SOCIn other words, every US citizen consumes more oil than 13 Chinese and almost as much as 32 Indian citizens.
How many of those 13 Chinese or 32 Indian citizens are able to afford automobiles? Simply comparing numbers does not give you anything remotely resembling an accurate image of the real picture.
And yes, I do believe we need to make an effort to find alternative fuel sources, particularly so we can write off the Middle East, but each nation has its own responsibility to take care of its own affairs in this regard, and no one nation has the right to tell another nation how to manage its own internal affairs, this included.
SOCSOC
Don´t you think that it´s a bit strange (to say the least) that the newest USAF and RAF fighter planes “have collaborated, but have never went at it”?!
Not really, if both of them are to be employed together at a future date in combat, it helps to operate together in training to formulate tactics and procedures.
We a have a Raptor front line pilot that the pay comes from his majesty´s MOD, and a Typhoon instructor with a Viper Wild Weasel “colonial” background…
There’ve been US and RAF exchange programs for decades, there was even one Sqd Ldr. Wardell who was an F-117A exchange pilot.
And a pair of “phoon´s” stationed in the USA for a couple of years… And photos of the two planes together, and the RAF openly admiting that they´ve flown together… Collaboration?!!! 😉
Everyone who participates in RED FLAG is collaborating. And I can show you images of Gripens at McConnell AFB…they were just passing through cross-country, not there to train against USAF KC-135s 😀
SOCWhich is what I was about to tell you, as it should be obvious that those objects are far too small to be AAMs by themselves 😀
SOCSOC, okay now where is the world’s most heavily protected area? As of right now, not what can be redeployed…:confused:
A-135 ABM sites (5 of them active), Don-2N ABM radar system, the first S-400 site, multiple S-300PM and S-300PM-1 sites, and multiple 64N6 radar sites for coordination…the answer can only be Moscow!
Being far from integrated into anything, but where do you see SAMP/T in your line-up of SAM systems?
Let me look into it, that’s one system I haven’t followed that closely. Obviously, my focus has been Soviet and Russian systems!
SOCMaybe because USAF can order your F-15s and 16s to accept whatever ROE which help the Raptor to achieve the unprecedented ‘mock combat results’ but they cannot order the same to RAF Typhoons? 😎 Certainly worth a second thought.
In exercises such as RED FLAG and COPE THUNDER it is typically the high performance jets like the F-22A and B-2 that are restricted insofar as what they can and cannot do. These are all operational training exercises, and the idea that the USAF would purposely skewer the concept of training to influence politicians is asinine. All you need to do in order to ensure continued Raptor production is to 1) have the rest of the F-15 fleet fall apart, or 2) continue making up asinine information about how China is the next great military threat to the world’s existance.
Politicians have a history of disregarding training numbers and all that anyway. When they were deactivated as a Bomb Wing, the 184th at McConnell in Kansas, even though they were “weekend warrior” ANG users, had some of the (and in some cases the) best operational effectiveness/mission readiness/etc numbers of any B-1B unit in the USAF. Had the politicians at the time taken any of that into account, it would have been Dyess or Ellsworth that lost a B-1B squadron, not the 184th BW.
And for every “well it tested great and looks great in exercises” argument, any sensible politician can fire back with “well this system had the same background and then didn’t live up to its reputation in combat”. All of that kind of crap makes for great copy in the media but beyond that, unless you are competent enough to grasp the context of operational training and all that entails, any claims/ratios/whatever are pretty much worthless anyway.
WRT EF-2000 vs F-22A…as far as I know, the jets have collaborated, but have never went at it.
WRT the F-22A as an A/G platform, the jet can carry at least 8 SDBs internally. That’s 8 PGMs for 8 different targets, and that isn’t bad by any stretch of the imagination. Bigger weapons like the 1000lb JDAM can be carried for bigger targets, and even though you can only fit two of them internally, you’re still a better option than a traditional aircraft because you’re far more survivable.
SOCThe technical implications of such a system are quite frankly astronomical to make any use of it in a tactical environment.
The Keldysh device, if it works as a full-scale system, would completely validate (not to mention explain) all the work the Russians have done in the WVR combat arena. It takes LO design and BVR combat out of the air combat picture, almost completely.
If it works.
If that was all that the Russian plasma stealth was then it would already be operational and available for export.
Actually, Jane’s reported that a version of the system was on the export market as far back as 1999 or 2000. I have a copy of that article around here somewhere.
But (and I asked this question many times on that forum) do you know that in Kossovo, US and allies fired hundreds oh anti radiation missiles (HARM, ALARM) on Serb radars. These missiles were fired against ground, imobile targets, from above at distances of around 40-50 km. Still, less than 10 % hit their targets!
