SU30 vs Super Hornet

[GGTharos]

I don't see any sources?

 

Probably because you failed to either read the thread, or you don't know what you're looking at.

 

As for your argument of the Superbug's tactical advantage, what's it gonna do? Get a higher altitude? In BVR combat it doesn't really matter the position(s) you start out with, only your missile and your electronics would matter. Only in a WVR environment would detecting first matter, as one could hide behind a mountain and do a sneak attack with a WVRAAM.

Okay, so you don't know what you're looking at. You've just disqualified yourself: Yes, position is a big deal in BVR. It is in fact such a big deal that even tactical formations used to employ BVR weapons are classified.

 

And you continue sauceless. Your "combat charts" are nothing but bits and pixels right now, please materialize them.

Most certainly so. It's me with 2 sauces and you with nilch. I don't wanna ad hominem you, but you're not doing so well.

Your sauce is kool-aid.

 

 

All the speed yet we are 20 years back in time. We must be going FTL :O

NATO, or at least USAF, has consistently been 20 years ahead in fighter capability.
Edited August 16, 2010 by GGTharos

[IronsightSniper]

Pretty silly thing to ask for. I don't recall you posting any graphs regarding the BARS. Or are you talking about the inherent capabilities of AESA radars? Yes, they can do that. They can literally change frequency for each pulse they belt out which makes a jammer that is based on repeating (most jammers) much less viable. That very same capability allows the radar to function as a very agile jammer while functioning as a radar.

 

Plasma stealth does not exist. Forget it, it is a pipe-dream ... nothing short of a boogeyman that does not factor in the least when it comes to air combat. Consider that PAK-FA is implementing traditional stealth.

 

Meh, you just can't stop your ad hominems can you? I already admitted that I have no source other than Carlo Kopp for the detection ranges of his radars. You have still yet to give me any evidence to the F/A-18E/F's radar's detection capabilities.

 

And no, Plasma Stealth is not a "pipe-dream", simply disregarding competitive technologies is a sign of ignorance. Moar info.

 

Probably because you failed to either read the thread, or you don't know what you're looking at.

 

Yes, I do admit I stopped caring for this thread after page 4 because after that it was spam of ad hominems against Kopp and a back and forth by Exec and Vault. If you do have the source, repost them now while they're sleeping.

 

 

 

Okay, so you don't know what you're looking at. You've just disqualified yourself: Yes, position is a big deal in BVR. It is in fact such a big deal that even tactical formations used to employ BVR weapons are classified.

 

Another ad hominem. Your position won't elongate your range beyond it's physical capabilities.

 

 

Your sauce is kool-aid.

 

And your sauce has no mass.

 

NATO, or at least USAF, has consistently been 20 years ahead in fighter capability.

 

Those inside the bubble, don't know when it's going to pop.

[GGTharos]

Meh, you just can't stop your ad hominems can you? I already admitted that I have no source other than Carlo Kopp for the detection ranges of his radars. You have still yet to give me any evidence to the F/A-18E/F's radar's detection capabilities.

 

Keep complaining about ad hominems. You have no source, no basis for comparison, and you just admitted it. Why are you even arguing? Grab the radar equation and figure it out for yourself. There's even apps on the net that will do the math for you.

 

And no, Plasma Stealth is not a "pipe-dream", simply disregarding competitive technologies is a sign of ignorance. Moar info.

It has been, and still is a pipe-dream, never implemented and so far never-to-be-implemented on any aircraft.

 

Yes, I do admit I stopped caring for this thread after page 4 because after that it was spam of ad hominems against Kopp and a back and forth by Exec and Vault. If you do have the source, repost them now while they're sleeping.

Then stop posting in it if you don't care. If your excuse for not checking up or doing any work is 'I don't care', you have no argument. No sauce of any sort either, not even Kool-Aid.

 

Another ad hominem. Your position won't elongate your range beyond it's physical capabilities.

A superior position will give you the first shot, and often the longest shot. This is what a superior position is about. So you see, there is no ad-hominem here. You really don't know.

 

And your sauce has no mass.

Enough mass to be taken seriously by people who do something with it ;)

 

Those inside the bubble, don't know when it's going to pop.

