Himansu i cant remember the source but i seriously saw that the IRBIS radar or whatever is planned to get installed in MKI when it arrives.
Irbis will be a formidable radar, but still a PESA, not an AESA.
What you wrote in reply to my question about any confirmed case of launching BVR missiles at supersonic speed in real combat does NOT show you were talking about cruising in AB at supersonic speed.
Maybe you missed these:
That’s why, letting aside the fact that will empty the fuel tanks like hell
If the AB is used for a few seconds, the tanks will not be empty. Also, in Hwang case, the guy was in combat, shoting down a Mig 29 IIRC. Is this a normal situation, or an emmergency ? 🙂 By the way, from the story it doesn’t result that is was maneuvring at supersonic (not to mention 1.5M!), instead it seems that he flew subsonic, chaged course towards the bandit and after this started the AB.
The aim-120D will IOC late next year !!
Yes, the info it was on Raythoen site. But it seems that it will go first at F 18E/F and F 22 units, not to F 15 .
We were talking about cruising in AB at supersonic speed, remember? AB is routinely used for short periods, for example in take-off. Also, in ACM/airshows after a tight turn, the AB is used to regain speed.
If used in conjunction with the JHMCS, the 9X doesn’t need NCTR features. The helmet display is telling you if the aquired target is friendly or hostile.
Yea, it is hard to believe. But I think that’s where all the money and time went. Think about it, this fighter has undergone more testing and research than other fighter before it. I mean 15 years between the first proto and operational service is a sort of ridiculous.
The first test F 22 was delivered in 1997. The one you mentioned (1991) was YF 22.
The internal fuel of the Su-30MKI is 9640 kg, not 9400 kg.
According to http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ge/furt18quargeracao.html the Raptor can fly in supercruise for 30 minutes, 3-6 times a normal fighter can fly in AB. So, unless the Flanker can carry a minimum 27 tons of fuel, it can’t match the Raptor. :diablo:
The Su-30MKI is not the same as a standard Flanker and time and again, DACT has proven that it is without peer, against anything that has flown against it. It allows for an unprecendented amount of freedom in combat manuevers. If it ever gets shot down by another fighter, it would most likely be due to inadequate training which does not fully exploit the type’s capabilties but the solitary airforce that operates the type need’nt worry about that
Although the stories about the recent meeting between the IAF Su 31 MKI and USAF F 16 are vagues, it seems that there were two DACT reprises and the f 16 managed to obtain a (gun!) kill. But again, it could be just folklore.
But then where would you put an F-15 with AIM-9X, HMCS, AIM-120D, and an AESA? IMO HOBS missiles and HMCS pretty much negates the differences in manuverability (assuming you don’t get to gun range that is) and it becomes more sensor/missile dependent.
All the C have now the JHMCS/9X. The (AESA) APG 63 (V) 3 is ready, but no one knows how many Cs will receive it. About the AIM 120D it seems that the #1 priority is puting it on the SuperHorror and the F 22. But I don’t think that the today C5 version has any serious contender.
BTW, had any fighter – be it F-4 Phantoms in Vietnam and the Middle East or F-15 Eagles in the Gulf and Kosovo – ever fired BVR missiles at supersonic speed in real combat?
Any fighter can go supersonic (in full AB of course), but will have the maneuvrability of a flying brick (read 1G). That’s why, letting aside the fact that will empty the fuel tanks like hell, pilots avoid going in AB unless in extreme emergency. OTOH, peoples tend to forget one thing: at 1.5M, at 10,000m, the Raptor can pull 6G! A minor detail, but it might help some people why the Raptor is entirely different from previous fighters.
No sh!t! First, you have made it sound like those were MY opinions. Second, I have mentioned neither Cobras, nor Chakras, dumb USAF pilots or uselessness of stealth in this thread. Prove me wrong if you got the balls.. Senseless bickering is all ye got to offer. Get a life, pal.
It was your opinion, at least about price & supercruise. It was a mistake indeed that I didn’t make a distinction between these two and other issues (the post was not entirely an answer to your post and I should have mentioned it). I do not apologize OTOH about the tone of the post, because I consider it polite; I did not offended anyone.
Your sarcastic remarks are not welcome, we have a civilized and fruitful debate here.. Stick to that or get lost..
An ” :p” makes a post “uncivilized”? I just summarized some of the opinion posted.
BTW, if you care to notice, it is EF2000 that is often being mentioned here, not Su-30.
