Jump to content

SU30 vs Super Hornet


SAM77

Recommended Posts

Actually they tend to point out that Kopp doesn't appear to have a clue as to what a datalink would be used for tactically, and that he has no access to classified information.

http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/cgi-bin/pub_search?publication_type=0&year=&authors=Kopp&title=

 

If you publish a paper on how to make Lazers on sharks head, then someone later makes a "classified" Lazer on a sharks head, the manufacturing details and implementation will be classified. Not the principle or some of the methodology. A lot or all of what you will see in modern combat in terms of technology originates in academia as well as in house research by defence contrators. I agree on this... he may very well be limited in the tactical sphere... he might not even know what a Immelmann is. :megalol:


Edited by RIPTIDE

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 419
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Now thats just trolling, my Pollack friend. :thumbup::matrix:

 

Nope, I have really heard opinions like that and I think some think here too.:P

Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D

ಠ_ಠ



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like you said, the Su-30 has the advantage of Energy. Once it's under attack, any knowledgeable pilot would begin making evasive maneuvers. "Nudge off any more attacks", again, with the maneuvers. At low-altitude against high-maneuvering targets, the AIM-9 and AMRAAM probably just doesn't have the range to kill or disable the Su-30. If you can't maneuver, climb and run.

 

I don't know what you base that assessment on. If a Su-30 turns tail and runs to avoid missiles, it isn't coming back to complete its mission. That is a mission kill. There's no amount of maneuvering a Su-30 can do to get rid of everything a hornet can throw at it.

The opposite is also true in general, but since the hornet is more likely to be getting the first shot ...

 

If you argument is load-out, then I would have no argument as there are no "standard combat loadouts" stats that I could look at and make a guesstimate. Again, you are assuming a battle in a mountainous terrain, where BVR weapons and radars would be of no use. A plain look of the map of South West Asia would not yield man mountainous regions. Most likely, combat would occur during an Indonesian intercept of F-111 or F/A-18E/F attempting to disable Indonesian military infrastructure.

 

I'm assuming an engagement over the sea. AIM-9 will be used if it gets down to WVR, which may happen. Depending on the exact aircraft used, they may also be packing ASRAAM which can be used BVR in many cases.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the point, yes.

 

If you publish a paper on how to make Lazers on sharks head, then someone later makes a "classified" Lazer on a sharks head, the manufacturing details and implementation will be classified. Not the principle or some of the methodology. A lot or all of what you will see in modern combat in terms of technology originates in academia as well as in house research by defence contrators. I agree on this... he may very well be limited in the tactical sphere... he might not even know what a Immelmann is. :megalol:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was about that Su-30 and super-hornets are both very capable aircraft's and that both sides should spend money on training pilots, That will be the key to complete A2A/A2G missions if they would encounter in a fight.

 

The point here is that F-18 dont have that great technological advantage over Su-30 and do not have better flight characteristics,. I would go for F-35 to be on the safe side. While that move would probably lead to less fly time and less aircrafts avaible.


Edited by Teknetinium
  • Like 1

Teknetinium 2017.jpg
                        51st PVO Discord SATAC YouTube
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Carlo Kopp's world Russian equipment is often 2 times better than in real world.

For example:

Irbis-E with 50% more range than APG-77.

R-77 with more range than AIM-120C (when we know that AIM-120A has a greater range than R-77)

OLS-30/35 IRST with 50-60 (or more) frontal detection range (when we know that its 35km in optimal conditions for OLS-35).

etc, etc...

His articles are biased, period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was about that Su-30 and super-hornets are both very capable aircraft's and that both sides should spend money on training pilots, That will be the key to complete A2A/A2G missions if they would encounter in a fight.

 

The point here is that F-18 dont have that great technological advantage over Su-30 and do not have better flight characteristics,. I would go for F-35 to be on the safe side. While that move would probably lead to less fly time and less aircrafts avaible.

 

Most NATO/USAF threat analysis about Flanker involves heavy use of Sorbtsya jammers, which would possible deny an Amraam advantage.

(We have burnthrough in Lockon at about 10 miles but real impact of the jammers is classified and the simulation also does not really take into account impact on missile guidance).

