F15C vs MIG 29 So dificult?

[Guest Cali]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilotasso

F-Pole means that once you fire your missiles you turn to one side to make the target stand on the edge of the radar scope in order to decrease aproximation rate and minimize his missiles range.

 

I always thought that you put the target at the edge of your radar before firing? Can someone clarify this??????

 

Pilotasso is staying when you fire and turn and put the target at the edge. That makes the missile travel farther to get to you. While your missile is getting closer to him (the bandit) that's if he flies straight at you still. You dont have have to put the target at the edge before you fir everytime. Where did you get that from?

[S77th-GOYA]

You don't f-pole a 120 shot. If you do, you're putting yourself in dangerous territory too long.

[xisko]

I think the F-Pole is a good tactic cause you can win a few seconds to destroy your target and after that evade the incoming missiles if they get launched. And another tactics agains Migs?

[Bouddha]

Eventually the relative realism of these aircraft should be brought in-line and then MiGs won't really stand much of a chance against F-15s (In the exact same way F-16's don't stand much of a chance against F-15C BVR ... and in fact, MiG will do even worse if it's old version like A or S.)

 

Hello,

 

why does the F-16 don't stand much against F-15 BVR ?

 

regards

[Pilotasso]

He was provoking me Boudha. :D He knows Im a falcon lover. ;)

 

The F-16 has the same weapons the same radar technology, only it has less range, that is, when not considering the F-16 smaller RCS and that of the Eagle wich is much greater. The F-16 will most certainly detect the F-15 far enough to plan an AMRAAM shoot at it. Although I do know the F-15's usualy fly higher for greater missile range but thats tactics I guess. The F-15 can be employed in fighter sweeps as the Falcon should be used as a point defense fighter.

 

In AA BVR arena the F-15 enjoys advantage but it is not so great that it can slack in front of the Falcon. If both were ever to clash the F-15 drivers would have to fly to its most or it would be fended off.

 

The Mig suffers from poor pilot/intrument interface, and less efficient weapons and a radar that wont impress anyone (unless you go for recent upgrades with AESA). Its strengths is down low and close to home base because it has very short range. Shorter than the F-16's.

[GGTharos]

Actually yes, the Eagle's advantage -is- that great, wether you like it or not ;)

 

No viper driver wants to face F-15's in BVR, period. This has been a well documented trend in what viper pilots say about fighting F-15's.

 

Could be a combination of things - eg, the radar is more powerful, but in turn the jammer may also be able to overpower the 16's less powerful radar and screw things up for the viper driver. It's been said than even the good old F-4's analog radar can detect targets at longer ranges and hold onto an STT lock much better than the viper. It would seem that antenna size matters A LOT, processing power etc aside.

 

At the very least, the Eagle gets to set up the engagement the way -it- wants, letting the 16 get blindsided ... but I hear the 'we get to shoot first' thing a lot ;)

 

It really seems that 'having the same weapons' doesn't matter quite that much if you don't have the radar power to match the opposition.

[ScEBlack1]

Pilotasso you said that you should not turn music on untill you have been locked by enemy first due to the increased range that music gives the mig/su HOJ capabilities...could you please elaborate on this a little further, i would like to know more about ECM when and how to use advice. Also what is your prefered loadout for the F-15, thanks.

[Pilotasso]

Pilotasso you said that you should not turn music on untill you have been locked by enemy first due to the increased range that music gives the mig/su HOJ capabilities...could you please elaborate on this a little further, i would like to know more about ECM when and how to use advice. Also what is your prefered loadout for the F-15, thanks.

 

To be honest I should have been more carefull with that what I said.

ECM is like a big flashlight. If you've been spoted you can blind your oposition but he will know wich direction your at even though he cant take a good look at you.

 

You shouldnt use ECM all the time because at long distace and at low altitude you will betray your presence when otherwise you would remain invisible, your oponents will see the the vertical srobe on their radars.

In other situations when your engaging and you are about to engage and still away from missiles MAX range and if you feel like making the enemy uncertain when he should fire, you can use ECM but be carefull, if he does fire before burn through you wont get launch warning at all untill that hapens. In some situations 1 or 2 seconds before impact= very bad.

 

So you see, you have to be very selective when swiching it on, it takes experience and a bit of common sense.

 

As for F-15 loads I usualy carry 6 AIM-120's and 2 AIM-7's.

 

AIM-120's are best used against targets in TWS mode (when they are not jamming) and they will only know they are being attacked when they go active. The 2 Sparrows are there for Bluffing :D When some people abuse ECM I give them a real scare by leting one off and when I get burn through the enemy will recieve both the lock warning a the launch warning but since that missile is smi-active only they wont have any idea at all where the missile is (unlike the 120's wich are active and give specific warning) and sometimes they do mistakes even when the AIM-7 has no chance of hitting at all (sometimes I shoot beyond range to give them the impression Im closer and more dangerous than I realy am to force them on defensive).

 

Hope this helps.

[Guest Cali]

To be honest I should have been more carefull with that what I said.

ECM is like a big flashlight. If you've been spoted you can blind your oposition but he will know wich direction your at even though he cant take a good look at you.

 

You shouldnt use ECM all the time because at long distace and at low altitude you will betray your presence when otherwise you would remain invisible, your oponents will see the the vertical srobe on their radars.

In other situations when your engaging and you are about to engage and still away from missiles MAX range and if you feel like making the enemy uncertain when he should fire, you can use ECM but be carefull, if he does fire before burn through you wont get launch warning at all untill that hapens. In some situations 1 or 2 seconds before impact= very bad.

 

So you see, you have to be very selective when swiching it on, it takes experience and a bit of common sense.

 

Hopefully more people will read this, ECM on is NOT, I repeat NOT part of the start up precedure.

[ScEBlack1]

I understand most about ECM, but, im curious as to when im jamming and the enemy fires a missle before burnthru i wont get a warning until seconds before? I have had this happen before and i couldnt figure out how it happened ( i know now ). Is this the same for the enemy and my 120? if hes jamming and i lock the hoj and fire he doesnt get a launch warning till second before? thanks for the help. I like the aim 7 bluff will try that sometime to force defensive.

[ScEBlack1]

Yeah Cali i understand completely, i use my music accordingly for sure.

[Pilotasso]

Actually yes, the Eagle's advantage -is- that great, wether you like it or not ;)

 

I think you tend to exarcebate it a litle bit, you speak about the F-15 almost the same way I do about the F-22.

 

No viper driver wants to face F-15's in BVR, period. This has been a well documented trend in what viper pilots say about fighting F-15's.

 

I would agree that going against the F-15 in falcons would be a gamble against the odds but I think you are heavily downplaying the capabilities of lighter fighters, some of wich-no just the F-16- boast some realy awsome toys and upgrades. There are some stuff that is not documented, and sometimes I do come across "hints" that what is public some times gives the wrong idea. One example of this is that in exercises my countries MLU aircraft have consistently out detected other MLU aircraft giving belgium and dutch pilots some raised eyebrows. Reason of this? I am not sure but I suspect there might be a difference between our signal processors even though the radars are all the same APG-66V2.

Despite trouble at the exit of our aircraft in prodution lines, the ones that do work flawlessly have caused some sensational apreciations for range at wich this radar can monitor the airspace in front of it.

BTW our MLU are equiped with IFF interrogators.

 

 

 

It's been said than even the good old F-4's analog radar can detect targets at longer ranges and hold onto an STT lock much better than the viper. It would seem that antenna size matters A LOT, processing power etc aside.

 

Well, its not the first time I see you mention this but, forgive me for doubting it because according to what I have studdied across years, the phantoms radar wasnt too good looking down. If it was so better holding the lock why did the Germans swich to the APG-66 on their Phantoms? ;)

What I have always heard is that the Phamtom radar like all non solid state electronic based radars were irky to operate and had serious reliability issues.

