Red Flag Su-30 MKI Lectures Video

[Cosmonaut]

IMO the Blog report seems more accurate with good explanations of what actually went on. "Not one Su30 shot down in close air combat" is definitely not the impression I got from the US pilot.

[tflash]

I do not deny there is something to learn from the US pilot's analysis. For the Indian party, I guess the most important achievement is the fact they were able to participate in a sizeable number, mastering all the logistics details, and adapting to multinational procedures. It is certainly proof they are capable of significant force projection. They also seem to be one of the few that can routinely operate with aerial tankers using Russian gear. Seems to me that their Flankers are a real capability, that can be integrated in an international effort.

[wasserfall]

As always the truth is somewere in between i guess.

 

But the story about the saturn-Lyulka AL31FP being prone to Fod or not as reliable can not be confirmed imho, as the F15 pilot is talking about Tumansky engines! (commonly used in Mig,s)

Would there be more or less fod on the runway when you talk about 1 minite or 45 seconds interval between take off? and theSU30MKI has fod covers! Anyone ever seen a Russian runway or parking area?

 

About the drag the SU30MKI vectoring engines create compared with the 2d vectoring engines of the Raptor i don't know, fact is that earlyer Su37 testbed had 2d vectoring and this culminated in the 3d vectoring by fitting the nozzle movement at an angle, so the Russians have tested both solutions.

 

Cheers!!

[Pilotasso]

IMO the Blog report seems more accurate with good explanations of what actually went on. "Not one Su30 shot down in close air combat" is definitely not the impression I got from the US pilot.

 

 

Theres is a bit of contradiction with the claims of use, non use of TVC as well as losses.

[X-man]

Isnt getting shot down half the point with RF. You learn from the mistakes and avoid doing the same in the real scenarios... :huh:

I don't see why the guy in the debrief would lie - makes no sense to me, but stuff doesn't have to make sense to be true.

There are quite a few factual errors in the debrief from the F-15 Pilot. The MiG-21Bison does not have Israeli radar/ECM, but rather Russian/Indian ones. Also, the MKI does not have Tumansky engines but Lyulka-Saturn ones.

 

And the fact that it was a debreif for 'Senior retired U.S. Air Force officers' makes me wonder if he might have "strayed" of reality to spice it up abit :)

Edited November 22, 2008 by X-man

[Vekkinho]

As always the truth is somewere in between i guess.

 

But the story about the saturn-Lyulka AL31FP being prone to Fod or not as reliable can not be confirmed imho, as the F15 pilot is talking about Tumansky engines! (commonly used in Mig,s)

Would there be more or less fod on the runway when you talk about 1 minite or 45 seconds interval between take off? and theSU30MKI has fod covers! Anyone ever seen a Russian runway or parking area?

 

About the drag the SU30MKI vectoring engines create compared with the 2d vectoring engines of the Raptor i don't know, fact is that earlyer Su37 testbed had 2d vectoring and this culminated in the 3d vectoring by fitting the nozzle movement at an angle, so the Russians have tested both solutions.

 

Cheers!!

 

I can't say for sure but if Flankers depart from the same runway as Falcons do than you can be sure there no debris on the runway ;).

[RedTiger]

IMO the Blog report seems more accurate with good explanations of what actually went on. "Not one Su30 shot down in close air combat" is definitely not the impression I got from the US pilot.

 

That's the biggist ":huh:" for me. The other stuff isn't as important. For example, the bit about the datalink. The USAF guy might just have assumed they were using their own datalink since they couldn't use NATO's when in reality, they weren't.

 

However the discrepancy in the close combat part is interesting.

 

"For starters … not a single Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter was `shot down’ in close air combat missions at the Mountain Home air base. In fact, none of the Sukhois were even close to being shot down in the 10 odd one on one sorties which were planned for the first two days of the exercises at Mountain Home. These one on one engagements featured USAF jets such as the F-15 and F-16 in close air engagements against the Su-30 MKI. The majority of the kills claimed in these engagements were granted to the Indian Air Force with the remainder of these being no-results. Indian Air Force Sukhois did use their famed thrust vectoring in these one on one engagements."

 

Compare this to what the USAF pilot said:

 

1. F-15s "dominated"

 

2. The Indian pilots were amazed at the F-15s ability to BFM with an actual combat load.

 

3. The Indians used their thrust vectoring in scissors but due to the aerodynamics of how the TV worked, it seemed to hinder them more than help.

