Flankers versus Falcons

[GGTharos]

They are mentioned in manuals - there have also been sales brochures with very specific mentions of target sizes, and there have been statements from pilots.

 

Maybe the guesswork is on your part - you know, guessing what we do and do not know?

 

It's not like I'm always right, but I'm not the one sitting here shouting 'boo you don't know, since I don't know'.

[Frostie]

They are mentioned in manuals - there have also been sales brochures with very specific mentions of target sizes, and there have been statements from pilots.

Show me one of your sales brochures with this information which isn't a sales brochure for an APG. And as for pilot statements i've heard these interpretations of what was said from you before.

[GGTharos]

It was a russian export brochure, in fact as it related to an AESA radar for the MiG in this case - it had nothing to do with APG-anything, and I was frankly surprised at the figures posted.

 

Show me one of your sales brochures with this information which isn't a sales brochure for an APG. And as for pilot statements i've heard these interpretations of what was said from you before.

[Frostie]

It was a russian export brochure, in fact as it related to an AESA radar for the MiG in this case - it had nothing to do with APG-anything, and I was frankly surprised at the figures posted.

So what has that got to do with an N-001?

[GGTharos]

You mean, what a radar that is newer and should perform better than the N-001 has to do with the N-001?

 

In terms of the hardware, little to nothing - in terms of detection ranges, it gives you a healthy idea of what you'd expect to see and when from a larger radar of similar construction. From there on, you can choose to treat detection ranges the same for a base N-001 or perhaps reduce them to account for some other factors - but that's your option.

 

So what has that got to do with an N-001?

[Frostie]

Yeah ive got a brochure too. I paid more attention to mine though.

[Krippz]

Yeah ive got a brochure too. I paid more attention to mine though.

 

Your turning a civil discussion to a hostile one. Tone down the rhetoric. Back to the topic at hand:

 

If we're going to do a fair comparison let's compare the Su-27SM to the F-15C. I mean to be quite honest here we are comparing an apple to an orange.

[tflash]

Do we really need Su-35 to match a block 50/52 or MLU Falcon? I think an Su-27 SM should already be a very worthy opponent; certainly because there are not much data on how the sorbtsiya jamming pods perform. Amraam is a proven weapon, but it has not been employed against Russian fighters equipped with current ECM. It are the ECM advances in particular that has prompted Pentagon simulations to more highly regard the Flanker threat. (And even while they might not be miracles of refinement, they do have a lot of power).

 

It also depends on the situation: a flanker party defending deep Russian airspace guided by GCI and using a height advantage would be a much more formidable threat than Flankers entering western airspace escorting bombers.

 

I would think these 4th gen fighters would match each other enough to make it a pilot/tactics question.

[Alfa]

N001 series radars are rather obsolete for many years as they can only attack one target at a time, with the exception of the N001VE wich can engage 2.

 

There is actually also a version of the N001 with a passive phased array antenna(called "Pero"), which can engage 4 or 6(cannot remember) targets simultaneously.

 

No wonder the russians and chinese tryed to ditch them and develop substitutes several times.

 

Actually they didn't - despite there being half a dozen modern Russian radar options available, the Chinese chose the upgraded N001VE for their Su-30MKK.

 

The APG-66V2A can do 6 (It realy should have had a different designation as it is completely redesigned).

 

Can stack 6 targets for engagement or can simultaneously guide missiles towards 6 individual targets?.....and how useful is this anyway. Apart from the fact that fighter engagements usually involve 2 vs. 2 encounters, there is also the question of how likely it is that 4 - 6 enemies just happen to be within the scope required to make simultaneous engagement of all possible.

 

 

Range of both types are measured in different ways. PoAF released the figures of 90km look up, 60 km look down for APG66V2A versus RCS similar to F-16. APG-68V9 and APG-80 do much better even. The later butchers the N001 tripling the range of previous APG-66/68 variants.

http://www.scramble.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Northrop_Grumman_%28Westinghouse%29_AN/APG-66

 

No offense Pilotasso, but how can you "triple" the range of a radar while retaining the same antenna area(dictated by the radome size)? .

 

While the N001 is measured against RCS of full blown bombers (their initial motif of development) setting the number somewhere between 140km and 200km wich is hardly impressive. The APG series surely can match or surpass this figure.

 

[headshake]. Pilotasso - there are a lot of things that make an N001 less capable compared to "APG series" radars, but to suggest that the tiny radar of an F-16 should "butcher" an N001 radar in pure range is just silly......size does matter :) .

 

Besides, I would be careful with those range comparisons - aside from RCS, there is also the matter of tracking range vs. detection range.....not to mention reliability of sources.

 

The N011 and N035 are both measured versus low RCS targets but then again they are few and far appart, or not even fielded yet.

 

The N011 is(was) the initial version with a slotted array antenna - it was installed on the initial Su-35 variant. The currently fielded version(on Su-30MKI) is the N011M.

 

What is "N035"?

