USAF vs Indian Air Force

[Chizh]

Somebody knows additional details of it?

 

3rd Wing Explains 'Cope India' Exercise

 

Aviation Week & Space Technology 10/04/2004, page 50

David A. Fulghum Elmendorf AFB, Alaska

 

3rd Wing explains what happened when U.S. pilots faced innovative Indian air force tactics

Indian 'Scare'

 

The losing performance of F-15Cs in simulated air-to-air combat against the Indian air force this year is being perceived by some, both in the U.S. and overseas, as a weakening of American capabilities, and it is generating taunts from within the competitive U.S. fighter community.

 

The Cope India exercise also seemingly shocked some in Congress and the Pentagon who used the event to renew the call for modernizing the U.S. fighter force with stealthy F/A-22s and F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.

 

The reasons for the drubbing have gone largely unexplained and been misunderstood, according to those based here with the 3rd Wing who participated. Two major factors stand out: None of the six 3rd Wing F-15Cs was equipped with the newest long-range, active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars. These Raytheon APG-63(V)2 radars were designed to find small and stealthy targets. At India's request, the U.S. agreed to mock combat at 3-to-1 odds and without the use of simulated long-range, radar-guided AIM-120 Amraams that even the odds with beyond-visual-range kills.

 

These same U.S. participants say the Indian pilots showed innovation and flexibility in their tactics. They also admit that they came into the exercise underrating the training and tactics of the pilots they faced. Instead of typical Cold War-style, ground-controlled interceptions, the Indians varied aircraft mixes, altitudes and formations. Indian air force planners never reinforced failure or repeated tactics that the U.S. easily repelled. Moreover, the IAF's airborne commanders changed tactics as opportunities arose. Nor did U.S. pilots believe they faced only India's top guns. Instead, they said that at least in some units they faced a mix of experienced and relatively new Indian fighter and strike pilots.

 

Maj. Mark A. Snowden, the 3rd Wing's chief of air-to-air tactics and a participant in Cope India, spoke for the 13 U.S. pilots who attended the exercise. They flew six F-15Cs, each equipped with a fighter data link for rapid exchange of target information, AIM-9Xs and a Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System, he says. The aircraft had been to Singapore for another exercise and for the long, six-week jaunt it was decided not to bring along the additional maintenance package needed to support AESA-equipped F-15Cs.

 

Cope India was held Feb. 15-28 at Gwalior, about 150 mi. south of Delhi, where the Indian air force has its Tactics Air Combat Development Establishment, which operates late-model MiG-21 Fishbeds as fighter escorts and MiG-27 Floggers as strike aircraft. Aerospace officials who have heard the classified brief on the exercise say the MiG-21s were equipped with a "gray-market" Bison radar and avionics upgrade.

 

Mica-armed Dassault Mirages 2000s are also stationed there. Brought in for the exercise were Sukhoi Su-30s (but not the newest Su-30 MKIs) carrying simulated AA-11s and AA-12 Adders. There also were five MiG-29 Flankers involved in a peripheral role and an Antonov An-32 Cline as a simulated AWACS.

 

"The outcome of the exercise boils down to [the fact that] they ran tactics that were more advanced than we expected," Snowden says. "India had developed its own air tactics somewhat in a vacuum. They had done some training with the French that we knew about, but we did not expect them to be a very well-trained air force. That was silly.

 

"They could come up with a game plan, but if it wasn't working they would call an audible and change [tactics in flight]," he says. "They made good decisions about when to bring their strikers in. The MiG-21s would be embedded with a Flogger for integral protection. There was a data link between the Flankers that was used to pass information. [using all their assets,] they built a very good [radar] picture of what we were doing and were able to make good decisions about when to roll [their aircraft] in and out."

 

Aerospace industry officials say there's some indication that the MiG-21s also may have been getting a data feed from other airborne radars that gave them improved situational awareness of the airborne picture.

 

Generally the combat scenario was to have four F-15s flying at any time against about 12 Indian aircraft. While the U.S. pilots normally train to four versus 12, that takes into account at least two of the U.S. aircraft having AESA radar and being able to make the first, beyond-visual-range shots. For the exercise, both sides restricted long-range shots.

 

"That's what the Indians wanted to do," Snowden says. "That [handicap] really benefits a numerically superior force because you can't whittle away some of their force at long range. They were simulating active missiles [including] AA-12s." This means the missile has its own radar transmitter and doesn't depend on the launch aircraft's radar after launch. With the older AA-10 Alamo, the launching fighter has to keep its target illuminated with radar so the U.S. pilots would know when they were being targeted. But with the AA-12, they didn't know if they had been targeted. The Mirage 2000s carried the active Mica missile. Aerospace industry officials said that some of the radars the U.S. pilots encountered, including that of the Mirage 2000s, exhibited different characteristics than those on standard versions of the aircraft.

 

 

Indian planners combined the use of top-line fighters like this Su-30 with older types and impressive, innovative tactics.

Credit: USAF TSGT. KEITH BROWN

 

 

The U.S. pilots used no active missiles, and the AIM-120 Amraam capability was limited to a 20-naut.-mi. range while keeping the target illuminated when attacking and 18 naut. mi. when defending, as were all the missiles in the exercise.

 

"When we saw that they were a more professional air force, we realized that within the constraints of the exercise we were going to have a very difficult time," Snowden says. "In general, it looked like they ran a broad spectrum of tactics and they were adaptive. They would analyze what we were doing and then try something else. They weren't afraid to bring the strikers in high or low. They would move them around so that we could never anticipate from day to day what we were going to see."

 

By comparison, the U.S. pilots don't think they offered the Indians any surprises. The initial tactic is to run a wall with all four F-15s up front. That plays well when the long-range missiles and AESA radar are in play.

 

"You know we're there and we're not hiding," Snowden says. "But we didn't have the beyond-visual-range shot or the numerical advantage. Eventually we were just worn down by the numbers. They were very smart about it. Their goal was to get to a target area, engage the target and then withdraw without prolonging the fight. If there were a couple of Eagles still alive away from the target area, they would keep them pinned in, get done with the target and then egress with all their forces.

 

"All their aircraft seemed to be capable of breaking out [targets] and shooting at the ranges the exercise allowed," he says. "We generally don't train to an active missile threat [like the Mirage's Mica or the AA-12 for the Russian-built aircraft], and that was one of the things that caused us some problems."

 

USAF planners here see Cope India as the first step in an annual series of exchange exercises.

[GGTharos]

This is old; it was much discussed and someone from the air-force spoke with someone who was at the exercise (so this is 3rd hand info)

 

But apparently shoot down depended on who locked who FIRST, and nothing else. No ECM was used, no advanced radar modes, etcetc.

 

The AA12 is rumored to have an unreliable (particularely, not robust against countermeasures) seeker, for example, which probably wasn't modelled. The AMRAAM launches were severely restricted. The newest equipment was not used by any side, and it was a 12 on 4 engagement which simply isn't very realistic even if its what they train on.

[olaleier]

There was many threads about this before summer in the Lock On - Aviation forum at Ubi, many bad threads as well. :lol:

 

The detail in the report you pasted pretty much sums it up. In addition to agreeing to a disadvantageous set-piece situation, the USAF underestimated the IAF tactics.

 

The result says more about the quality of IAF than it does the lack of quality in the USAF. It does not say much about how an airwar between the IAF and the USAF would fare.

 

There is probably much info at http://www.acig.org , in either the forums or the articles, but it can sometimes be hard to search. (you have to register for the forums)

[SUBS17]

There was also a thread in the Fighterops forum, those F-15C were not fitted with AESA. Also you cannot really take that as gospil since as the various senarios were played out in a certain way to test both sides. One thing is certain, the Indian pilots do more flying hours than US pilots. Also there was a safety concern in some of those engagements by the US pilots. You can't really judge the US or Indian Air Force by this exercise as we don't know the real details of how it was set up or who did what during the engagements.

cheers

Subs

[britgliderpilot]

The AA12 is rumored to have an unreliable (particularely, not robust against countermeasures) seeker, for example, which probably wasn't modelled. The AMRAAM launches were severely restricted. The newest equipment was not used by any side, and it was a 12 on 4 engagement which simply isn't very realistic even if its what they train on.

 

IIRC, they didn't simulate using the AMRAAM in this exercise.

 

 

What this exercise really proved was that the Indians were far better trained than the USAF expected them to be - but that's about it.

[uhoh7]

very interesting post.

 

Does anyone have details or links on the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System?

 

all the best

 

uhoh7

[kydius]

There also were five MiG-29 Flankers involved in a peripheral role and an Antonov An-32 Cline as a simulated AWACS.

Nice... :roll:

So where were the Su-27 Fulcrums :?

[Guest DeathAngelBR]

Probably facing the F-15 TomCat's.

