How PAF Should Counter the SU-30 MKI

[Skull and Bones]

in short

j11b is the only answer i see so far

only 2 squarden
or
2billions usd

Why only two squadrons?

 

[farhan_9909]

we cant afford more

aswell future paf/iaf war will be a very limited one

so odd 40 is good for paf

 

[alimobin memon]

Poor English ? I never Said you are a moron!
Genius! Let me enlighten you
today a Mki Cost nearly 100million per peice so by your logic rafale costs 300million ?

How little you know!

Are you kidding me 100 million dollars ? even your indian friends won't agree here , it is 32 million dollar check it anywhere bro you are wrong

 

[Skull and Bones]

Are you kidding me 100 million dollars ? even your indian friends won't agree here , it is 32 million dollar check it anywhere bro you are wrong

$40 million dollar as of 1997, check the calender now to know what date is it.

 

[alimobin memon]

$40 million dollar as of 1997, check the calender now to know what date is it.

ok my figures were old so it is indeed 40 million dollar not 100mn mentioned by wet shirt

 

[Skull and Bones]

ok my figures were old so it is indeed 40 million dollar not 100mn mentioned by wet shirt

Have you ever heard of the term price inflation? And check the date of it's valuation again.

 

[Mav3rick]

according to your logic US should have only F 22, China should have only j10

Well, I believe the US would replace all other Air Superiority or Multi Role Combat Aircraft with the F-22 if they could 'afford' to do so. They are replacing almost everything with F-35 because they cannot afford to procure 1000's of F-22's!

85 % of 120 is 102 kms ..... that is the tracking range of JF-17 for 5 m2 RCS. For 10 m2 RCS The Detection Range of KLJ-7 will be around 135 - 140 kms. KLJ-7 is not a high power radar. So as the Target range increases, The tracking range % gets reduced due to loss of power & disturbance in reception of reflected wave. Therefore consider 77-80 % as tracking range for 10 m2 RCS target. Even at 80% of 140kms the tracking range would be 112 kms. My previous calculation was based on 77% & so was not wrong.

& PESA Radar [N011M] are hard to jam then MSA [KLJ-7]. So in a dense electronic jamming environment the performance of JF-17 will fall drastically when compared to Su-30MKI.

JF-17 Are inferior of Su-30MKI but they have provided PAF with a cost efficient solution for replacement of mirages & f-7. And JF-17 Outperforms & Is a generation ahead of the aircraft's it is replacing.

The most important thing is the STRATEGY of the user.

If the highlighted part is indeed correct, then what's the point of replacing 1 obsolete jet with another when neither can compete with the opponent? Think about it.

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

Are you kidding me 100 million dollars ? even your indian friends won't agree here , it is 32 million dollar check it anywhere bro you are wrong

Hi Memon,
No i am not kidding, but you are ill informed and know very little related to aviation field. i'll stop replying to you now, unless you post something constructive.

Lets get back to topic now! thread is already way offtopic!

How PAF Should Counter the SU-30 MKI ??

in short

j11b is the only answer i see so far

only 2 squarden
or
2billions usd

"J11b is the only answer for Su30mki" ? can you be more specific ?

Why only two squadrons?

Limited funds probably

 

[Jungibaaz]

So what??? Even F15 has same RCS? How RCS matter for 4th gen fighter??? Do you think missile fired from 200 KM can bring 4.5++ gen fighter down???

No need to get so defensive.
It seems I offended you somehow.

I merely pointed out a mistake in the post I quoted.
perhaps you didn't pay attention to that.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Well, I believe the US would replace all other Air Superiority or Multi Role Combat Aircraft with the F-22 if they could 'afford' to do so. They are replacing almost everything with F-35 because they cannot afford to procure 1000's of F-22's!



If the highlighted part is indeed correct, then what's the point of replacing 1 obsolete jet with another when neither can compete with the opponent? Think about it.

imagin you got trouble with a guy who is having an ak47 all you got is a knife with you. somebody offered you a pistol which you can take immediately or you can wait for an m4 which you will get few months later. isn't it wise for you to catch hold of that pistol first and and wait for the m4 when it's available.

