How PAF Should Counter the SU-30 MKI

[gambit]

How will you exploit the RCS without a good enough radar?

That is actually a very good question, one that many take for granted that there is a consistency between the world's 'fighter-class' radar systems. Truth is that since there are wide variations between manufacturers in terms of the technology level they have at their disposal, it is inevitable that the products they produce will have variations in terms of RCS values as well. It may sound counter-intuitive but there is a direct relationship between quality of the seeking radar and an aircraft's RCS value, meaning the lower the quality the lower the RCS, which in this case does not mean the aircraft itself 'reflect' that RCS. Pun intended.

A radar cross section (RCS) value is calculated based upon these major (target) factors:

- Target shape.
- Target dimensions.
- Aspect angle to the seeking (mono-static) radar.

For the seeking radar, its burden on PRODUCING an RCS value rests upon these major factors:

The quality of ALL signal components must be equal IF these target resolutions are to be extracted from the echoes:

- Altitude
- Velocity
- Aspect angle
- Heading
- Range

- Direction

Case in point: The MIG-25's radar was so powerful (amplitude wise) that it could achieve 'burn-through' of most jamming signals, but the cost was altitude, velocity, aspect angle, and heading resolutions, leaving only direction (position) and possibly range for the pilot to know if anything is 'out there'. That is why I put 'Direction' apart from the other resolutions. Of all target resolutions, location of target is the easiest to produce by post WW II radars. Location of target is the first bit of target information that we seek before we formulate any course of action, whether it be by sight or sound.

So here is a dilemma for radar engineers worldwide: In trying to balance out the quality of signal components to achieve the above 6 target resolutions, the lower the technology level used to design the radar system, the lower any target RCS value. In other words, in trying to extract the 5 crucial data for the B-52, the lower the quality of the seeking signal, the lower the RCS value of the B-52. It can be difficult to understand why because we are used to thinking that a value of any kind is fixed but in radar detection an RCS value is a completely fictitious figure.

- No radar signal, no RCS value.

- No target, no RCS value.

But if the seeking radar signal is 'crappy' enough, then even if the target is physically real and in the area, it may as well does not exist for the seeking radar. After all, if it does not know how 'crappy' it is to begin with, how can it process any echoes to determine if there is anyone out there?

It is no longer appropriate to extract only target location and call it good as in the old MIG-25 days. So a new dilemma exist for the radar engineers of any country: In creating as high a quality signal as possible with the available technology at hand, distance may have to be sacrificed, in other words, if the B-52's RCS of 100 m/sq appears at 100km for country A, that same RCS of 100 m/sq will be available at 80km or less for country B because B is working with a lower technology base. In radar detection, the lower the distance figure, the less response time available, be it a civilian air traffic controller or an air defense crew protecting a valuable national asset.

The uncomfortable choice for country B is this: Either sacrifice 5 target resolutions and get only location. Or sacrifice distance to get all 6 resolutions, but with a lower distance resolution, of course. The decision to go either way depends on many factors, highest importance of them is the proximity of potential adversaries. If the threat can cross the borders and attack valuable national assets quickly, then may be general location is good enough. At least the defenders can face the enemy instead of being blindsided or flanked.

Next to the jet engine, a good radar system is the equal technical hurdle.

 

[shree835]

Good discussion is on…Please pass it to Pakistani Govt. and Air Force…It will help them to understand in good way.

 

[Najam Khan]

Before the arrival of BVRs, new variants of sidewinder,JHMCS, electronic pods and AEW&C systems Su-30MKI was a great threat, and still is...but the counter strategy has changed. Even today Su-30 is is equipped with greater engines, better ECM suite and weapons package...but thats not everything that will bring victory.

Have you people ever seen a fight between an average/small size fighter to a very large size adversary? The smaller size fighter makes quick moves from various directions, uses element of surprise to out maneuver his adversary. Because he knows his weaknesses and limitations...all he can do is to become proficient in other skills.

The case of PAF and its counter Su-30 policy is pretty much the same. In the past two decades, PAF has assessed its weak areas, and it has gained experience in other areas. Procurement of modern day weapons and ECM/Air combat ranges were necessary to over come its weak areas.

Finally its participation in multinational exercises was to assess its performance with better/equivalent state-of-the-art combat aircraft such as F-22,Eurofighter,Rafale,Su-27SK,F-16 Block60, Mirage-2000-9, F-15E/C etc.

The exercise Shaheen-I with Chinese Su-27SK aggressor unit solely focused on Su-30. Instead of F-16s, Mirage-VEF, F-7PG and JF-17 participated in it. Both BVR and WVR air combat scenarios were discussed.