 

fneb

[SUBS17]

Probably facing the F-15 TomCat's.

 

fneb

 

F-15 Eagle

F-14 Tomcat

[Guest DeathAngelBR]

No shit. You didn't read the previous replies, eh?

[Captain R]

Those are cool excersises. Wish someone made a DVD about them!

[crazyleggs]

You can't really make anything of the outcome as there were severe training restrictions imposed on the US side. They would really like more F-22s...

 

Also, as britgliderpilot said, main thing learned here is to never underestimate your opponent. A common mistake by Western AirForces.

[Alfa]

The AA12 is rumored to have an unreliable (particularely, not robust against countermeasures) seeker, for example, which probably wasn't modelled.

 

I have yet to see any - even remotely- credible source providing any kind of evidence or intelligent arguments as to why the "AA12 seeker" should be "unreliable". As a matter of fact whenever I hear this claim and ask the people who make it what they base this on, it immedeatly becomes painfully clear that they know absolutely nothing what so ever about the 9B-1348E seeker - its construction, specs functionality or even what it is called :) .

[Alfa]

There was also a thread in the Fighterops forum, those F-15C were not fitted with AESA.

 

....so?

 

The standard Indian Su-30Ks are equipped with the N001 twist cassegrain radar and not the N011M phased array set(only the -MKIs have those).......which means that the the Indian Su-30s participating in the exercise would be much more restricted by the nature of their radars(N001) than the F-15Cs would with their APG-63s. :)

 

I am also a little baffled about this bit:

 

Brought in for the exercise were Sukhoi Su-30s (but not the newest Su-30 MKIs) carrying simulated AA-11s and AA-12 Adders

 

How?....AFAIK the "Su-30s" participating in the exercise were standard Su-30Ks, which dont support the R-77 at all :?

[britgliderpilot]

I am also a little baffled about this bit:

 

Brought in for the exercise were Sukhoi Su-30s (but not the newest Su-30 MKIs) carrying simulated AA-11s and AA-12 Adders

 

How?....AFAIK the "Su-30s" participating in the exercise were standard Su-30Ks, which dont support the R-77 at all :?

 

Reading that article carefully, it's full of holes in all sorts of places . . . . Bison being grey market, MiG29 Flanker, the USAF not using active missiles but restricting AMRAAM launches . . . . . shrug.

 

I'd guess your complaint falls into the same category.

[Alfa]

Reading that article carefully, it's full of holes in all sorts of places . . . . Bison being grey market, MiG29 Flanker, the USAF not using active missiles but restricting AMRAAM launches . . . . . shrug.

 

I'd guess your complaint falls into the same category.

 

Yes exactly Britglider :)

 

As you mentioned, there is a lot of contradictory information in the article, which quite frankly makes you wonder about the people who wrote it.

 

"MiG29 Flanker" ( :lol: ) is also a "grey area" because India operates both the "baseline" MiG-29(no R-77s) as well as the MiG-29S with R-77 compatibility - it obviously makes a difference which type they are referring to.

 

And yeah I also stumbled over this bit....

 

The U.S. pilots used no active missiles, and the AIM-120 Amraam capability was limited to a 20-naut.-mi. range

 

....apparently the author didnt realise that the AIM-120 is an active missile :roll:

[BIOLOG]

That article is well fishy...

Do you smell that smelly smell? :D

[GGTharos]

You can't really make anything of the outcome as there were severe training restrictions imposed on the US side. They would really like more F-22s...

 

Also, as britgliderpilot said, main thing learned here is to never underestimate your opponent. A common mistake by Western AirForces.

 

Common? Is that why the F-15 has a 100+ to 1 kill ratio? ;)

[britgliderpilot]

You can't really make anything of the outcome as there were severe training restrictions imposed on the US side. They would really like more F-22s...

 

Also, as britgliderpilot said, main thing learned here is to never underestimate your opponent. A common mistake by Western AirForces.

 

Common? Is that why the F-15 has a 100+ to 1 kill ratio? ;)

 

Nope - the Israeli estimation of their enemies was about right.

 

They just kicked arse :wink:

 

 

Bear in mind that the F15 hasn't gone up against a *serious* opponent in the A2A arena yet . . . . the Indians were better prepared and trained than anyone the USAF has faced in combat. Good for the Indians.