A lot of that had to do with the radars being shut off while the ARMs were in flight. New model HARMs have a much improved ability to maintain the emitter’s location in their guidance system and greatly increase the chances of striking a target that has ceased to emit RF energy. Besides, in the SEAD world, every single HARM fired that caused the radar to switch off was a successful shot even if the radar survived as it negated that radar’s ability to do its job. The press and the armchair analysts seem to forget that when they bring Kosovo up in what appears to be an attempt to make the NATO air arm look inept.
Until then, it’s going on inertia, thus no datalink, completely passive.
I find that really hard to believe. If you fire a KS-172S-1 at an AWACS from 300km, and have no midcourse update feature, you’re asking for it to miss. If you got a hit off of the AWACS towards the turnpoint of an AEW orbit, and your FCS projects that the AWACS will continue on its present course, your missile may arrive within theoretical seeker range of the position only to find that the target has altered course and is now outside the seeker’s FOV. The most logical and sensible route is to provide the missile with a midcourse update feature taking cues from the FLANKER’s RWR and ESM gear. You don’t have to operate your radar to provide midcourse updates. Also, if you shoot one at a head-on target at 300km, and it turns away while the weapon is in flight, you’re probably going to miss anyway as the target will probably be outside the missiles range by the time it gets to 300km. BVR weapons are rarely fired at their maximum range for that reason, they’re easy to avoid, even by accident in this case.
Really, the prospects of a kill at maximum range are not that good, but the strength of the weapon is that it possesses such a range, making hostile nations have to take the system into account and have a plan in place to counter it, be that more effective ECM gear of barrier CAPs 200km or so from the AWACS. If you have the KS-172S-1 in your arsenal, what you want to do in order to be successful is not to fire it at 300km, but to identify how the enemy reacts to the presence of the missile, and then exploit the weaknesses of that defensive strategy.
SOCThe J-10 is the most credible threat to Western fighter aircraft, but only if you discount anything produced by Russia!
SOCCovered already, old news, thread closed!
SOCYeah but in that case Igla-S is just a pure user, it isn’t an integrated system in the IADS. It has nothing to offer other than as a pure weapon system.
SOCWhen did LA or SF get trashed?
Good god man have you not seen Independance Day? For more LA roasting, check out Tommy Lee Jones in Volcano, that one was actually pretty good I thought. And they did try to obliterate SF in Live and Let Die, but even Christopher Walken is no match for James Bond!
I’m very curious what SOC has to say on this
I seem to be in demand these days, don’t I? 😀
Who has the best selection of AD systems? In my opinion, any answer other than Russia is false. I see this as one of those times where there is a definite right answer, one not based on opinion but on hard fact.
For long-range, strategic air defense, there is no system better than the S-400. The S-300PM-1/2 aren’t far behind, and Russia still uses some of the older S-300PT/PM systems in certain areas of less importance or those which are under a lesser strategic threat. The PM, PM-1/2, and S-400 are even absurdly mobile, being able to pack up or deploy in as little as five minutes, making them very survivable to an extent (any strategic SAM system can’t really hide too long, it has to radiate to be effective and once it does you’ve got its position). The SAGG guidance method (PATRIOT’s TVM is basically a less refined, less advanced version of true SAGG) also makes the system a real bear for EW assets or inbound enemy aircraft.
All of those systems are controlled by the 64N6 BIG BIRD radar system, a massive phased array radar that outsizes those found on AEGIS vessels and which has a range of over 300 kilometers. Low altitude detection is aided by the use of mast-mounted 5N66M/76N6 CLAM SHELL radars, which only help to increase the systems’ situational awareness.
Tactical SAM systems include the 9K37 Buk-M1 and 9M331 Tor-M. Both of those systems are advanced, modern SAM systems incorporating agile weapons and good electronics. The 9K338 Igla-S and 96K6 Pantsyr-S1 complete the world-beating tactical SAM arrangement for defending Russian ground forces.
The weird stepchild of the TACSAM environment is the S-300V, of which there is simply no equal in the world. Were I to rate SAM systems, I’d likely place it behind the S-400, tied with the S-300PM-1/2. Multiple radar systems and obnoxiously high-speed missiles make the S-300V potent against any type of target short of a full-scale ICBM. Like the S-300P/400 systems, the S-300V can cause problems in an EW environment. The S-300V only uses its seeker head during the terminal phase, and that isn’t good considering that the EW radars can be used to provide range-to-target data to support a launch. An EW radar typically won’t make your RWR system go berserk, because it doesn’t normally indicate any hostile action is imminent or possible (and there are a lot of EW systems that can be used by numerous SAM types as well).
If you’re talking about straight-up national air defence, then you can’t leave the A-135 ABM system out of the equation either. The 53T6 high-speed endoatmospheric interceptor appears to be in the class of the Sprint ABM tested by the USA, and that’s not a bad thing.
