Flankers versus Falcons

[GGTharos]

Here's a clue: Start with the antenna.

 

When you figure that one out, you'll be one small step closer to being qualified to judge whether I have a clue on the subject or not.

[mikoyan]

I don't want to sound disrespectful; but those guys on f-16.net are very bias, who an blain them the f-16 is a nice jet. The problem with the su-27 is that it stayed frozen on the 80s. while the f-16 keep getting upgrades over more upgrades. but if you take an su-30mk that is a totally different story. Even the US pilots recognized that when used properly; an su-30mki could beat f-16s and f-15 on a daily bases.

Lest not forget that that is the primary product from sukhoi. How many countries already have the su-30MK? I don't think that it is just a handful. Yes the russian su-27s are outdated but how do you guys know that it didn't got upgrades on radar software and ecm? What about the su-35, this thing is going to have more power than a flanker and a totally new flight control system, you don't have that on the f-15cs or f-15es. What about the TVC ?

[GGTharos]

I don't want to sound disrespectful; but those guys on f-16.net are very bias, who an blain them the f-16 is a nice jet.

 

That isn't disrespectful, but we're not talking about the F-16.net guys either.

 

The problem with the su-27 is that it stayed frozen on the 80s. while the f-16 keep getting upgrades over more upgrades.

 

And that is the point, pretty much.

 

but if you take an su-30mk that is a totally different story. Even the US pilots recognized that when used properly; an su-30mki could beat f-16s and f-15 on a daily bases.

 

No, that is untrue. It is a dangerous opponent, but still not up to snuff (its armament is mostly at fault here). It'll definitely do much, much better than the 27S/P, and likely better than the SM, too ... it carries a superior radar to start with.

The 'MK' however is a poor competitor.

 

Lest not forget that that is the primary product from sukhoi. How many countries already have the su-30MK? I don't think that it is just a handful.

 

And how many chose to use western, instead of Russian avionics within? ;)

 

Yes the russian su-27s are outdated but how do you guys know that it didn't got upgrades on radar software and ecm? What about the su-35, this thing is going to have more power than a flanker and a totally new flight control system, you don't have that on the f-15cs or f-15es. What about the TVC ?

 

We may as well start talking about F-15SE's then, or NASA's F-15's. The Su-35 is right now a prototype just like those.

 

I have no doubt that a Su-35BM will out-fly an F-15C since they're putting engines with more thrust on it, though I doubt it'll outright out-shoot it. It's basically a 'caught up to the modern eagle' variant.

The flight control and TVC are just more icing on the cake for dog fighting. If it numbers at 48 though, it won't be a particularly dangerous force by comparison.

[MoGas]

I would say, in the 80`s, the Flanker's are been a danger. But now the F-16 or F-15 beat those handful upgraded "Flanker's" with just the technology, what we see in the current US or MLU NATO planes.

 

And when it comes to the point where the pilot makes the diffrents, between the win or loss, then I would say NATO or US pilots with the fact that the have much more training and flyt houre's.

[Pilotasso]

Future: AESA (Not MLU specific, for all Falcons), MAWS (Subsquent MLU tapes) etc etc. Benelux Falcons are carrying Spectra and C.A.R.A.P.A.C.E. Systems.

 

BTW Frostie, PoAF falcons PEACE ATLANTIS I were newly built in 1993 and delivered in 1994 with block 50 standard structural cels. ;)

PEACE ATLANTIS II aircraft are second hand but they were only flown up to 2000h (just on the same level of use as the fist batch now). So theres plenty service life time left.

 

BTW MLU tape 2 for wich manuals are avaiable are mere toys compared to the current M5, block 52+ and block 60.

 

Just to let you know how things have evolved since then, we can now look out the cockpit (in adition the the MFD threat dysplay), know where everyone else is, enemy or firend, designate any further targets by eye, adding that to the other aircrafts lists, and send an AMRAAM, EGBU, or a maverick anywhere your sensors can look at. Other things that are classified, basicaly they didnt told me what,but what you can imagine possible with connectivity, it is actualy implemented or going to. ;)

 

More, theres room in the hardware to integrate lots more stuff.

 

Unfortunatly theres limits so, yes the Su-35 and the MKI should have an upper hand over the falcon in most areas, still not all since they still lack a high end BVR missile.

But for the time being the flanker family are still represented by soviet era Flankers and all others modernising but still using similar radar and missiles.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Pilotasso

[FeoFUN]

eg. the R-77 troubles for India, making that missile's range shorter than it is (or degrading Pk) due to lack of datalink integration ... just as an example.

