China Deployed J-11B jets in Tibet

[SBD-3]

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.

there is something called system development, F-22 is more complex than MKI, but you why its a single seat, because systems do the work of wizzo .HOTAS was another development for the same purpose......the only argument in favor two seaters are 1) Training 2)Dedicated strike. Nothing more

 

[jagjitnatt]

there is something called system development, F-22 is more complex than MKI, but you why its a single seat, because systems do the work of wizzo .HOTAS was another development for the same purpose......the only argument in favor two seaters are 1) Training 2)Dedicated strike. Nothing more

F-22 does have a lot of sensors, and it makes flying the aircraft much easier. But in the end, all the data from the sensors have to be fed to the pilot, and its the pilot who takes the final decisions. In a dogfight, a second pilot will be a great help. Don't you think?

In any case, a second pilot not only boosts morale, but also gives you much more options. Kehte hai na 1 or 1, 11.

I won't say MKI two pilots will take down an F-22, but it will surely help.

 

[SBD-3]

F-22 does have a lot of sensors, and it makes flying the aircraft much easier. But in the end, all the data from the sensors have to be fed to the pilot, and its the pilot who takes the final decisions. In a dogfight, a second pilot will be a great help. Don't you think?

In any case, a second pilot not only boosts morale, but also gives you much more options. Kehte hai na 1 or 1, 11.

I won't say MKI two pilots will take down an F-22, but it will surely help.

Sir what I mean is that when you have 360% of view thanks to JHMCS and that too telling you where your adversary is and what weapons can you launch, would there bee a need for second pilot?..why to burden an airfraft with another seat when your systems can process all the information for which second pilot is needed?...

 

[jagjitnatt]

Sir what I mean is that when you have 360% of view thanks to JHMCS and that too telling you where your adversary is and what weapons can you launch, would there bee a need for second pilot?..why to burden an airfraft with another seat when your systems can process all the information for which second pilot is needed?...

I understand what you are saying. What I was saying is that even when the pilot has a 360 degree view, he needs to process all that knowledge with his brain. He needs to survey 360 degrees, check radar contacts, then think of all the options he's got, and then choose a way to take down the enemy. All this while flying the aircraft.
It is tough. But Americans can afford that, because they spend a lot on training of pilots.

We can not spend so much training, so we use two pilots. One to fly the plane, and the other to help in navigation and combat.

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChineseTiger1986 View Post
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.

Originally posted by Jagjitnatt
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.

@ Chinese Tiger
The technical part has already been explained in detail by Jagjitnatt above , but since you 've seen the Colonel Corkey Fornof videos , you may want to read this -

A final word, from India, on 'YouTube Terry' - The DEW Line

It includes views from respected reporters covering the Red Flag 2008 exercise one of whom was Vishnu Som -A prominent defense journalist present during the ongoing exercise who spoke to several of the participants..

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

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.

it also means j 11's interface is better integrated so 1man can do the job of 2 easily

 

[SQ8]

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.

With newer missiles able to execute 50G turns.. I doubt even the MKI can out turn them.
The raptor too can slow down to 140 knots and maintain excellent maneuverability..
The ability to maneuver at slow speeds is a trait common to all Flanker variants.. and most of it comes from the excellent lifting body design..
However.. I am at a loss as to how flying slower wont allow an opponent to tail it..
IF an opponent sees an MKI slowing down.. there are multiple maneuvers ..quite a bit of them in the vertical..that will negate the need to tail the MKI.. in most cases it would allow the opponent to make an easy kill of a slow MKI..
Most dogfights are fought in the transonic range.. in the future with advanced missiles...almost all will be slash and dash.. turning fights will be less common.
The ability to maintain high AoA comes at a loss of lift and airflow over the surfaces.. What TVC brings is the ability to point the nose whenever..and wherever you wish.

A slower flying MKI does have advantages when it comes to STOL..
Compared to a normal flanker..it can be airborne faster..and land in a smaller space.. even if half of the runway is unusable..the MKI will still be able to get into the fight.

 

[SBD-3]

I understand what you are saying. What I was saying is that even when the pilot has a 360 degree view, he needs to process all that knowledge with his brain. He needs to survey 360 degrees, check radar contacts, then think of all the options he's got, and then choose a way to take down the enemy. All this while flying the aircraft.
It is tough. But Americans can afford that, because they spend a lot on training of pilots.

We can not spend so much training, so we use two pilots. One to fly the plane, and the other to help in navigation and combat.

This is the main idea, in raptor and other modern aircraft, this is done by system. Now your visor shows you how many bogies and where, and you can just lock your target by merely looking at this. no need to move your hands towards the weapons switch. the whole idea of INEWS,ICNIA,IFF,CNI, JTIDS and CIP is to reduce the burden of pilot and to let him concentrate on Combat not working with the system. for example, TVC in F-22 is not controled by pilot as in MKI but its the computer which makes adjustments to the nozzels according to the situational data recieved and processed by CIP. In gulf war merges were often necessary to identify friend or foe but now thanks to IFF, there is no need for taking such risk.

 

[jagjitnatt]

it also means j 11's interface is better integrated so 1man can do the job of 2 easily

it doesn't mean so. Its just your assumption. You can assume anything.

 

[rockstarIN]

there is something called system development, F-22 is more complex than MKI, but you why its a single seat, because systems do the work of wizzo .HOTAS was another development for the same purpose......the only argument in favor two seaters are 1) Training 2)Dedicated strike. Nothing more

The main point you missed, censer, ECMs, weapon systems and radar operations. MKI has the ability to track 15 targets and engage 4 simultaneously.

In a battle scenerio where large number of air crafts involved, you have an edge as a dedicated guy doing all these work. You need to continuously track, get radar lock on target, break the lock and evade the incoming missile...the job is tireless.

Apart from these, it can work as a Early warning system coordinating with fellow jets. I think IsRF too apply this doctrine in Sufa.

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

it doesn't mean so. Its just your assumption. You can assume anything.

respectfully it can also be ur assumption cus honestly after reading the entire thread i can not see solid conclusion just assumptions .all military are very hush hush abt the machines they make and still we dont know much abt j11 or in ur case the LCA so it all a game of assumptions ant what we read and hear

 

[rockstarIN]

Sir what I mean is that when you have 360% of view thanks to JHMCS and that too telling you where your adversary is and what weapons can you launch, would there bee a need for second pilot?..why to burden an airfraft with another seat when your systems can process all the information for which second pilot is needed?...

Hasnain, it is correct when it is 1 to 1 basis. what if there is suppose 10 jets in each side?you have to track everyone. Get radar lock on someone and fire one BVR. At the same time, you were fired upon by another enemy craft, Suddenly you need to try Jam the incoming missile while keeping the radar contact with the missile which you have fired to guide it.

Don't you think if you have one more guy to do all these while the pilot is there to fly?

 

[kingdurgaking]

MKI is a multirole aircraft, i doubt it can take an air-superiority aircraft of its own generation in a dog fight, let alone a next gen air superiority aircraft like Raptor. Gimme a break!!!

Multi role means doesnt mean less A2A missile... You dont have any clue how many BVR's a MKI can carry... shows your knowledge on fighters... Please do some research on google or check in wiki

 

[SBD-3]

Hasnain, it is correct when it is 1 to 1 basis. what if there is suppose 10 jets in each side?you have to track everyone. Get radar lock on someone and fire one BVR. At the same time, you were fired upon by another enemy craft, Suddenly you need to try Jam the incoming missile while keeping the radar contact with the missile which you have fired to guide it.

Don't you think if you have one more guy to do all these while the pilot is there to fly?

...JHMCS is not a radar which can track only target at a time, what i does is that instead of looking at radar scope and outside the cockpit, it brings up all the information gathered through AC systems into the visor so the pilot dont have to look into the radar scope and work with the systems. if there is no system integrationa and data management, then yes you do need a buddy to do this. but if a radar can track 15 targets and engage 4, then JHMCS will show you all the targets in the visor and also identify and lock the four closest ones. I hope you have good readings on JHMCS before posting

 

[kingdurgaking]

Sir what I mean is that when you have 360% of view thanks to JHMCS and that too telling you where your adversary is and what weapons can you launch, would there bee a need for second pilot?..why to burden an airfraft with another seat when your systems can process all the information for which second pilot is needed?...

Actually technology is alone is not a solution always in a manned aircraft.. human + technology complements each other.. Take for an example a trainer F16.. there is an expert and a novice in the cockpit.. the expert monitors the novice and does not fly the bird, where as novice learns the machine and does not monitor the expert which is the assigned role.. means learning is easy right??.. same applies here in MKI.. it makes the work easy..

India having huge land mass and where MKI is configured for mission from 10-20 hours it is better to have two people.. one can fly and other can take rest and share the work.. and the pilots dont feel alone in the dark mission... when the mission is on board each will do there duty and ultimately it is a team effort for the success..