In a nut shell, any BVR+ AWACS equipped fighter can counter a best equipped heavy weight aircraft..but all it needs is a training, experience, knowledge about adversary's strength and weaknesses. For a pilot, it is difficult to fight with limited strength but that gives him out of the box thinking as well.

 

[gambit]

Know Thy Enemy– Dissecting SU-30 MKI

In most likely scenario that adversary will be PAF which will field its own front role fighters. Just like a boxer a fighter pilot always enters a battle with a view to win and does his homework to know the strengths and weakness and to avoid the former and exploit the later to achieve the kill.

Put it another way: In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

If you have less soldiers than your enemy but your soldiers have longer distance rifles and are better marksmen, they why would you want to go into combat within your opponent's reach? You would not. Your opponent have more troops, that is a 'rule' that you do not have. You have longer distance rifles and better marksmen, two 'rules' in your favor that your opponent does not have. So why would you want to get into a shooting match within his inferior rifles' distance, especially when you have less troops than he?

But the major problem for your advice, while in theory is true and admirable, in practice it is extremely difficult to apply. Assume that the Su does have a higher IR signature. The question then is how are you going to apply the 'exploitation of weaknesses' advice in training, in other words, how can you simulate that higher IR signature in as many variety of combat and flight situations as possible for your pilots to learn how to spot and exploit?

Infrared, just like radar, can vary according to target aspect angle, meaning how the target is facing (viewing) you -- the seeker. Not every aircraft is going to produce the same intensity and the more maneuverable ones can deny you that information really quick. What can you do to replicate those conditions to confuse your pilots in training so that they will not be confused in a war?

This is a real problem and it is real enough for US that we ended up with Red Flag and these guys...

4477th Test and Evaluation Squadron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By the late 1970s, United States MiG operations were undergoing another change. In the late 1960s, the MiG-17 and MiG-21F were still frontline aircraft. A decade later, they had been superseded by later-model MiG-21s and new aircraft, such as the MiG-23. Fortunately, a new source of supply of Soviet aircraft became available, Egypt. In the mid-1970s, relations between Egypt and the Soviet Union had become strained, and Soviet advisers were ordered out. The Soviets had provided the Egyptian air force with MiGs since the mid-1950s. Now, with their traditional source out of the picture, the Egyptians began looking west. They turned to United States companies for parts to support their late-model MiG-21s and MiG-23s. Very soon, a deal was made. According to one account, two MiG-23 fighter bombers were given to the United States by Egyptian president Anwar Sadat. The planes were disassembled and shipped from Egypt to Edwards Air Force Base. They were then transferred initially to Groom Lake for reassembly and study.

This forum have a former F-15 pilot. Odds are good that he faced a MIG-21 in training. The US have nothing in inventory that could match the -21 in air combat maneuvers, as in how quickly can it turn, does it have any unique in-flight behaviors that could help our pilots in predicting what a -21 pilot must do, how can a -21 pilot exploit his small size, what altitude is the -21 best at, all these advantages are 'rules' that a -21 pilot can force his opponent to fight under. Then the -21 pilot win.

Can you train a soldier to be a sniper so the rest of your army can learn how to deal with snipers? Yes. But can you produce an Su so your non-Su pilots can learn how to deal with an Su should that day ever come? If not, then what do you have that can come close enough? For US, we had to get real MIGs. Then it was decades of learning and simulating and learning how to simulate that we now can comfortably part with our MIGs. But even so, every US military service have a 'Foreign Technology Exploitation' office whose work are top secret.

We do not want to go to war but unless we actually literally kill ourselves in live fire war games to have real combat experience, we should have training programs and regiments that should come as close to real as possible. In my days and that was during the Cold War, we have inspectors walking around putting red tags on people to indicate casualties and deny the unit manpower. Today we have laser tags to virtually 'kill' a soldier. At Red Flag, the only limitations are altitude and live missiles.

The point is this: War and combat are confusing enough so the goal should be to have as realistic of war and combat training as possible in peacetime so our forces can have as many combat instincts as possible to increase their odds of survival in a real war. That is why we have Red Flag and Fighter Weapons School. That is why we conduct revealing and embarrassing exercises like the Millennium Challenge that so many misunderstood to be the end of the US Navy in a Persian Gulf scenario. These gullibles are so wrong and they do not even know it. That is why Desert Storm was so shocking to most but not to training specialists worldwide who know of our training programs.

If:

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules but by forcing him to fight under yours.

Then:

In peacetime training, you should have as many of your opponent's rules as possible, or as close to real as possible, so your forces can study and learn how to avoid getting trapped by a real enemy.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Put it another way: In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

If you have less soldiers than your enemy but your soldiers have longer distance rifles and are better marksmen, they why would you want to go into combat within your opponent's reach? You would not. Your opponent have more troops, that is a 'rule' that you do not have. You have longer distance rifles and better marksmen, two 'rules' in your favor that your opponent does not have. So why would you want to get into a shooting match within his inferior rifles' distance, especially when you have less troops than he?

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules but by forcing him to fight under yours.

Then:

In peacetime training, you should have as many of your opponent's rules as possible, or as close to real as possible, so your forces can study and learn how to avoid getting trapped by a real enemy.

^^^thanks gambit sir....count have explained it better , Thanks Again.

kindly if possilble do explain your take on INDO - PAK scenario....Thanks Again .

 

[Black Widow]

@topic:History tell us that handful of soldiers stopped massive attack, be it Longewala, Be it Veer Durgadas against Mughal forces or Trojan against enemy. So no doubt if PAF can counter Su30MKI.

Theoretically Su27 series has an advantage. The legendary F15 carry all flaws (Huge IR and RCS, Bulky) what Su27 has. But I bet in one to one or one to many F15 can rip any one's a$$, be it MiG29 or F16. Our (indian) commanders are not fool that instead of knowing all this (Huge IR and RCS) they bought Su27. If F15 can do it, Su27 can also do it.

RCS: RCS has no role to play in fourth generation fighter planes, no matter how good is the 4th gen plane, it can be tracked much before it comes into target zone.

BVR Missiles: For same generation and same class fighter BVR can not guarantee certain kill. In one of legendary encounter between American F16 and Russian MiG25, more than dozen A2A missile was fired and ironically none of them scored a kill.





CB4 talked bout 65 war: Son you need to learn about India be4 passing any statement. In 1965 India was all time low, Just 4 year ago We were attacked and hurt on eastern border. America were supplying you world class weapons (including World famous Patton Tank). Though India was numerically in advantage, Quality wise India was not that good. Any way leave it, its 50 year old story.

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

Sir, what if we take super sukhoi in context... ?

We Have To Wait And See What Upgrades Su30Mki 'll Get....The Best Thing Is To Equip Them With Tikhomirov NIIP AESA Based On Irbis-E, 5th Gen Avionic's Developed For Pak FA Including A IRST Optical/IR Search And Tracking System, And Higher Thrust Engines. I Do Not Expect Any Major Structural Changes For Lowering It's RCS.

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

Go look at the first page for SU-30's RCS....
I have answered the reason for 2....
Since JFT is made in Pakistan, we can make as much as we can. There is a reason why we want 350...

Sukhoi 30Mki Advantage Is It's High Power Radar And Brute Force. It's Huge RCS Can Also Be Use As A Advantage. Many People Will Not Understand That, And Officials Don't Disclose Such Information's. Air Battles , Tactics Are Very Complex In Nature.....

 

[Black Widow]

We Have To Wait And See What Upgrades Su30Mki 'll Get....The Best Thing Is To Equip Them With Tikhomirov NIIP AESA Based On Irbis-E, 5th Gen Avionic's Developed For Pak FA Including A IRST Optical/IR Search And Tracking System, And Higher Thrust Engines. I Do Not Expect Any Major Structural Changes For Lowering It's RCS.

Lets not talk about Super MKI or further upgrades, This thread is about PAF countering Su30MKI.

IAF has 146 Su30MKI Vs PAF 50 FC1 + 60 F16 + 186 Mig21. 158 Mirage and other are ground attack bomber so discard them..
If PAF is aggressor (as mentioned by Paf internet warrior) 186 MiG21 is useless coz they are point defense fighter, they can't do Multi role attack. So in aggresive role PAF has just 110 fighter Vs Indian 146 Su30.

If PAF has defensive role, PAF can use its MiG21 along with its 110 fighter planes. In that case PAF has numerical supremacy. ALong with it PAF has advantage of SAM.

Conclusion: In Offensive role PAF has no match for Su30, In defensive role they have Numerical advantage and Advantage of SAM.

 

[joekrish]

There is no fighter in the world that can't be countered including a F22, hence trying to counter just one fighter makes no sence. There have been cases where a F16 has marked a F22, does this mean a F22 can be countered by a F16 eveytime they face each other.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Sukhoi 30Mki Advantage Is It's High Power Radar And Brute Force. It's Huge RCS Can Also Be Use As A Advantage. Many People Will Not Understand That, And Officials Don't Disclose Such Information's. Air Battles , Tactics Are Very Complex In Nature.....

Can you please enlighten me how can it be an advantage?

