The only place for F-15C/E is retirement. Airframe cannot sustain beyond 10 years. and it takes even longer to upgrade an airplane than building new one.
Flanker has large airframe so it is capable of carrying internal and external jammers with boatload of BVR missiles. We are not going into multi-rack arrangement on flanker. it will always be competitive.

So now it takes a long time to upgrade aircraft? Or is it just that it takes a long time for anybody but Sukhoi and the RuAF?:cool:

How many ships can fire a couple of SM-2s at a reasonably stealthy target from ~100 miles away?

The Kh-35 has its place in the Russian inventory of anti-ship weapons, particularly in its airlaunched variant. It isn’t really a Harpoon counterpart in that it carries a smaller warhead and has a shorter range than the most recent AGM-84s, but it is *very* compact for a reasonably long-ranged weapon designed in the 1980s. Substantially shorter (4,2 vs. 4,8m) and lighter (480kg vs. 540kg) than Harpoon, it is more like an early take on what NSM is designed to be. Compare to contemporary airlaunched Exocet variants which carried a warhead that was only slightly heavier but weighed the same as a ship-launched Uran *including* the booster – only with half the range!

If the bays on the PAK-FA are infact large enough to accomodate a 4,2m weapon I bet the Kh-35 design team will be congratulating themselves for keeping the folding wings of the ship-launched version in the airlaunched variant 😉

Exactly how far from shore will these tactical aircraft be engaging surface ships, and in what kind of numbers?

Scramble says they get NATO standard 180 hours per year at a minimum, and AWST said that the Su-30 pilots at Cope 4 the USAF flew against were at 300 hours per year. Of course, that was the K version and I dont think they have had many MKIs yet to fly so extensively. I think you are right about the situational awareness part. But regionally speaking, the Indians will only get some 3-6 Phalcons and their local Embraer AEW&C airplane and that should be good enough for them.

In addition to the number of flight hours, you also have to look at the number of US pilots going through Red Flag/Top Gun/etc… as well as training with/against NATO pilots, etc… That cross training combined with flight hours creates a synergy that mere flight hours alone can’t compete with.

Same will be the flanker arm it with other types of weapons and it always will win.

here is the question which one is the most agile fighter, the F-15 or the Su-27? the answer is the Su-27, the pilot reaction was he used guns so you are considering a gun battle to show who is the best airframe, the answer is the Su-27 all the time.

with a 21 deg/s instantaneous turn rate and a 16 deg/s sustained turn rate you can not expect the F-15 to be the winner because the Su-27 numbers are 27deg/s instantaneous turn rate and a sustained turn rate of 21 deg/s, the SU-30MKI is better than the regular Su-27B

now what the pilot is saying is the Indian pilots did not use the Su-30MKI properly and basicly since it is not stealthy in a real war the F-15 will beat the Su-30MKI, now if you go to airframe and aerodynamics the F-15 won`t win.

the whole point is in a no air to air missiles combat only guns dogfight the F-15 is inferior, armed with same missiles like the IRIS-T, Python V or AIM-9X both aircraft more or less have the same chances.

The irony what the pilot is talking about is that a super agile fighter can be beaten by just simply not turning horizontally and using vertical turning not horizontal turning.

Newer Su-35BM have corrected the shortcomings seen in the Su-30MKI, what the F-15 pilot is saying is what the Hellcat pilots knew, do not turn just do slash attacks.

The failure of the indian pilot is do a tactic wrong, first you have to make the F-15 to turn later you beat it, if the SU-30MKI plays well his cards always will win in a dogfight with only guns.

The newer Su-35MB will use supercruise to be quick and nimble, will be fast and agile so in performance and agility will be as difficult as an F-22.

The Su-30MKI has only one real advantage over a fighter like the F-15, that is superior agility but in combat a good missile will reduce that chance, the Pilot is not talking about such combat but a combat where superior agility was not well used and it was outsmarted by cunning, this will work once in real wars after that the Su-30MKI pilots will learn the lesson and will beat the F-15. and he meant that, once they start learning the opposition`s tactics these will become useless for the F-15 pilots.

The question is whose pilots on average are more experienced? Of course a more experienced pilot is less prone to making mistakes, so that goes without saying. The F-15 in the real world will never be fighting Flankers 1:1, but as part of a team. No other Air Force will have greater situational awareness under real world conditions than the USAF. Under most real world conditions, the USAF won’t be fighting at a numerical disadvantage. The AESA upgrades combined with the -120C7/D, -9X/JHMCS will ensure that a foe doesn’t have avionic/weapon superiority.

Ground based radars just liks SAM can also be transported by strategic airlift to battlefied. AWACS doesnot operate in vaccum. It needs land bases and tanker support. and low altitude targets can also be picked by fighter radar.

Let me get this straight- prior to the first day of war, you’re gonna use airlift to set up ground based radars, in a non-permissive environment?:rolleyes:

AWACS have a long range, so they don’t have to launch from a bordering nation airbase, and with tanker support, can remain airborne for very long periods.

Fighters can detect low altitude targets, but….with a relatively narrow field of view compared with a dedicated AWACS’ search volume, and with far less endurance.

One last point, just because you can out turn an apponent DOES NOT guarantee that you will win the fight. Just ask the Japanese Zero pilots…

Exactly- if a pilot uses lead or lag pursuit wisely, they can fight more manueverable aircraft, and win. This is where pilot experience comes into the equation, and where there’s no substitute for stick time.

so what? the Flankers fly with no external fuel tanks anyway in general configuration..they only will carry external missiles, which would add drag, not as much though as fuel tanks would.

The point is that the F-15 wasn’t clean, yet was still very competitive, and able to prevail, when flown well.