 

[alimobin memon]

Jf17 was supposed to be a jet fighter to replace 3rd generation fleet , but after 1998 it eventual became the new fighter with 4+ generation avionics and airframe the new canopy , new airframe material , more composites than steel and RAM at critical positions ... Later jf17 was offered GRIFO S7 which was Originally Designed to replace APG 66 of F16 , However China came up with the better solution name klj7 version derived from KLJ10 however when it was introduced PAC was looking at the RC400 of MIRAGE 2000 for Jf17 but later PAC tested KLJ7 and approved it however neither was RC400 later offered so KLj7 was the solution .. Pakistan also introduced the DEEC Electronic warfare suite to jf17 with an excellent Radar warning receiver to the program, Radar warning receiver is believed to have a good range against enemy aircraft radar locking to the jf17. Later it was announced that SD10A and later upgraded to B are being procured by PAF , for jf17 some claimed SD10A had 70km range while'st B had over 100 but for the Effective usage of SD10B JF17 Radar needed to be effective , KLJ7v2 introduced already and was announced that it is easy to upgrade klj7 to V2 and so are updated let me tell you that in EW suite of jf17 contains Radar warning reciever that can help to know the enemy aircraft location if needed which can support to the mechanical steered array radar (doppler) of jf17 ... not just that jf17 has also external EW suite name k300G ... which can provide further Protection by supporting the EW Suite fitted on vertical stablizer as one works as RWR and K300G as jamming role to do multi tasking ( If they are designed to do one operation in combat scenario at a time) whil'st SU30MKI has the same but lacks the internal jamming capability as jf17 has in DEEC EW SUITE k300G is external one i repeat. Some one said that "RCS doesn't matter" that is not correct. When a enemy jet detects u first it is indeed a problem , Locking an Su30mki with KLJ7V2 if is little difficult is because of SU30MKI has a good radar ok , but one must realise that SU30MKI locking Jf17 is also difficult since in war scenario when both are well equipped than Jf17 also has EW SUITE to self protect from BVR ... So what I am saying is if BVR are fired from both side will also have less probability to kill because the as we all know the modern BVR's are Active Guided which have radar transceiver which have electronics to only track the missile to target , and as told both have a very good and autonomous RWR to alert the jet that missile is approaching and a good time b/w at least 30km . which is enough to deploy Chaff's and counter measures , furthermore they can get out of missile's range (which is tricky) or out course, and at the other hand both BVR's have anti jammers so again same probability for both to die and if a BVR is fired from 20 - 30 km radius it does not work as effective as in long range (if u know BVR u wont argue on this line).In end WVR again .So the conclusion for me is indeed in WVR SU30MKI is super maneuverable but if Jf17 did got HMD with missile as effective as off bore sight of +/- 50 degree off bore sight than I can happily say both the pilot will have an dangerous Bogey's to each other.

 

[Jungibaaz]

85 % of 120 is 102 kms ..... that is the tracking range of JF-17 for 5 m2 RCS. For 10 m2 RCS The Detection Range of KLJ-7 will be around 135 - 140 kms.

That is a fair estimate. I'd agree with you and put the detection range for 10m^2 around 140km given the range for 5m^2 as you've said is 120km. But the upgraded KLJ-7 has a detection range for a fighter sized target up to 130km. Now that would probably mean a target representing 5m^2.

KLJ-7 is not a high power radar. So as the Target range increases, The tracking range % gets reduced due to loss of power & disturbance in reception of reflected wave. Therefore consider 77-80 % as tracking range for 10 m2 RCS target. Even at 80% of 140kms the tracking range would be 112 kms. My previous calculation was based on 77% & so was not wrong.

The KLJ-7's only a bit less in terms of power then the APG-68.
And that I'm talking about the old stat, plans were underway to increase the power, meaning greater range without the cost of target resolution.

& PESA Radar [N011M] are hard to jam then MSA [KLJ-7]. So in a dense electronic jamming environment the performance of JF-17 will fall drastically when compared to Su-30MKI.

That's true BARS Hybrid ESA is harder to jam UNLESS you use a specific jamming technique and signal.

JF-17 Are inferior of Su-30MKI but they have provided PAF with a cost efficient solution for replacement of mirages & f-7. And JF-17 Outperforms & Is a generation ahead of the aircraft's it is replacing.

I never said that JF-17 was more capable, the question is can it take on MKI?
I would say it certainly can.

JF-17 has a massive RCS advantage, lowest RCS of all PAF airforce aircraft, putting in the F-16 Class of RCS so easily 1-2m^2.

Now MKI's RCS is higher than the Su-27 because of canards and extra seat.
and frontal RCS clean would be at least 10m^2, armed would likely be 15m^2 all the way up to 20 depending on weapons configuration. Meaning the KLJ-7 could detect the MKI at long ranges.

