India to deploy Sukhoi-30 jets on Pakistan border

[blain2]

I would be wondering, whether this thrust vector control thing..TVC..will make any difference in 1-on-1 dogfight? lets suppose SU-30MKI vs F-16 block-52.

It does but keep in mind that the USAF F-16s flying at CI-05 were not JHMCS/9x capable or even simulating that capability. You can definitely get your HMS to cue a weapon against a TVC capable aircraft because you can see him before he can pull something nutty with his Thrust Vector Controls. With AIM-9x and other HOBS AAMs, your engagement envelope is that much greater to engage a TVC equipped aircraft.

 

[Indicom]

It does but keep in mind that the USAF F-16s flying at CI-05 were not JHMCS/9x capable or even simulating that capability. You can definitely get your HMS to cue a weapon against a TVC capable aircraft because you can see him before he can pull something nutty with his Thrust Vector Controls. With AIM-9x and other HOBS AAMs, your engagement envelope is that much greater to engage a TVC equipped aircraft.

U're right,but the MKIs will be getting the Top Owl HMCS in a year or two and those will become standard with most of the IAF birds including the Tejas.

Moose in F-16.net did say about the manoueverability of the block 52 the one which is not posted was most of the time the MKI bettered the block-52 and most of the USAF pilots agreed to the better manoeverability of the MKIs,that was the reason why the entire thread vanished overnight,there were tons of great pics which I miss till date.

 

[vish]

The manoeuvrability of the Su-30 MKI has never been in doubt; neither have been its avionics (Israeli, French).

But you can't ignore that it is a pretty big target and has a very big RCS.

In the end though, in actual combat a lot will depend on multiple external factors and pilot(s) skills.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

At BVR range both F-16block 52 and MKI are at the same league because in case of Pakistan which will be armed with most advanced AMRAAM in the world while Erieye providing superior detection. MKI may be backed by even more superior AWACS but then it comes to first lock first kill and AMRAAM will do the job!
In dogfights MKI hands off one of the best machines in the world, but 2010 beyond in aerial engagement dog fights will be very rare.

and please dont bring the IAF officers day dream CI-05 again..

 

[vish]

First lock first kill does not guarantee a kill. Further, and I may be wrong on this, won't the F-16, in a BVR engagement, need to switch on it's own radar before getting a lock on the Su-30 MKI? If this is indeed so, won't the F-16 itself be "known" to the pilot of the Su-30 MKI?

In BVR, both, Su-30 MKI and F-16, are equally placed. In WVR, Su-30 MKI does have an edge.

However, a lot depends on the several other factors (pilots, AWACS, etc.)

 

[nitesh]

At BVR range both F-16block 52 and MKI are at the same league because in case of Pakistan which will be armed with most advanced AMRAAM in the world while Erieye providing superior detection. MKI may be backed by even more superior AWACS but then it comes to first lock first kill and AMRAAM will do the job!
In dogfights MKI hands off one of the best machines in the world, but 2010 beyond in aerial engagement dog fights will be very rare.

and please dont bring the IAF officers day dream CI-05 again..

How can be so sure that AMRAAM will do the job isn't MKI is equipped with r77? or u say that in BVR only pakistani pilots will fire the shot?

 

[Myth_buster_1]

First lock first kill does not guarantee a kill. Further, and I may be wrong on this, won't the F-16, in a BVR engagement, need to switch on it's own radar before getting a lock on the Su-30 MKI? If this is indeed so, won't the F-16 itself be "known" to the pilot of the Su-30 MKI?

In BVR, both, Su-30 MKI and F-16, are equally placed. In WVR, Su-30 MKI does have an adge.

However, a lot depends on the several other factors (pilots, AWACS, etc.)

PAF block 52+ and MLU will be equipped with APG-68v(9) radar same as Israeli Soufa which has a detection range of 300 KM, and with a huge RCS of MKI can be locked at 160 km.
Link 16 is a NATO's standard data exchange format. Both F-16 and Erieye will have the ability to exchange tactical information and thus allowing F-16 to have its radar switched off while the missile is guided by AWACS.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

How can be so sure that AMRAAM will do the job isn't MKI is equipped with r77? or u say that in BVR only pakistani pilots will fire the shot?

r77 is a 80s technology while Aim-120C-5 is a 21centurey missile!

 

[vish]

PAF block 52+ and MLU will be equipped with APG-68v(9) radar same as Israeli Soufa which has a detection range of 300 KM, and with a huge RCS of MKI can be locked at 160 km.
Link 16 is a NATO's standard data exchange format. Both F-16 and Erieye will have the ability to exchange tactical information and thus allowing F-16 to have its radar switched off while the missile is guided by AWACS.

I doubt whether the missile can be guided by the AWACS. Can you provide me with a link please?

Also you are discounting the presence of an Indian AWACS and the terrain over which the engagement is taking place.

Further, the "range" of the AMRAAM C is 105 km; this figure is, however, for a non-manoevoring target in a head-on course. I may be wrong on this though.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

I doubt whether the missile can be guided by the AWACS. Can you provide me with a link please?

Also you are discounting the presence of an Indian AWACS and the terrain over which the engagement is taking place.

Further, the "range" of the AMRAAM C is 105 km; this figure is, however, for a non-manoevoring target in a head-on course. I may be wrong on this though.

though i hate this wiki but you asked for it..
AMRAAM uses two-stage guidance when fired at long range. The aircraft passes data to the missile just before launch, giving it information about the location of the target aircraft from the launch point and its direction and speed. The missile uses this information to fly on an interception course to the target using its built in inertial navigation system (INS). This information is generally obtained using the launching aircraft's radar, although it could come from an infra-red search and tracking system (IRST), from a data link from another fighter aircraft, or from an AWACS aircraft.

i may be wrong in saying that AMRAAM is totally independent from the launching aircraft and is entirely guided by AWACS. but still the point is block 52 can launch 2 Amraams at the target MKI and bugoff while Erieye takes care off the rest.

 

[vish]

though i hate this wiki but you asked for it..
AMRAAM uses two-stage guidance when fired at long range. The aircraft passes data to the missile just before launch, giving it information about the location of the target aircraft from the launch point and its direction and speed. The missile uses this information to fly on an interception course to the target using its built in inertial navigation system (INS). This information is generally obtained using the launching aircraft's radar, although it could come from an infra-red search and tracking system (IRST), from a data link from another fighter aircraft, or from an AWACS aircraft.

i may be wrong in saying that AMRAAM is totally independent from the launching aircraft and is entirely guided by AWACS. but still the point is block 52 can launch 2 Amraams at the target MKI and bugoff while Erieye takes care off the rest.

For that to happen, Erieye needs to be inducted and integrated with the F-16.

Assuming that happens, the F-16 will not launch the missile at the periphery of its missile range. Furthermore, the Su-30 MKI will be supported by the Indian Phalcon AWACS, which again I'm assuming have been inducted and integrated, and will be armed with R-77s.

This implies that both the aircraft will try to hold on to their missiles as much as possible. Further, both the aircraft will be known to each other. All in all, its a pretty even contest as far as BVR engagements are concerned.

The Su-30 MKI does have an edge in WVR engagements.

 

[Muradk]

I doubt whether the missile can be guided by the AWACS. Can you provide me with a link please?

Also you are discounting the presence of an Indian AWACS and the terrain over which the engagement is taking place.

Further, the "range" of the AMRAAM C is 105 km; this figure is, however, for a non-manoevoring target in a head-on course. I may be wrong on this though.

No an AWACS can only coordinate with the ground Air defence and the F-16's in the air and give the Coordinance where the targets are but cannot guide a missile.
No my knowledge contradicts what I just said. In case of a JDAM which works on GPS can be turned by any carrier if they have the proper codes but that is the only one which can guided through multiple carriers. AWACS is only warning and control. Control means can bring the friend to Foe.

 

[shehbazi2001]

For any long range AAM shot, it needs guidance at least 3 times....once at launch time, second in mid-range and third when near to target...

The IN takes over after the initial coordiantes have been fed to missile computer, but at long range the target can move away a long distance from those initial coordiantes.

Therefore a mid-range datalink is provided. That updates the target position and brings missile at a position that when it switches on its own nose-radar, it can see the target.

Without the mid-range update through datalink, it would be really hard for the missile to locate the target even with its radar on, at about 90-100 km.
Now this update is too provided by the launch aircraft and it cant just turn away after the launch. Can AWACS give this update to AMRAAM? Personally I doubt it.....but as I am not a professional, I cant claim it....

But talking of 90-100km too does not seem realistic. IMO, Meteor can do this but AMRAAM has not got so much long legs practically.

 

[vish]

For any long range AAM shot, it needs guidance at least 3 times....once at launch time, second in mid-range and third when near to target...

The IN takes over after the initial coordiantes have been fed to missile computer, but at long range the target can move away a long distance from those initial coordiantes.

Therefore a mid-range datalink is provided. That updates the target position and brings missile at a position that when it switches on its own nose-radar, it can see the target.

Without the mid-range update through datalink, it would be really hard for the missile to locate the target even with its radar on, at about 90-100 km.
Now this update is too provided by the launch aircraft and it cant just turn away after the launch. Can AWACS give this update to AMRAAM? Personally I doubt it.....but as I am not a professional, I cant claim it....

But talking of 90-100km too does not seem realistic. IMO, Meteor can do this but AMRAAM has not got so much long legs practically.

I'm aware of the mid-course correction that you are referring to. Not all operators of the AMRAAM have that technology. I know the USAF and the RAF does. But does Pakistan have that technology? I doubt so, because if the PAF was in possession of such advanced technology, it would have been announced. Further, Pakistan has only recently gone ahead with its AWACS program.

Also the target details can be updated mid way by the AWACS or the aircraft that launched the missile.

But the AWACS does not "guide the missile," per se.

 

[blain2]

U're right,but the MKIs will be getting the Top Owl HMCS in a year or two and those will become standard with most of the IAF birds including the Tejas.

Moose in F-16.net did say about the manoueverability of the block 52 the one which is not posted was most of the time the MKI bettered the block-52 and most of the USAF pilots agreed to the better manoeverability of the MKIs,that was the reason why the entire thread vanished overnight,there were tons of great pics which I miss till date.

In the words of a F/A-22 test pilot, "every one dies at the same rate in WVR combat". If the technology is generally in the same category then better SA and pilot skill will make the difference. Better SA would depend on which side tends to use the sensors (AI radar/IRST based, Ground based, or AEWC&S based etc. etc.) available to it in a better way.