 

But with the current APG-79 AESA solution on the Super Hornet, C5/C7 Amraams can be fired at max range without the bandit even knowing he is painted. Couple this with Wedgetail coverage and crossing the Timor Sea is a unsurmountable hurdle, even for the Su-30. It becomes even better when the more stealthy F-35 enters service, so that the attacking party would not even have an idea how far fighters are from intercept.

 

I'm not even sure Indonesia has the jammers.

 

If you add EA-18G with ALQ-218 to the pack then I would say the electronic battlefield superiority is such that you better not take off in the Su-30's.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But with the current APG-79 AESA solution on the Super Hornet, C5/C7 Amraams can be fired at max range without the bandit even knowing he is painted.

 

Or at least you can hope that his RWR isn't reprogramed and that above is true.

Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most NATO/USAF threat analysis about Flanker involves heavy use of Sorbtsya jammers, which would possible deny an Amraam advantage.

(We have burnthrough in Lockon at about 10 miles but real impact of the jammers is classified and the simulation also does not really take into account impact on missile guidance).

 

But with the current APG-79 AESA solution on the Super Hornet, C5/C7 Amraams can be fired at max range without the bandit even knowing he is painted. Couple this with Wedgetail coverage and crossing the Timor Sea is a unsurmountable hurdle, even for the Su-30. It becomes even better when the more stealthy F-35 enters service, so that the attacking party would not even have an idea how far fighters are from intercept.

 

I'm not even sure Indonesia has the jammers.

 

If you add EA-18G with ALQ-218 to the pack then I would say the electronic battlefield superiority is such that you better not take off in the Su-30's.

 

You dont necessarily need AESA for facing stobriskyas or any other pod, you need an ECM resistant radar with agility shifting frequencies, of course the AESA are best at it but are not the only ones. There are some pretty decent mech arrays still out there, not to mention PESA. Of course if your in bad luck of finding one AESA on the opposition and you have a mech, yours will be garbled beyond use. :)


Edited by Pilotasso

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what you base that assessment on. If a Su-30 turns tail and runs to avoid missiles, it isn't coming back to complete its mission. That is a mission kill. There's no amount of maneuvering a Su-30 can do to get rid of everything a hornet can throw at it.

The opposite is also true in general, but since the hornet is more likely to be getting the first shot ...

 

In such a low-visibility region, any amount of high-maneuvering will render the AMRAAM a miss, and yes, there are no amounts of maneuvering one can do to get rid of everything a hornet can throw at it, but enough to make the Hornet's successful kills "negligible" and allocate for a decent counter response from R-27's.

 

 

I'm assuming an engagement over the sea. AIM-9 will be used if it gets down to WVR, which may happen. Depending on the exact aircraft used, they may also be packing ASRAAM which can be used BVR in many cases.
In that case, as long as there are no in-land obstacles, both radars should function at relative efficiency, again, allowing the F/A-18E/F to detect the Su-30MK from over 100 kilometers away, but also allowing the Su-30MK to detect the F/A-18E/F from just over 80 kilometers away. And so can the R-27 or R-73, hell, if you want to argue over numbers again, the R-73M has a 12 km longer maximum range advantage.

 

In Carlo Kopp's world Russian equipment is often 2 times better than in real world.

For example:

Irbis-E with 50% more range than APG-77.

R-77 with more range than AIM-120C (when we know that AIM-120A has a greater range than R-77)

OLS-30/35 IRST with 50-60 (or more) frontal detection range (when we know that its 35km in optimal conditions for OLS-35).

etc, etc...

His articles are biased, period.

 

Why are you still attacking the source?

 

Anywho, according to Deagle(that's us by the way), the Irbis-E can detect a target with a RCS of 0.01 meter squared from 90 kilometers away. Regarding R-77 v.s. AIM-120C, again, according to Deagle, the R-77 baseline has a maximum range of 80 km, while the AIM-120 baseline has a maximum range of 48 km. Okay, so it doesn't exactly have twice the range of the AIM-120, we're very sorry.

