft would already be ready to respond when your aircraft are coming towards us. You don't seem to understand how it all works.
What you're saying is just what you've heard from other people, which is incorrect at many places. You've got to have the complete understanding to be able to comment on these things.

 

[jagjitnatt]

I mean TVC is a good toy if fight is one-on-one but this is not likely to happen in a real combat say if MKI dodges one of J-10 or 11 by performing a cobra, it will be a sitting prey for another J-10 hovering around. So its not likely to be adding a lot. Raptor's engine is more than sufficient for its weight so thats why it performs clean manuvering unlike falnker which tends to freefall in post stall indicating insufficient power. So a raptor can recover from a cobra since its engine have the muscle to do this something which falnker still lacks, thanks to tonns of weight and relatively underpowered engines in the back

In a true dogfighting scenario, MKI would be aware of all the enemies around, and it won't be doing cobras. It would use the TVC to maneuver hard to evade an incoming missile. Missiles can not have such high sustained turn rates.

About the cobra, Raptor sucks at it. What Raptor does is not cobra. Cobra is when an aircraft immediately halts in mid air, when it stalls, that's cobra.
Raptor doesn't stall. It keeps moving, it doesn't stop so easily, it takes a lot of time to come to a halt.

 

[SBD-3]

Ok. Tell me what amount of extra weight does TVC add to the MKI?

About the second thing, I was just checking your knowledge. Sir, don't you think our ground radars, and AWACS would detect your J11B coming towards the border?

Our aircraft would already be ready to respond when your aircraft are coming towards us. You don't seem to understand how it all works.
What you're saying is just what you've heard from other people, which is incorrect at many places. You've got to have the complete understanding to be able to comment on these things.

but sir, this is where the level of preparedness chips in and I can still remember US Official indicating this critical weakness of IAF that by the time the whole US team was airborn, only a couple of MKIs were able to get into the air. I agree IAF will certainly response but this area is something that needs to be worked on when especially MKIs pilots were considered as best resources of IAF. Given the standoff weaponary PLAAF has developed recently. even a couple of second may prove to be very costly.

 

[SBD-3]

In a true dogfighting scenario, MKI would be aware of all the enemies around, and it won't be doing cobras. It would use the TVC to maneuver hard to evade an incoming missile. Missiles can not have such high sustained turn rates.

About the cobra, Raptor sucks at it. What Raptor does is not cobra. Cobra is when an aircraft immediately halts in mid air, when it stalls, that's cobra.
Raptor doesn't stall. It keeps moving, it doesn't stop so easily, it takes a lot of time to come to a halt.

but a pilot cant take more than 13 or lets be more lenient 16 Gs (thanks to human body inside the cockpit) where as a good missile can easily pull 40+G so thats why Yankees are working on more sophisticated systems, system that can defeat such incoming missile cuz planes wont be able to, honestly. Probably thats why we havent seen US taking the idea of TVC forward cuz they dont believe that this would be any value add in future.

 

[jagjitnatt]

but sir, this is where the level of preparedness chips in and I can still remember US Official indicating this critical weakness of IAF that by the time the whole US team was airborn, only a couple of MKIs were able to get into the air. I agree IAF will certainly response but this area is something that needs to be worked on when especially MKIs pilots were considered as best resources of IAF. Given the standoff weaponary PLAAF has developed recently. even a couple of second may prove to be very costly.

Yes, but I don't believe American words for anything. I just don't trust them. It was an exercise and Indian pilots were ready. They knew they had to fly, why would they get late?

PLAAF is building a lot of stuff, but it also faces some issues. It needs to cross Tibet to get into Indian territory, and it is tough. Logistical support is almost non existent. Almost all of Chinese airbases, SAM installations, missiles are located on the eastern coast.

A war between India and China would be very tough, and both countries would never want to get into it.

 

[SQ8]

A couple of observations..

First..
The F-22 is hardly a flying brick.. throughout the flight envelope.. the only time it..(or the MKI) need to go TVC is to go beyond aerodynamic turn rates.. or which the video in discussion also put as "post stall maneuvering".

The Cobra.. is ..and will always be either an airshow maneuver.. or a last minute desperate ditch..
In any fight involving more than three aircraft.. it is useless.
The cobra will result in the jet being a sitting duck long enough for the wingman of the opposing flight to take a clear shot.

 

[jagjitnatt]

but a pilot cant take more than 13 or lets be more lenient 16 Gs (thanks to human body inside the cockpit) where as a good missile can easily pull 40+G so thats why Yankees are working on more sophisticated systems, system that can defeat such incoming missile cuz planes wont be able to, honestly. Probably thats why we havent seen US taking the idea of TVC forward cuz they dont believe that this would be any value add in future.

Ok. You seem to a good learner, I will explain to you how it is.

A missile can handle up to 40 Gs. Yes, its true. But what they don't tell you is that 40 Gs don't mean high sustained turn rate.

An aircraft at 600 Km/h at 8 Gs, can easily out turn a missile at 4800 km/h at 40 Gs

The G's a missile is handling is a result of speed and turn rate.

G Force = Speed x Turn Rate

A missile has a high G tolerance due to high speed, not high turn rate.
This is why an aircraft with tight turns is very important these days. And TVS helps an aircraft reach high Gs at slower speeds, and not necessarily at high speeds, as was the case with older planes.

 

[IND151]

if war occurs between china and India, IAF SU 30 MKIs will have edge over J 11Bs
PLAAF coz SU 30 MKI is double seated. in MKI there is pilot and navigator. in J 11B there is only one pilot. so in war J 11B pilots will face more burden of work. as MKI has separate navigator, MKI pilot will be able to concentrate completely on flying fighter and using air to air missiles. MKI have more advanced devices made by France, Israel, Russia and India. so mki will defeat j11 b.

 

[jagjitnatt]

A couple of observations..

First..
The F-22 is hardly a flying brick.. throughout the flight envelope.. the only time it..(or the MKI) need to go TVC is to go beyond aerodynamic turn rates.. or which the video in discussion also put as "post stall maneuvering".

The Cobra.. is ..and will always be either an airshow maneuver.. or a last minute desperate ditch..
In any fight involving more than three aircraft.. it is useless.
The cobra will result in the jet being a sitting duck long enough for the wingman of the opposing flight to take a clear shot.

Yes, but TVC also helps in the following:
- evading missiles
- tight turns to lose opponent on tail
- high angle of attack
- fly at much slower speeds, this is very important. MKI can fly at speeds as slow as 200 something km/h. This is very important in a dog fight, and doesn't allow the opponent to tail it.