Yes thats the ferry range, combat radius is significantly less. There is no way the FC-1 can have a combat radius over 900km. I would expect something like anywhere between 600-800km.

You should click the site. 864 nautical mile is old figure. 2037 KM is new figure for range.

this is your old data from Flug rev. there dimensions are also wrong.
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRFC-1.htm

Dimensions (Abmessungen)
Length (Länge): 13,95 m
Heigth (Höhe): 5,10 m
Span (Spannweite): 9,00 m

——————————————————————————–

Weights (Massen)
Empty weight (Leermasse): about 6350 kg
External load (Außenlasten): 3800 kg
Max. take-off weight (Max. Startmasse): around 12700 kg

——————————————————————————–

Performance (Flugleistungen)
Max. speed (max. Fluggeschwindigkeit): around Mach 1.6, clean
Take-off run (Startrollstrecke): 500 m
Landing run (Landerollstrecke): 700 m
Service ceiling (Dienstgipfelhöhe): 16500 m
Combat radius (Einsatzradius):
– 1200 km as a fighter
– 700 km for ground attack mission
Range (Reichweite):
– 1600 km maximum on internal fuel
– 2220 km ferry
g-Limit (max. Lastvielfaches): + 8

PS. Maximum ferry range is now 3500KM as mentioned by peoples daily not 2220KM. Als 1200KM fighter radius and 700KM for ground attack is still good enough. we still don’t know what will be Su-30 radius in full ground strike role.

Why you think the Su-30MKI only can carry four R-7? it can carry eight R-77/AA-12.
The Fc-1 operation radius is just a mere 1352Km, range of the Su-30MKI 8000km with one inflight refueling.
However what i have read about the Su-30MKi says it only can carry 6 AA-12 adder but it is possible to carry eight AA-12 since look at the pictures the SU-35 can carry four AA-12 Adder in wing hard points

How is 1352KM operational radius small when Flanker radius is 1500KM? Here we are not talking about exteranl support like Air refeullers or AWACS. It is fight between 1 Su-30 and 3 datalinked FC-1 or group of Su-30 with much larger group of FC-1. I already gave 8 BVR for Su-30 in air to air role which is the maximum it can take. Do you even know that only two R-77 can be guided simultaneously through datalinks versus 4 SD-10. this another limitation of R-77 in addition to not having lofted profile. 3 Fuel tanks will give 3500KM range to FC-1 which is ofcourse more than 3000KM of Su-30. So need of it. Instead one centreline tank is enough for air to air role in most cases.

No i was wrong it can carry 8 BVRAAMs (and i later corrected my statements) and 4 WVRAAM because it can carry two AA-10 or AA-12 withing the engines nacelles, two AA-10 or AA-12 on the engine nacelles and four AA-12 or AA-10 on wing hardpoints look at the SU-30 MKI drawing and you wil find 8 hardpoints for BVRAAMs

that was my position that Flanker can carry 8 maximum BVR as i put it in my strike analysis before your drawing. 6 R-77 and 2 R-27 but not 12 BVRs as Srbin was insisting on it.

He’s from PDF lol, there is no point in arguing with those type of people.

You havent proved anything nor provided any information. just stating that bigger is better. You started with BVR and later turn into dog fight where you want to disengage and than engage on individual basis when the number of fighters against you are greater in number and are well coordinated in team. this. here is another article for you. It just shows how much Russia is depended on Chinese market.

Jul 24, 2000
In mid-May, the US’s age-old dominance of the guided weapons market received its biggest jolt in decades when the UK Ministry of Defence selected a European consortium to develop a new beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) called Meteor for the Royal Air Force’s Eurofighter Typhoon multi-role fighter.

Raytheon had contested BVRAAM tooth and nail with an updated version of its AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), the weapon that has enjoyed near-monopoly status in this key market sector since the early 1990s.

Matra BAe Dynamics (MBD), the Anglo-French joint venture company, maintained that only with Meteor could European fighter aircraft manufacturers guarantee independence from a US power of veto over sales of AMRAAM in third markets.

These days, fighters and their weapon systems are so tightly integrated that even a shred of doubt over the availability of an air-to-air missile for the Dassault Rafale, Saab-BAE Gripen or the Typhoon would give the US an enormous advantage in the export market, MBD officials claim.

That message appears to have registered at a fundamental level. At the announcement of the winner, Geoff Hoon, the UK defence minister, made no secret of the fact that “safeguarding UK industrial interests” had played a hand in the UK’s choice of Meteor.

While AMRAAM remains the world benchmark for a medium-range fighter missile, Meteor will not be available for export until the end of the decade.