 

The graphs I have on my books shows the basic APG-66 confortably out ranging the one on the Phantom. (I supect wich scenaroius could cause what you said to be true but Im wainting for you to say it in order to fully show you how specific those situations are, and how many more other problems of the APQ-xxx radars you would have to live with)

 

At the very least, the Eagle gets to set up the engagement the way -it- wants, letting the 16 get blindsided ... but I hear the 'we get to shoot first' thing a lot ;)

 

NOT the same as saying "the 16 wasnt able to get a shot off", nor how much time difference that was between the shots, and then we would have to draw specific scenarious wich of these missiles have spent more time in the air and wich is flying faster in a given moment of the closure, but then I wouldnt want to get to that. ;)

[GGTharos]

I think you tend to exarcebate it a litle bit, you speak about the F-15 almost the same way I do about the F-22.

 

Not my exaggeration -> Viper pilot testimony ;)

 

I would agree that going against the F-15 in falcons would be a gamble against the odds but I think you are heavily downplaying the capabilities of lighter fighters, some of wich-no just the F-16- boast some realy awsome toys and upgrades. There are some stuff that is not documented, and sometimes I do come across "hints" that what is public some times gives the wrong idea. One example of this is that in exercises my countries MLU aircraft have consistently out detected other MLU aircraft giving belgium and dutch pilots some raised eyebrows. Reason of this? I am not sure but I suspect there might be a difference between our signal processors even though the radars are all the same APG-66V2.

Despite trouble at the exit of our aircraft in prodution lines, the ones that do work flawlessly have caused some sensational apreciations for range at wich this radar can monitor the airspace in front of it.

BTW our MLU are equiped with IFF interrogators.

 

I'll try to make it very simple: When it comes to radar of say, similar technology, bigger is better and it always will be (given the same application) ... so long as this is taken into context.

 

Bigger antenna, more memory, more processors - all of this is 'bigger'. Space has a lot to do with 'bigger' right now as well. So does cleanliness and amount of input power, etcetc. The twin-engine F-15 might well be capable of feeding more power at a better level than the F-16 for example.

 

Well, its not the first time I see you mention this but, forgive me for doubting it because accordint to what I have studdied for years, the phantoms radar wasnt too good looking down. If it was so better holding

 

More specifically it couldn't look down - not really the point. ;) Look-up the F-4's radar was capable of outperfoming the F-16's radar, is the point.

 

the lock why did the Germans swich to the APG-66 on their Phantoms? ;)

What I have always heard is that the Phamtom radar like all non solid state electronic based radars were irky to operate and had serious reliability issues.

 

You just answered your own question :)

 

The graphs I have on my books shows the basic APG-66 confortably out ranging the one on the Phantom. (I supect wich scenaroius could cause what you said to be true but Im wainting for you to say it in order to fully show you how specific those situations are, and how many more other problems of the APQ-xxx radars you would have to live with)

 

I got that one straight from an F-4/F-16 operator, he didn't provide details sadly, but he was pretty adamant about the F-4's old analog radar being much more difficult to disrupt (when in good working condition) in STT than that of an F-16.

 

NOT the same as saying the 16 wasnt able to get a shot off, nor how much time difference that was between the shots, and then we would have to draw specific scenarious wich of these missiles have spent more time in the air and wich is flying faster in a given moment of the closure, but then I wouldnt want to get to that. ;)

 

Yeah yeah. F-15s will always clobber F-16's like baby seals in BVR, just live with it ;)

[Pilotasso]

LOL :)

 

 

I got that one straight from an F-4/F-16 operator, he didn't provide details sadly, but he was pretty adamant about the F-4's old analog radar being much more difficult to disrupt (when in good working condition) in STT than that of an F-16.