 

4. The Indians ceased to want to do 1 vs. 1 after losing engagements.

 

There is a significant contradiction!

 

 

And the fact that it was a debreif for 'Senior retired U.S. Air Force officers' makes me wonder if he might have "strayed" of reality to spice it up abit :)

 

Wha...? :huh: Where'd you hear that? I'll be perfectly honest here...if that briefing was for retired USAF brass, that would hurt its credibility a bit in my eyes. The one saving grace, though, is that he did give an honest opinion on the capability of the MKI vs. the F-15 and F-16. That's either the hallmark of an honest person or a skilled and crafty bullshitter. ;)

[X-man]

Wha...? :huh: Where'd you hear that? I'll be perfectly honest here...if that briefing was for retired USAF brass, that would hurt its credibility a bit in my eyes. The one saving grace, though, is that he did give an honest opinion on the capability of the MKI vs. the F-15 and F-16. That's either the hallmark of an honest person or a skilled and crafty bullshitter. ;)

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/RED11058.xml&headline=USAF%20Pilot%20Critiques%20Red%20Flag%20Action&channel=defense

That opinion comes from an unidentified, senior F-15 pilot taped while briefing senior retired U.S. Air Force officers about the most recent Red Flag exercise. The video was made available online at YouTube.com.

[GGTharos]

There are quite a few factual errors in the debrief from the F-15 Pilot. The MiG-21Bison does not have Israeli radar/ECM, but rather Russian/Indian ones. Also, the MKI does not have Tumansky engines but Lyulka-Saturn ones.

 

... which, however, aren't important. The flying part is. I could tell you all the wrong part numbers for your flanker, but if I'm sitting in your elbow in some evil capitalist jet fighter, you probably wouldn't be worrying about that (or whether my evil capitalist engines are GE's or PW's!!! ) ;)

 

And the fact that it was a debreif for 'Senior retired U.S. Air Force officers' makes me wonder if he might have "strayed" of reality to spice it up abit :)

 

I doubt it. Remember that this was a brief (15 min) presentation, and so he simply provided highlights, not a very in-depth, detailed briefing. You should thus only look at the highlights of this presentation.

 

Those would be:

1. Certain turn numbers were mentioned

2. Certain ways of 'how not to' use your TVC were mentioned

3. Some examples of what training does for you

4. Some incompatibilities between IAF and 'the rest of the world' (verified by someone on the flight-line while the exercise was happening)

5. Some 'interesting behavior' from the French crews, similar opinion also shared by certain other people 'in the know'.

[GGTharos]

1. F-15s "dominated"

 

Realize that whether this happened or not, the USAF will not officially belabor this point.

 

2. The Indian pilots were amazed at the F-15s ability to BFM with an actual combat load.

 

As they should be: They were fighting more experienced crews, training to fight exactly like that - but it has little to do with aircraft capability.

 

3. The Indians used their thrust vectoring in scissors but due to the aerodynamics of how the TV worked, it seemed to hinder them more than help.

 

I believe that any issues due to this have been attributed to training and experience, NOT aircraft capability. You really have to read between the lines on this one though.

 

4. The Indians ceased to want to do 1 vs. 1 after losing engagements.

 

Again, this point will obviously not be belabored ;)

[X-man]

... which, however, aren't important. The flying part is. I could tell you all the wrong part numbers for your flanker, but if I'm sitting in your elbow in some evil capitalist jet fighter, you probably wouldn't be worrying about that (or whether my evil capitalist engines are GE's or PW's!!! ) ;)

Indeed, it is quite irrelevant. But since there are factual errors there, I wouldnt be so sure that all about the flying is the solid truth...

 

I doubt it. Remember that this was a brief (15 min) presentation, and so he simply provided highlights, not a very in-depth, detailed briefing. You should thus only look at the highlights of this presentation.

Thats your opinion. However I still stand by my, that you should take it with a grain of salt...

[GGTharos]

Indeed, it is quite irrelevant. But since there are factual errors there, I wouldnt be so sure that all about the flying is the solid truth...

 

Why would the guy who flew the sortie be talking about anything but his flying experience in the sortie, and why would you indeed consider anything -but- that experience; everything else is simply extraneous.

 

If I produce a mathematical theorem but throw in some factually incorrect information about Archimedes' life, does this invalidate my theorem? I think not ;)

 

Thats your opinion. However I still stand by my, that you should take it with a grain of salt...