No ****! And I thought that the thread was: “Can Su 30MKI supercruise?” I guess I was wrong…
Bring it on, you won’t convince him; the F 22 is made in US, and this means:
-it is too expensive;
-it is useless;
-it will be fly by dumb USAF pilots;
-it is not a Flanker;
-it can’t do a decent Cobra;
-it can’t do a Chakra or whatever (ask Firebar)
-supercruise is useless (until the Russian will achieve it; afterwards it will become mandatory for fighter);
-stealth is useless (unless the Russains will do it; afterwards it will become mandatory for fighter);
-it is not a Flanker; sorry I already mentioned it;
:p :p :p :p :p :p
The question would be why would an Su-30 or any other plane really need to fly at Mach 1.72 for such a long time (except for impression of the Congress members, of course).. The history of aerial combat has pretty much proven supersonic flights not very useful in practical sense. I am pretty surprised that you people play on the speed card deep in the BVR era. A Mustang catching a Bf109 at low speed would definitely have a decisive advantage. But a today’s plane catching its opponent at low speed in the BVR arena (40-50 km range)?What decisive advantage does it bring?
If the supercruise isn’t so important, why the Russians and Europeans are so desperate to replicate it?
On Russian aviation forums supermaneuvrability is presented as a decisive factor in aerial combat while supercruise is being downplayed. Here, supermaneuvrability is being downplayed and supercruise presented as the ultimate feature of all. And Flanker Fanboys and US-tech fans are fueling their ideas to the very extreme while still knowing sh!t about what is really decisive.
And the result? Russians are introducing supercruise on PAK-FA and Ams are desperately trying to squeeze a Cobra from their Raptors. That pretty much says it all..
So now future USAF fighters are no longer designed by people at LM Skunk Works or Boeing Phantom Works; equally the future Russian fighters are no longer planned at TSAGI, MiG or Sukhoi; all that is needed is to surf aviation forums, listen to smart people here and apply their invaluable ideas to future fighter designs:p
By the way, the requirements of supercruise, supermaneuvrability, stealth were established in 1982 when USAF Tactical Air Command issued a request for proposals for the ATF. Difficult to imagine how a circus maneuver the Russian would perform a few years after, had influenced in any way the design of the Raptor.
Going slow is the sure recipe to die. The cobra and similar maneuvers are possible at speeds of ~ 150 knots. Not something you will see in real life. At speeds the dogfights occur (350-450 knots) the “virtual speedbrake” is the right maneuver if you want to avoid on overshot. The cobra is great as airshow stunt, not in real combat.
And be left with what ?? Assuming that the manuver needs to be performed at low airspeed ( below 350Knts presumably) and assuming a 1-2 Km seperation that still gives plenty coverage to fire away for the enemy provided the pilot tries this in the first place !!!
Not to mention that at least two US aircrafts have a far better solution to reduce airspeed than the Cobra: the Raptor and the superHornet. They both havre the “virtual speedbrake”. Instead the clasical speedbrake mounted behind the cockpit, the superb digital flight controls of these two planes, allow the “breaking” to be performed by simultanously raising ailerons, lowering trailing flaps, and splaying out rudders. In this way these fighters can lose speed without any change in pitch. So, if a Su-whatever is in front of such fighters and the pilot is dumb enought o perform Cobra, the US pilot will “breake” and he will have a big, fat target for a few good seconds…
The US troops in SK are no longer near the DMZ.
Yes i think he meant that this thread was about the COBRA which many believed that the raptor could not do until it did it and now the bar has shifted to the CHAKRA – i dont think he meant that they are the same manuvers .
Exactly. The Flanker fans claimed that their beloved bird was the only one that could do high AoA maneuvers, even if a lot of experimental US planes did: F 15 ACTIVE, F 15 MATV, X 31, YF 22 (the Russians stunts at Farnborough or Paris were also done by experimental pleas Su 35 Su37). When the Su 30 MKI (the only operational Russian fighter with TVC) reached IOC (2004) the same guys claimed that again only Russian produced operational planes with TVC; when a year later the Raptor reached IOC, they said OK, but the Russians still dominate airshows (like doing circus in airshows is the main pourpose of a military airplane!); when in 2006 the Raptor begin demonstartions in US, they said OK but the Su is the only one present in internatuinal airshows :p; finally, if the Raptor can do a Cobra, they said: yes but it can’t do the Chakra…It’s pathetic :p
Why we do not do something better a F-15E armed with AIM-9X versus a Su-30BM armed with R-37, AA-12 and the Latest AA-11 models; and I-21 versus an F-22 you are saying why not a F-4 versus an MiG-29
MiG 31BM doesn’t exist and R 37 isn’t operational; by the way, the standard A-A suite of an F 15E is 4 AIM 120 C and 2 AIM 9M (the X is not yet integrated in the F 15E). 4 AMRAAMS can do just fine against the existing MiG 31 carrying R 33 and R 40; I’m afraid that these are jokes compared with AMRAAM. By the way, the F 15E can carry those A-A missiles together with 11 tons of precision guided munitions, something that no Russain plane can.
Up to what i have read Russia was upgrading their MiG-31s to MiG-31BM, those aircraft can carry the R-37 and cand etect targets at 320km of distance can fire 6 misiles at six different targets simultaneously.
Man, you are Firebar! :p
It would be better if Raptor would not fly outside US in any circumstances except wartime. Too sensitive.
Fly at Paris? What for? Raptor will not be exported, even if it was cleared for export.