I forgot to ask a questions about that.

 

1) What troubles? With storing conditions?

2) Since when RVV-AE doesn't have a datalink? THis one has been there when missile was on initial stage of development, even before it received the new index 'RVV-AE' instead of the old soviet 'R-77'.

[Teknetinium]

Its funny that u are talking about the latest upgrades for F-16s and when u do that u are including all nations using F-16, and compering it only to Russian Su-27S model. LOL

 

Like someone mentioned Su-27SM,Su-30,Su-30MKI, Su-35 will eat F-16 for breakfast, if not by missiles then by tactics :) and a lot of nations are using already new versions of Su-30s. So dont even think to stick ur nose in there whit any F-16 versions pilotasso/GG.

 

U are talking about missiles again with no prove where you have only educated assumptions, and what irritates me is that you only find problems in technology you nation is not using.

 

And when you hear something that you dont like you start to accuse media for spreading propaganda whit intentions of getting new nations buy more advanced technology. Pilotaso/GG you Can forget F-16 its no match any more, the avionics cant save it from its design.

 

If you want to bring down Su-30MKI, Su-35, SU-27SM a better choice would be EF-2000.

 

No blocks of F-16 can even match Mig-35 there is not enought lift for pods jammers and weapons :)

I hope I dint rubb your wings there pilotasso.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

It has the datalink, but it wasn't integrated with the Su-30MKI's FCS - that was one of the problems. The other problem was the relatively short shelf life of the stock that the Indians received - half of their missiles were dropping right off the pylons like fuel tanks, went nowhere and did nothing.

 

I forgot to ask a questions about that.

 

1) What troubles? With storing conditions?

2) Since when RVV-AE doesn't have a datalink? THis one has been there when missile was on initial stage of development, even before it received the new index 'RVV-AE' instead of the old soviet 'R-77'.

[Pilotasso]

Its funny that u are talking about the latest upgrades for F-16s and when u do that u are including all nations using F-16, and compering it only to Russian Su-27S model. LOL

 

Like someone mentioned Su-27SM,Su-30,Su-30MKI, Su-35 will eat F-16 for breakfast, if not by missiles then by tactics :) and a lot of nations are using already new versions of Su-30s. So dont even think to stick ur nose in there whit any F-16 versions pilotasso/GG.

 

U are talking about missiles again with no prove where you have only educated assumptions, and what irritates me is that you only find problems in technology you nation is not using.

 

And when you hear something that you dont like you start to accuse media for spreading propaganda whit intentions of getting new nations buy more advanced technology. Pilotaso/GG you Can forget F-16 its no match any more, the avionics cant save it from its design.

 

If you want to bring down Su-30MKI, Su-35, SU-27SM a better choice would be EF-2000.

 

No blocks of F-16 can even match Mig-35 there is not enought lift for pods jammers and weapons :)

I hope I dint rubb your wings there pilotasso.

 

"Unfortutnalty" for your argument, the situation for the F-16 right now is the reverse that of flanker: i.e. most of them are upgraded or going to, and continously, while the flanker has only enjoyed few and far between.

 

Right now even the common MLU standard are pretty advanced even if in a few years they will be all (but PoAF's) replaced by 5th gen fighters.

 

About the missiles it seem pretty obvious for most, that the R-27 are OLD and the R-77 has been hindered by budget cuts and politics.

 

I wouldnt say that all flankers sold are advanced. With he exception of India ans possibly malaysia, all others are using the core and radar equal to that used by the russians, providing only modest aditions to the analogue avionics.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Pilotasso

[FeoFUN]

It has the datalink, but it wasn't integrated with the Su-30MKI's FCS - that was one of the problems.

What's the source of this info?

 

The other problem was the relatively short shelf

life of the stock that the Indians received - half of their missiles were dropping right off the pylons like fuel tanks, went nowhere and did nothing.

It's their own fault - they violated storing conditions and that's why they didn't demand any compensation from ROE.

[Pilotasso]

Actualy, no, Vympel technitians went to india to repair the survivals of that 2000 batch order of R-77's under warranty AFAIK.

 

Vympel has a page with that information although I admit it that I read it long ago.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Pilotasso

[FeoFUN]

Actualy, no, Vympel technitians went to india to refurbish the survivals of that 2000 batch order of R-77's to repair them under warranty AFAIK.

Anyway, AFAIK, ROE didn't pay a cent for the broken ones.

