How would PAF deal with the possible threat from indian Su-30mki?

Status
Not open for further replies.

mysterious

New Member
Well Gary, dont you think that given the fact that the Gripen was tailored to be a short-range point defense fighter, it could well be usefull for Pakistan as well because Pakistan only wants 'deterence', hence no question about becoming an aggressor plus the fact that Pakistan has relatively less strategic depth as compared to India. So I think Gripen's characteristics should make it quite close to what PAF expects from an AC for front-line defense. :smokingc:
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
I've got a point to make, someone earlier on was trumpeting the values of the SU-30 over every other aircraft bar the JSF and F-22. I do not doubt that it is an excellent aircraft, but this poster went on to claim that the SU-30 can "out-turn" any missile in existence. This is simply ludicrous.

Modern air to air missiles are designed to conduct sustained 20g or greater turns, with missiles like AIM-9X Sidewinder, ASRAAM and IRIS-T designed to perform 30g turns. No fighter in the world at present can sustain much better than 9g turns for one major reason. Every major fighter in the world is flown by a human being.

Physiologically human's cannot stand more than 9g for very long and can't even stand 9g for long as I understand things. Gremlin can probably elaborate on this, but the simple fact is no aircraft can out-turn a modern air to air missile. It simply nonsense to think it can.
 

Pathfinder-X

Tribal Warlord
Verified Defense Pro
Normally pilots will start experiencing blurred vision at 7g. At 9g, they will be near the point of unconciousness. Modern fighters do not emphysis on using its manoevurbility to evade missiles, but rather use electronic counter measures such as jamming, chaff or flare.

I believe any BVR capable plane will post a threat to Su-30MKI, it's just the matter of getting the first look and first shot. I doubt the PAF F-16A/B and JF-17 have such capability to have first shot on Su-30MKI. In the best case scenario, that is PAF receiving F-16 block60 they might stand a good chance. If they are unable to obtain the block 60 or any other western jets for that matter, J-10A would be PAF's best shot.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
mysterious said:
Well Gary, dont you think that given the fact that the Gripen was tailored to be a short-range point defense fighter, it could well be usefull for Pakistan as well because Pakistan only wants 'deterence', hence no question about becoming an aggressor plus the fact that Pakistan has relatively less strategic depth as compared to India. So I think Gripen's characteristics should make it quite close to what PAF expects from an AC for front-line defense. :smokingc:
Superficially yes. The point I am trying to make is that there is a tendency in here for people to say "if we buy "x" then we can beat the pants off "y" , this is done with little if any understanding of the design restrictions within that platform and whether it is even remotely suitable for the national ORBAT - let alone sympathetic to the defence doctrine. People get excited at how acrobatic planes are, or the fact that they are photogenic rather than an appropriate "fit".
 

VICTORA1

New Member
GF,
Thanks for the explanation. What is a point defence fighter for!!! Just to let the opponent to strike at will. First and foremost, our priority must be to have something that can combat the SU 30 on its own---one on one, even though it maybe in smaller numbers. But you got to have something.

Now comparing the abilities of a SU 30 to that of a JF 17 is like comparing the .50 calibre barrett to the likes of a .308 H&K. Now both are deadly, no doubt about it, but one is absolutely destructive over all ranges of engagement as compared to the other. The zone of engagement of one is far superior to that of the other. The first one does not need to get into the secondary zone of engagement. It can maintain its superiority outside of the circle.
 

Sq No.15

Banned Member
SU 30 Vs F16 Vs F18

The basic tactical and technical characteristics determining the capabilities of any aircraft include its flight performance and avionics and armament characteristics. Their analysis makes it possible to compare aircraft and assess the level of their technical perfection.

The Su-30MKI’s structural and aerodynamic configuration incorporates the latest research and technological achievements. It is a triplane (a combination of conventional design with foreplanes) with a lifting fuselage and developed wingroot extensions. The interaction of the foreplanes and wingroot extensions creates a controlled vortex effect similar to that of the adaptive wing. The F-16 and F-18 designs were developed in the early and mid-1970s. In terms of maximum aerodynamic efficiency, the Su-30MKI, like all Su-27-family aircraft, is unparalleled in the world and outperforms the above foreign counterparts by at least 50 to 100 percent. This is why the latest modernization programs, which gave birth to the F-16C Block 60 and F-18E/F versions, involved the increase of wing span, fuselage length and control surface areas and significantly changed the structural configuration and general layout of their basic versions.

Engines with thrust-vectoring nozzles enable the Su-30MKI to perform such maneuvers as «cobra» vertical reverse, roll in «bell» turn in «cobra» etc. In these maneuvers, an angle of attack can reach 180o. These are not purely aerobatic maneuvers: this supermaneuverability can be effectively used in combat. As for the F-16 and F-18 aircraft, their maximum angles of attack are 30o and 40o, respectively, and they cannot use armament at supercritical angles of attack.

In terms of conventional maneuverability characteristics, all these fighters are very similar. However, according to preliminary assessments, the Su-30MKI’s supermaneuverability gives it a 30-percent superiority over its competitors in close air combat. Aircraft multiple capabilities put into the forefront the problem of effective weapon employment. To solve this problem, the Su-30MKI has a copilot/operator to improve the crew’s performance, weapon employment efficiency and provide for group missions.

Compared to the F-16C Block 50, a heavy weapon load carried by the Su-30MKI significantly (by 20 percent) reduces the time required to defeat ground targets by one sortie, especially when using aerial bombs. The F-18E/F fighter is planned to have a similar combat load capacity in the future.

Notably, in terms of quantity and types of weapons, the Russian fighter considerably outclasses the F-16C Block 50 and F-16C Block 60 aircraft. Only the F-18E/F is close to the Su-30MKI in this respect.

Fitted with 12 weapon stores, carrying a full complement of air-to-air missiles and featuring a multichannel target engagement capability, the Su-30MKI fighter can be effectively used to repulse a massive air raid.

The Su-30MKI has a twofold advantage over the F-16 aircraft in the number of simultaneously carried air-to-ground guided weapons, which are also more efficient. High-power guided weapons carried by the Su-30MKI enable it to defeat deeply buried, hardened and superhardened priority targets. The Su-30MKI’s medium-range guided missile can be launched at stand-off ranges. The F-18E/F fighter is expected to be armed with similar missiles after 2005. It will be also equipped with air-to-surface missiles guided by a satellite navigation system, although export deliveries of these aircraft are unlikely in the near future.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
In general I would agree with some of what has been said - but it gets back to the issue of the relevancy of these tests on a platform to platform basis - more critically it gets back to an ORBAT to ORBAT test, and then defence force to defence force.

an easy example of exercises and comparisons that have shown to be "real world" meaningless is Cope India 04. However, as an exercise in assessing platform and doctrine issues - Cope India 04 was geared to do exactly that. As an example of what happens in the real world - well the recent release of some of the restrictions show how dangerous it was for the Indian media to get carried away. Note how the IAF said nothing - as they knew the combat restrictions.

My point is, I would question an Su-30MKI against an Israeli F16I, I'd also question it in ACM against a Singaporean F-16 in "unfettered" ACM.

These platform to platform comparisons mean very very little except as an interesting exercise in how data points can be created to promote a certain point of view. As a realistic exercise in outcome, they certainly are not.

Trying to compare an F-16 to an Su-30 is like trying to compare a ASW frigate against a AWD destoyer.
 

Sq No.15

Banned Member
Well here some thing you might be intrested .

Six F-16 Fighting Falcon jets from the RSAF, led by Detachment Commander Lt Col Anil Sanker, 39, engaged in aerial combat with aircraft deployed by the Indian Air Force, which included the top-of-the-line Sukhoi-30, MiG-27, and MiG-29 and the Mirage 2000.
The MiGs and the F-16s are comparable in terms of manoeuvrability, sophistication of avionics and weapons systems, say analysts.

Both Singapore and Indian pilots tested their skills in one-on-one dogfights, which escalated to two-on-two clashes and eventually involved up to as many as 10 aircraft.
Considering that the Indians, in their Sukhoi-30s, triumphed over a visiting American team in their F-15 Eagles in exercises earlier this year at Gwalior, how did the RSAF pilots, who have fared well in international competitions, do?

A Times of India news report, quoting IAF sources, said the Indian pilots proved more than a match for their visitors. Responding, a Mindef spokesman said: "We can understand why the Indian media would come out with a sensational story like this.
"We are very pleased with the exercise and the performance of the RSAF's pilots and aircraft. The Indian Air Force has been an excellent host, and as their guest, it would not be courteous for us to comment on the specific outcomes of the exercise."

The RSAF was, however, keener to elaborate on the knowledge it had gained from the exercise, a first between the two countries.
which clearly state that SRAF is not winner in the excersise or else they strongly denied that , or atlest put mild denial.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
That speech sounded like a marketing brochure Sq No.15. Unfortunately it's real world results that count, not speeches from salesman. The SU-30 outperforms the F-16 or F-18 by 50 - 100 per cent in aerodynamic efficiency eh?

That's a pretty varied estimate and seems to be to be a rather meaningless figure to me. So what. If the IAF want a real challenge they should test their SU-30MKI's against the Israeli F-16I's in an unfettered "free-play" exercise. Introducing stringent performance restrictions against your opposition in an exercise and then trumpeting your performance is simply ludicrous. It's akin to playing a cricket match against another team that has to have 1 hand tied behind their back all game...

I don't doubt the Su-30 IS a good plane, but that statistic and the accompanying literature make it sound like some sort of "super plane". Unfortunately it's not. What it is, is a very capable strike fighter, that is an incremental improvement over existing "teen series" fighters.
 

VICTORA1

New Member
Guys,
Now competing against the israeli F16I is a different story. The indian SU30 may not enjoy the same superiority as it does against the PAF( PAF has no aircraft to match it ). But then israeli AF is not geared to fight against the SU30 and niether the indian AF against the Israelis. So combat training against each other would would not prove much. There would be one too many restrictions and ROE.

Now cobra manouvers are spectacular to look at an air show-----but how many times does a combat pilot really perform these back breaking display in a combat situation still has to be tested yet. Cobra is a slow speed action, at high speeds such an activity could tear up a plane and render the pilot unconscious----so showmanship aside, this fighter still has to prove itself in actual combat. On paper, it indeed is deadly.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Sq No.15 said:
Well here some thing you might be intrested .

A Times of India news report, quoting IAF sources, said the Indian pilots proved more than a match for their visitors. Responding, a Mindef spokesman said: "We can understand why the Indian media would come out with a sensational story like this.
"We are very pleased with the exercise and the performance of the RSAF's pilots and aircraft. The Indian Air Force has been an excellent host, and as their guest, it would not be courteous for us to comment on the specific outcomes of the exercise."

The RSAF was, however, keener to elaborate on the knowledge it had gained from the exercise, a first between the two countries.
which clearly state that SRAF is not winner in the excersise or else they strongly denied that , or atlest put mild denial.
You have obviously never worked in Govt or at an executive level. ;) At the diplomatic level that is akin to getting a final notice from a debt collector. The Indian media just got rebuked in a very polite but precise manner.

I say again (as I have with a number of other beat ups) that the Indian Air Force never had pilots or planners come out with similar comments because they understand that DACT is a very controlled environment. These kinds of things made really good copy for a moronic journalist keeping the readers bright eyed and happy - but it has no reflection on the actual capability in a free for all engagement. In fact I would be betting London to a Brick that the IAF asked the Indian media to temper their comments in future as it makes them looking very very ordinary at a professional level.

I understand the patriotism, as its expected - but you really REALLY need to understand how DACT works before getting excited about a press report.

BTW, the Australian media can be just as bad, which is why journalists are not allowed near the results as they will not understand what has transpired.

Before getting excited at such events, I suggest you do a search on DACT and read what I have said in the past - it's an article provided by a DACT Op Planner - it's not a response by someone who wouldn't know an Su-27 from an Su-30
 

ajay_ijn

New Member
I think there is too much of hype about Su-30MKI.
The real test for weapons is only in the war not through wargames.

The real test for MKI will be in the event of a war.

For example everybody say the MKI has beaten F-15 eagles in the exercises But if u imagine a war between USAF and IAF at that time F-15 will beat Su-30MKI ,The reason is as simple USAF will have a better and a more capable AWACS,AEW,SPY plane,Satellites,tankers,Electronic warfare platforms and many more.
Even at that stage if MKI beats F-15's then it will be the real hero for IAF and Indian military.

But exercises will give good experience,knowledge etc.

IAF is doing well by conducting exercises with other countries.

This will be invaluable for IAF pilots and relations between each countries will be maintained as well.


Will every Airforce take military exercises as seriously War or as any kind of patriotism related to it?

The answer is no i think.

Don't see which aircraft has beaten which aircraft in the excersices but see what IAF pilots and personnel has learnt from USAF. ;) becoz USAF has more experience of War.
 

mysterious

New Member
I think you completely missed out Gary's posts in which he tells 'why' the Su-30s faired against USAF F-15s and Singaporean F-16s. Sorry to say, but your post serves more to confuse people around here rather simplify things (which Gary had done already). Mods, anyone around? :smokingc:
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
What ajay_ijn says is right. What I've tried to point out is that exercises are not events for anyone to go and beat their chest over. They are scripted by both sides so as to extract a probable training outcome.

Hence why no planners from the IAF, SAF or USAF (or any other exercise) will ever comment about whether their side "won". They know exactly the reasons why certain combat scenarios were run and set up with specific limitations.

Unless the exercise is running "loose" and the potential is for both sides to bring in all their theatre assets - then it's an exercise in parameter training - not platform "invincibility".

ajay_ijn has tried to say this in his own way.
 

adsH

New Member
why do people keep stressing that there platforms are more superior then the others, remember the good old day when the person using the platform was suppose to be feared. sure the spear and the shield was a brand, which was honored but only to represent the warrior him self. well none of that has changed even the most high tech defense system have a minimum requirement for a man in the loop, this will never change (throw books at me but the day computers take over our defense is the day we surrender to the will of others, a word of a computer Scientist). So i say this again don't feer the platform feer the man that utilizes it to wage war. anyone fool can use a spear but if a real soldier uses the same spear then he can rage havoc on his enemy
 

Sq No.15

Banned Member
adsH said:
why do people keep stressing that there platforms are more superior then the others, remember the good old day when the person using the platform was suppose to be feared. sure the spear and the shield was a brand, which was honored but only to represent the warrior him self. well none of that has changed even the most high tech defense system have a minimum requirement for a man in the loop, this will never change (throw books at me but the day computers take over our defense is the day we surrender to the will of others, a word of a computer Scientist). So i say this again don't feer the platform feer the man that utilizes it to wage war. anyone fool can use a spear but if a real soldier uses the same spear then he can rage havoc on his enemy
Oh man , i think you are impressed by RAMBO movie and its character.

Well if i am not wrong SU-30MKI is also made to work as mini AWACS. :smokingc:
 

mysterious

New Member
It remains to be seen (that is 'if' and 'when' PAF gets the J-10 and with what avionics and equipment on board). Commenting on your question now would be quite misleading as hardly any facts are available that would allow for a credible comparison.
 

iceman_f15

New Member
I think it will take PAF a long time planning for procuring good fighters in palnned way to counter the IAF. For IAF wiith Su-30 MKI which is a air superiorty and multi-role fighter which can also act as mini awacs by trasfering the target info via secure data link can easily spot and guide other airfrace in direction of PAF plans which will be reallt threating to PAF.. also PAK does not have good BVR capability as opposed even upgraded MIg-21 has BVR capability in addition to Migrage 2000-5 which IAF is acquirng, Mig-29, Su-30 MKI. Inaddition to these INDA have recently purchased IL-78 tankesr which will give boost to Deep Penration Strike Airface like Jaguars and Mirage 2000, Su-30 MKI as there lottier time will increase and also the range. Also IAF is getting Phalcon which chaneg the whole screnario as u all are aware of Phalcons capabilities. More over pak is depending in 28 or more F-16 which will be no match for Su-30 MKI or MIG-29 as the types which PAF has does not have look down shoot down which only F-16 BLOCK 40/60 have...which PAF do not have.

Hereis is the Web link which will give info on Su- 30 MKI and why it si regarded as Best fighter currently in service expect for F-22 which willtake some time.

http://indianaf.tripod.com/su30mki.htm

http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/comparison-f16-f18-su30-1.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top