Raytheon will press home its advantage in the meanwhile with electronically-updated variants of AMRAAM to counter increasing appearances on the world market by Russia’s R-77 missile, with which it is synonymous. A long-range ramjet-powered version of the R-77, similar to Meteor, is believed to be under development between Russia and China.

“Fire-and-forget” missiles in the AMRAAM, R-77 and Meteor category are deemed so powerful that they can trigger mini-arms races in the quest for air superiority, analysts say. For this reason, the US has a policy of not authorising sales of AMRAAM into regions that do not already have a similar capability.

In the dogfight missile market, MBD’s Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM) is due to enter service with the RAF at the end of this year.

ASRAAM is the first of three new Nato dogfight weapons to have achieved export success, following Australia’s recent decision to select it for RAAF F/A-18s. The RAAF move has paved the way for ASRAAM sales to other nations that operate the F/A-18, MBD officials say. Foremost amongst these is Spain.

But ASRAAM will face stiff competition from Raytheon’s AIM-9X, a replacement for the venerable AIM-9 Sidewinder which has dominated the short-range fighter missile market since the 1960s. It will also be up against IRIS-T, which is led by Germany’s Bodenseewerk Geratetechnik with industrial participation from Canada, Greece, Italy, Norway and Sweden.

AIM-9X and IRIS-T differ from ASRAAM in their ability to fire at targets at high “off-boresight” angles. Cued by a pilot’s helmet pointing system, both weapons have the ability to hit enemy aircraft at 90 degrees from the parent fighter’s centre-line.

Although ASRAAM does have a limited off-boresight capability, its high speed and long range (for a short-range missile) give it a markedly different operational emphasis. The main marketing battleground for the three weapons will be in Nato’s European nations, where anything up to 10,000 missiles may be procured over the next two decades.

A similar number of AIM-9Xs are required in the US alone. AIM-9X is set to enter service in 2002 and IRIS-T up to two years later. Mopping up sales in between will be Israel’s Python 4, manufactured by Rafael, and Vympel’s R-73- the Russian dogfight missile that triggered the development of all this activity when it appeared on the MiG-29 and other Russian fighters almost 15 years ago.

* The author is aviation editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly and industry editor of Interavia Business and Technology Copyright Financial Times Limited 2000. All Rights Reserved.

ndia Will Develop Astra BVR Missile

Forecast International/Missile Forecast
232 words
18 June 2004
Forecast International Defense Intelligence Newsletters
English
© 2004 Forecast International, Inc./DMS.

Newtown, Conn. — Despite statements to the contrary, India has not abandoned its Astra medium-range air-to-air missile development program. India has been working on the Astra for many years and the program has been repeatedly delays.

Some media sources had reported that India was ready to abandon Astra in favor a foreign alternative, specifically the Russian AA-12 Adder (R-77) missile. Now, an article in the local newspaper The Hindu claims the Indian government has approved development of Astra. The government run Defence Research & Development Organization (DRDO) will lead this design effort in cooperation with civilian firms like Bharat Dynamics and HAL. The first flight of Astra could take place this year.

The Astra is intended to arm the Indian Air Force’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA). Development of Astra may take between five and eight years to complete and there are still individuals that believe India will eventually abandon this missile in favor of a foreign solution.

Until the Astra is ready for service, the Indian Air Force will continue to procure foreign air-to-air missiles. Over the years, the main source for these missiles has been Russia, from whom India has purchased a large number of fighter aircraft. However, New Delhi is cultivating other sources for arms, among them Israel

[QUOTE=Harry]

And the Mirage-2000, Ching kuo, F-35, F-22 or even the FC-1, have? Sighhh…

Mirages and teen series fighters have credibility of there respective airforces and manufactures. you cannot say this about russians.

3)The less capable and similar N019 has made atleast two lock-ons (IIPGW, Kargil) at BVR, which could not be broken.

What is the credibility of lock on. lock on in war means you shoot if it is not shoot that means no lockon.

Even though that above is a lie, since when did Thales earn the right to “declare” that? What fun! 😀

So you want to compare Russian figures with French. what a joke.

PS The development of the Astra has no relevance to the thread.

I know development of Astra has nothing to do with this thread but Flogger put its picture as if it is future advantage for Su-30.

Also note the mention of “larger antenna”. So I guess that the Su-30 radars which were being trashed by the oracle, just consist of a 10 cm long YaG aerial? 😀

nope. Your crediblity or Russian specification is not better than French. Thales have publicly declared in 1999 that RC400 is the most advanced light radar in the world for upgrades of MIG-29, Su-27 and other fighters etc. there isnt a russian product whose manufacturing quality or sophistication is better than French.