The real advantage is that all of these systems are native, meaning that they can all, with the obvious exception of the shoulder-fired Igla-S, be keyed into national acquisition and C&C networks. Greece has had some issues getting the S-300PMU-1s talking with their Western systems, which of course was to have been expected anyway due to differing system architectures.
The USA has some good SAM systems, but are nowhere near the level of the Russian military in terms of diversity (which is a benefit in an EW environment) or system performance. People may want to bring the latest SM-series missiles, which are outstanding weapons, but as they have not yet been land-based they do not factor into the equation of national air defense. They could of course be placed along the borders out at sea, but the fact of the matter is that they are not placed there at this moment, and therefore are not part of any American permanent defensive network. Europe also has some interesting and capable SAM systems, one of which I am interested in being the VL-MICA, but again, find me one nation with the experience and depth of capability offered by Russia.
Simply put, Russian air defense is composed of systems and networks that nobody else can match at this point. Eventually, there’ll be a Russian SAM Network Analysis piece on my blog, but I’m waiting for more imagery around Moscow and St. Petersburg to fill in some of the obvious gaps that I’ve noted so far based on what is currently visible in Google Earth.
SOCI wouldn’t put the J-10 in the class of the F-15, simply because the F-15 and the PLAAF’s Su-27/J-11 are the heavy, long range/endurance fighters. The J-10 is the Chinese F-16 equivalent, the shorter-ranged, multipurpose type. This is not to state that some of the performance characteristics or some of the equipment might exceed or outperform that which you find on an F-15C, but merely a statement of context. Think of it as an analogy: J-11 is to F-15 as J-10 is to F-16 (or F-18 for that matter).
SOCAnd the new radar for the MiG-31M was Zaslon-M, that was not the upgrade.
SOCThe Mig-31M is well operational, with many MiG-31B aircraft upgraded to that standard. Unless sources online confuse the MiG-31BS / M / BM.
The BM should be in extremely limited service if any, but the “M” variant is only a small upgrade of the B/BS standard.
The MiG-31M was an 80’s/90’s program to refine the MiG-31 with various airframe changes, new avionics, and the addition of six conformal stations for the new R-37 AAM. This is NOT the same aircraft as the current MiG-31BM upgrade. The MiG-31M was one of the post-Cold War programs that didn’t survive into the 21st Century. It never reached service, and only a handful of prototypes were built.
Also, the MiG-31BM will have an upgraded Zaslon radar set, but it isn’t being replaced completely with the MiG-31M’s Zaslon-M set as far as I am aware.
SOCsferrin, ARA662, kindly conduct your discussions in a more civilized manner. Further back-and-forth sniping from this point forward will result in a leave of absence for a time from the forum!
SOCIf it can supercruise, it would likely only be able to do it with minimal loadout if not clean. Something like wingtip AAMs and maybe a few more under the wings, but much more than that will be pushing it.
Unless you have internal weapons bays, or recessed fuselage hardpoints (ala F15 and Typhoon), then the benefit from being able to supercruise in clean config is not going to be that noticeable. Which is very likely the case here. Supercruise is just a marketing ploy that may well not bring much operational benefit.
If you are a fighter aircraft on an air-to-air sortie, supercruise is most certainly an operational benefit. Supercruise lets you go faster without expending a lot of fuel in the process. Going faster is an advantage in BVR combat. The faster you fly, the more kinetic energy you impart onto your AAM at launch, thereby increasing the range at which you can fire.
You don’t have to be able to fly about in supercruise mode for the duration of your sortie for it to be effective either. It almost functions as a force multiplier, allowing the jet to accelerate for a better BVR shot without burning excess fuel, which allows it to remain on station that much longer to prosecute more targets.
My main question about an Indian F-16 would be if LockMart would go so far as to develop a retractable IFR probe compatible with the IAF’s Il-78MK fleet? Give that capability to an AESA-equipped, supercruising F-16 fitted with four AIM-120Cs and two AIM-9Xs and you’ve got the makings of a very useful and capable fighter jet for the IAF, one that would still be very potent in the A/G role. Dunno if it’d necessarily be the best option, but in this light it certainly doesn’t look like the worst, either, and were they to go this route I’d think they’d be satisfied with the result.
The prospects of an IAF Predator variant or something similar possibly being a result of this would seem to be a nice addition to the deal as well, giving them something armed and with long endurance capability to more effectively monitor areas of Kashmir and the border with Pakistan.
What’s up with this though:
The export version of the fighters, for the first time, has also been equipped with AESA radars…
Top company official Chuck Artymovich told a group of Indian newsmen that the AESA radar…has been cleared by the US government for installation in 80 F-16s ordered by the United Arab Emirates.
“We are confident that similar green signal would be given for installation of such radars in the case of export to India also,” he said.
If the UAE has already been cleared for the AESA, how is it a first for any IAF variant?
Sign In