[Pilotasso]

This should shed some more light regarding sold RVV-AE's:

 

http://eng.ktrv.ru/news/company/153.html?PHPSESSID=8d0bb347ba9e0a5e289faae676f4b358

http://sify.com/finance/astra-air-to-air-missile-to-make-its-first-flight-news--news-jktck1dieah.html

 

The russians themselves admit there were probelms with the missiles. And it seems to me, they were the ones taking a loss for having to repair them under the contract warranty.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Pilotasso

[MoGas]

Its kinda funny, u get SU-30MKI's and u have only couple faulty R-77's, where I guess the advantage of the plane is smashed with it because the are not working correctly and the have to fly with semi-actives only if needed. I guess most stuff outthere looks only on the paper good.

[GGTharos]

What's the source of this info?

 

Indian Air Force. They complained about it - it was a while ago though, so, sorry, no references handy.

[GGTharos]

Its funny that u are talking about the latest upgrades for F-16s and when u do that u are including all nations using F-16, and compering it only to Russian Su-27S model. LOL

 

Like someone mentioned Su-27SM,Su-30,Su-30MKI, Su-35 will eat F-16 for breakfast, if not by missiles then by tactics :) and a lot of nations are using already new versions of Su-30s. So dont even think to stick ur nose in there whit any F-16 versions pilotasso/GG.

 

The Su-27SM will be eating itself for breakfast. It still uses the same Radar as the Su-27S/P.

 

The Su-30 is a non-factor (it's a 'command' version of the Su-27S) - the Su-30MKI is a much better bet, but it has inferior A2A weapons.

The Su-35 isn't an operational fighter.

 

U are talking about missiles again with no prove where you have only educated assumptions, and what irritates me is that you only find problems in technology you nation is not using.

What's the problem? One side's avionics and weapons as currently fielded are inferior. Does this irritate you? Is it because you WISH this was not the case?

What problems would you like to talk about?

 

And when you hear something that you dont like you start to accuse media for spreading propaganda whit intentions of getting new nations buy more advanced technology. Pilotaso/GG you Can forget F-16 its no match any more, the avionics cant save it from its design.

Such as what? Lately I've been spending time telling people who are claiming that the PAK-FA stealth will not 'all that' that they're full of it. Moving on - the F-16 is a very dangerous opponent - it's design is air to air from the start with room to grow, and that's all there is to it. It is currently a more advanced aircraft than the vast, VAST majority of anything that the Russian air force fields.

 

If you want to bring down Su-30MKI, Su-35, SU-27SM a better choice would be EF-2000.

And F-15C will do the job just fine, and will have the upper hand against pretty much any of those save for the Su-35 - I'd expect that one to have better chances ... when and if it gets a better A2A missile.

 

No blocks of F-16 can even match Mig-35 there is not enought lift for pods jammers and weapons :)

I hope I dint rubb your wings there pilotasso.

You didn't rub anything - you just showed you don't know what you're talking about.

Who uses the MiG-35? Who buys it?

 

Ah wait. NO ONE! ;)

 

Your fantasy world does not equate to reality :)

[FeoFUN]

The russians themselves admit there were probelms with the missiles.

Yes, but with the first lots, produced and delivered more than 7 years ago. So, i couldn't see any relation between the stories.

 

And it seems to me, they were the ones taking a loss for having to repair them under the contract warranty.

So, indians just 'forget and forgive' to the ROE 'hundreds' of 'broken' missiles, each of those costs hundreds of thousands bucks? What a kind people. :D

 

I think all this story it's just the tempest in a teapot, at least this is my conclusion at the moment.

[GGTharos]

I think Pilotasso meant that the Indians got them repaired under warranty, but the warranty was on Vympel's side maybe, not ROE's.

[Pilotasso]

If Vympel doesnt have the capacity to repair its own missiles I would be surprised. Normaly in the west manufacturers can and will repair their own components should their clients complain and prove any faults under warranty, not their commercial intermidiate companies.

[Wilde]

Actually there are at least 48 Su-27SM in service. 22nd and 23rd fighter aviation regiments, both 11th air army, have been upgraded. Don't know if there are any plans to upgrade further regiments to 27SM though as they seem to be going after Su-35S now. Plans there are to crank out 2 regiments within the next 2 years. That would be at least 3 years ahead of IOC of the PAK-FA. So presumably they'll get follow-up contracts before production of PAK-FA starts. And frankly, does anyone here really believe PAK-FA will be in service by 2015?! ;)

 

As for the topic I'm pretty sure any Flanker owns any Falcon if flown correctly. Flanker is faster and has a lot more range. Thus the Falcon will never get within shooting range. Once it hits bingo fuel and has to run the Flanker could go after it and take it down. Also a Block 50 or whatever is no match whatsoever for an MKI or even 35S.

