star49We shall see.:rolleyes:
Why u have to see. They have already declared operational. or u want tests in front of TV like Topol?
And it’s designed as an anti-radiation missile to home in on the AWACS emitter.
It does not preclude other seekers nor anyway for Ruaf use they will not even disclose.
AIN
PARIS 2003 • June 16 & 18
New AGAT seeker in a class by itself
by Reuben F. JohnsonRussia’s chief designer of radar homing missile seekers, Moscow’s AGAT Research Institute (Hall 5A/Rosoboronexport Stand), is unveiling a brand-new seeker design at this year’s Paris Air Show. AGAT general designer Dr. Joseph Akopyan told Aviation International News that this new model, currently designated simply as the extended range active radar seeker, or ARGS-PD, will become the basis of a new class of Russian-designed air-to-air (AAM) and surface-to-air (SAM) weaponry.
“This seeker is unique in its capabilities and performance over previous generation models,” he explained, “and it is also unique in that no other firm in the U.S. or Europe or anywhere else has ever designed such a system.” Akopyan’s new seeker is capable of locking on to targets at more than 44 miles, which is two to two and one-half times the range of other active radar homing seekers, and–depending on the speed and altitude of the target–the missile has an effective range of 125 to 188 miles. “Any weapon that it is fitted with becomes the longest range active homing missile in the world,” he stated
How is a missile fired at 300km gonna hit at 400km? That’s counter-intuitive, as one would hope the missile would make forward progress in a head on shot(i.e. the targets distance is getting smaller, rather than larger). You still haven’t addressed the point that-
It is not counter intuitive. u lock on at 300km and target moves 100km away in mean time but missile will still hit at 400km or maybe more it fired from MIG-31BM which allows twice the speed of anyother 4th generation fighter.
A- the Foxhound/Flanker can’t see the aforementioned fighters at 400km
B- if they turn on their non LPI radars and emit at that range, the RWR/ESM systems on the other fighters will alert them, before being detected.
C- The Flanker/Foxhound would need updates from other sources, if they were flying passively as their IRSTs sure aren’t gonna detect anyone at 400km. This would require them to be operating over friendly territory, and utilizing ground based assets(that presumably have survived), or AWACS of their own. If they’re not operating with a home team advantage, then they’d lose that passive situational awareness.
D- just how large do you think the NEZ of a missile fired at 400km from its intended target vs. say fired 200km from its target? At it’s max range, it’s not gonna have a lot of energy to do many aggressive manuevers against a non-cooperative target.
All these figures are down graded export version. If they advertize 400km for Su-35. Expect 800km for Su-27SM2.
star49When was the IOC for the KS-172? R-37?
http://www.deagel.com/Air-to-Air-Missiles/AAM-L_a001030001.aspx
Where exactly are you getting your figures for 12g targets?
You may be able to fire one at a fighter, but you won’t be doing it from 400km. Assuming that you could, as soon as the Foxhound/Flanker turned its radar on, and locked on, the fighter would just change course(and the Foxhound/Flanker would now be targets as they’ve given their positions away).
R-37M is part of MIG-31BM. So IOC will be beginning of this year. KS-172 is derived from SAMs. it is illogical that it has speed of SAM as it will be launched from high altitute. so these are wrong specifications.
Fighters cannot change course with in NEZ zone of larger missile. Larger missile have bigger motors more burn times and more speed. Speeds in excess of Mach 6. I am just rebutting ur theory that larger missiles are only against large non-manevouring targets. In that case no medium range SAM can hit anything as they are heavier than AAMs.
400km is maximum range that missile can travel. it can be fired from 300km and hit at 400km.
star49I realize that, but the ultra long range AAMs are for use against high priority(but low manuevering/speed) targets(i.e. AWACS, Tankers, etc…).
The Foxhound/Flanker aren’t gonna be able to engage F-18E/F/22/35/Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen, at 400km.
Nowwhere it is written they are for AWACS/tankers only. Even the KS-172 is against 12g targets (12g depends on aerodynamic target). Much heavier SAMs can engage targets at long ranges. there is no reason to believe AAMs cant.
star49And which weapons would these be exactly, and what’s their expected IOC?
AIM-120D will be more than capable enough until the JDRADM comes in to service. You weren’t trying to use the range of anti-AWACS missiles as a comparison to something designed for maneuvering targets were you?
MIG-31 and Su-27SM are not Anti-AWACS only. They are against all kinds of airborne vehicles from slow moving heli to hypersonic missiles.
star49😀
I have to smile about that school. You can develop as much tactics as you like with little help from that. All that ideas are related to an opponent, who is willing to play to the rules set by you. The most intresting part is to operate your airforce and the related missions in that way, that your opponent is unable to refuse it. It seems, that such a school did teach enough tactics to choose from, when the behavior of the opponent is learned in short notice and enough flexibility allowed to adopt to that.