 

... you think a 15min debrief is in-depth? I've debriefed a 2min dogfight for two hours. I hear real pilots can go into much greater lengths :P

[X-man]

Why would the guy who flew the sortie be talking about anything but his flying experience in the sortie, and why would you indeed consider anything -but- that experience; everything else is simply extraneous.

Ill give you that, though I doubt this guy was involved in everything the Indians were...

 

... you think a 15min debrief is in-depth? I've debriefed a 2min dogfight for two hours. I hear real pilots can go into much greater lengths :P

In-depth or not is irrelevant.

[mvsgas]

It seem to me a lot of you guys are taking this video as some thing negative against the IAF. If I am mistaken I apologies but it seems that way. The few thing I took from the video is that the IAF acted like any new unit that goes to Red Flag (no matter from what ever country they might come from). I do not think that it says anything negative. We have many US units that do the same when going to Red Flag and like the pilot said, most of their short falls or mistakes where mostly driven by inexperience. But that is the main reason to send pilots to Red Flag, so they can learn how to fight in one of the toughest environments.

 

About the IAF being concern with F.O. or F.O.D. Nothing special about that. Most Air Forces are very concern with F.O.D. As far as I know it is one of the most preventable causes for aircraft mishaps and it is a constant issue. We hear about it 20 time an hour. Nothing new there and I do not believe it says anything negative about the AIF

 

As for the pilot discrediting himself by saying erroneous info, to me actually verifies he is a pilot. You guys would be amaze how little most pilots I ever work with know about aviation, Most (not all but most) look at flying as a job, after some time, they have very little enthusiasm for aviation. Very few ( if any) know anything about even the aircraft they fly, except how to operate in combat of course. I have many pilots that don't even know what king of engine they use. They only know that if it get to a specific temp it is a over temp and so on. I ask pilots questions all the time ( which I am sure annoys most of them) and most of them have not clue what a IRST missile is! They think I am talking about the Russian aircraft infrared sensor. They do not know what a R-73 is, they know what a AA-11 is. My point is pilots don't have to know specific equipment about an aircraft, they just have to know hot to fly theirs and how to fight the others.

 

As for the comment about the French AF. Well, they do that. Nothing wrong about them and I have no idea why they do that. But they are always trying to acquire Intel on anyone through social engineering, and asking some weird questions. When ever we deploy with them, they will always ask: "What weapons systems do you have?", "How many aircraft did you bring?", "How many people do you have?", "What is your plans?" etc. No other military force I have work with does that. I am sure some other military agencies do that but I have not seen it. That does not say anything is wrong with the French doing that, I am not saying that, but we always find that weird.

At any rate I think the video is pretty cool and it is insight full. I believe after watching this video we can agree that the AIF seems to be a great alley, very capable air force and I hope we never have to fight them.

[RedTiger]

It seem to me a lot of you guys are taking this video as some thing negative against the IAF. If I am mistaken I apologies but it seems that way. The few thing I took from the video is that the IAF acted like any new unit that goes to Red Flag (no matter from what ever country they might come from). I do not think that it says anything negative. We have many US units that do the same when going to Red Flag and like the pilot said, most of their short falls or mistakes where mostly driven by inexperience. But that is the main reason to send pilots to Red Flag, so they can learn how to fight in one of the toughest environments.

 

I didn't think there was anything negative about the video. What you have is a fighter pilot giving a very brief account of what happened in a very casual setting. It wasn't "just the facts", he was free to give his opinion.

 

As for the pilot discrediting himself by saying erroneous info, to me actually verifies he is a pilot. You guys would be amaze how little most pilots I ever work with know about aviation, Most (not all but most) look at flying as a job, after some time, they have very little enthusiasm for aviation. Very few ( if any) know anything about even the aircraft they fly, except how to operate in combat of course. I have many pilots that don't even know what king of engine they use. They only know that if it get to a specific temp it is a over temp and so on. I ask pilots questions all the time ( which I am sure annoys most of them) and most of them have not clue what a IRST missile is! They think I am talking about the Russian aircraft infrared sensor. They do not know what a R-73 is, they know what a AA-11 is. My point is pilots don't have to know specific equipment about an aircraft, they just have to know hot to fly theirs and how to fight the others.

 

That's a good point. It reminds me of reading accounts of battle given by Allied soldiers in WWII. You may read an account from a veteran referring to the gun on a Panther tank as an "eighty-eight". The historian or enthusiast may be quick to point out that the Panther fielded a high-velociy 75mm gun. For the veteran, such distinction is pointless. All he had to know was that the Panther's gun was very dangerous.