 

EDIT:

Same also goes for the OLS-35, just search Deagle.com, 50 km detection range against a front-on non-afterburning target and 90 km detection range against a target in it's rear-hemisphere.


Edited by IronsightSniper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I think we are comparing apples with oranges here.

 

First, russian marketing is very aggressive and quotes figures in different launch/flight conditions as their west counterparts. Russians go by the ballistic range from high altitude criteria.

Second, Westerns go by mach 0.9, angels 33000 or 40000 (depends on source) and missiles end game speed criteria. And that off course makes the Russian weapons look better because we forgot how relevant these conditions differences are for actual combat.

 

But truth is, these old Russian hardware were almost always second best in the armament industry and this suits them very conveniently in the export market as specs confusion sets in.

 

Sometimes all you need is gullible people on your adversaries country to have a good deterrence. It sounds ridiculous but people cry over irans old wrecks will defeat USA in a concflict, How Iraq would crush coalition forces back in 1991 etc etc etc efectively pushing their governments against military action (among other arguments, valid or otherwise). Its a way of psychological war. Its half of a victory already. The other half though consists on the actual capabilities of the forces on the ground.


Edited by Pilotasso

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In such a low-visibility region, any amount of high-maneuvering will render the AMRAAM a miss, and yes, there are no amounts of maneuvering one can do to get rid of everything a hornet can throw at it, but enough to make the Hornet's successful kills "negligible" and allocate for a decent counter response from R-27's.

 

You're saying it will make up for the utter dominance of the 120 over the 27R with um ... maneuvering?

 

 

In that case, as long as there are no in-land obstacles, both radars should function at relative efficiency, again, allowing the F/A-18E/F to detect the Su-30MK from over 100 kilometers away, but also allowing the Su-30MK to detect the F/A-18E/F from just over 80 kilometers away. And so can the R-27 or R-73, hell, if you want to argue over numbers again, the R-73M has a 12 km longer maximum range advantage.
I do not know about the ranges, I guess they could be naively calculated using the radar equation; those depend on many factors, and the RCS of the SH is pretty low. The R-73 has a maximum 20km employment range head-on at high altitude, by its combat diagram, effectively the same (slightly more than, perhaps) as the 9M. It does best the 9M in off-bore capability, making the short range footprint of the Su better. The AIM-9X eats that one up.

 

 

Why are you still attacking the source?

 

Anywho, according to Deagle(that's us by the way), the Irbis-E can detect a target with a RCS of 0.01 meter squared from 90 kilometers away. Regarding R-77 v.s. AIM-120C, again, according to Deagle, the R-77 baseline has a maximum range of 80 km, while the AIM-120 baseline has a maximum range of 48 km. Okay, so it doesn't exactly have twice the range of the AIM-120, we're very sorry.

 

EDIT:

Same also goes for the OLS-35, just search Deagle.com, 50 km detection range against a front-on non-afterburning target and 90 km detection range against a target in it's rear-hemisphere.

In fact the R-77 is slightly shorter ranged low altitude than AIM-120A (and IIRC, the AIM-120A outperforms the 77 by a wider margin still at higher altitudes). I'd say for argument's sakes, for now, same range ... which the AIM-120C5-7 puts about 15% on top of that, conservatively speaking. Both out-perform the R-27R (which is the missile used against fighters typically so far, not the ER) by a wide margin in terms of range.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I think we are comparing apples with oranges here.

 

First, russian marketing is very aggressive and quotes figures in different launch/flight conditions as their west counterparts. Russians go by the ballistic range from high altitude criteria.

Second, Westerns go by mach 0.9, angels 33000 or 40000 (depends on source) and missiles end game speed. And that off course makes the Russian weapons look better because we forgot how relevant these conditions differences are for actual combat.

 

But truth is, they were almost always second best in the armament industry and this suits them very conveniently as specs confusion sets in.

 

You just spouting nonsense or you got proof?

 

 

You're saying it will make up for the utter dominance of the 120 over the 27R with um ... maneuvering?

 

Apples to oranges. Why would one use the R-27 in a short range fight?

 

 

I do not know about the ranges, I guess they could be naively calculated using the radar equation; those depend on many factors, and the RCS of the SH is pretty low. The R-73 has a maximum 20km employment range head-on at high altitude, by its combat diagram, effectively the same (slightly more than, perhaps) as the 9M. It does best the 9M in off-bore capability, making the short range footprint of the Su better. The AIM-9X eats that one up.

 

Best information regarding the F/A-18E/F's RCS that I found was about 0.1 meter squared. Keep in mind that the Irbus-E can track a 0.01 meter squared target from 90 km away.

 

In fact the R-77 is slightly shorter ranged low altitude than AIM-120A (and IIRC, the AIM-120A outperforms the 77 by a wider margin still at higher altitudes). I'd say for argument's sakes, for now, same range ... which the AIM-120C5-7 puts about 15% on top of that, conservatively speaking. Both out-perform the R-27R (which is the missile used against fighters typically so far, not the ER) by a wide margin in terms of range.

 

Pff...you have supplied no proof regarding the AIM-120A's superior range as compared to the R-77. You can search Deagle.com, the site your on, the R-77 baseline's range is 80 km, compared to the 48 km of the AIM-120A.


Edited by IronsightSniper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... Did you see the R-27R diagram I posted? That's one piece of proof right there.

If you want to know how far a 120 can be launched, there's a couple youtube HUD videos that'll give you a few hints.

 

You just spouting nonsense or you got proof?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just spouting nonsense or you got proof?

 

No, its a sense of consecutive myth busting realization over the years since the cold war ended. Some payed attention. others go panic and cry we are doomed just because they kinda like doing that in a sort of masochist kind way or just plainly to disdain. :)


Edited by Pilotasso

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, its a sense of consecutive myth busting realization over the years since the cold war ended. Some payed attention. others go panic and cry we are doomed just because they kinda like doing that in a sort of masochist kind way or just plainly to disdain. :)

 

So no proof.

 

... Did you see the R-27R diagram I posted? That's one piece of proof right there.

If you want to know how far a 120 can be launched, there's a couple youtube HUD videos that'll give you a few hints.

 

Nope, haven't seen it, link?

 

And I prefer not to do guesstimate the range with my eyes, as your eyes can deceive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You reading same thread as I am or your simply disdain like I said? :)

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could repost it but you would just go selectively blind again :D

 

GG do the honors if you like, Im off to bed. sorry :D

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's in this thread ... have a look back through the posts.

 

Nope, haven't seen it, link?

 

You aren't guesstimating anything with your eyes. The WEZ is on the HUD.

 

And I prefer not to do guesstimate the range with my eyes, as your eyes can deceive.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds ridiculous but people cry over irans old wrecks will defeat USA in a concflict, How Iraq would crush coalition forces back in 1991 etc etc etc efectively pushing their governments against military action (among other arguments, valid or otherwise). Its a way of psychological war. Its half of a victory already. The other half though consists on the actual capabilities of the forces on the ground.

 

We've been though this. Who told you Iraq would crush coalition forces? You don't listen to limp wristed liberal news now do you? Unless of course there's a straw man there.. which i think is your way. :megalol:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just take a look what NATO brought against Yugoslavia few years back. NATO brought ten times more aircraft that what Yugo's had. And those NATO aircraft were latest and gratest against Yugo's MiG-29A (export version)aircraft whose SPO-15 did not work and some old MiG-21's.

 

If technology of AIM-120 and other crap is so superior, why in the world did NATO need 10 TIMES as many aircraft as what Yugo's have?


Edited by =4c= Hajduk Veljko

Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just take a look what NATO brought against Yugoslavia few years back. NATO brought ten times more aircraft that what Yugo's had. And those NATO aircraft were latest and gratest against Yugo's MiG-29A (export version)aircraft whose SPO-15 did not work and some old MiG-21's.

 

The only thing that matters in that war in terms of an air to air perspective is the AMRAAM hit ratio, that's about it. The rest is irrelevant. The gulf war was more interesting with respect to opposing forces executing tactics.

 

If technology of AIM-120 and other crap is so superior, why in the world did NATO need 10 TIMES as many aircraft as what Yugo's have?
Because that is how you keep up the tempo of operations.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...