 

[Frostie]

Your turning a civil discussion to a hostile one. Tone down the rhetoric.

 

Can I have some of the herbal supplements that your taking?!?

You might want to take some of your own medicine before acting so pretentiously in future.

 

 

 

 

Air International, for what its worth.

F-16 : 150+ Km detection Range

Su-30 MKI : 350+ Km detection range/200 Km Tracking Range

 

Obviously the RCS of an F-16 is smaller than that of a Flanker which would probably mean a lot tighter detection figures.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Frostie

[Pilotasso]

 

There is actually also a version of the N001 with a passive phased array antenna(called "Pero"), which can engage 4 or 6(cannot remember) targets simultaneously.

 

 

 

I am Aware of this but like I said earlier, it was not fielded in numbers if at all, although surely offered to the market.

 

 

Can stack 6 targets for engagement or can simultaneously guide missiles towards 6 individual targets?.....and how useful is this anyway. Apart from the fact that fighter engagements usually involve 2 vs. 2 encounters, there is also the question of how likely it is that 4 - 6 enemies just happen to be within the scope required to make simultaneous engagement of all possible.

 

 

Yes, 6 targets, get 6 AMRAAM simultaneous attacks.

 

EDIT:

Watch this portion of video at 4:30: http://www.youtube.com/user/MrMilitaryAviation#p/u/275/4uCZSVPBmp0

Old video but shows APG-68 (probably early pre V5 variant) multi targeting capability at long range. Should be similar to APG66V2A

 

 

No offense Pilotasso, but how can you "triple" the range of a radar while retaining the same antenna area(dictated by the radome size)? .

 

 

 

None taken but it is what is writen on that page although they do not specify any actual figures. What I do know is that the APG-80 suposedly has much higher output power (UAE recieved special modification because the standard generators on PW engines cannot suply enough power for it) coupled with even better signal processor, on top of being AESA VS Mech array of previous generations.

 

 

[headshake]. Pilotasso - there are a lot of things that make an N001 less capable compared to "APG series" radars, but to suggest that the tiny radar of an F-16 should "butcher" an N001 radar in pure range is just silly......size does matter :) .

 

 

DIdnt say all APG-66/68 butcher the N001, just the APG-80. The older ones however do not stay behind much in range but are much more versatile and reliable.

 

 

What is "N035"?

 

 

 

Suposedly is to be the Irbis radar for Su-35BM.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Pilotasso

[GGTharos]

These are figures against bombers ... detection against another F-16 is 70-80km.

 

To double it you need 16x the RCS.

[Pilotasso]

That would make it on par with the APG66v2A should it be true.

[Krippz]

You might want to take some of your own medicine before acting so pretentiously in future.

 

 

 

 

Air International, for what its worth.

F-16 : 150+ Km detection Range

Su-30 MKI : 350+ Km detection range/200 Km Tracking Range

 

Obviously the RCS of an F-16 is smaller than that of a Flanker which would probably mean a lot tighter detection figures.

 

 

I used satire you we're condescending ;)

[Krippz]

These are figures against bombers ... detection against another F-16 is 70-80km.

 

To double it you need 16x the RCS.

 

According to Northrop Grumman the detection range against a fighter sized target is 265KM.

[GGTharos]

Must be the space shuttle ;)

[tflash]

Let's keep it to a realistic scenario, and compare Poland's F-16 Block 52+ with a Russian Flanker. So no APG-80 here.

 

I do not think the Polish F-16 radar has a range advantage. It has an automation advantage and provides better SA and TWS targetting, + the whole AIM-120C edge.

 

It doesn't fly as high and as fast as the Flanker, which also impacts BVR engagements, and we know little to nothing about how ECM comes into play (so it might end up in a classic dogfight).

[Pilotasso]

Maybe not a range advantage, but range isnt everything. IMHO SA is more important and might provide first shot. Im talking about radar discrimination and SA modes coupled with advanced IFF and other methods the F-16 now uses to ID target at BVR.

[Vault]

This topic is blatant fanboy bait.

 

[Frostie]

I used satire you we're condescending ;)

How to contradict oneself 101.

Its fine for you to use satire and try and humiliate people because you know better but I can't make a comment of owning a brochure, sorry.

 

Why not get off your holier than thou soapbox and give the topic a go.

 

F-16 vs Flanker is an interesting topic, but claiming that one would oust the other is pure speculation.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Frostie

[GGTharos]

Take your own advice :)

 

Why not get off your holier than thou soapbox and give the topic a go.

[Frostie]

Lets just sling mud for the sake of it shall we?

[GGTharos]

What else have you been doing in this thread?

 

Have you posted anything informative? You may disagree with me all you like, but so far your only argument has been 'I don't know, so you can't know', and 'Uh, I can find a brochure too'.

[Frostie]

And all you've brought is that the F-16 will beat the Flanker because its got a bigger antenna, great theory.

[Pilotasso]

I think this thread has just been destroyed like so many others, oh well, it was fun for a while :D