I remember one of your fellow Indian brothers claiming that SU30MKI huge RCS was designed on purpose and it was specifically designed to intimidate the enemy. That was just all horse sh** as we all know and he was proved wrong but please enlighten me how is the huge RCS an advantage. Announcing your arrival and letting the enemy know where you are is no advantage in my books.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Lets not talk about Super MKI or further upgrades, This thread is about PAF countering Su30MKI.

IAF has 146 Su30MKI Vs PAF 50 FC1 + 60 F16 + 186 Mig21. 158 Mirage and other are ground attack bomber so discard them..
If PAF is aggressor (as mentioned by Paf internet warrior) 186 MiG21 is useless coz they are point defense fighter, they can't do Multi role attack. So in aggresive role PAF has just 110 fighter Vs Indian 146 Su30.

If PAF has defensive role, PAF can use its MiG21 along with its 110 fighter planes. In that case PAF has numerical supremacy. ALong with it PAF has advantage of SAM.

Conclusion: In Offensive role PAF has no match for Su30, In defensive role they have Numerical advantage and Advantage of SAM.

exactly mate and I will like to recall all of us about radar range part. you and us agreed in principle that with all ground and air assets factored in (AWACS, ground radars etc) the difference is negligible. And when we are both able to pick each other the moment one of us takes off then its pretty much a same deal.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...-ranges-different-fighters-3.html#post1901105
the thread was meant to discuss one aspect of possible engagement of PAF with the IAF's flagship. I think there is much already on BVR so it was a welcome change to talk WVR thats why all planes (even existing 5th Gen) are carrying cannons and short range IR missiles.

looking forward to Sandy's comments in this thread too.

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

Lets not talk about Super MKI or further upgrades, This thread is about PAF countering Su30MKI.

IAF has 146 Su30MKI Vs PAF 50 FC1 + 60 F16 + 186 Mig21. 158 Mirage and other are ground attack bomber so discard them..
If PAF is aggressor (as mentioned by Paf internet warrior) 186 MiG21 is useless coz they are point defense fighter, they can't do Multi role attack. So in aggresive role PAF has just 110 fighter Vs Indian 146 Su30.

If PAF has defensive role, PAF can use its MiG21 along with its 110 fighter planes. In that case PAF has numerical supremacy. ALong with it PAF has advantage of SAM.

Conclusion: In Offensive role PAF has no match for Su30, In defensive role they have Numerical advantage and Advantage of SAM.

1st PAF Was Never A Defensive Force....Even Today When IAF Enjoys Numerical And Technological Superiority.

Use Of Tactical Stand Off Weapons Will Be The Game Changer Here... As Most Of The PAF Bases Falls Under Brahmos Range. Sukhoi 30Mki Long Range With Refueling Capability 'll Help Here (Understand How). Pakistan Also Got Long Range Missiles (Ballistic) To Hit High Value Assets Deep Inside Indian Territory..... But Using Them Depends On What Political Objective Both Parties Want To Achieve...

 

[Black Widow]

Can you please enlighten me how can it be an advantage?

I remember one of your fellow Indian brothers claiming that SU30MKI huge RCS was designed on purpose and it was specifically designed to intimidate the enemy. That was just all horse sh** as we all know and he was proved wrong but please enlighten me how is the huge RCS an advantage. Announcing your arrival and letting the enemy know where you are is no advantage in my books.

I don know what advantage my friend is talking about, But if yo are regular visitor on PDF you might be knowing that RCS is nothing to do for 4th gen fighter planes. Infact many Indian/Pakistani/American and Russian Senior members have discussed it and conclude that No matter how low the RCS of 4th gen fighter it can not evade the targeting range of enemy.

Read my post above (Post#130), In second para I have mentioned that with similar flaws F15 can rip off F16/MiG29. If F15 can so does Su27 can.

having said that I am not saying that PAF can not counter Su30MKI. It sure can. But as mentioned in very first post of this thread, I disagree with that. The thread starter has posted absurd logic.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Can you please enlighten me how can it be an advantage?

I remember one of your fellow Indian brothers claiming that SU30MKI huge RCS was designed on purpose and it was specifically designed to intimidate the enemy. That was just all horse sh** as we all know and he was proved wrong but please enlighten me how is the huge RCS an advantage. Announcing your arrival and letting the enemy know where you are is no advantage in my books.

indeed, thats a novel claim maybe he should join the PAF-FA program and advocate increasing the RCS of the plane to help the AOA as he puts it. lets see how the rest of Indians see his claim

Sukhoi 30Mki Advantage Is It's High Power Radar And Brute Force. It's Huge RCS Can Also Be Use As A Advantage. Many People Will Not Understand That, And Officials Don't Disclose Such Information's. Air Battles , Tactics Are Very Complex In Nature.....