So I believe that MKI's radar advantage is made up for by JF-17's RCS advantage and MKI's assive RCS

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Jf17 was supposed to be a jet fighter to replace 3rd generation fleet , but after 1998 it eventual became the new fighter with 4+ generation avionics and airframe the new canopy , new airframe material , more composites than steel and RAM at critical positions ... Later jf17 was offered GRIFO S7 which was Originally Designed to replace APG 66 of F16 , However China came up with the better solution name klj7 version derived from KLJ10 however when it was introduced PAC was looking at the RC400 of MIRAGE 2000 for Jf17 but later PAC tested KLJ7 and approved it however neither was RC400 later offered so KLj7 was the solution .. Pakistan also introduced the DEEC Electronic warfare suite to jf17 with an excellent Radar warning receiver to the program, Radar warning receiver is believed to have a good range against enemy aircraft radar locking to the jf17. Later it was announced that SD10A and later upgraded to B are being procured by PAF , for jf17 some claimed SD10A had 70km range while'st B had over 100 but for the Effective usage of SD10B JF17 Radar needed to be effective , KLJ7v2 introduced already and was announced that it is easy to upgrade klj7 to V2 and so are updated let me tell you that in EW suite of jf17 contains Radar warning reciever that can help to know the enemy aircraft location if needed which can support to the mechanical steered array radar (doppler) of jf17 ... not just that jf17 has also external EW suite name k300G ... which can provide further Protection by supporting the EW Suite fitted on vertical stablizer as one works as RWR and K300G as jamming role to do multi tasking ( If they are designed to do one operation in combat scenario at a time) whil'st SU30MKI has the same but lacks the internal jamming capability as jf17 has in DEEC EW SUITE k300G is external one i repeat. Some one said that "RCS doesn't matter" that is not correct. When a enemy jet detects u first it is indeed a problem , Locking an Su30mki with KLJ7V2 if is little difficult is because of SU30MKI has a good radar ok , but one must realise that SU30MKI locking Jf17 is also difficult since in war scenario when both are well equipped than Jf17 also has EW SUITE to self protect from BVR ... So what I am saying is if BVR are fired from both side will also have less probability to kill because the as we all know the modern BVR's are Active Guided which have radar transceiver which are and electronics to only track the missile to target , and as told both have a very good and autonomous RWR to alert the jet that missile is approaching and a good time b/w at least 30km . which is enough to deploy Chaff's and counter measures , furthermore they can get out of missile's range (which is tricky) or out course, and at the other hand if a BVR is fired from 20 - 30 km radius it does not work as effective as in long range. So the conclusion for me is indeed in WVR SU30MKI is super maneuverable but if Jf17 did got HMD with missile as effective as off bore sight of +/- 50 degree off bore sight than I can happily say both the pilot will have an dangerous Bogey's to each other ...

mki is a larger aircraft with better ew suite and radar. it got speed, altitude and missile number advantage also.

 

[alimobin memon]

mki is a larger aircraft with better ew suite and radar. it got speed, altitude and missile number advantage also.

My friend if Su30MKI is flying above will give Jf17 advantage of Greater radar range since LOOK up range is greater than look down and no one can in present judge if EW SUITE OF jf17 is less or SU30MKI's greater

 

[Abingdonboy]

That is a fair estimate. I'd agree with you and put the detection range for 10m^2 around 140km given the range for 5m^2 as you've said is 120km. But the upgraded KLJ-7 has a detection range for a fighter sized target up to 130km. Now that would probably mean a target representing 5m^2.



The KLJ-7's only a bit less in terms of power then the APG-68.
And that I'm talking about the old stat, plans were underway to increase the power, meaning greater range without the cost of target resolution.



That's true BARS Hybrid ESA is harder to jam UNLESS you use a specific jamming technique and signal.



I never said that JF-17 was more capable, the question is can it take on MKI?
I would say it certainly can.

JF-17 has a massive RCS advantage, lowest RCS of all PAF airforce aircraft, putting in the F-16 Class of RCS so easily 1-2m^2.

Now MKI's RCS is higher than the Su-27 because of canards and extra seat.
and frontal RCS clean would be at least 10m^2, armed would likely be 15m^2 all the way up to 20 depending on weapons configuration. Meaning the KLJ-7 could detect the MKI at long ranges.

So I believe that MKI's radar advantage is made up for by JF-17's RCS advantage and MKI's assive RCS

The JF-17 may in special circumstances be "able to take on MKI" but in most cases the MKI will see the JF-17 much earlier and be able to take due action before the Thunder ever even knows the MKI is out there- the MKI will see the JF-17 at 140km, the JF-17 will see the MKI at ~115 km.

Now take into consideration that from 2013/14 the MKIs will begin a "deep upgrade" known as the "Super" upgrade that will equip the MKI with an AESA radar, a new weapons suite ( Meteor/R-77 are going to part of it along with others) and RCS reduction through RAM coatings aswell as a greatly improved EW suite. So the MKI will be able to detect all PAF a/c at much greater ranges and engage them and the opposition a/c will be much less likely to ever see a MKI let alone engage it. Also if the oppostion a/c ever did manage to get lucky and get within missile range of the MKI the EW suite would make it much harder to lock-on an secure a kill wherin a WVR fight might ensue and we all know of the MKIs super-maneuverability with canards and TVC. One of the main criticisms always used by members here to attack the MKI is its relatively large RCS and now that is being addressed.