 

That being said, I think it's moot to compare planes in some amateur armchair expert sort of way. After all both the Flanker and the Falcon are just one of many wheels in their respective war machineries. The question should be: do all the wheels fit nicely together? And the answer is only known to the people who know all the strategies and data. Unfortunately they would never share it with us. :(

[GGTharos]

As for the topic I'm pretty sure any Flanker owns any Falcon if flown correctly. Flanker is faster and has a lot more range. Thus the Falcon will never get within shooting range. Once it hits bingo fuel and has to run the Flanker could go after it and take it down. Also a Block 50 or whatever is no match whatsoever for an MKI or even 35S.

 

I would say this is a very very simplistic and unrealistic comparison. Anything with the old radar will get owned by an upgraded F-16. It doesn't matter if you're faster, or you carry more fuel, or whatever. The newer plane will just deny you the BVR capability and hit you with a more capable weapon.

This is the price you pay for using something out-dated.

Let me put this another way. Think of a Vietnam-era F-4 with that era's radar and weapon set vs. a MiG-29S. Who do you think would win?

 

That being said, I think it's moot to compare planes in some amateur armchair expert sort of way. After all both the Flanker and the Falcon are just one of many wheels in their respective war machineries. The question should be: do all the wheels fit nicely together? And the answer is only known to the people who know all the strategies and data. Unfortunately they would never share it with us. :(

I think the disparity in equipment is large enough that you can make a reasonable guess.

If we were talking for example, Su-30MKI vs. an F-16 whatever version, then I agree that things might be significantly more difficult (but not impossible, the MKI isn't the flanker pinnacle yet - you need to look to the 35 for that) and the 16 might even be disadvantaged IF the MKI uses R-77 (which AFAIK it does) and advantageous positions, but it's not the slam-dunk you'd be looking for.

 

Yep, CURRENTLY fielded Russian equipment is still outdated. Some less than others, but that's how it is. In no case is there clear superiority ... now, if we were talking F-16A/Bs with little to no updates and old AIM-120s or no AIM-120's, that's a different story.

 

That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it :)

 

PS: The one real unknown is DRFM jammers. Those are game-changers, but there's no info out there on whether Russian planes are equipping them and how many sets are available and to whom.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Going a bit OT (yet quite related), what about later MiG-29SMT against F-16s?

 

We all know that old story that "close combat - MiG-29 will kick ass, then run out of fuel and get its ass kicked", but what about BVR and everything else?

[GGTharos]

I personally believe the SMT to be slightly inferior to an upgraded F-16, but only slightly - ie. here I think the F-16 would have a bit of BVR advantage due to armament.

 

In WVR they are actually fairly equal (they have advantages in different regimes when it comes to a dogfight and they even out) ... if you have a non-9X carrying F-16, I would say the MiG-29 in this case has the upper hand, if the F-16 is carrying a 9X, the MiG-29 would have a very, very hard time winning.

This assuming both pilots do everything correctly.

 

Going a bit OT (yet quite related), what about later MiG-29SMT against F-16s?

 

We all know that old story that "close combat - MiG-29 will kick ass, then run out of fuel and get its ass kicked", but what about BVR and everything else?

[Wilde]

I would say this is a very very simplistic and unrealistic comparison. Anything with the old radar will get owned by an upgraded F-16. It doesn't matter if you're faster, or you carry more fuel, or whatever. The newer plane will just deny you the BVR capability and hit you with a more capable weapon.

 

I disagree. A better radar or new missiles don't teleport you in the position you need. Neither do those things refuel you in flight. Yes, on paper an up-to-date F-16 is superior a 1985 Su-27 in BVR. But in reality it would be extremely difficult to make use of that superiority unless the Sukhoi pilot is drunk or generally bad. Basing your capabilities on just that would be stupid.

 

That is why we built the Eurofighter. It has better BVR capabilities compared to hundreds of old Flankers too. But unlike the F-16 it is actually fast enough to get in firing range and make use of it.

 

Your comparison of Vietnam era F-4 vs MiG-29S is not correct here. The MiG is better in BVR and has slightly more range also. It doesn't resemble the F-16 vs Flanker situation.

 

It's not like I rate the Falcon a bad aircraft. Quite the contrary. But in my opinion it is just not a good tool to be used against Flankers.

[Pilotasso]

Yes, superior SA does give you the adavantage more than speed and fuel.

 

The Eurofighter was concieved with a Su-37 class threat in mind wich never materialized.