Edited November 23, 2008 by RedTiger

[nscode]

bottom line is: until I see at least photos of the other side in cross hairs, I choose not to believe either.

[wasserfall]

Stones can be dangerous, but bullets too, so i like to be very much informed of what my (potential)enemy is carrying other ten saying they are dangerous.

 

Just my point of view:)

[Vekkinho]

Slightly OT but a nice footage on Indian Flankers:

http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=YZRxycj5vCY&feature=related

[Groove]

New facts arised lately, this time from InAF perspective:

 

 

• Not one Su-30 MKI was shot down in 1vs1 enagements.
  

 

• Su-30 MKI pilots used their radars in training mode only.
  

 

• There were fractricide by the Su-30's, mainly when there was no AWACS support and poor performance by GCI's officers.
  
• The F-15C's and other USAF Jets had the same ammounts of fractricide despite the use of Link 16, IFF Mode 4 and other network features.
  
• Su-30 MKI's flown from Mountain Home AFB had a kill ratio of 21:1 in favour of the Indian Flankers.
  

[Pilotasso]

If Su-30MKI's had such an outstanding perfomance I wonder why there arent any cries out there for more f-22's like in cope india? :huh:

[Peyoteros]

New facts arised lately, this time from InAF perspective:

 

 

• Not one Su-30 MKI was shot down in 1vs1 enagements.
  

 

• Su-30 MKI pilots used their radars in training mode only.
  

 

• There were fractricide by the Su-30's, mainly when there was no AWACS support and poor performance by GCI's officers.
  
• The F-15C's and other USAF Jets had the same ammounts of fractricide despite the use of Link 16, IFF Mode 4 and other network features.
  
• Su-30 MKI's flown from Mountain Home AFB had a kill ratio of 21:1 in favour of the Indian Flankers.
  

 

Those are good stats! :pilotfly:

I always preferred Russian planes over the buckets ...

Edited December 27, 2008 by Peyoteros

[Groove]

If Su-30MKI's had such an outstanding perfomance I wonder why there arent any cries out there for more f-22's like in cope india? :huh:

 

Indians state the all flights were with full ACMI recording so they can back up what they say. Don't ask me though.

[Vault]

The debreifing confirms the rock solid reputation of the Eagle. Now I understand why the Eagle has gone down in the history book as the number 1 air superiority fighter of teen fighters. I didn't know that USAF Eagles had shot down several MiG 29's in real life without a single loss :surprise:untill I read it today.

[RedTiger]

The debreifing confirms the rock solid reputation of the Eagle. Now I understand why the Eagle has gone down in the history book as the number 1 air superiority fighter of teen fighters. I didn't know that USAF Eagles had shot down several MiG 29's in real life without a single loss :surprise:untill I read it today.

 

The performance of the F-15 vs. the OpFor equipment it has faced and won against is a double edged sword for/against it in any argument.

 

True, the F-15 has fought a number of the aircraft it was intended to face and did so unscathed. However, an F-15 pilot never faced the Soviet pilot he trained to fight. An F-15 pilot has never had to deal with the entire picture of what a Soviet offensive in Europe would have looked like.

 

OTOH, as I always say, it isn't the ability to fight that makes one dangerous, its the willingness too. Despite the less than perfect threats the F-15 has faced, they were still threats. They still had to face other pilots in machines perfectly capable of killing them.

 

You can take its combat record and try to glean what you can about how it and its pilots would have matched up against its intended foes and just be glad that we never had to find out. Like I said, my opinion on the matter will always be that it cuts both ways.

Edited December 29, 2008 by RedTiger

[RedTiger]

New facts arised lately, this time from InAF perspective:

 

 

• Not one Su-30 MKI was shot down in 1vs1 enagements.
  

 

• Su-30 MKI pilots used their radars in training mode only.
  

 

• There were fractricide by the Su-30's, mainly when there was no AWACS support and poor performance by GCI's officers.
  
• The F-15C's and other USAF Jets had the same ammounts of fractricide despite the use of Link 16, IFF Mode 4 and other network features.
  
• Su-30 MKI's flown from Mountain Home AFB had a kill ratio of 21:1 in favour of the Indian Flankers.
  

 

The discrepancy is either very strange or exactly what you would expect, depending on your point of view. Who do you suppose should be believed?