There is no question, the Su-30MKI is superior to FC-1, when it comes to a 1:1 encounter and both pilots are informed of the threat. Even in close-combat the Su-30MKI is in favour.
In real life it depends on circumstances. When surprised or in a disadvantage situation, the outcome maybe different. Similar in multiple encounters.
The main advantage of Su-30MKI is, its crew has the choise to refuse a fight under disadvantage conditions, when the FC-1 has not. The number of opponent FC-1 does not matter in this case. Similar like F-15E it can hit a target and fight its way in and out. All western fighters are judged against a “Su-35” threat with a good pilot in an one-one encounter as yardstick. But this is statistics and bound to conditions there. 🙂

How you assume that in 1:1 Su-30MKI has advantage over FC-1. FC-1 can lock 3sqm target at 100KM. just think about 25sqm target. Similarly FC-1 is coming with 100deg offboresight WVR and HMD so no advantage there. disengaging means running away from BVR which is impossible. once you are locked and missile is fired in no escape zone there is no running away.

Also to talk about FC-1 in general.

Here’s the deal. FC-1 is far by the most cost effective light multirole fighter out there, when compared to other lighter aircraft on the market like A-50 and Gripen, it is certainly cheaper than both of them(twice as cheaper than Gripen) and will not be plagued by political embargoes and such. It’s like a plug and play plane, as it looks like the 15mn base price is probably for the Chinese version, and by the time PAF installs all the Western goodies they want like avionics and radar(Grifo-M) it will be around 20mn mark.

For PAF, FC-1 will offer good avionics and probably a radar and it should make a decent Air Defense fighter, however when it will be overwhelmed by massive Indian armed ARH fighters like Mig-29s, Mig-21s, LCAs, Flankers, M2Ks and with support of AWACS, the 150 FC-1s for Pakistan will have a hard time with just GCI support. In a dogfight, I would expect the FC-1 to loose against the Mig-29, Mig-21 and the Flanker because of the R-73+HMS combo which PAF’s FC-1s really won’t have and the R-73 is better than any Chinese equivelant dogfighting AAM. I would expect it to hold off its own against the M2K or the LCA somehow. Don’t hope for FC-1 to have a TVC RD-33 variant, the Indian lobbying and if they do it will **** of India and Russia doesnt want that. As for PAF FC-1s A2G weapons, the BVRAAM, AshM and SRAAM seem to be already settled and for sure, as for other Chinese weapons, they are still in long development.

Now as for other FC-1s, like I said plug and play, TVC variant of RD-33 if wanted, plug in Russian or Israeli weapons and avionics and you got yourself a nice cheap light multirole fighter(all depends who the customer is, the budget and such, but it would not be much).

As for FC-1 having similar performance to Su-30, yahh are you serious? The FC-1’s range is similar to that of A-50, FCK1 and Gripen based on weights, engine efficiency and of course internal fuel. The F-16, J-10, M2K and Mig-29 are a tad big higher in range than those fighters. In T/W ratio FC-1 simply cannot compare to likes of Su-30, nor in payload, range or anything of that sort.

FC-1 is coming with HMD and A-Darter(IIR, 100offbore), PL-5C,PL-9C. So no advantage there for Su-30. Oponnet of FC-1 does not matter as it is built with smaller RCS than all Indian fighters in mind. And FC-1 will be backed by AWACS (ERIEYE or Chinese) so no advantage there also. R-73 is no yesterday news. It is more than likely that China will pass all techniques to deceive it to PAF. As i said there is no intellectual controls on russian tech unlike French, Italian or South african.

Please, at least I have some intellectual capacity. Where is yours? destroyed after your last OD? :dev2: Remember that speculation does not mean fact, http://www.dictionary.com is your friend.

Now if you want a better example, you have Russian, French and Italian products on display, does that mean they’re all going to be bought? Such idiotic assumptions. :rolleyes:

Not they not going to be bought but there is possbility of all of them to be used on system. no body display product where it is not compatible with system. It will be interesting to see R-27EP with Grifo.

note the choice of weopons. MICA, Aspide, A-Darter, PL-5C.

Yahoo25 you are going against the logic, the top Su-27 variant is the Su-37 and Su-30MKI, you are simply telling me a statement that does not go with the reality, the Indians got the must advanced Su-27 variant, the F-22 has Thrust vectoring and the AL-41 is the most advanced three dimensional thrust vectoring engine in the world and the Russians fitted those to the MiG-1.44 and Su-47 was to be fitted also with them why? because the thrust vectoring enhances the turning ability of any jet the F-16 VISTA can defeat any J-10 or FC-1 only becasue it has thrust vectoring and the Chinese know they will need Thrust vectoring to enhance the J-10 if the F-35 or F-16 are fitted with thrust vectoring engines

I am not going against logic. I am simply telling the statement of Russian airforce deputy. You shoud know that current Su-35 uses AL-31FP engines not the much higher rated AL-31FM-2. There is new FBW system for SK, New air to ground modes, new IRST(same as Su-35), New EW suite with 4 ton less weight than MKI. That new engines are the key. AL-41 is not in operation but superseded by less thrust AL-41F1. Sure thurst vectoring is the way to go but not untill its up time is increased to acceptable levels.
here is another view of FC-1. I can safely assume CFT is coming with this. just look at rectangular back.

this image of heavier AA-10 presumably for FC-1. so this theory doesnot hold that heavier BVR cannot be carried by lighter fighters.

Interms of capability MKI is not better than current F-16 or Mirage 2000. F-16 will beat it in climb rate but MKI is better in turn rate.

In terms of air-to-air, beyond-visual-range engagements, the Su-30MKI’s powerful NOIlM Bars-M radar gives the aircraft capabilities similar to the F-15E’s AN/APG-70 or the F-15Cs AN/APG-63(V)2, but it surpasses the F-IoCs AN/APG-68(V)5 and the Mirage 2000’s RDI radar. The newest French RDY and US AN/ APG-68(V)9 compare well to the Bars-M as far as modes and general capabilities, but they have lower ranges and power outputs. The Su-30’s main disadvantage, though, is that it has a large radar cross-section (RCS) and can be detected earlier than any of the Western aircraft being compared here, as they all have significantly smaller RCSs. But Russia’s new plasma-stealth technology can be a very big advantage for the Su-SOMKI1 if and when employed (see “Russian Stealth Research Revealed,” JED, Ianuary 2004.

As for the air-to-ground capabilities, the Su-SOMKI essentially is restricted to only daytime operations, although it can employ a wide variety of laser- and TV-guided weapons, including the Kh-59M (140-km range with the ARK-9 datalink and TV guidance). The Chinese Su-SOMKK, with addition of the Sapsan targeting pod, has basic night-attack capabilities, although in fair weather only (the US LANTIRN pod and similar Western systems are much more capable). The Su-SOMKl has two MilStd 1553B data buses, however, so it is not difficult to integrate a variety of existing targeting pods with the aircraft.

The Su-SOMKI presently lacks the capability to drop GPS-guided bombs. However, such weapons are under development in Russia, and the aircraft’s avionics system already has some of the features required for the integration of such weapons. The other disadvantage of the Su-SOMKI is its lack of true standoff weapons, work on such which in Russia is only in the very early stages.

The Su-SOMKI, however, can be a very capable aircraft for the suppression of enemy air defenses, as it can carry four fast and effective Kh-SlP anti-radiation missiles. The Kh-SlP was optimized for the Patriot’s radar and could, therefore, be very dangerous (see “Crimson SEAD”, /ED, January 2003). The same can be said about the Su-SOMKFs anti-ship capabilities, especially with addition of the Indian Brahmos supersonic missiles, (see “Cruiser and Destroyer Killers”, JED, November 2003).

Generally speaking, the Su-30MKI can be assessed as an aircraft of similar capabilities to the existing F-16C, F-15E, and Mirage 2000 and, as such, should be taken very seriously.