Is the Su-30MKI Superior to the Eurofighter And Rafale?

[ayesha.a]

Ironically, such exaggerated stories are ultimately, damaging to India. I'm sure there were Indian Su-30 pilots who participated in the UK exercise who have read these stories and winced.

Not at all. I'm just very familiar with these types of exaggerated claims and stories. They always prove to be mostly wishful thinking and juvenile bragging not worthy of military professionals.

I agree with your posts on this thread. It would be unbecoming of anybody in the military to trot out these feel good stories. I myself winced at reading some of the language in the posted articles. For example:

By humiliating the RAF in its lair, the IAF has once again showed that its Sukhois easily outgun and outrun any fourth generation western jet fighter.

If anybody in the IAF says something like that to the media, he will find himself on civvie street in the blink of an eye.

You have to understand how it works. To an extent this is true in all countries, but especially so in India - somebody authoritative would put out a bunch of statements, and some idiotic blogger or journalist would pick a few sentences in it, with no regard to the context, and write these ridiculously exaggerated articles.

Another thing - I can't believe that posters here are so naive when it comes to checking credibility. One of the articles posted is from "Russia and India report" - a nonsensical website that constantly peddles stories of Russians humiliating Americans. I think they are the same ones who put out a story that the entire crew of an American warship resigned en masse after a Su-24 buzzed them and jammed their communications. (It has been posted on this website too.) It is a laughable platform filled with high praise to the glorious Russian stuff, and makes me wonder how they think they can get away with communist style propaganda in this day and age, on the internet.

And the article calls Vishnu Som a "veteran air combat analyst". Yea, right - a person who reads the news on a news channel, and has covered some defence related news is a "veteran air combat analyst".

It's embarrassing, the way these articles are written, and disturbing how so many people defend it.

The statement about the 12-0 victories may be true - but what is left unsaid is the conditions, the rules of the exercise, etc. In another round, the shoe may have been on the other foot. In some of the exercises with the USAF in the early 2000s, the IAF would demand to exercise against the conditions they would likely face, with F-16s of the PAF. No AEWAC, not BVR, and so on.

 

[Hamza913]

Su-30mki beats Typhoon in Indradhanush combat exercises with 12-0 scoreline
- A +
In the recently concluded international air combat exercises featuring the Indian Air Force’ (IAF) Sukhoi Su-30 MKI fighters and British Royal Air Force Typhoon jets, the Su-30MKI outsmarted the Eurofighter Typhoon 12-0 in the Within Visual Range (WVR) dogfighting operations.

If the Su-30MKI has a tactical advantage over the Typhoon, the same advantage should extend over the Rafale as well, both of which are more expensive than the Russian origin aircraft.

Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale can be closely compared. Both the fighters have nearly identical size, power and performance. Both are twin-engined Eurocanards. Both aircraft are capable of carrying advanced Electronic warfare suites equipped with jammers and decoys. Both can deliver ALCMs like storm shadow, AASM or Taurus KEPD 350. Both have roughly the same IR and radar signature. Both are equipped with AESA radars and IRSTs. Both have roughly the same speed and are capable of mounting ramjet powered MBDA Meteor.

The Sukhoi-30 MKI mounts a Vympel R-77M BVR AAM missile and aNIIP NO11M Bars (Panther) integrated radar sighting system. The Russian origin plane is capable of performing all tactical tasks of the Su-24 Fencer deep interdiction tactical bomber and the Su-27 Flanker A/B/C air superiority fighter while having around twice the combat range and atleast 2.5 times the combat effectiveness.

The Su-30MKI is powered by the Al-31FP (P for povorotnoye meaning "movable") engine. The Su-30MKI has a large range of 3,000 km without refueling which allows for autonomous operations that require high endurance.

It has an inbuilt In-Flight Refueling (IFR) probe that is retracted beside the cockpit during normal operation. The aircraft can carry air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles, guided bombs, unguided projectiles, APK datalink pods, ELTA RF jammers etc.

“In all dog fighting exercises, IAF Sukhois were able to turn sharply into the extremely agile Typhoons using their thrust-vectored engines to keep the RAF jets locked in their sights. The Su-30's advanced Infrared Search and Track System (IRST), a passive sensor, which cannot be tracked, proved to be a distinct advantage for the IAF's pilots in close-combat maneuvering,” NDTV quoted Group Captain Ashu Srivastav, the Contingent Commander in the exercises as saying.

“Both the IAF and RAF used the full capabilities of their onboard radars in training mode, which meant that actual radar frequencies used in combat conditions were never exposed for confidentiality reasons. However, the detection ranges of the radars of both aircraft were not curtailed per se. This was air combat as close to the real thing as possible,” he said.

So does it mean that the Su-30MKI is superior to the two leading European fighters? Experts are divided on this as the Russian aircraft won in a dogfight, a type of aerial warfare which went out of practice in the 80s with network-centric warfare now in vogue.

Both Eurofighter and Dassault were contenders for the Indian Air Force MMRCA program. Dassault Rafale won the contract but later with technology transfer and cost escalation issues, India chose to reduce the number of aircraft from 126 to 36 this April.

The MMRCA deal was scrapped only this month. The new deal to buy 36 Rafales is still to materialize.

Is the Su-30MKI Superior to the Eurofighter And Rafale?

No, of course not.

These kind of reports often end up as gross exaggerations or just pure fabrication. Another thing to take note is that we don't know how many Sukhoi fighters and Eurofighters were involved. It is likely that the RAF let India have a pretty substantial size advantage, the Americans did the same one time when training with the Indian Air Force, and the Indians started making such bold claims, when in reality they outnumbered the Americans 15-2 and they were facing older fighter jets that were stripped of most of their equipment just to even the odds. Not only that, but one pilot said that the IAF only won 7-4. So I would also assume that the UK used tear worst Eurofghters and stripped them down a fair bit.

Also, in another exercise, the RAF beat the IAF's SU-30MKI with their Eurofghter 3-0, that was also a WVR match. In this match, the IAF also had a size advantage and one pilot said the Eurofighters were stripped down.

Another thing to consider is that the RAF has denied this report.

 

[ayesha.a]

No, of course not.

These kind of reports often end up as gross exaggerations or just pure fabrication. Another thing to take note is that we don't know how many Sukhoi fighters and Eurofighters were involved.

Right, and we know close to zilch about what the exercise was about, what was being tested, what the rules were etc. They could have been simulating a very specific scenario in which the MKIs had a big advantage. (WVR itself is one such scenario.)

 

[Hamza913]

It is FAR better and powerful than PAF

Sorry, what was that? Couldn't hear you over the sounds of MM Alam destroying 5 IAF Hunters in under a minute, the fact that multiple IAF aircraft were shot down in the Kargil war from fucking ground fire, or that the IAF has the highest crash rate amongst air forces. A tool is only as good as the operator my friend, and the IAF has poor operators.

Right, and we know close to zilch about what the exercise was about, what was being tested, what the rules were etc. They could have been simulating a very specific scenario in which the MKIs had a big advantage. (WVR itself is one such scenario.)

They probably were. Maybe it was a friendly gesture to make the IAF look good?

 

[Stephen Cohen]

I agree with your posts on this thread. It would be unbecoming of anybody in the military to trot out these feel good stories. I myself winced at reading some of the language in the posted articles. For example:



If anybody in the IAF says something like that to the media, he will find himself on civvie street in the blink of an eye.

You have to understand how it works. To an extent this is true in all countries, but especially so in India - somebody authoritative would put out a bunch of statements, and some idiotic blogger or journalist would pick a few sentences in it, with no regard to the context, and write these ridiculously exaggerated articles.

Another thing - I can't believe that posters here are so naive when it comes to checking credibility. One of the articles posted is from "Russia and India report" - a nonsensical website that constantly peddles stories of Russians humiliating Americans. I think they are the same ones who put out a story that the entire crew of an American warship resigned en masse after a Su-24 buzzed them and jammed their communications. (It has been posted on this website too.) It is a laughable platform filled with high praise to the glorious Russian stuff, and makes me wonder how they think they can get away with communist style propaganda in this day and age, on the internet.

And the article calls Vishnu Som a "veteran air combat analyst". Yea, right - a person who reads the news on a news channel, and has covered some defence related news is a "veteran air combat analyst".

It's embarrassing, the way these articles are written, and disturbing how so many people defend it.

The statement about the 12-0 victories may be true - but what is left unsaid is the conditions, the rules of the exercise, etc. In another round, the shoe may have been on the other foot. In some of the exercises with the USAF in the early 2000s, the IAF would demand to exercise against the conditions they would likely face, with F-16s of the PAF. No AEWAC, not BVR, and so on.

That story was definitely intentionally leaked with the Blessings of IAF bosses
Because it had truth in it

The clarification later on does not matter ; The Arrow hit the target and did its job

The clarification was a polite way of saying " Hey bud ; Chill ; Let us do it one more time"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, what was that? Couldn't hear you over the sounds of MM Alam destroying 5 IAF Hunters in under a minute, the fact that multiple IAF aircraft were shot down in the Kargil war from fucking ground fire, or that the IAF has the highest crash rate amongst air forces. A tool is only as good as the operator my friend, and the IAF has poor operators.

Well you know what your Generals said in 1965

One Muslim is equal to Ten Hindus

And the result ; you know what happened

How long will you and @Windjammer live in 1965

 

[ayesha.a]

They probably were. Maybe it was a friendly gesture to make the IAF look good?

Unlikely. These exercises and foreign deployments cost a lot of money. Both sides do the exercises to test themselves, to learn. They would try to make every penny spent worth spending. Sending MKIs and pilots and ground crew to the UK, and holding exercises, all for a token gesture from either side to the other, would be an immense wastage of money and resources.

 

[ayesha.a]

the IAF has the highest crash rate amongst air forces.

That's not true. Try to find the figures to support that claim, and you will realize that it is far from true. Especially since 2005, the IAF's crash rate is pretty much the same as western air forces. (Despite the geriatric age of half the fleet.)

 

[randomradio]

And the article calls Vishnu Som a "veteran air combat analyst". Yea, right - a person who reads the news on a news channel, and has covered some defence related news is a "veteran air combat analyst".

He is important enough to be given rides in the MMRCA fighters.

The statement about the 12-0 victories may be true - but what is left unsaid is the conditions, the rules of the exercise, etc. In another round, the shoe may have been on the other foot. In some of the exercises with the USAF in the early 2000s, the IAF would demand to exercise against the conditions they would likely face, with F-16s of the PAF. No AEWAC, not BVR, and so on.

The rules are the same for all contenders.

If there are no Awacs, then nobody will have Awacs. If there's no BVR, then nobody will use BVR.

The rules are important, but within the rules, the MKIs completely dominated the Typhoons. And during Indradhanush 2015, the rules were made to be as close to real as possible.

 

[ayesha.a]

That story was definitely intentionally leaked with the Blessings of IAF bosses
Because it had truth in it

The clarification later on does not matter ; The Arrow hit the target and did its job

The clarification was a polite way of saying " Hey bud ; Chill ; Let us do it one more time"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Definitely"? How do you know that so definitively? How do you know that at all? Please don't allege wild theories like this.

BTW if this is true, why would the same IAF bosses demand Rafales?

The "IAF bosses" became bosses after a long, professional career. They are not armchair warriors who would say such things. They do not need to boast about their planes. This is fiction from a third rate website. Nothing more.

He is important enough to be given rides in the MMRCA fighters.

Oh wow, really? He had a joyride in a fighter?

That's not because he is a "veteran air combat analyst" - it is because he works in a large media powerhouse, and Saab wanted publicity. Here is another person who was given a ride in an MKI, maybe she is also a veteran of air combat:

Even the serving IAF officers, who studied in the NDA and other air force academies, wouldn't call themselves as "veterans of air combat".

The rules are the same for all contenders.

If there are no Awacs, then nobody will have Awacs. If there's no BVR, then nobody will use BVR.

The rules are important, but within the rules, the MKIs completely dominated the Typhoons. And during Indradhanush 2015, the rules were made to be as close to real as possible.

OK, you shouldn't talk about topics you are ill informed about. Military exercises are not like cricket, where everybody abides by the same rules, and then find out who wins. Each exercise has specific aims. For instance, one side may want to know how to fight an enemy with AEWAC coverage, while they lack the same. So the first side would fly without AEWAC, and the other with it. Or one side would want to know how to fight when outnumbered.

Exercises are not simply to know who would win - as I said, these are not sport contests. Or any sort of contest. These exercises are to learn what to do in specific situations.

You say that the rules were "as close as possible to real" - and what does that mean? In the real world, during war, they can encounter many scenarios. For example, maybe our ground radars were knocked off by a first strike, and we have to defend the airspace without it, while the enemy has GCI. There are many, many possible scenarios in the real world, and exercises are a chance to test them out.

 

[randomradio]

"Definitely"? How do you know that so definitively? How do you know that at all? Please don't allege wild theories like this.

BTW if this is true, why would the same IAF bosses demand Rafales?

The "IAF bosses" became bosses after a long, professional career. They are not armchair warriors who would say such things. They do not need to boast about their planes. This is fiction from a third rate website. Nothing more.



Oh wow, really? He had a joyride in a fighter?

That's not because he is a "veteran air combat analyst" - it is because he works in a large media powerhouse, and Saab wanted publicity. Here is another person who was given a ride in an MKI, maybe she is also a veteran of air combat:

Even the serving IAF officers, who studied in the NDA and other air force academies, wouldn't call themselves as "veterans of air combat".

Veterans of air combat analysis is not the same as veterans of air combat. And Vishnu doesn't use that term to describe himself. It doesn't change the fact that he has important access to the IAF.

And he is present during all exercises, even during some of the more important exercises like Iron Fist and Live wire. What he has said has been verified by other professionals also. The IAF has also confirmed it through their press release.

And you don't need to patronize the Pakistani members here.

 

[ayesha.a]

Veterans of air combat analysis is not the same as veterans of air combat. And Vishnu doesn't use that term to describe himself. It doesn't change the fact that he has important access to the IAF.

And he is present during all exercises, even during some of the more important exercises like Iron Fist and Live wire. What he has said has been verified by other professionals also. The IAF has also confirmed it through their press release.

And you don't need to patronize the Pakistani members here.

Having access to the IAF doesn't make him a veteran of air combat analysis either. Since you insist that he is a veteran of air combat analysis, although not of air combat itself, could you please link me to a few of the veteran's analyses? Maybe a thesis he has made about air combat? Erudite dissertations? Thought provoking essays? About air combat?

Vishnu Som is a TV newsreader and reporter who reports defence related issues, among other things. That's it.

BTW, the point here is not about Vishnu Som's credibility, but the credibility of an article that calls him a veteran of air combat.

Oh and I am aware that I don't need to patronize anybody. I'm not sure you know what that means, though.

 

[aakash_2410]

i thought we were allies? meh whatever.
this is to basically say if the suppa duppa mki can beat the typhoone which is in the same class as the rafale then why buy the rafale. thats what they are trying to imply here.
dont worry if i was to choose between the mki and the rafale it would be the rafale hands down, but the rafale after the typhoon though

I have two words in response.

1) AESA radar
2) Diversification and familiarity with Dassault jets.

But, in all fairness it is possible that MKI may have had an upper hand in dogfighting. Because they can make full use of the canards and operate at higher angle of attack than Typhoon because of 3D thrust vectoring.

Not to take any credit away from Typhoons if this was a real war scenario RAF would not have banned the use of CAPTOR. It would have never come down to dog fights in the first place.

 

[randomradio]

OK, you shouldn't talk about topics you are ill informed about.

Right.

Military exercises are not like cricket, where everybody abides by the same rules, and then find out who wins. Each exercise has specific aims. For instance, one side may want to know how to fight an enemy with AEWAC coverage, while they lack the same. So the first side would fly without AEWAC, and the other with it. Or one side would want to know how to fight when outnumbered.

Those are extremely specific instances. Like one Su-30 fought two Typhoons and won. It's a pretty standard fight. Obviously the rules surrounding the exercise is special, the Su-30 would follow some rules and the Typhoons may have slightly different rules. But the same rules applied when two Typhoons fought one Su-30.

In case of WVR, both Typhoon and Su-30 fought with the same rules in 1v1, 2v1, 1v2 and 2v2 scenarios.

In LFE, the combat was 4v4 and 8v8. And throughout the engagement, the Typhoons were networked while the MKIs weren't. So the MKI was at a disadvantage throughout.

You say that the rules were "as close as possible to real" - and what does that mean? In the real world, during war, they can encounter many scenarios. For example, maybe our ground radars were knocked off by a first strike, and we have to defend the airspace without it, while the enemy has GCI. There are many, many possible scenarios in the real world, and exercises are a chance to test them out.

Air forces put restrictions on their aircraft in order to keep some technologies secret. Some of that was lifted to the point where the two air forces could fight as normally as they could without EW.

So the Bars and Captor-M used training mode, but a lot of range restrictions were lifted to facilitate a more realistic environment. Similarly, the MKIs used TVC in their fight. TVC wasn't used in the previous exercise.

The missile simulation was based on a fictional missile, but both operated the same missile. During offensive missions, the BVR limit was 25 miles. During defensive missions, it was 22 miles. Both had this limit.

So short of a dense EW environment and actual shooting, the rules allowed more realism and the pilots had more flexibility.

The reason why the results of the exercise were revealed by the IAF was in order to kick Eurofighter out of India, they were making trouble for the IAF. It was entirely politically motivated. The Eurofighter consortium had started lobbying their jet by lying about the Rafale, and they had to be weeded out. The Germans withdrew from India after the exercise.

Having access to the IAF doesn't make him a veteran of air combat analysis either. Since you insist that he is a veteran of air combat analysis, although not of air combat itself, could you please link me to a few of the veteran's analyses? Maybe a thesis he has made about air combat? Erudite dissertations? Thought provoking essays? About air combat?

Vishnu Som is a TV newsreader and reporter who reports defence related issues, among other things. That's it.

BTW, the point here is not about Vishnu Som's credibility, but the credibility of an article that calls him a veteran of air combat.

Oh and I am aware that I don't need to patronize anybody. I'm not sure you know what that means, though.

So you will dismiss Som because someone called him a veteran of air combat?

 

[ayesha.a]

So you will dismiss Som because someone called him a veteran of air combat?

I will (and do) dismiss the claim that he is a veteran of air combat. And as I said before, that calls into question the credibility of that article - it is the article and its writer than I am dismissing.

And that's just one. That website is a known hack. As I mentioned, another story they wrote last year was that a Russian Su-25 buzzed an American destroyer, and the entire crew resigned in fear. Yea, that's the sort of nonsense they peddle. Read a few articles from there, you will know what I'm talking about.

Right.



Those are extremely specific instances. Like one Su-30 fought two Typhoons and won. It's a pretty standard fight.

And that's the point. This 12-0 victory probably happened in one such specific scenario.

Unless you know the details of the specific test, you cannot simply conclude that the MKI v/s Typhoon is going to be such a no-contest.

As for your claim that this is a deliberate leak by the IAF to push the Eurofighter out...I really don't know what to say. I'll let that one pass.

 

[ravi gupta]

That story was definitely intentionally leaked with the Blessings of IAF bosses
Because it had truth in it

The clarification later on does not matter ; The Arrow hit the target and did its job

The clarification was a polite way of saying " Hey bud ; Chill ; Let us do it one more time"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Well you know what your Generals said in 1965

One Muslim is equal to Ten Hindus

And the result ; you know what happened

How long will you and @Windjammer live in 1965

Forever,However in Kargil your PAF was hiding becoz they did not have BVR CAPABILITY.
Read KARGIL CONFLICT AND PAKISTAN AIRFORCE
KAISER TUFAIL

 

[randomradio]

I will (and do) dismiss the claim that he is a veteran of air combat. And as I said before, that calls into question the credibility of that article - it is the article and its writer than I am dismissing.

Great. Your logic is outstanding. Now I am more stupid after reading your post.

And that's just one. That website is a known hack. As I mentioned, another story they wrote last year was that a Russian Su-25 buzzed an American destroyer, and the entire crew resigned in fear. Yea, that's the sort of nonsense they peddle. Read a few articles from there, you will know what I'm talking about.

Vishnu Som must have written that article.

Just so you know, the article wasn't written in the website you are talking about. It was first published on NDTV.

And that's the point. This 12-0 victory probably happened in one such specific scenario.

That was the whole exercise for the WVR part.

As for your claim that this is a deliberate leak by the IAF to push the Eurofighter out...I really don't know what to say. I'll let that one pass.

You don't need to say anything. It won't be important.