In the skirmishes between the IAF and PAF the exchange ratio was around 1:1 so far , despite contradicting claims.
😉
Where was the location of those skirmishes. Number of attack sorties for each side. Un less that data is not available 1:1 ratio is dubious. In todays war Russian side has advantage of using bigger planes with longer range weopons.
star49It shows nothing about Chinese/Russian pilots. Indian Migs/SU have been considerably modernized from 70s avionics/weapons.
they are not modernized. Su-30K is ur plaing vanialla Su-27SK and MIG-21 Kopyo-21 radar is derived from mid 80s Zhuk. There is newer Kopyo-F & M but that is offer for export after 2004. so little evidence of them equiping MIG-21bison.
star49I’ll take an AIM-120C7/D over any R-27/77 variant, in terms of performance. As for the kinematic performance advantage of being fired from a Flanker.:rolleyes:
Exactly how much faster do you think the Flanker is flying than the Eagle?
I wouldn’t want to rely on a semi-active missile in modern aerial combat. That puts you perilously close to your foe, before you can take evasive manuevers.
R-27 has twice the weight of R-77. So it gives sufficiently large motor for extended range attack and has various seeker even active one in R-27EA and R-27P. It is relevant thats why countries are buying it in addition to R-77. Flanker has the internal fuel , TWR and sleek profile in single seat version not the raised canaopy of F-15 to be at high speeds for significant amount of combat.
remermber u cannot upgrade lighter F-15C with newer engines but u can upgrade Flanker with higher thrust engines like AL-31FM1 of Su-27SM. and it goes into AL-31FM2/FM3. Flanker has alot more upgrade potential.
star49First of all the Indian Air Force wasn’t using Russian tactics. Secondly the Indian Air Force beat the F-15s due to numbers and ROE(remember this was an opportunity for the USAF to demonstrate why we need F-22s). This isn’t to say that Indian pilots aren’t very good(of that Flankers aren’t any good).
This still doesn’t show how proficient Chinese or Russian pilots are, so it’s a bit premature to extrapolate that information.
Not against MIG-21 and Su-30k which are late 70s era technology. and it shows alot about China and Russian. Just look at amount of time and quantity J-10 develped and compare it with LCA. Money and superior institutional system plays big part in it.
star49When’s the last time the Chinese Air Force engaged another one in real combat, or had to fly through enemy air defenses, while doing precision bombing? How many exercises per year do the Chinese fly with other nations, to learn valuable lessons in tactics?. You can believe whatever BS you want about every Russian weapon being superior, but show me some examples of where this has been proven under real world conditions. Do you believe you know the true performance of Western equipment well enough to emphatically say that none of it is any good in comparison? Russians understating performance?:rolleyes: That’s funny. Their equipment performs very well until it has to be used against a capable foe, armed with Western equipment. Of course we know this doesn’t mean anything because it’s all export systems which are inferior to Russian ones in every way.
Your making the same mistake. The Wars after second world war does not count as real world experiance. Chinese had imported large amount of SAMs and it is reasonable to assume that will train against them. They have large inventory of fighers of different kinds. J-10 has influence of both East and West. They dont have shortage of training among themselves.
Apart from Russia Chinese have nothing to learn from other countries now. what can China learn from South Korea whose fighters are mostly bomb trucks or Taiwan with obsolete inventory. Mostly good will visits.
Russia have stated policy of down grading equipment or developing specifically do customer requirements which have no bearing on them.
star49Many would believe China won some of its medals because it cheated. (i.e. under age girls) Regardless, I am not here to talk politics. Well, its getting late for me so I’ll be quick. The Flanker is large powerful, agile, and has range.
Even if u deduct some of the medals. it were alot more than any one else. especially China Olympic experiance is only two decades old. Boat load of money make a difference in shortest possible of time. We live in globalized world where knowledge and tactics are for sale to highest bidder.
I would not disagree……………Yet, the F-15 has better BVR Weapons, Avionic, Radar, and pilot Training. Then you have to consider no weapon system fights by itself. So, in short if you look at the whole package. The F-15 is likely to win more times than not vs the Flanker. Either way I am sure you could find many on this site that would be happy to debate on the point of Flanker vs Eagle to great detail. (and much better than me) Really, the same could also be said for Hornet or Super Hornet vs the Flanker. In the real world 1 v 1 is extremely rare…………
F-15 does not have upgraded R-27 class weopon nor it has the kinematic performance of larger airframe of Su-27. Flanker internal fuel/IRST and conformal weopons give it enormous advantage.
