Whatever

[Parul]

name? title? by whom?

Band A- Studio - Song name - Raz I navsegda - Singer - Keri Topuria

 

[Chak Bamu]

@ZamsaHassan

This F-16s V/s Su-30MKI question is one of the most common questions asked on PDF.

The thread got closed so answering your question here. hopefully i'll learn something too.

Here's what i've learned so far.

Superior weaponry matters but superior strategies win wars.

Nothing to do with Passion.

In BVR combat , the one who sees first, returns back to the base.

Su-30MKI with more than 6 BVRs will have a huge RCS. Almost 20m2.

on the other hand our F-16s (with 4 BVRs and 2 WVRs) will have a max 8m2 RCS.

For 20m2, APG-68(V)9 detection range is 149km.

Hence the F-16 will detect SU-30MKI at 149km.

For 8.5m2, N-011M BARS detection range is 160km.

Hence the SU-30MKI will detect the F-16 at 160km.

In terms of detection, SU-30MKI has a clear edge over the F-16.

But,

Given the fact that the F-16s are combat proven, have superior BVRs and Electronic warfare/countermeasures package and because PAF has huge experience with them, i'd bet my money on the eff solah.

@Aeronaut @Munir @gambit @Chak Bamu @Oscar @Dillinger

Correct me if i'm wrong please.

It is not that you are wrong, its that one-on-one scenarios are very unlikely. You have to consider as to who is aggressor and who is defending? Whose air-space is the engagement likely to take place in? How many aircraft constitute the strike package and how many are defending? Are there SAM batteries nearby? Are respective AWACS / AEW&C aircraft keeping watch? What is the mission of the strike package? What, then, is their weapon's load?

Let me paint a very simple scenario of 2X2 engagement. Let us assume that SU-30 pair is aggressor.

1. AEW&C cues a pair of defenders towards hostiles travelling at high subsonic speed towards the border.

2. An F-16 is detected by SU-30 at (your figure) 160 KM, that gives the aggressors 30 second lead on the F-16, and the SU-30 pair begin an accelerating climb to give their missiles an advantage against superior AMRAAMs. The pair crosses the border.

3. F-16 detects the pair and executes a turn away from SU-30s.

4. SU-30 leader decides to give chase, while simultaneously wondering if he is being led into an ambush or within kill-zone of a SAM.

5. AWACS from across the border warns the aggressors that a low-flying fighter (another F-16) is climbing towards them and closing fast from an angle which is not within their radar's detection cone.

Now what would SU-30 pair do? Split in unfriendly air? Stick to the chase and take unacceptable risk?

Chances are that they would bug out and that nothing would have happened.

Let us just hope we never find out SU-30 vs. F-16.

There are many more factors: Man-Machine Interface of respective aircraft, relative abilities of BVR missiles, Radar coverage (AWACS and Fixed), SAM placement, decoys, and more along with fog of war. It is too hard to tell. Moreover Pakistani defenders would not necessarily be only F-16.

 

[Dillinger]

It is not that you are wrong, its that one-on-one scenarios are very unlikely. You have to consider as to who is aggressor and who is defending? Whose air-space is the engagement likely to take place? How many aircraft constitute the strike package and how many are defending? Are there SAM batteries nearby? Are respective AWACS / AEW&C aircraft keeping watch? What is the mission of the strike package? What, then, is their weapon's load?

Let me paint a very simple scenario of 2X2 engagement. Let us assume that SU-30 pair is aggressor.

1. AEW&C cues a pair of defenders towards hostiles travelling at high subsonic speed towards the border.

2. An F-16 is detected by SU-30 at (your figure) 160 KM, that gives the aggressors 30 second lead on the F-16, and the SU-30 pair begin an accelerating climb to give their missiles an advantage against superior AMRAAMs. The pair crosses the border.

3. F-16 detects the pair and executes a turn away from SU-30s.

4. SU-30 leader decides to give chase, while simultaneously wondering if he is being led into an ambush or within kill-zone of a SAM.

5. AWACS from across the border warns the aggressors that a low-flying fighter (another F-16) is climbing towards them and closing fast from an angle which is not within their radar's detection cone.

Now what would SU-30 pair do? Split in unfriendly air? Stick to the chase and take unacceptable risk?

Chances are that they would bug out and that nothing would have happened.

Let us just hope we never find out SU-30 vs. F-16.

There are many more factors: Man-Machine Interface of respective aircraft, relative abilities of BVR missiles, Radar coverage (AWACS and Fixed), SAM placement, decoys, and more along with fog of war. It is too hard to tell. Moreover Pakistani defenders would not necessarily be only F-16.

