look at value of weapon that USA sell compared to russia ,also the amount of money they spend on developing weapon
btw f-18sh also an upgrade of f-18c

weapon sells does not mean overall money available to manufacturers for product improvement and Russia dont do that much offsets so it sells are more profitable.

ehhh????

on a more serious note…. CATIC sales director was hobnobbing with the Iraqi Air Force commander and discussing JF17, K8 and UAVs among other things…

The French defence attache had in the past organised trips for Iraqi Air Defence Command committees to observe tests of “new” air defence systems in france and in the last meeting in Baghdad indicated France’s willingness to meet Iraq’s air defence needs.

The point is all these countries will not stand with Iraq. for example when Iraq starting using those Mi-28s in Anbar province or against kurds. there will be reaction like in Syria. China does not have operational carrier or bases nearby to help Iraq in trouble. when dealing with RSAF or Turkish airforce. Iraki politicians are slowly realizing it.
http://en.aswataliraq.info/(S(2z1qgmriu4wtie55nsgougeq))/Default.aspx?page=article_page&c=slideshow&id=152830

lol Meteor is used by F-35 , EF-2000 , Rafale , Gripen and not to mention these aircraft have future version as well => their radar range is even longer , Gripen radar range now have nothing to do with the range of meteor , AWACs play very important role in war and they can give firing solution for fighter too
btw against normal target mig-21 bison radar range is less than visual range but it still equip with R-77 😉 which have range of 100 km => your argument is nonsense

before proclaming that Meteor is used by such and such. why not show production standard orders for so many aircraft. Gripen radar range has nothing to do with Meteor?. how convenient excuse. Actually MIG-21bison has 75km range.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=26667&stc=1
older R-77 didnot have 100km range. but around 80km maximum.

what the hell ? what you mean by exploit here ?????? do you know how nonsense this is ????
i already said that gripen can get firing solution from AWACS as well , and Meteor was designed to be used by many aircraft like EF-2000 , rafale , F-35 , gripen ..etc , it range has nothing to do with gripen radar range alone ( what you say is like if a missiles is using by 5 aircrafts and if even one of them can’t use the range when flying without AWACs support then the producer solution is to reduce missiles range => sound really dumb if you ask me )

This is your baseless assumptions. turbo prop AWACS are slow moving and have no future. I doubt Gripen/Meteor combo is based on AWACS. Rafale PESA is not exactly of higher range either. by the time other airplanes use Meteor. the missile will be practically obsolete.

they are both heavy missile used to attack AWACs mainly , and old or not we both know that big , heavy missile will tend to be less maneuver ( due to physic )

There are alot heavier sams that can attack plane at 100k+ feet.

RVV-BD not going to fly at mach 6 , especially at max range , service ceiling of Su-35 is only 2 km higher than rafale you will not get much potential energy from that (higher speed of su-35 will not boost the missiles speed over mach 6 because at that speed drag is very very huge , do you even know how to calculate drag ?? )

Mach 6 intercept is figure from 15 years ago. Real ceiling of Su-35 is alot higher than Rafale. see this MIG-29 ceiling with two pilots.

http://www.flymigsokol.com/flights/space_program

Irbis-e 400 km range is not the export version ( there not even a export Irbis-e at the moment

Publish figures are for export advertizement.

ESM will have a lot of trouble against LPI AESA radar => unlikely to use to get firing solution
but they can be used to get firing solution ( EX : asq-213 , ALR-94 ..etc )

nonsense , it have weaker engine but have smaller size + more aerodynamic + smaller RCS
and against deceptive jamming dont really require very high energy

what do you know about aerodynamics. when i mention weaker engine it means relative to its weight/size.

yes russian may be have a little bit more experience in missiles than EU but that it ,they dont have monopoly in missiles like American have with stealth a while ago and it doesnot mean their product always better no matter what
gripen can have Awacs guide it’s weapon too , and many aircraft have weapon that excess it’s radar range ( ex : mig-21 bison + r-77 )
it nothing illogical about meteor have 160 km range compared to 100 km range of r-77sd , they have different electronic equipment , different aerodynamic , different way to generate thrust ..etc the only problem is you can’t accept that some country surpass your beloved russia in some aspect

It is not little bit experiance but alot more in manufacturing and testing. and with more money infusin now. it is highly unlikely EU created a wonder weapon. MIG-21 Bison has 57km range. which is sufficient for 1990s era R-77.
You dont bring AWACS in primary testing of new missile. i would say Meteor is under Gripen radar testing range.

I think that the reason that the Irbis E has such high range is more of a side effect of the need to detect VLO aircraft at a useful range, not to engage targets at this range. Also- there is a difference between “detection” and “tracking.” You need the latter to determine a firing fix.

Long range radar needs more powerfull engines. If Gripen with current radar can exploit Meteor. So it means its range is not that much.

