Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I read all this from official sources even from AF websites. Are you sure about this ??/
Also we just got carried away with the discussion on ASF, its not F16 vs MKI ...sorry to be off-track...
Let me guess, you are still hearing those old news where Su30 beat F16. Let me tell you the last couple years update of Red flag.
After those previous losses in exercises USAF fielded their latest F16 which had aesa and all. The result were Su30 became to vulnerable. I just gave example, Rafale and EF were able to beat Su30 without aesa during the exercises not to mention the block 52 and block 60 F16 hs mny changes apart from aesa.
I hope you guys also understood that air superiority concept.
Look buddy...aesa does not guarantee victory but it increases vulnerability of enemy AF. In aesa the frequency at which your radar works is not fixed, it keeps on changing while the fighter jet without aesa will work on a fixed frequency and every AF work on a particular frequency. Now during war if you get hold of that frequency which is not a big deal would mean an easy kill for you as every other fighter of your enemy will be working on the same frequency while your fighter with aesa will keep changing its frequency and the enemy won't be able to lock down the frequency of your fighter.One more thing AESA Radar is not something which guarantees victory ...
You may be right....I read that USAF pilots were saying that it was easy once we got hold of their frequency (Indians) and then the kill was easy. I thought they might have aesa then only they would have been able to lock down Su30 frequency without letting their own frequency revealed because normally Su30 radar is stronger.Information available on the internet isn’t reliable -this includes official sources. Take the Sukhoi Su-30 MKI's empty weight for instance, does the Sukhoi website account for the extensive work done in India to increase composite materials content, work that includes modifications to the wing, elevators and rudder etcetera? I don’t think it does, those figures reflect the modest 6% composite content on MKI’s originally made in Russia.
The same is true for the F/A-18, ECPs (engineering change proposals) and block updates including weight reducing change to the fuselage, wing, rudder and avionics. The APG-79 electronically scanned radar is much lighter than the mechanically steered APG-73 installed on earlier model F/A-18 E/F. The figure for engine thrust on ‘official’ websites isn’t what is available to the pilot in the air. Engine makers’ measure thrust at sea level on a test rack, real world performance depends on air intake design, nozzle design features such as VEN (variable exhaust nozzle) and FADEC software efficiency and environmental factors such as temperature, altitude and air speed.
I’ll conclude this post by saying that the only people qualified to assess the performance of each of the MMRCA contestants are the people who have performed a comprehensive evaluation of each of the MMRCA contenders and have access to accurate performance data. That’s right, wait for the IAF to announce its decision and have faith in the institute that was created to serve and protect your nation.
What happened to your MRCA deal? still running?
Look buddy...aesa does not guarantee victory but it increases vulnerability of enemy AF. In aesa the frequency at which your radar works is not fixed, it keeps on changing while the fighter jet without aesa will work on a fixed frequency and every AF work on a particular frequency. Now during war if you get hold of that frequency which is not a big deal would mean an easy kill for you as every other fighter of your enemy will be working on the same frequency while your fighter with aesa will keep changing its frequency and the enemy won't be able to lock down the frequency of your fighter.
Aesa is a game changer and thats why IAF made it a requirement and there are talks for installing it in Su30 also.
Don't just guess and speculate when the official Sukhoi site clears says 8000Kg payload and please think about it logically, because you are mistaken on several points!
1) Only stealth fighter has internal and external payloads, the one for the internal weapon bays, the other for the external wingstations.
2) Internal fuel and payload has no relation and that is pretty easy to understand, when you think about it logically.
The maximum internal fuel is 9640Kg, so if the MKI carries only 4 x AAMs (around 600Kg), does it mean that the internal fuel can be increased for 7400Kg?
Of course not, because the fuel tank is only big enough to carry 9640Kg, that's why it's called maximum internal fuel!
And you can turn it around as well, if you carry only half the fuel, does it mean you can carry a higher load on the wingtipstation?
Of course not, because it has a load limit that allows only AAMs on this station and no matter what the load on other hardpoints, or the internal fuel tank are, you can only carry this specific load on this hardpoint!
3) Here you can see the weaponload config of Su 30 versions and as you can see, the 32 bombs are located at the centerline, air intake and mid wing hardpoints:
http://www.knaapo.ru/media/rus/about/production/military/Su-30MK2_sheme_b_eng.gif
Once again, the payload of the Flanker is 8000Kg, which is the addition of the load limit, from all 12 hardpoints!
i never said that the wingstation paylaod can be increased by reducing fuel weight , but load on the centerline between the two air intake could carry addition load by reducing internal fuel load ,
means in 6 tonne it can have enough A2A missile to take of number of Euro fighters...
more fuel is always an advantage so that you can use more AB because of more fuel.. where EFT will loose there...
while in WVR you cannot always take the maximum load for engagements because in WVR pilots will try to engage on optimal configuration like use of half of internal fuel and less missile ... which actually increases the agility of MKI and which dramatically increased the advantage of MKI over EFT...
how ever light and manuvarable it can be ... EFT cannot compromise on fuel because already it is very less of 4 tonne not it can compromise the load while it engages the MKI in WVR.... while MKI will do because of being a monster.. In either case MKI has more advantage on EFT or Rafale...
Boss i am very logical.. when all the external hardpoints have the capability to carry 8000 tonne payload..if need arises i repeat if need arises we can multirack missiles... please come out of page books... IAF already have done multiracking with Mig bison...Oh boy
MKI has 12 x hardpoints, each can carry an AAM. Lets say 4 x R73 and 8 x R77 = 1820Kg payload. So when all hardpoints are already occupied, where do you want to add payload?
Start thinking about it logically and not mixing up all numbers please, the payload is limited by the number and the load limit of the hardpoints, not by the internal fuel!...But there is an important point you are missing, that EF can SC with an normal A2A weapon config + fuel tank. It don't have to use the AB, because it already has a speed advantage.
Again you miss the important points, because EF will simply jettison the fuel tank to reduce weight and drag in dogfights, while MKI carries all fuel internally and will remain with most of the weight.
Not to mention that EF carries 5t of fuel internally as well, just like the MKI with normal take off weight and it should be clear that with the lighter weight and lower fuel consumtion, EF has even longer range than the MKI in this case.
I can only repeat it, don't confuse EF with light weight fighters like older Migs, F16s, or Gripens, that had not only less thrust, but also less radar range, internal fuel, or weapon carriage capability. EF in this role is a class above and way closer, if not superior to MKI.
In south Asia, only PLAAFs Flankers will be a real opponent in this situations at the moment, but EF and to some extend even Rafale offers better capabilities, that only a few other fighters have.
Let me guess, you are still hearing those old news where Su30 beat F16. Let me tell you the last couple years update of Red flag.
After those previous losses in exercises USAF fielded their latest F16 which had aesa and all. The result were Su30 became to vulnerable. I just gave example, Rafale and EF were able to beat Su30 without aesa during the exercises not to mention the block 52 and block 60 F16 hs mny changes apart from aesa.
I hope you guys also understood that air superiority concept.