@Oscar I FOUND HIM! OH LORD, OH LORD! A fellow who finally gets that warfare is not platform centric but rather net-centric. My heart weeps with joy.

Although one slight correction, AMRAAMs are no longer superior, lest we are referring to the AMRAAM-D otherwise the Adders can pretty much even the playing field.

 

[RAMPAGE]

2. An F-16 is detected by SU-30 at (your figure) 160 KM, that gives the aggressors 30 second lead on the F-16, and the SU-30 pair begin an accelerating climb to give their missiles an advantage against superior AMRAAMs. The pair crosses the border.

18 seconds lead if If both aircrafts, the F-16 & SU-30MKI are flying at the speed of 1.6 mach.

And that's a lot of time.

@Oscar I FOUND HIM! OH LORD, OH LORD! A fellow who finally gets that warfare is not platform centric but rather net-centric. My heart weeps with joy.

Although one slight correction, AMRAAMs are no longer superior, lest we are referring to the AMRAAM-D otherwise the Adders can pretty much even the playing field.

Dude everybody understands that.

 

[Dillinger]

18 seconds lead if If both aircrafts, the F-16 & SU-30MKI are flying at the speed of 1.6 mach.

And that's a lot of time.

Dude everybody understands that.

Not everybody and even rarer few explain it as succinctly as @Chak Bamu did here. Me, Hype and Oscar have spent countless hours on countless threads trying to hammer this into people's heads.

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar I FOUND HIM! OH LORD, OH LORD! A fellow who finally gets that warfare is not platform centric but rather net-centric. My heart weeps with joy.

Although one slight correction, AMRAAMs are no longer superior, lest we are referring to the AMRAAM-D otherwise the Adders can pretty much even the playing field.

AMRAAMS may no longer be superior.. but they are still possibly very likely to kill. The AMRAAMSKI itself is a mean missile. But engagement envelopes..assets in play.. even the damn weather.. all decide a fight. Glad someone gets that.

 

[Dillinger]

AMRAAMS may no longer be superior.. but they are still possibly very likely to kill. The AMRAAMSKI itself is a mean missile. But engagement envelopes..assets in play.. even the damn weather.. all decide a fight. Glad someone gets that.

All of it. As Mike Spick once said, its not the stated brochure range but the effective engagement range that matters, what matters is not that the missile is said to travel at mach.4 for it will never ever travel for any significant amount of time or distance at that speed rather you need to see what will be its speed during the end-game phase, how "energetic" is the missile then. A fighter maybe limited to 9gs and a missile may go up to 30, even that is misleading given that a track/lock can be broken and most missiles even today have to make use of a sustainer which doesn't last long..so many variables.

 

[SQ8]

All of it. As Mike Spick once said, its not the stated brochure range but the effective engagement range that matters, what matters is not that the missile is said to travel at mach.4 for it will never ever travel for any significant amount of time or distance at that speed rather you need to see what will be its speed during the end-game phase, how "energetic" is the missile then. A fighter maybe limited to 9gs and a missile may go up to 30, even that is misleading given that a track/lock can be broken and most missiles even today have to make use of a sustainer which doesn't last long..so many variables.

The 120C that the PAF has replaced the sustainer motor with a pure boost I think. The idea is to get the missile faster rather than take it to longer ranges. Although the C-5 variant that the PAF has comes with a larger motor section(after the guidance and control units shrank). That being said, most fighters.. and this will sound rather dismal.. have a lot less of a chance once a missile flies off the rail. Usually the best "hope" is to turn the other side and run in the opposite direction..hugging the ground and popping chaff. The only use the Jamming is to make sure the other guy does not get a lock on you before you get one on him. otherwise.. for missiles the Jamming is like a homing beacon...only makes things worse.

The SD-10A is rumoured(reported) to be as good as the 120C.. the grapevine from the vineyard that matters put the successor at ranges somewhere between the 120-C-7 and the D.. with much gradtitude to the Russians on letting the master duplicator having a looksie at the motor for the AMRAAMSKI. But then again, its a rumour.. on a grapevine.. although as grapevines go.. .

To add to the first paragraph..and the post you praised.. chances are both fighters will try to just get one missile off.. and then run like hell to the other side. Chances are that the MKI shoot first.. but it will still get shot at. It will however make for some wonderful photography sessions for any observer on the ground.. with aircraft running at tree top heights with the pilots asking their respective makers for some last minute miracle.

 

[Dillinger]

The 120C that the PAF has replaced the sustainer motor with a pure boost I think. The idea is to get the missile faster rather than take it to longer ranges. Although the C-5 variant that the PAF has comes with a larger motor section(after the guidance and control units shrank). That being said, most fighters.. and this will sound rather dismal.. have a lot less of a chance once a missile flies off the rail. Usually the best "hope" is to turn the other side and run in the opposite direction..hugging the ground and popping chaff. The only use the Jamming is to make sure the other guy does not get a lock on you before you get one on him. otherwise.. for missiles the Jamming is like a homing beacon...only makes things worse.

The SD-10A is rumoured(reported) to be as good as the 120C.. the grapevine from the vineyard that matters put the successor at ranges somewhere between the 120-C-7 and the D.. with much gradtitude to the Russians on letting the master duplicator having a looksie at the motor for the AMRAAMSKI. But then again, its a rumour.. on a grapevine.. although as grapevines go.. .

I'm waiting for the meteor and the ramjet AMRAAMSKI! Oh baby, those are going to be mean bullets.

Btw as I was telling Indischer..I dreamed of your mountains again..cold and clean wind, cold as steel daggers shearing away at the skin..the solitude of stone and sky..a length of sharp steel at my hip and a journey...someday Oscar I will visit that place..perhaps in kinder and more forgiving times when perhaps sanity shall have returned to its denizens.

To add to the first paragraph..and the post you praised.. chances are both fighters will try to just get one missile off.. and then run like hell to the other side. Chances are that the MKI shoot first.. but it will still get shot at. It will however make for some wonderful photography sessions for any observer on the ground.. with aircraft running at tree top heights with the pilots asking their respective makers for some last minute miracle.

Shoot and duck, bug out till your feet graze the tree tops with full throttle..pretty much what I would expect. How do you think that will play out with a PAK-FA though?

 

[Dubious]

What does @blain2 mean? sounds like blaa-ain no.2

and who was blain no.1 ?

 

[Alpha1]

Morning people

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Morning people

Good morning Let's waste the day here

 

[gambit]

@ZamsaHassan

This F-16s V/s Su-30MKI question is one of the most common questions asked on PDF.

The thread got closed so answering your question here. hopefully i'll learn something too.

Here's what i've learned so far.

Superior weaponry matters but superior strategies win wars.

Nothing to do with Passion.

In BVR combat , the one who sees first, returns back to the base.

Su-30MKI with more than 6 BVRs will have a huge RCS. Almost 20m2.

on the other hand our F-16s (with 4 BVRs and 2 WVRs) will have a max 8m2 RCS.

For 20m2, APG-68(V)9 detection range is 149km.

Hence the F-16 will detect SU-30MKI at 149km.

For 8.5m2, N-011M BARS detection range is 160km.

Hence the SU-30MKI will detect the F-16 at 160km.

In terms of detection, SU-30MKI has a clear edge over the F-16.

But,

Given the fact that the F-16s are combat proven, have superior BVRs and Electronic warfare/countermeasures package and because PAF has huge experience with them, i'd bet my money on the eff solah.

@Aeronaut @Munir @gambit @Chak Bamu @Oscar @Dillinger

Correct me if i'm wrong please.

When there is a head-on engagement, in order for one side to have an advantageous position, the difference between effective radar detection ranges must be sufficient to allow that side about 30 secs of setup time. We are talking about a difference of distance where the closing speed, A + B, will have both sides detect each other in a couple secs. So let us say the F-16 and the SU-30 detect each other at 150 km apart, rounded off figure. At this point, whoever has the higher altitude have the initial superior setup position. It is not guaranteed, just improved odds. And whoever have the superior training will have even better odds.

 

[RAMPAGE]

When there is a head-on engagement, in order for one side to have an advantageous position, the difference between effective radar detection ranges must be sufficient to allow that side about 30 secs of setup time. We are talking about a difference of distance where the closing speed, A + B, will have both sides detect each other in a couple secs. So let us say the F-16 and the SU-30 detect each other at 150 km apart, rounded off figure. At this point, whoever has the higher altitude have the initial superior setup position. It is not guaranteed, just improved odds. And whoever have the superior training will have even better odds.

So during a head-on engagement, 18 seconds lead isn't a big deal ???

 

[gambit]

So during a head-on engagement, 18 seconds lead isn't a big deal ???

You need to look at the closing speed versus effective detection distance difference. You can have a 100 km detection difference but if both fighters approaches each other at Mach 1+, the fighter with the better radar will bring himself into detection range of the other fighter anyway while he tries to set himself up for the better shot. The other guy is not going to be idle either. What if he go low to try to get lost in ground clutter because he know he is already is at an inferior altitude? What if he is already at a superior altitude? It is somewhat misleading from popular media to post images of fighters side by side with their respective radar ranges devoid of tactical situations.