 

 

To add another note here:

 

The doctrines about fighting in an F-4 and F-16 are totaly different. For example in the F-4 with sparrows you would want to get lower than the target to fire. Back then the oposition would consist on Atol armed Mig-21's or 23's and you could afford to loose range by going lower. In the F-16 you will want to fly higher to get more range with your weapons, for letting a sidwinder off (if the pilot you talked with flew both, chances are that he did so a while ago when BVR reach for the F-16 was something new) .

 

Naturaly it is easier to loose a target on the ground clutter than it is looking up with a radar that wont loose the lock with zero dopler shift. But then employ both radars on todays scenarios, looking down and with reduced RCS and better ECM and shooting BVR missiles, and the APQ is a paperweight...

 

In my view your pilot freind is comparing radar capabilities in 2 very different eras, like comparing aples with oranges.

[nscode]

It would seem that antenna size matters A LOT, processing power etc aside.

 

not that it would just seem that way, but in terms of signal power (both send & recive) it's a fact that it's way more important to have a good antenna than to boost the signal (and this is true in any radio application)

[peterj]

Time to loose the baby seals, we'll hook you up with some Gripens' :P

[Pilotasso]

not that it would just seem that way, but in terms of signal power (both send & recive) it's a fact that it's way more important to have a good antenna than to boost the signal (and this is true in any radio application)

 

:D

 

Processing power or signal processor does not boost the signal. They simply have more CPU power to distinguish targets in a mess. Its like nullifying low res Anti-aliasing to get a tally on black dots on a radars brain. :D

 

Unfortunatly for you this is where the russian aircraft lagged (the other was cockpit integration and SA, no matter how macho you are with dials, its does give the edge)

 

Time to loose the baby seals, we'll hook you up with some Gripens' :P

 

Last time I chekked, those baby seals have been giving the gripens a run for their money. ;)

[GGTharos]

:D

 

Processing power or signal processor does not boost the signal. They simply have more CPU power to distinguish targets in a mess. Its like nullifying low res Anti-aliasing to get a tally on black dots on a radars brain. :D

 

Unfortunatly for you this is where the russian aircraft lagged (the other was cockpit integration and SA, no matter how macho you are with dials, its does give the edge)

 

If your antenna sucks, your signal sucks, and your processor isn't getting an opportunity to do its job ... basically you're looking at a weakest link srt of relationship in this case.

 

The AD processor doesn't have the hardest job in the world anyway, and it'll certainly foul everything up if you don't give it a reasonably good signal ... the part that comes after it (data collection/aggregation processor) won't be able to cope if your AD gives it crummy data to play with - the algos in particular won't cope either.

 

And small antenna=less quality, that's just the way things work. Not only do you SPRAY your power output in more area, but you RECEIVE less power on the smaller surface, thus allowing closer returns (even ones that are rejected during filtering) to mess up the gain on the antenna so you won't be looking 'as far as you could'.

[nscode]

:DProcessing power or signal processor does not boost the signal. They simply have more CPU power to distinguish targets in a mess. Its like nullifying low res Anti-aliasing to get a tally on black dots on a radars brain. :D

 

And where did I say they do? I was talking about different things - purely of signal strenght and "quality". By giving better quality signal to your processor you efectivly multiply it's power. There are also other tricks and techniques for preprocessing to give you more usability for what you have - e.g. adding some known noise (a process called dithering) for which you can calculate the effects it will do to your signal and you effectivly turn a 2-bit A/D converter to a 12 bit one :) And all this stuff is essential. We can talk about better or worse processors, but one way or the other, the processing power you have is very limitted, and you need to do anything you can to help it. But, to get back at my original point, you can't do anything if you don't have a decent antenna. I would put it at 51vs49% for imortance of antenna vs everything else.

[xisko]

Se nos fue la olla.

 

Are we still talking about F-15 vs Mig?

[nscode]

No... radars in general :)

[Xealot]

Se nos fue la olla.

 

Are we still talking about F-15 vs Mig?

 

Things tends to get off topic after a while on this forum ;)

[xisko]

yeah!! but always here, and all forums... anyway, i get the info a i wanted, thanks all.