Also, are you sure a large missile like the RVV-BD/SD is meant for engaging fighters? I thought similar, large non ramjet missiles like the AIM-54 were at a disadvantage against quickly maneuvering fighter sized targets and were typically more effective against tankers and AWACS.

AIM-54 is 4 decade old tech. i am not sure what it has anything to do with RVV-BD.

This gives a 150 nmi (280 km) *detection* range against a 1 m^2 rcs target, which I think would fit the RCS of the Rafale while both carrying Meteor and MICA missiles (drop tanks would add to this). However, in a cleaner configuration, the Rafale RCS may be as low as 0.01 to 0.1 m^2 depending on the angle of the Rafale relative to the Su-35. So we are really looking at a potentially much lower range than the 400 km you are providing. Also at 400 km, what would be the NEZ of the missile in question? If the Rafale detects the incoming missile, it will have *plenty* of time to evade if it is actually launched from that range.

Is Rafale rcs from top 0.1sqm as Su-35 is likely to find down below it. 400km plus range is for export. Rafale has limited fuel capacity and slow speed. it has very little chance against Mach 6+ missile and especially if launch from higher speed aircraft.

And if you really want to bring yet to be deployed systems into the mix (such as RVV-SD/BD), you could just as easily bring the next generation SPECTRA EW system into the discussion-

These missiles are practically deployed in 2013. not some 10 year down the road GaN.

GaN TR elements and a fully digital channelized design would likely make it very possible for the Rafale to detect LPI signals emitted by the Irbis radar. I would bet with very reasonable certainty that detection and classification of LPI signals were part of the next gen SPECTRA requirements.

As i said these technolgoies are 10 year away from operational service and Sukhoi is likely to get before anyone else considering the funding situation taken into account.

A radar system will have twice the R value (distance from emitter to receiver) and a factor of 0.01 m^2 to 1+ m^2 to overcome vs an ESM suite since the radar signal actually has to bounce off the target and return all the way back to the emitter. That’s a factor of ~1/10th to 1/1600th (!!!) of the amount of power required for the ESM suite to detect the emitted signal vs a radar. So were I a Su-35 pilot, I would be *very* careful about emitting when there are Rafales (or F-16 b60’s or F-35’s or F-22’s with similarly advanced ESM suites) present. Likewise, a Rafale pilot may have to do the same vs a Khibny equipped Su-35 (although perhaps to a lesser extent, as I doubt Khibny is a solid state GaN digital receiver).

ESM does not function as radar so even if some thing is detected what a fighter can do about it as there is no long range missile solution.

So I think it would turn into a cat and mouse fight- the Rafale has an advantage in missiles and RCS and EW, and the Su-35 has an advantage in range and radar power outside of the merge. In a dogfight, I think the Rafale’s *possibly* lower wing loading, higher thrust/weight, and greater structural load tolerance *may* give it an advantage in a sustained turning fight, but the Su-35’s thrust vectoring and better HOBS missiles would likely dispense of the Rafale very quickly otherwise- so I would probably give the WVR advantage to the Su-35 unless the Rafale pilot is very careful. BVR could go either way depending upon the scenario.

Actually Rafale has zero advantage. its weak engine does not allow it to become an electronic attack aircraft and weak engines does not give the energy to BVR shot. Rafale is simply not a fighter but more compromised design for carrier operations.

;);) yeah and by your logic aim-120 will be the best , much better than r-77sd , rvv-bd , meteor or anything else because USA can throw alot of money into single projects if its necessary to accelerate things. If they found that Meteor or RVV-BD is more effective. they are going to spend boat load of money in a their own missiles which no one in EU , russia can match on project by project basis.
so conclusion is AIM-120 , CUDA are the right solution 😉 right :D:diablo: LOL LOL

US does not have much money left to accelerate things from current pace. It has already distribute alot on F-35, F-18E (these aircrafts have less in common). now Chinese do have money left but it will interesting to see whether they can do things quicker and with higher technology. they havent done TVC or long range AAM yet.

Su-35 is the key weopon system.

http://www.itar-tass.com/en/c154/685888.html
Today we’ve laid the groundwork for such arms supplies as the S-400 air defence systems, the Borei submarine and the Su-35 fighters for 10-15 years from now. The plants, which produce this hardware, are engaged with orders by 100 percent,” Gerasimov said.

different time line = different solution for same problem = longer range, same idea for meteor vs r-77sd ( may be same time but different solution ..etc )
yes

Russia has more funding for single projects and have exported more BVR AAMs than EU. so there is likelyhood that its solution is more correct.
EU fundings are spread out between Iris-T, Asraam, Mica and now Meteor.

nonsense they have different aerodynamic

so Rafale can maintain higher top speed with ET than Su-35 with AAMs. Rafale top speed is lower than M2K. Russians atleast does not go backwards with top speed. Su-27SK is adjusted to Mach 2.15 and Su-35 to Mach 2.25