What would you, with no particularly good sources, know anything about any type of bubble?
Edited August 16, 2010 by GGTharos

[IronsightSniper]

Keep complaining about ad hominems. You have no source, no basis for comparison, and you just admitted it. Why are you even arguing? Grab the radar equation and figure it out for yourself. There's even apps on the net that will do the math for you.

 

Keep complaining about sources. You have no source, no basis for comparison, and you just admitted it. As for the radar equation, it is relatively moot as there is no info on the RCS of the Su-30. We can assume, but nothing is like facts, right?

 

It has been, and still is a pipe-dream, never implemented and so far never-to-be-implemented on any aircraft.

 

Heh, isn't anything in RnD a pipe dream? Just because it's not being developed to the point of implication does not mean it does not exist.

 

Then stop posting in it if you don't care. If your excuse for not checking up or doing any work is 'I don't care', you have no argument. No sauce of any sort either, not even Kool-Aid.

 

Eh? People started realizing how degraded and derailed this thread was back at page 26, so I just took the opportunity and argued my side again. As for your simplistic attacks, "I stopped caring" meant for this thread only, does not mean I instantaneously forgot everything, because if I did, I would get brainwashed by Military channel again.

 

A superior position will give you the first shot, and often the longest shot. This is what a superior position is about. So you see, there is no ad-hominem here. You really don't know.

 

Pff, really? Unless the F/A-18E/F is stationed 10 klicks above the Su-30, it's AIM-120 will have no advantage over the R-77, who's range is still superior to the AIM-120, dispite every single piece of no evidence you presented.

 

Enough mass to be taken seriously by people who do something with it ;)

 

I didn't know you had a mass spectrometer too :O

 

What would you, with no particularly good sources, know anything about any type of bubble?

 

Because you don't need a source to see the lies which engulfs you.

[EtherealN]

Ironsight, position doesn't matter in BVR?

So why do fighter planes ever fly above 3000 feet? I mean, it would be safer to stay down there to give the enemy a look-down situation and force their missiles to fly into thicker air, so they slow down more and get less range than up in the thinner air... wait a minute! ;)

[GGTharos]

Keep complaining about sources. You have no source, no basis for comparison, and you just admitted it. As for the radar equation, it is relatively moot as there is no info on the RCS of the Su-30. We can assume, but nothing is like facts, right?

 

Sorry, what did I admit? That I have no specifications for the APG-79? :)

Okay, and? The radar equation will give you a way to compare at least roughly, and the RCS assumption is a relatively safe one.

 

But if you really don't know, and you don't think I know, then why are you talking about facts?

 

Heh, isn't anything in RnD a pipe dream? Just because it's not being developed to the point of implication does not mean it does not exist.

I'd like to believe you didn't say that with a straight face :D

 

Eh? People started realizing how degraded and derailed this thread was back at page 26, so I just took the opportunity and argued my side again. As for your simplistic attacks, "I stopped caring" meant for this thread only, does not mean I instantaneously forgot everything, because if I did, I would get brainwashed by Military channel again.

What is it that you knew to forget, since apparently you know of no facts?

 

Pff, really? Unless the F/A-18E/F is stationed 10 klicks above the Su-30, it's AIM-120 will have no advantage over the R-77, who's range is still superior to the AIM-120, dispite every single piece of no evidence you presented.

... did you not start this post with talking about facts, and not having sources?

 

Because you don't need a source to see the lies which engulfs you.

 

You have admitted to knowing nothing; you have failed to use reasonable methods of comparison when pointed to them; you are unable to accept sources of information other than the same internet sources that copy each other ad infinitum; and then you went on to say something like:

 

it's AIM-120 will have no advantage over the R-77, who's range is still superior to the AIM-120, dispite every single piece of no evidence you presented

.. while having no useful sources of your own. Seriously. Fail.
Edited August 16, 2010 by GGTharos

[dennisllante]

SU30 vs Super Hornet?

 

for me, no matter how advanced or how outdated the aircraft technology is..if there's no recorded real life duel (real fight to death between the two) there's no way we can safely assert who wins..

 

let's hope there won't be any.

Edited August 16, 2010 by dennisllante
changed from bold letters to plain

[IronsightSniper]

Sorry, what did I admit? That I have no specifications for the APG-79? :)

Okay, and? The radar equation will give you a way to compare at least roughly, and the RCS assumption is a relatively safe one.

 

But if you really don't know, and you don't think I know, then why are you talking about facts?

 

Yes, you have no hard facts regarding the detection range of the APG-79. As for "me not knowing and you not knowing", it was a simple statement that nothing is better than facts, don't get too ancy :music_whistling:

 

I'd like to believe you didn't say that with a straight face :D

 

Oh but I did, a Su-30 with plasma stealth pretty much negates the gap of the RCS advantage of the Superbug.

 

What is it that you knew to forget, since apparently you know of no facts?

 

If you want, we can make each other cite every statement we made, so, give me all your proof regarding all your claims.

 

... did you not start this post with talking about facts, and not having sources?

 

I cited Deagle.com and Enemyforces.com, you should go back to caring about this thread. :smilewink:

 

 

You have admitted to knowing nothing; you have failed to use reasonable methods of comparison when pointed to them; you are unable to accept sources of information other than the same internet sources that copy each other ad infinitum; and then you went on to say something like:

 

.. while having no useful sources of your own. Seriously. Fail.

 

Having the same sources over again only means redundency. Having no sources like yourself means spineless claims. You use original research, I go by the books. You are not willing to accept me, and I am not willing to accept you. Face it, we've both been failing and so has everyone here.

[GGTharos]

I posted a couple sources, you didn't look at them. So ... you just babble on, and keep failing, Sir. :D

 

PS: FYI, both of your sources just copy-paste what they find elsewhere. Not much of a source.

 

Having the same sources over again only means redundency. Having no sources like yourself means spineless claims. You use original research, I go by the books. You are not willing to accept me, and I am not willing to accept you. Face it, we've both been failing and so has everyone here.

[Pilotasso]

Yes, you have no hard facts regarding the detection range of the APG-79. As for "me not knowing and you not knowing", it was a simple statement that nothing is better than facts, don't get too ancy :music_whistling:

 

 

 

Oh but I did, a Su-30 with plasma stealth pretty much negates the gap of the RCS advantage of the Superbug.

 

 

 

If you want, we can make each other cite every statement we made, so, give me all your proof regarding all your claims.

 

 

 

I cited Deagle.com and Enemyforces.com, you should go back to caring about this thread. :smilewink:

 

 

 

 

Having the same sources over again only means redundency. Having no sources like yourself means spineless claims. You use original research, I go by the books. You are not willing to accept me, and I am not willing to accept you. Face it, we've both been failing and so has everyone here.

 

So, GG has no facts but your absense of facts is better than his??? :huh: :D

[IronsightSniper]

I call http://www.deagle.com and http://www.enemyforces.com to the stands. If exec does not disagree, I might as well call Carlo Kopp to the stands.

 

GG so far has posted a diagram of a semi-circle with numbers. Not much explanation.

[EtherealN]

Yes Iron, GG only uses original research. That's why he posted charts from the russian manuals. ;)

[dennisllante]

What You guys should research is if the F-18 and Su-30 has been in a real life combat to death (not combat exercises)..that's the only way to know who wins..historical facts not technological capabilities..

 

I remember in military channel top-10 fighters, P-51 mustang was number 1!..and the F/A 22 was number 10..you would expect it was number one because of high technology..but of course P-51 has a Historical Kill Record..

[EtherealN]

GG so far has posted a diagram of a semi-circle with numbers. Not much explanation.

 

Actually, that shows the WEZ of the R-27ER at different altitudes, platform velocities and aspects. From the russian manuals. ;)

[GGTharos]

So far, AFAIK, the F-18C is the only modern aircraft to kill bandits during self-escort. I might be wrong - but that's about all the real A2A the hornet has seen AFAIK.

The Su-30 has not even seen that.

 

What You guys should research is if the F-18 and Su-30 has been in a real life combat to death (not combat exercises)..that's the only way to know who wins..historical facts not technological capabilities..

[dennisllante]

Yes, but the ONLY way to prove who wins..is when these Two Meet in real Life..Until then We can never say who wins..there's just too many variables.

 

Again we need historical facts..in a war situation anything can happen..lack of respect on enemy capabilities will definitely get you killed.

Edited August 16, 2010 by dennisllante
spelling

[GGTharos]

Sure. Do you think that NATO is not respecting their potential enemies capabilities?

 

Yes, but the ONLY way to prove who wins..is when these Two Meet in real Life..Until then We can never say who wins..there's just too many variables.

 

Again we need historical facts..in a war situation anything can happen..lack of respect on enemy capabilities will definitely get you killed.

[EtherealN]

Even then there's still the question: were the pilots of equal skill? Did they have equal support from AWACS/GCI etc?

 

The kind of "proof" you are talking about is an impossibility.

[GGTharos]

I call www.deagle.com and www.enemyforces.com to the stands. If exec does not disagree, I might as well call Carlo Kopp to the stands.

 

All of which have been rejected as useful sources by ED, a bunch of RL fighter pilots, including one who posted his opinion on Kopp in this very thread.

 

GG so far has posted a diagram of a semi-circle with numbers. Not much explanation.

... which is used by Russian combat pilots, and for some reason they match with RL HUD symbology for the appropriate missile! Who couldt have guessed? ;)

[Pilotasso]

Even then there's still the question: were the pilots of equal skill? Did they have equal support from AWACS/GCI etc?

 

The kind of "proof" you are talking about is an impossibility.

 

 

Logistics support and ofset deals is equaly important, and this is another area where the Su-30 is at disavantage, safe from indian and chinese cases.

 

 

In the case of indonesia I would guess their small fleet would see relativeley poor avaiablility making it even look smaller for combat purposes. When planes are few and fly less pilot avaiability and skill suffers as well. This is tru and extends to the vast majority of its operators.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Pilotasso

[tflash]

In the hypothesis that the AU party did not first disable their airfields, I guess the best chance for the Su-30's would be in a pursuit when the Hornets are egressing after a strike.

 

Also supposing that there is no fighter sweep / escort party.

 

The problem with long-range strike in the past was that your fighter escort ran out of gas when it counted. But that is not anymore the way it goes: the escorts just buddy refuel from other Hornets just before doing the last leg. Given the fact that USN Super Hornets are doing CAS over landlocked Afghanistan from a carrier on a daily basis (averaging 5-6 hour flights) for years now, no one should ever doubt long-range is still a problem.

[exec]

I'll jump in again with missile ranges (last time I promise).

If someone is still not convinced:

 

R-27R http://aeroweb.lucia.it/rap/Vympel/R-27.jpg

R-77 http://aeroweb.lucia.it/rap/Vympel/RVV-AE.jpg (25% more than the R-27R)

AIM-120 - russian manual + range we've seen on F-16s HUD confirms that AMRAAM has longer legs than R-27R and R-77.

[dennisllante]

Su-30's and F-18's have NEVER in a real combat situation..until that time (hope never comes).

 

We will never know the answer.

[EtherealN]

Like I said: even then we won't, since either side of the debate will be able to say "oh, but the pilots from Airforce X had less flight hours/worse maintenance/less support and therefore it isn't a fair statistic".

[IronsightSniper]

So, 1 picture of the HUD of a F-16 decisively proves that the AIM-120 outranges the R-77? I don't think so buddy. Also, the maximum ranges in that picture of the R-27 goes from 72 to 130 km, compared to the 100 km on the export R-77. I really don't see how the miraculous fact that the AIM-120 outranges them all are present.

 

As for GG, what reasons are there to deny them as "useful" sources? And really, one pilot telling me what to feel about another guy is not something I would trust.

 

In any case, any chances of a F/A-18E/F meeting a equally trained/equipped Su-30 would most likely occur in the Pacific or Mediterreanean, as for AWACs and ECW, that's a whole nother argument. Even though I like the Su-30 and it's compliment of missiles, in reality, the Su-30 in Indonesia that the Superbugs in Australia might be facing are: low in numbers, poorely trained, poorely equipped(AA-2 ffs), and above all else, logistically incompatiable to the Superbug.

 

So yeah, in a realistic scenario, the Superbug would reign supreme over Indonesia, you can make a good plane but it won't work without good pilots.