Interesting article about E-E conflict in late '90s

[RvETito]

http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2009/03/26/169637.html

 

It's in russian but thought it's worth posting it here. IMO it is written by a representative of some (I suspect

Krasnodar) russian overhaul factory who has been in charge of assembling and maintaining ethiopian Su-27's.

 

According to this article the ethiopian Su-27's have two confirmed and one partialy confirmed kills over eritrean MiG-29's. What is interesting to read is that all of them are made by export R-27R and R-27T missiles. There hasn't been any R-73 launch, what we've read so far.

 

All of the engagements have been 1v2 in favor of the MiG's. The typical scanario includes one Su-27 flying long endurance CAP at high altitude while the MiG-29's have used ambush tactics with two planes with severe altitude separation- one at the same altitude as the Su-27 and one on the deck. The GCI usualy sees the low flyer quiet late thus giving the Su-27 warning too late, or often it has seen it himself by the Beryoza warning.

 

Both the Su-27's and the MiG-29's have used dual missile launch (including R-27T for the Su-27) and despite they've used exactly the same SARH missiles and same high speed-high altitude profiles the Su-27 has had a cruical advantage of 1-2 sec earlier LA which is due to the longer target illumination time limit.

[topol-m]

Pretty interesting fight.

Edited March 29, 2009 by Groove

[Vekkinho]

It's an interesting read, thanks for sharing!

 

I just don't understand the idea of flying CAP with a single Su-27, I believe it's a major mistake of Ethiopian AF command that may produce some serious consequences.

 

I guess those SARH missile launches happened in typical head on sprint and shoot scenario and this is where the Su-27 gains the upper hand because of it's more powerful N001V, N001VE or N001VEP* radar which gains lock at greater distance than N019 onboard MiG-29.

 

*I can't say which radar was used but I'm sure some of the Ethiopian Su-27SK were equipped with one of these upgraded versions of N001 that was used initially with Su-27P.

[tflash]

Very interesting find!

 

Google translation: http://translate.google.be/translate?prev=hp&hl=nl&js=n&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aviaport.ru%2Fnews%2F2009%2F03%2F26%2F169637.html&sl=ru&tl=en

[Groove]

Very interesting were also clashes between Ethiopian Su-27S' and Eritrean MiG-29s. Besides taking out four Eritrean MiG-29s - plus writing another off due to damage received from an air-to-air missile - Ethiopian Su-27s flew many strike missions against the Eritrean ground forces, using unguided rockets and "dumb" bombs, and also escorted almost all MiG-23 deep strikes into Eritrea. Interesting is also, that most - if not all - Eritrean MiG-29s were shot down in close-quarters turning dogfights, where MiGs were supposed to have some advantages over larger and heavier Sukhois. Finally - except one - all the air-to-air kills were reportedly scored by R-73, even if quite a few (up to 24) R-27s were fired, pointing to some possible problems with R-27s, which is otherwise highly praised by quite a few air forces around the world! Supposedly, there should be no significant differences between early and new - or domestic and export - versions of R-27s, however, it seems, that this type so far has a worst combat record than even US Vietnam-era AIM-7Es or AIM-7Fs! This was certainly no good news for the Russians, which were keen to try out their new mounts and weapons under conditions of conventional warfare, and against a well organized enemy.

 

from: http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_189.shtml

 

Old article, but maybe interesting for some of you.

[Vekkinho]

^^^^

Yeah it's quite contrary to what AirTito posted. Archer kills in WVR combat, bad Alamo A performance...whom to trust?!!

[nscode]

I just don't understand the idea of flying CAP with a single Su-27, I believe it's a major mistake of Ethiopian AF command that may produce some serious consequences.

 

 

simply no fuel for two?

[RvETito]

I've read that too. Just found this which gives totaly different outline of this aerial conflict. This article also says about some problem with the SARH R-27's (no problems reported on the IR R-27T). Namely one missile hasn't selfdestroyed after losing track and it's remains have been evaluated for the reason. It says that main reason for missed shots has been the poor pilot performance of operating the radar and building/keeping the proper attack profile. When fired properly (especially in pairs) the SARH R-27 has worked. Note that these are the non-E variants.

