Su-30MKI & JF-17 Air Fight

[notorious_eagle]

how can people here post the aircraft's RCS????
what people know is that the Su-mki has a big RCS..waht they don't know is that given the Bars's Tx power....the Mki would still see any Jf-17 or F-16 first than being seen itself...!
and that is what matters.

Sir Jee you would be right if there were no AWACS in South Asia, but with the introduction of AWACS both MKI and F16/JF17 will see each other at approximately the same time. With MKI's huge radar cross section, there is simply no chance the Erieyes would miss it. India stands to loose more than Pakistan with the introduction of AWACS, i guess this was a miscalculation on part of IAF's top command.

 

[ice_man]

Iceman. The JF-17 uses RD-93, the Mig-29's use the RD-33. The RD-93 engine is a variant, designed primarily for single engined aircraft, of the original RD-33.

In 2005, Russia signed a $250 million deal with India to modernize engines for the MiG-29 fighters of the Indian Air Force. According to the terms of the deal, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) will make 120 RD-33 series 3 jet engines at its Koraput plant for the upgrade of MiG-29 fighters.

The difference between these RD-33 series 3 and the RD-93 is substantial. The RD-93 on the JF-17, however is a reliable, efficient and cost effective solution as well.

buddy the most significant diffrence between the RD-93 & the RD-33 engine is the position of the gearbox! not much difference except that RD-93 is designed for a single engined fighter

 

[unicorn148]

the awacs capabilities on india are better than pakisthan the range of phalcons are higher than the erieye so the su30mki with the help of phalcon will detect the jf17 of f16 earlier

 

[unicorn148]

the rd 93 has the same capabilities of a normal rd 33 engine but what mig29 of IAF will be using the rd33 3 series engines which are superior to the normal rd33 engine

 

[ice_man]

@ unicorn....buddy please read the thread from the beginning before coming up with PHALCON is SUPERIOR & RD33 is superior india is superior.....it will help

 

[paritosh]

I agree with you on almost all points in your post regarding sensitivity of TX modules and its relation to RCS. Just wanted to add that Reflectivity is something where MKI will always proved to be a big target compared to JF-17. If fully loaded its reflectivity will further increase towards Thunder's radar when facing each other in head on engagement. So, superior Gain by Tx module of MKI radar has to do more work than JF-17 or F-16 radar's Tx module will have to. Keeping RCS equation in mind (RCS= reflectivity x Directivity x Projected Cross section)... IMO, still Thunder will have a chance to detect MKI before it enter in a range where it can lock on Thunder while latter totally unaware of fact what is about to come to its way... I am sure PAF will always keep this in mind that's why it is not satisfied with KLJ and is looking some Western radar. More range + more sensitivity (Gain by Tx modules).

I agree that the Mki is indeed like a floating truck in the sky.....and the reduction of RCS is a concern and would be addressed in the scheduled upgrade...it is planned to use much more RAMs in the areas which tend to be the most reflective...and yes one of the biggest source of echo is the under-wing pylons and fuel tanks...and the rotors...
see when a plane say the f-16 would with it's radar range of say R1 kms is flying and a Su-30 with a big RCS is flying at a range R2(R2>R1)
at some distance R3 (R2>R3>R1)...the radar would start receiving echoes from the MKI due to it's sheer size now it is upto the signal processing equipment aboard the plane to either reject the echoes obtained as clutter or put it as a blip on the Heads up display...
so most radars traditionally suppress echoes obtained from targets outside of their unambiguous range as they can be misguiding...most modern radars use multiple prfs to clear the unambiguities and obtain a target even beyond their range...so it's about the quality of radar as well...
and in the MKi's case it having a powerful radar of it's own doesn't help it's case...microwaves from the Bars would also attract attention.
but I'd ask you to fetch the values of the Radar output powers of the Bars and the APG-68...I think that there is a significant difference in their output powers...but frankly I don't know the exact output power of the APG...do you have any data on that?

 

[paritosh]

Sir Jee you would be right if there were no AWACS in South Asia, but with the introduction of AWACS both MKI and F16/JF17 will see each other at approximately the same time. With MKI's huge radar cross section, there is simply no chance the Erieyes would miss it. India stands to loose more than Pakistan with the introduction of AWACS, i guess this was a miscalculation on part of IAF's top command.

yaar...read my next post..it'd be stupid not to involve the AWACS...that is what they are for...
but the other important aspect is to shoot the detected enemy plane...and for that you have to depend on your missiles...the awacs can guide the missile more efficiently but can't increase it's range...and plus the number of BVR missiles carried by JF-17 is lesser than that carried by the MKI...so we have to consider all these factors as well...

 

[unicorn148]

mr ice men it u who wanted to know abt rd 93 engine

 

[raveolution]

Sir Jee you would be right if there were no AWACS in South Asia, but with the introduction of AWACS both MKI and F16/JF17 will see each other at approximately the same time. With MKI's huge radar cross section, there is simply no chance the Erieyes would miss it. India stands to loose more than Pakistan with the introduction of AWACS, i guess this was a miscalculation on part of IAF's top command.

Notorious Eagle, lots of people do not understand how an Awacs works. The part in which you are right is that the MKI and JF-17 would "see" each other at the same time with the help of the Awacs. However, the radar on the Awacs can only "track" targets and not "engage" them.

It essentially means that to engage, lock on to the enemy aircraft, fire the missile and provide mid term guidance, the MKI would need to use its own radar. The technology doesn't exist at the moment (although the US is experimenting), to use Awacs for engagement.

So essentially, even though they can see each other at probably the same time, the aircraft's individual radar would have to do the rest and that is where the MKI's Bars radar would be superior.

Hope you understood my point.

 

[Sapper]

It essentially means that to engage, lock on to the enemy aircraft, fire the missile and provide mid term guidance, the MKI would need to use its own radar. The technology doesn't exist at the moment (although the US is experimenting), to use Awacs for engagement.

So essentially, even though they can see each other at probably the same time, the aircraft's individual radar would have to do the rest and that is where the MKI's Bars radar would be superior.

The comparison to make here is

At what range Su30's radar detects a 1m2~1.5m2 RCS target.
compared with
At what range JF17's KLJ 7/10 radar detects a 5m2~10m2 target.

MULTIPLY IT WITH

Max range and speed of Su30's BVR missile.
compared with
Max range and speed of JF17's BVR missile.


As per my caculations, MKI has an edge due to its BVR missile, but the EDGE is not as great as it would be if the RCS of MKI was lover than 5m2.

 

[unicorn148]

sapper
i think that a better radar should have a very low rcs that means it should be able to detect even small cross sections

 

[paritosh]

Notorious Eagle, lots of people do not understand how an Awacs works. The part in which you are right is that the MKI and JF-17 would "see" each other at the same time with the help of the Awacs. However, the radar on the Awacs can only "track" targets and not "engage" them.

It essentially means that to engage, lock on to the enemy aircraft, fire the missile and provide mid term guidance, the MKI would need to use its own radar. The technology doesn't exist at the moment (although the US is experimenting), to use Awacs for engagement.

So essentially, even though they can see each other at probably the same time, the aircraft's individual radar would have to do the rest and that is where the MKI's Bars radar would be superior.

Hope you understood my point.

you sure about that?I though that the AWACS can be used to guide a radar guided semi-active missile to it's target...thee is nothing technically that should stop the AWACS from doing that...a semi-active seeker needs a radar lock on to it's target...an AWACS can provide that...can't it?

 

[paritosh]

sapper
i think that a better radar should have a very low rcs that means it should be able to detect even small cross sections

radars don't contribute to the RCS's directly...I guess you meant resolution...

 

[paritosh]

The comparison to make here is

At what range Su30's radar detects a 1m2~1.5m2 RCS target.
compared with
At what range JF17's KLJ 7/10 radar detects a 5m2~10m2 target.

MULTIPLY IT WITH

Max range and speed of Su30's BVR missile.
compared with
Max range and speed of JF17's BVR missile.


As per my caculations, MKI has an edge due to its BVR missile, but the EDGE is not as great as it would be if the RCS of MKI was lover than 5m2.

there are so many edges that you did not see...
a)the Su-30's PESA is far more advanced than the mechanically scanned radar that the f-16 is going to have...under the upgrade that is yet to happen..
b)the Su-30's Bars allows it engage 12 targets simultaneously and the SU-30's advanced data comm systems allow it to function as a mini AWACS data-linking itself to other wingmen and ground support people..
c)the SU-30s killer advantage is it's ability to carry the most number of BVR missiles 4 more than the f-16 or the JF-17...
d)the Su-30s EW suite is stated to be one of the best....

 

[SBD-3]

yaar...read my next post..it'd be stupid not to involve the AWACS...that is what they are for...
but the other important aspect is to shoot the detected enemy plane...and for that you have to depend on your missiles...the awacs can guide the missile more efficiently but can't increase it's range...and plus the number of BVR missiles carried by JF-17 is lesser than that carried by the MKI...so we have to consider all these factors as well...

Bhai sahib.......plz keep in mind that once data linked with AWACS, the plane can switch its radar off and even awacs can guide the fired missile just like F-22 does. it is lethal....cus you don't know that a missile is homing on you until it suddenly lites up and you have to save your *** in no time....and secondly that its not necessary that a plane,if carries greater amount of missiles, should emerge victorious.....remember race is won by agile not laden.....if JF gets meteor or AIM-120 then even 4 missiles mean a good combat capability....now please do some research befor posting anything