[D-Scythe]

Okay fine, this article is full of loops and holes, but that doesn't detract from the main point its getting across. How many people take the Bible word for word? :roll:

 

The exercise as a whole does not prove anything, as the F-15Cs were simulating Red Air, probably a Pakistani J-7 BVR threat and an F-16A WVR threat. The F-15Cs were outnumbered and outgunned, AIM-120 launches from BVR were restricted and multiple target engagement forbidden. AIM-120s were used as AIM-7s, that's why the article said that no active radar missiles were really employed.

 

And before anyone says the strikers also factor into the 3 : 1 ratio, remember that strikers carry AAMs too. And that's a common mistake made by everyone.

 

As a comparison, Luftwaffe MiG-29Gs and Nellis F-16C/Ns are used to simulate Red Air all the time for Western air forces, and they get beat most of the time, for exactly that reason: they are simulating a third world country flying MiG-29s and Su-27s. Does that mean that their aircrew or their aircraft are not up to par?

 

Of course not. Pilots flying Red Air are among the most highly trained and experienced pilots...You're a somebody when you walk into the Nellis bar with a Red Air patch stitched on your shoulder.

 

And JJ Alfa, there has been some proof for at least a little bit of vulnerability in Russian radar seekers. Take Ethiopia, where MiGs and Flankers flown by Russian and Ukrainian mercenaries (and native Ethiopian and Eritrean pilots, but they can be dismissed as inexperienced) exchanged volleys of R-27REs - and the Flanker carries a lot of those - only to have to kill each other in a dogfight with R-73s.

 

BUT I realize that there are probably some other reasons to contribute to this so we won't take this as an indication of how Russian weapons work in general, just as this exercise is NOT an indication of how F-15Cs are becoming less effective to updated MiG-21s and Su-30s.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

BTW, the F-15C kill ratio is 102 to 0, including 11 MiG-29s in A2A combat, over half of which were WVR. But the MiG is not really a serious threat so close, you know, Archer and all... :roll:

[GGTharos]

The forces operating those MiGs may have actually been using AA8's...who knows ... but anyway.

 

AFAIK the Ethiopia-Eritrea thing offers zero indication of R_27 performance. It says -nothing-. The R-27 models aren't mentioned, launch parameters aren't mentioned, nada.

 

Who knows wether these were export versions incapable of ECCM? Maybe you can spit out the window and they'll lock on to that or something, if you get my drift. First chaff bundle off the crate, they go for it.

 

One of the R-27's did get a prox hit, and downed a MiG, but for the most part they were all dodged or they plain missed. This isn't too surprising if we talka bout experienced pilots who knows the operational parameters of these weapons: They know exactly how to defeat them. Besides, the US AIM-7 wouldn't have done any better in a similar situation (both sied fielding it)

[britgliderpilot]

So the sum total of this thread so far . . . . .

 

"We can't tell anything about any of this, there isn't enough information."

 

 

I love the Internet :D

 

 

Still, at least it's better than "OMGOMGOMGteh fl4nk3r pwwwnnnzzzZZZzz!!!11!!one!!!111!!eleven!!"

[BIOLOG]

LMFAO. You really got me rolling on the floor in hysteric laughter mate. Thanks! :D

 

Now then. First of all you would not know a single reliable thing about ethiopian incident. Neither would I or anyone else for that matter. Most of info which is published about it not particularly reliable to say the least... Of cause you could be working in CIA or something but even then you would probably not know the whole story. And you would probably have enough sence to keep what you know to yourself in that particular case :wink: . Anyway from what I heard they used R-27R's (I am quite sure not R-27RE's, but have no reliable proof), and these missiles were not even maintained correctly (now this part is relatively reliable).

 

Ethiopia story is even more unreliable then this article, which has tons of holes in it. This article is, IMHO quite contarminated with propaganda, to make senate provide more money for F-22's...

 

Also, regarding these MiG-29 kills you mentioned... They were in such state that I am not at all surprised that thy got shot down. Many of them didn't have ammunition, working radars and RWR's. So not a particularly worthy opponent against F-15. Still they got pretty close to F-15's undetected. What was it, 20km? With AWACS in the area :D ?

 

Anyways I do appoligise if I offended anyone in this post... Lets keep this argument civil, as it is now... Don't spike a flame war lol.

[GGTharos]

Yes, they got pretty close, undetected, and without detecting anything themselves. Works both ways, you know? ;)

[Alfa]

That article is well fishy...

Do you smell that smelly smell? :D

 

Yeah but I dont think it is fish.... more likely to be BS :lol: