What's new

Could Su-35 Beat a F-16 in Battle?

Asian.Century

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
10,754
Reaction score
-2
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Dead Falcon: Could Russia's Su-35 Beat an Air Force F-16 in Battle?

15710179866_4b975128e3_h.jpg

April 26, 2019
by TNI Staff


With an AESA, the F-16 could probably hold its own against the Su-35 at longer ranges—but it would still be a challenge.

The Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon has been the mainstay of the U.S. and allied air forces for decades. Over the years, the aircraft has evolved from a lightweight visual range dogfighter into a potent multirole warplane that flies the gamut of missions ranging from the suppression of enemy air defenses to air superiority. Though it has been operational since 1980, the “Viper” continues to evolve and will remain in service with the U.S. Air Force and other militaries for decades to come. But while the F-16 remains a potent fighter, potential adversaries have caught up—the latest Russian aircraft like the Sukhoi Su-35 can match or exceed the Viper in many respects.

While the Su-35 is more of an analogue to the Boeing F-15 Eagle, Russia is selling many more Flankers than MiG-29 Fulcrum derivatives around the world. Indeed, the U.S. Air Force usually has its “red air” aggressors replicate Flanker variants (usually the Flanker-G) rather than the MiG-29 or its derivatives during large force exercises like Red Flag or Red Flag Alaska. That’s because derivatives of the massive twin-engine Russian jet are amongst the most likely aerial adversaries American pilots might face.

0

Betty Boothroyd becomes the first woman to be elected Speaker of the British House of Commons in its 700-year history.

Panmunjom Declaration signed, declaring the end of the Korean conflict.

The Su-35 is not the most common Flanker derivative, but it is the most capable version built to date. In the right hands—with properly trained pilots and support from ground controllers or an AWACS—the Su-35 is an extremely formidable threat to every Western fighter save for the F-22 Raptor. The F-35 would probably be ok too—if the pilots used its stealth, sensors and networking to their advantage—tactics and training makes all the difference.

What about the workhorse fleet of F-16s? The Viper doesn’t have the latest upgraded F-15C’s massive active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar nor can the F-16 usually lob the AIM-120 missile from the speeds and altitudes that the Eagle can attain. But then the F-15C was built as a dedicated air superiority fighter. Most in-service F-16s don’t have an AESA installed at all. The UAE’s advanced F-16E/Fs have the APG-80 AESA—which has excellent capability—but that’s a tiny fleet of aircraft. U.S. Air Force F-16s are not currently fitted with an AESA and are at a severe disadvantage versus the Su-35 or other advanced Flanker derivatives.

The U.S. Air Force is keenly aware of the problem. The service had intended to retrofit 300 or so F-16s with an upgrade called the Combat Avionics Programmed Extension Suite (CAPES), but that program was cancelled because of automatic budget cuts known as sequestration. Nonetheless, the Air Force knows it needs to urgently retrofit the F-16 fleet with new radars sooner rather than later.

Earlier this year, the Air National Guard issued an urgent operational need statement calling for an AESA to be installed in their F-16s performing the homeland defense mission. The radars are needed to track cruise missiles and other small, hard to detect targets. The active Air Force is also aware of the problem and issued a request for information for a new radar for the F-16 fleet in March. That same month, Air Force chief of staff Gen. Mark Welsh told the House Armed Services Committee, “We need to develop an AESA upgrade plan for the entire fleet.”

The U.S. Air Force does not use the F-16 primarily as an air superiority fighter—the air-to-air mission is secondary—the AESA is needed to keep the venerable jet relevant. With an AESA, the F-16 could probably hold its own against the Su-35 at longer ranges—but it would still be a challenge.


At shorter ranges, it comes down to pilot skill and the performance of each jet’s high off-boresight missiles. The advent of missiles like the R-73 and AIM-9X have turned visual range fights into mutually assured destruction scenarios. Mutual kills are not uncommon during training sorties. While the Su-35’s thrust vectoring gives it an edge at very low speeds (mind you, low speeds mean a low energy state), it’s not an insurmountable problem for an expert F-16 pilot—who knows how to exploit his or her aircraft to the fullest—to overcome.

The bottom line is that the Su-35 and the other advanced Flankers are extremely capable aircraft. The Pentagon’s fourth-generation fighter fleet no longer enjoys a massive technological advantage as they did in years past. The United States must invest in next-generation fighters to replace the existing fleet as soon as possible.

Image: Flickr.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
If an Indian pilot fly mig -35 and Pakistani pilot fly f-16, the Pakistani pilot will win and f-16 would win. If the Pakistan pilot fly mig-35 and Indians fly f-16, than mig -35 will destroy the f-16.

If an Indian pilot fly F-22 and Pakistani pilot fly a Mitsubishi zero, maybe the Indian have a chance to win.

This shows that quality of pilot matters more than the quality of the plane. If you caste pearls before the swine, the swine will not turn into the princess.
 
. .
Russians have an age long bad habbit of exporting extremely inferior version of the original hardware to customers and keeping the best most capable versions for themselves alone. Even from the times of Soviet union. A Russian Su35 and an Exported Su35 will be way different in capabilities.
 
.
Russians have an age long bad habbit of exporting extremely inferior version of the original hardware to customers and keeping the best most capable versions for themselves alone. Even from the times of Soviet union. A Russian Su35 and an Exported Su35 will be way different in capabilities.

How did you come up with this conspiracy theory?
 
. . . .
Two observations:

1) Most of comparisons are short in terms of facts and other circumstances rather, contains product appraisals.
2) Why to use Bold/Large Size font?

Regards,
 
.
Its the pilot, not the machine.

Either way, for obvious reasons Su-35 is the superior jet but I don't think we have enough information about its operational abilities to compare it yet.

Question would not be if it is superior, rather how superior is it.

Nonetheless, F 16 can take it down if pilot can produce right circumstances. As for long range missiles, I am not sure but I see them more as a deterrent because its considered "easy" to evade them.
 
.
How did you come up with this conspiracy theory?
Not a conspiracy theory. The Mig 29s of Warsaw Pact Countries and Non Warsaw Pact Countries is discussed in all forums. The Mig 29s that were sold to countries outside soviet union didn't even had electronic Countermeasures suit or Friend Foe Identification systems. And Mig29 case is a documented one known to every one. Then their was S200VE Export Version having inferior range and ceiling against Regular Russian S200 and the formidable S200D version. These are the two cases i am aware of currently.
Compare it to Western F16 Falcons , Patriots, Mirage 2000s etc Except for Nuclear Armed Cruise missiles Capability, their was no difference between the ones operated by the Manufacturing Country and the one used by Customers. Infact it is widely Believed that Israeli F16I Sufa and F15I Ra'am were even more capable then US Counterparts in some areas.
 
.
2) Why to use Bold/Large Size font?
Not his fault. When copy/pasting articles in a PDF reply box, PDF tries to maintain the original font style of the source article. A remedy to this problem is to first copy the text in notepad and then paste it here
 
.
Recent events have proved that modern air battles are far complex than general understanding. Man behind machine matters the most after sound operational planning. Yes, SU-35 has some edge over F-16s but considering sensor fusion capabilities, Lockheed Martin has proven that it can easily integrate the most modern AESA and other avionics on F-16 thanks to it scalable architecture.
 
.
Su-35S is very good but Russian hardware is overhyped in the discussions of average joe and/or pseudo-intellectuals, and also on paper.

Authentic aviation experts are able to pinpoint shortcomings in Russian jets, methods of engineering and even in sensor systems upon a closer look, but this type of insight is difficult to access.

F-16 Block 70/72 >>> Su-35S on any given day - assuming both in good hands.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom