Nick_76Before we get on to the old chestnut that China gets treated worse than India in terms of arms transfers it should be pointed out that there is not actually any evidence for this.
My personal favorite is the comparison between the Su-30MKI and the Su-30MK2. Sure the MKI is a better aircraft but the reason behind that is not Russia’s attitude to China but about Chinas 1996 desire for immediate capability. The spending splurge that occurred in the immediate aftermath of the 1996 straights crisis does not fit with the long term Chinese procurement and development plans and was intended to try and offset some of the humiliation caused by the arrival of the USN.
Sovremennys/Moskits
Kilos/Klubs
S-300FM
Help for the Chinese space program
etc.China has got plenty out of Russia.
China got the crown jewels just as India did
the entire issue is which items are available to china and which to india and whether all that is available to india has been available to china.
i think not. there is evidence to back this, including several of the key systems on the mki itself. no jvs with china/ deep license for any cutting edge item, which is the absolute best russia has at any time. one of the reasons – real – because of which india has signed up for pak-fa is to have this quid pro quo with russia continue. otherwise things may have turned out differently and russia may have had to finally turn to china.
Nick_76Before we get on to the old chestnut that China gets treated worse than India in terms of arms transfers it should be pointed out that there is not actually any evidence for this.
My personal favorite is the comparison between the Su-30MKI and the Su-30MK2. Sure the MKI is a better aircraft but the reason behind that is not Russia’s attitude to China but about Chinas 1996 desire for immediate capability. The spending splurge that occurred in the immediate aftermath of the 1996 straights crisis does not fit with the long term Chinese procurement and development plans and was intended to try and offset some of the humiliation caused by the arrival of the USN.
Sovremennys/Moskits
Kilos/Klubs
S-300FM
Help for the Chinese space program
etc.China has got plenty out of Russia.
China got the crown jewels just as India did
the entire issue is which items are available to china and which to india and whether all that is available to india has been available to china.
i think not. there is evidence to back this, including several of the key systems on the mki itself. no jvs with china either, or a deep license for any item. and one of the reasons – real – because of which india has signed up for pak-fa is to have this quid pro quo with russia continue. otherwise things may have turned out differently and russia may have had to finally turn to china.
Nick_76That’s a whole lot of bull, if I may say so. The Chinese N001VE and VEP does have DSPs. Funny that Chinese N001s even support R-77s while the original Russian systems don’t. They also feature an additional MFD for additional modes (on the original N001); the MFD itself is visually and photographically confirmed and this is something you don’t see in the canopies of Russian Su-27s.
spare me your ranting about bovine parts please. mfds by themselves dont mean any extra modes in a2a. the chinese n001 v variants use dsp for a2g functions, while the same is not available for additional signal processing in air to air. the air to air filtering is done via analogue filtering banks as in the original n001 series. the rvv-ae function is enabled by an entirely different set up which doesnt add much to the overall functionality of the radar.
i could post more, but it depends on whether you can even have a sane discussion without bringing in national pride into it.
Velocity Search , which by the way, is also used in Western fighter radars (it was invented there), is not a very useful situational awareness tool since it cannot give range. It only gives velocity and heading, but you always run to RWS and later TWS for some real useful information. VS is a “cheat” mode meant to give the radar a better looking spec and can be added to a radar with little cost. The fact that there is no boost on RWS and TWS capabilities—where it really all counts—shows there is no substantial improvement at all.
speak to a fighter pilot about how and where the vs is used, and how useful it is for a quick scan of prioritising threats and you’ll say it differently. vs and rws both have their own utility and especially in the manner in which they are integrated into the flanker. not only do the russian radars now have vs, they also have rws and several other modes only available in the latest (and more expensive) russian/ western radars. the chinese n001’s on the other hand, run in the old usual tws equivalent mode.
I also find it very funny how you talk about track record with tphuang. The Chinese sources do have a proven track record right to the tee in predicting things long before Western sources can confirm them. Do you personally have a good track record in saying what should come and whatever did? You have been all gaga about this Russian cooperation thing, and now India is in a major mess with its arms programs with the Russians. So you have a better track record? Who is here more on “faith”?
you can find it as funny as you want- these diversions will get you nowhere.
your so called chinese sources which you remark- if they have evidence, lets see it. fact is that irbis is but in recent tests, and china itself has had no access to time travel technology to see the radar. my personal track record, as if it matters- and loose lips sink ships. what i know about indian procurement, stays with me until it becomes public.
last, whether or not indias procurement is a major mess is irrelevant, we are talking of china here.
second, fact is that apart from bought out items, the codevelopment, significant license production programs w/ russia have all been successful and appreciated by the indian military and r&d establishment. so much so, they are even willing to go the extra mile in negotiating for more of the same, whether it be the t-50 or brahmos follow on, or some other items which will become public in due course.
Nick_76hexpop, for one, whether irbis or apg-79 or apg-77, with awacs, the entire concept of having fighter radars alone for situational awareness is not the way things will be done. what this fcr range is good for is discrete tracking at extreme ranges, allowing for long range ultra bvr sniper shots at supporting assets of the enemy. when i say this, i dont mean 400 km, even half of that will do.
so irbis is a very potent threat, dont underestimate it if it comes with a full weapons package that allows for it to be exploited. otherwise, the finer things for fighter radars, are modes, whether raid assessment or nctr or lpi. in the last, yes, aesas are ahead.
Nick_76believe what you must. All the Chinese sources that I use have proven themselves in other areas before. I don’t believe export Irbis would be full spec either, but the one China gets will not be any less the one that Venezuela gets for example.
c’mon tp you are a nice guy, and trust me i mean you no offense or imply any insult when i say this.
am i the one who is “believeing what i must” or is it you, with this faith based system in a bunch of websites? doesnt it strike you remotely weird that the chinese got a time machine moved to the future, tested a radar which is by no means done and is ramping up testing now, and then came back to present time, with the test results even?! its like some indian website claiming that they evaluated the pak fa secretly, and it didnt hit more than mach 2. well, get the darn thing flying first before claiming a whopper. this aint no different.
coming to china and venezuala- i definitely doubt whether what venez gets will be full spec, but thats a lot to do with us-venez politics. i for one think that nothing state of the art will go to venezuala yet because the us will be monitoring it 24/7 and the last thing, russia needs is for its latest bunch of systems taken down by the usual overwhelming force blitz, but giving its gear a bad name in the process.
Nick_76Yeah. Radar manufacturers have a way of pulling legs of their customers by introducing modes e.g. Velocity Search, that extend the range of detection further but at the expense of providing quality information about the target. I mean like giving only the speed information, but not the range information.
if thats what you want to believe, go ahead but it aint the reality. fact is that the russians recieved long range vsearch which is quite useful for situational awareness, and specific enhancements which werent provided to china and this was done at the express request of the russian govt. ask niip themselves if you want to confirm it. in fact, russians got raid assessment since their n001 has a digital receiver and dsp for a2a, unlike the chinese n001s which only got analog filtering banks and neither do they have long range modes, raid assessment etc etc let alone the more fancy stuff like nctr.
Nick_76that’s what they advertise, not necessarily going to reach that. Did you see what they were going for before with N-001 and didn’t reach their ambitious goals?
Let’s put it this way, China has already tested this thing according to JDW and Chinese sources and the Russians are trying to sell su-35 along with Irbis to China right now (confirmed by Kanwa). If this thing can actually track F-22 from 90 km out and other radars available do not have this capability, they’d be jumping at the opportunity. I certainly wouldn’t trust Russian sales pitch.
dude, dont know how you can believe in such stuff when everything is against it. there is no evidence that the irbis has been tested by china at all. in fact, its but entering full scale tests now, and has only demonstrated certain facets of raw range in mkk tests and a theoretical possibility that it can track 30 targets, and engage 8 – this from running simulated targets through its present processing eqpt.
the chinese sources you are depending upon are bunkum.
and sukhoi wll sell the pak-fa to iran if it could doesnt mean the russian govt will agree to it. time will tell, but i have my money on china not getting the full specs irbis and wisely deciding to continue with its homegrown radars.
second, there is no evidence that the f-22 is just 0.1 or 0.01 sq mtr either. the actual rcs is classified and will remain so for another decade and a half in all probability.
and lastly, they did reach their ambitious goals with the n001…in russian service. including adding long range search modes which werent exported to china.
Nick_76I know, offer the Indians the F-16XL with recessed positions for AMRAAM-C7e and AIM-9Xe.
The little ‘e’ means I only support them getting the export version of each; no HOJ, no lofted trajectory, no tlu beyond the initial 27 miles, and no IIR.
…and the indians will use the lm bid as a doorstop ..good idea! :p :p
Nick_76The US has some decent stuff but it doesn’t have squat for defending the country. A couple ABMs is about it. No SAMs.
and that is why the us bears the brunt of alien invasions and monster attacks. the lack of effective sams is what causes nyc, la and sf plus dc to get trashed. 😡
Nick_76The letter to AFM (i haven’t seen a copy of it, here) :
reads like a tabloid piece of trash. says a lot for the credibility of afm that they’ll publish such bilge, with a snippet from the editor as well. sheesh. mark one more up for the falling standards of defence journalism worldwide.
Nick_76What is this obsession Indian defence commentators seem to have nowadays with Israel & the USA? Look at Bharat Rakshak, & you see that many posters seem to take it as given that Israeli missiles, radars, UAVs – you name it – are matched only by American. There are also fervent partisans of Russian weapons, but they often argue on price grounds.
Meanwhile, other producers are treated as if they don’t exist. This is a case in point: Austria produces rotary-wing UAVs which are in service (Schiebel Camcopter). Sweden has one under test (Saab Skeldar), reckoned ready for service before the end of this year. EADS will happily sell you rather bigger maritime VTOL UAVs (& one can hardly say that Eurocopter aren’t serious players). Etc, etc. Yet the author of this article, like one of Pavlovs dogs, reflexively says “Israel & USA”.
http://www.schiebel.net/pages/cam_applic.html
http://www.saabgroup.com/en/ProductsServices/products_az.htm
http://www.uvs-international.org/pdfs/brochures/eads-sde_uav_orka1200.pdf
he who has the money, has the song sung to his tune.
force is a magazine which routinely shills for israel and the us.
no wonder, because its proprietor gets significant advertising revenue from certain indian representatives of firms based out of those two countries!
btw, in a recent interview to the same mag, the naval chief shot down claims by force that india should seek “jv” with other countries for rotary uav’s saying hal is perfectly capabe of doing it and they should do it because navy wants max indigenisation! and that only mission payloads can be acquired from other countries- if need be!
of course force didnt put it in bold or emphasise it.
Nick_76Actually, the Su-30K’s that the IAF operated, had been upgraded to the MK standard by the end of 2000!
what is this “mk standard”? the iaf k’s as far as air to air was concerned remained k’s! you are mistaken here.
the “mk” designation only comes into some validity viz the iaf k’s when we consider a2g integration and is more of a marketing sleight of hand, than anything in real terms.
apart from that, its the mkis in india which have far superior a2a performance, and they didnt take part in cope india.
when you consider the su-30k’s that did take part, their avionics were a generation behind those on the f-15 c to begin with. the su-30k’s had n001 cassegrain array radars whereas the f-15 c’s had the apg-63 series. so its not some “uber” indian fighter taking on the non aesa equipped poor f-15s. both guys had datalinks. but not all the indian fighters were equipped with datalinks only the k’s were. iaf tho’ had done intensive mission planning and changed tactics with an audible when the k’s called it out.
Hasn’t that been the story of the Tornado’s life, with tactics they can accomplish their mission against anyone. Their kills in exercises against F-14’s and F-15C’s were basically due to tactics not the performance of the Tornado.
My late friend Art, an F-14A pilot stated the greatest strength of the Tornado community is their tacticians. The tactics and discipline pilots made the plane a good aircraft.
yes, agree about the tornados pilots and tacticians. but they didnt have a walk over the su-30 which did fairly well in the exercises and reaffirmed the iaf’s faith in the type, which is what i was also referring to.
true, AW&ST stated and alluded to this several times. Statements about leaving their F-15C’s equipt with the (V)2 radars, “-9X” and, HMDS were left at home for these aircraft were already scheduled for an air exercise with the Singapore AF. That they realize the ROEs agreed upon took away their best effort by limiting the USAF SARH missile firing eighteen miles on the offensive and twenty miles on the defensive plus the opposition was able to ARH missiles (Adders and MICAs).
Adrian
apart from direct quotes by neubeck and snowden, the awst article has several errors in it.
the battle between the f-15s and iaf was lost primarily in the bvr stage. no point in bringing the hmd and aim-9x then.
the apg-63 was far superior to the n001 on the iaf k’s- the best a2a radar used by the iaf. so wheres the need for the aesa?
the only real restriction was the lack of active homers on the usaf side if this was true to begin with- rayrubik should have more details. but even with sarh missiles, it was the f-15 guys bad tactics that doomed them to get such a lopsided score- they couldnt decide whom to focus on – the strike team or the escorts and hence got whacked. this was because of poor mission planning- didnt know what they’d be facing in oca or dca. and they were participants in the roe creation and let it slide since they didnt even think the iaf were competent at bvr. they came in thinking it would be a friendly “teach a lesson to a third world af” kind of thing, but not a competitive exercise.
they didnt make the same mistake in cope 2.
Nick_76This thread reminds me of a thread on F-16.Net, F-22 Forum in which an F-22 pilot and an F-15D (“RaptorKiller”) disagreed over an engagements between the two types of aircraft. They went back and forth a couple of times until I interjected the detail of ROE’s. I stated they were probably both correct in that there is nothing to state that both sides had the same ROE’s!
The F-22 pilot did make mention that there are different levels stealth of which the F-22 can use!! It (stealth) is not an all or nothing situation of which most people tend to think. Drop tanks, leaving certain antennas uncovered, etc. can greatly enhance the capability of the F-22’s opposition.
We can’t even begin to intelligently speculate on the F-22 or Typhoon versus any other aircraft until both sides are allowed to work the skies without restrictions. Remember how bad the USAF’s F-15C’s looked up against the InAF’s Su-30MK’s until we learned the ROE’s.
Since then word has come out the RAF Tornado’s working with AWACS gave the InAF’s Su-30MK’s a real bad time in BVR. Another posting made the comment that there are ‘points’ at speeds above Mach 1.1 and above 30K ft. (9,150m) where the F-15 can out turn the Su-30. (I have no second confirmation by some authority on that but, I have seen diagrams of rate of turns between the F-15 and the Su-27).
The only thing we do know for sure is that free play (no ROE’s), the F-22 defeated five F-15C’s, four F-16C’s (in BVR) and, shot them all down. In another exercise three F-16C’s with HOB missiles (Archer Class) plus HMDS went against in WVR. The F-22 shot down all three of the F-16C’s although the third F-16C fired simultaneously as the F-22, so it was judged a mutual kill.Adrian
theres a lot of incorrect stuff in your post adrian, passed off as fact.
no su-30 mks fought the f-15s. only su-30 k’s did. and the lopsided results were as much a result of usaf overconfidence as they were to roe’s.
second, there is no “word” on the su-30 mkis ever getting a bad time in bvr from the tornados. there was one pak idiot who made up a story about it and posted it on another forum and tried to con people into thinking it was true. in fact, it was pretty much the reverse with the raf commander praising the mkis as a far superior aircraft. the tornados did set up bvr traps on occasion tho’ some of which worked against bisons etc- not much to do with any aircrafts per se but tactics and a testimony to the raf’s bvr skills.
Nick_76Yeah, I really liked the part where the guy says the Typhoons made “mincemeat” out of the Su-30MKIs. Where’s burgerboy (F-18 hamburger) gone, he’d have loved it! 😀 Can’t believe an international mag like AFM will give such reports print space. 😮
Regards,
USS.
letters to the editor in afm and the rest is akin to the “penthouse letters”…all idle fantasy directed towards the editor of the mag and an easy way to get one bs printed. only a few are to the point corrections or add valuable information.
Nick_76Ok here’s my take
1. Rafale
2. Mirage 4000
3. Mirage 2000
4. Mirage F1
5. Mirage III😀
is there anything common to those types? 😀
Sign In