star49China has very little real world experience in A2A combat. Western allies on the other hand have developed and shared tactics based upon things that are proven methods, and their pilots get more flight hours. An F-15 with the latest avionics and weapons, and support for situational awareness, flown by a western pilot, is gonna be superior more often than not. Even with all the TVC, etc…Flankers main advantage over the F-15 is in lower speed manuevering. The APG 63(v) 2,3,4 are superior to threat radars. The AIM-120C-7/D, and AIM-9X are superior to threat missiles. You can make whatever assumptions you want about pilot skill, but I know who I’d bet on.
what is mean by real world experiance. The only real world experiance was second world war but even than there was certain things that does not make it real world. China has everything going for it. It is baseless assumption that Western Pilot gets more flight hours when most of the fleet is older than Chinese Flanker and J-10 fleet. Maybe large number of J-7/J-8 skew the numbers. Introducing large number of Flanker require its own tactics which is irrelevant to small fleets of other countries. There areant that many AESA radars in operations. TMC disagree with notion that Western missiles are superior infact they said that Western missiles are inferior to what downgraded version they export. Russians always understate there fighters and weopons specification. Flanker is alot faster than any other 4th generation fightrer except MIG-31 with same weopon load. which gives it enormous kinematic advantage in BVR shot.
star49First money doesn’t always translate into better!
Money translate into better in most cases. it is the money that led China to won most gold medals in Olympics. It is the money that enable it sent person into space. It is the money that enable them to hit satellite in space. They have built economic system that serve quite well for them in so many fields. there was long Russian article about it. Australlia has nothing compared to it except for selling raw Uranium/Iron/Coke to China which Russia intend to replace in couple of years.
Second, the Flanker maybe more agile. Yet, the more agile aircraft doesn’t necessarily guarantee victory. As a matter of fact the F-16 is more agile than a F-15. Yet, does that make the F-16 a Superior
Flanker is not only agile but has deep fuel reserves and higher speed with weopons. It gives strategic and tactical flexibility interms of weopons load and reach of sensors and weopons.
Fighter…………Personally, I think not! So, your logic that the Flanker is more agile than a F-15……doesn’t mean the former is better. For example a AESA Radar equipped F-15C with HMD and AMRAAM’s would be a very serious threat to “ANY” Flanker. Regardless, how agile the Su-27/30/35 was………..of course pilot training is also a big factor. Which, would be another likely advantage for the F-15.
First generation AESA does not make aircraft superior unless everything else is taking into account. Infact Russian Su-27SM is superior to Su-30MKI PESA.
On paper the Flanker may appear superior. Yet, in the real world the older F-15 would likely be the winner.
F-15 is only superior against third world airforces where lack of money/training/tactics/equipment upgrades dont keep pace with modern times and at the end doctorine of overhelming force of quantity at one place . Which simply not the case with China. They are moving faster than rest of world by wide margin.
star49Well, funny on how FOX is Propaganda. Yet, the other four or five are left to middle……………..Hey, you even make the association that China and Fox are in bed together. Please, most of the major New Networks are obviously bias to the left and generally the Democratic Party as a whole. Which, is clearly why Networks like Fox and Conservative Radio Shows are gaining in popularity…..:D
China hiring Fox people should not be surprized in Bush term. I will not be surprized if China hires people from MSNBC/CNN during Obama terms. They are using there money to buy influence through corporations. China trade suprlus is increasing even during down turn.
star49Well, funny on how FOX is Propaganda. Yet, the other four or five are left to middle……………..Hey, you even make the association that China and Fox are in bed together. Please, most of the major New Networks are obviously bias to the left and generally the Democratic Party as a whole. Which, is clearly why Networks like Fox and Conservative Radio Shows are gaining in popularity…..:D
China hiring Fox people should not be surprized in Bush term. I will not be surprized if China hires people from MSNBC/CNN during Obama terms. They are using there money to buy influence through corporations. China trade suprlus is increasing even during down turn.
star49Australia’s F/A-18’s are being equipped with APG-73’s, AMRAAM’s, ASRAAM’s, and I believe HMD’s. That combined with better trained pilots would easily make them a match for most Flankers. That doesn’t even include the much more capable Super Hornets with APG-79 AESA Radars to be followed by the 5th Generation F-35’s. Sorry, Australia will have Air Superiority vs China for many years to come……….
Why would be Australlian pilot better trained than Chinese pilot? Chinese have so much money with more than half domestic Oil production that it can afford very best pilot training with large Industrial complex and that combines with excellent Flanker F-18/JSF will be no match for it. Currently there is no F-18E with Australlia while China has two decades of experiance with Flankers. Austriallia economic case is hopeless if China turned to Russia for Iron Ore and Coke the currency will collapse.
Note: If, you believe first the PAK-FA will be in widespread service in just a few years. You must be drinking………….and even when it does enter service that hardly concludes it would be better than the F-22 or F-35. As a matter of fact the odds are against the latter.
Flanker is so better than Eagle that even if it is offered to IAF it will not take it. MRCA competition is for fighter below Su-30MKI class.
Sign In