[nscode]

That thing about earlier LA leads me to believe that they were max distance shots

[Vekkinho]

I've read that too. Just found this which gives totaly different outline of this aerial conflict. This article also says about some problem with the SARH R-27's (no problems reported on the IR R-27T). Namely one missile hasn't selfdestroyed after losing track and it's remains have been evaluated for the reason. It says that main reason for missed shots has been the poor pilot performance of operating the radar and building/keeping the proper attack profile. When fired properly (especially in pairs) the SARH R-27 has worked. Note that these are the non-E variants.

 

Well, may be but if that's a Russian article it would put the blame on a poor African pilot performance rather than blaming poor look down-shoot down capability of a radar (may happen in case those R-27Rs were launched on that 2nd MiG-29 who's pilot was hugging the deck).

 

The first article you posted is obviously Russian made so Russian made hardware received all the credit but Groove's http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_189.shtml may be closer to realism!

[Vekkinho]

That thing about earlier LA leads me to believe that they were max distance shots

 

Rmax shots are good, IMHO! Although the kill possibility is diminished to nil it makes the opposing fighter turn away (drag) or fly high angle off (beam) making you close the initial distance fast. If the opposing fighter makes a mistake of turning >60° he'll be losing the lock he had upon you and he's in deep trouble for a second missile!

[tflash]

If I recall it right, this was standard soviet tactics: shooting a radar-guide missile at RMax, so that the opponent is forced in a corner and shoot a follow-up IR missile next.

[Teknetinium]

If I recall it right, this was standard soviet tactics: shooting a radar-guide missile at RMax, so that the opponent is forced in a corner and shoot a follow-up IR missile next.

 

Yes in a perfect dream scenario, against F-5 :)

[topol-m]

As there is so much controversial info on the net about what missiles were used, how many were fired what is the ratio fired-hits i don`t know how can we say this site is giving the right info, that one is lying..., this one is russian so it is overestimating the performance of the missiles, that one is underestimating it. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between.

[Vekkinho]

As there is so much controversial info on the net about what missiles were used, how many were fired what is the ratio fired-hits i don`t know how can we say this site is giving the right info, that one is lying..., this one is russian so it is overestimating the performance of the missiles, that one is underestimating it. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between.

 

Most likely.

[Vekkinho]

If I recall it right, this was standard soviet tactics: shooting a radar-guide missile at RMax, so that the opponent is forced in a corner and shoot a follow-up IR missile next.

 

I also remember someone mentioning R-27R as a distraction missile and 27T as a kill certificate.

[RvETito]

Well, may be but if that's a Russian article it would put the blame on a poor African pilot performance rather than blaming poor look down-shoot down capability of a radar (may happen in case those R-27Rs were launched on that 2nd MiG-29 who's pilot was hugging the deck).

 

The first article you posted is obviously Russian made so Russian made hardware received all the credit but Groove's http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_189.shtml may be closer to realism!

 

You must have read the wrong article because the one I posted is full of criticism toward the russian hardware/military system in general and points out a lot of weak sides of the russian aircraft.

[Maximus_G]

...and despite they've used exactly the same SARH missiles and same high speed-high altitude profiles the Su-27 has had a cruical advantage of 1-2 sec earlier LA which is due to the longer target illumination time limit.

First of all, the author doesn't really know what the situation was there on the Eritrean side. They could have problems with using their R-27 missiles or even have none of them at all. Some sources (undisclosed yet) appear to confirm that assumption.

Has anybody seen them hanging on Eritrean MiGs in that period of time?

Second, "due to the longer target illumination time limit". I find that explanation strange at least.

[RedTiger]

Interesting article! I wish the translation worked better. :(

 

Rmax shots are good, IMHO! Although the kill possibility is diminished to nil it makes the opposing fighter turn away (drag) or fly high angle off (beam) making you close the initial distance fast. If the opposing fighter makes a mistake of turning >60° he'll be losing the lock he had upon you and he's in deep trouble for a second missile!

 

I've always wondered about this and how this is done in real life. It works well in flight sims, especially against AI. You can do this in Falcon 4.0 and LOMAC for this exact effect.

 

I have two problems with this though. First, it's been discussed that in real-life cases, a lock-on tone was considered to mean a missile was launched. No waiting around for a launch signal since it may never come, but your fiery death might while you wait. You get locked on to, you go defensive. I've read myself that this is how F-15 pilots operated in Desert Storm. So, depending on how accurate your info is on the range and altitude of the bandit, do you ALWAYS go defensive? Does that even makes sense? Where do you chance it and close a bit more or climb or increase your speed before you launch your missile? A lock tone from an Iraqi MiG-29A should be treated differently than one from an Indian Su-30MKI, right? Or maybe not? Do real pilots ever chance it as a standard operating procedure?

 

Second...does anyone really try to get into optimal parameters before firing? Rmax is supposed to be the maximum range you can hit a non-maneuvering target...hmm...kinda like the bandit that's continuing to close to his Rtr range, doesn't it? It just seems like you're asking for a missile in the face unless you greatly outclass your opponent in your ability to operate at high altitudes and you've got a missile like the Aim-120 that tries to maximize particularly the Rtr range. What do you do if you do not have this advantage? If you can both operate at 40k feet+ and you both have missiles like this, how do you reach Rtr at that altitude without dying?

 

Stealth??? :O ;)

 

^^^^

Classified stuff, I'm sure. :alien:

Edited March 30, 2009 by RedTiger

[Pilotasso]

My airforcesmontlhy issue reports the R-27 problem version of the conflict. All kills made by R-73 and one possible Mig write off due to R-27 damage in battle (after successfully landing and later left unrepaired).

 

It has accounts for multiple R-27 Shots, all of them but 1 suposedly missed.

[RvETito]

Second, "due to the longer target illumination time limit". I find that explanation strange at least.

 

What so strange about it? The N001E can provide longer SARH missile guidance in STT compared to the N019E, hence LA will come sooner for the Su-27 even when using the same missiles.

 

I don't state the article is the whole truth, it just gives another point of view. And it doesn't say anything new actualy, everyone knows that the first Su-27 has better BVR capabilites than the first MiG-29, when it comes to detection/track/lock ranges.

 

As for the ranges- they say first R-27R launch at 45km head-on (high alt-high speed), then R-27T at 10km both head-on or in chase. They mention only one MiG-29 dual R-27R launch- of the low flyer after leader's been shot down- 4km altutude separation and supersonic speed is what claims to be the Su-27's dodge due though pilot has seen the two splashes of the selfdestructing missiles near, article say.

[GGTharos]

Not just stealth, although it certainly helps a lot ... think ECM/ECCM + tactics ;)

 

Second...does anyone really try to get into optimal parameters before firing? Rmax is supposed to be the maximum range you can hit a non-maneuvering target...hmm...kinda like the bandit that's continuing to close to his Rtr range, doesn't it? It just seems like you're asking for a missile in the face unless you greatly outclass your opponent in your ability to operate at high altitudes and you've got a missile like the Aim-120 that tries to maximize particularly the Rtr range. What do you do if you do not have this advantage? If you can both operate at 40k feet+ and you both have missiles like this, how do you reach Rtr at that altitude without dying?

 

Stealth??? :O ;)

 

^^^^

Classified stuff, I'm sure. :alien:

[Groove]

Putting your opponent into a defensive situation is B-BFM :)

[RedTiger]

Not just stealth, although it certainly helps a lot ... think ECM/ECCM + tactics ;)

 

Ah...I think I get it. I foresee this being a weak point in flight sims, unfortunately.

 

Back on topic. I'm guessing that the planes in the E-E aerial battles probably did not have any ECM. Some part of me always wonders why this conflict is taken so seriously in terms of judging Russian missile performance. I grew up being told "don't waste food! There are starving people in Ethiopia!". Now they have air to air battles and we're surprised that their missiles might not be the best quality or well maintained. :huh:

[Pilotasso]

Well, the E-E conflict tells you that without ECM warfare R-27's still miss alot. This means they will work even worse against more modern aircraft.

 

R-27's are old and past their unit service lives. Planes armed with them IMHO have little credibility.