uss noviceIf not Iran I’d say Syria.
Nic
May be this has something to do with it?
My guess – US elections are near – the current bubs ain’t exactly popular, create a diversion. Nic might not be too far from the truth.
uss noviceI was talking with 2K12 Kub operator, ha saw Su-27 on his radar, when turning the echo was as big as for the airliner.
I’ll reply to this with one of your own:
Any hard data on this ? This is fairy tale.
Su-27 has estimated RCS of 15 square meters; Su-27UB has even bigger.
Even if the MKI is 16square meters, which it most likely is not, the f16 will only double its detective range vs. a 1msq target – “detection range varies by 4th root or rcs”. Now, if you google a bit you should find that the Apg68v7 has approx 50% range of Apg 80 (AESA). The apg 80 detects a 1msq target ~ 130km, and that is double that of the v7 (65km?). Translates a v9 (33% more than v7)out to about 85km. So, in effect the f-16 blk50 with the apg 68v9 will detect the flanker at about 170km (if the MKI is not RCS treated and has a 16msq rcs).
Otoh, the Bars (open source info) is said to have caught the same 16msq target at about 300km+. So a 1msq target gets detected at 150km+, and no, the f-16blk50 is not that small, may be clean. With EFT, which it’ll have to use to match a flanker’s endurance, my guess is about 5+msq. Detection should be about 200km+. Btw, endurance too is a great advantage for the flanker – it could quite easily disengage/reengage if needed and thereby dictate the fight.
Btw, all the info about the MKI/Bars is about 10-12 years old, in which time the Bars has already undergone 2 upgrades. And the MKI, was slated to use more composites at every stage. RAM coatings are hardly new to the IAF, iirc their fulcrums and Jags have these since quite some time. What is even more advantageous to the MKI is the slated super 30 upgrade, which estimates radar range to be doubled, should be ample enough to get a first look over the blk50+.
It stands to reason, that in most DACT the MKI has done v.well as per the IAF, vs. opponents having more powerful radars than the F-16. These include the Tornado, Mirage-2000-5, and the F-15.
Men, you have no idea what you are talking about. Do you know how big the turning radius of MiG-21 is? MiG-21bison has neither effective BVR capability nor VR capability. The only advantage is speed; Indians use it as flying platform for RVV-AE that it can shoot missile’s using data from AWACS or MKI. It may work as part of the system to fill the gap.
Sorry man, but all you write here are some fairy tales. I must tell about you when I will see the F-16 pilot next time, some of them were actually flying MiG-21 before switching to F-16.
I think others have already understood and clarified this. Btw, you Polish? Trust me, I am not dissing your new F-16s. Just putting things in perspective.
uss noviceNot possible, those carriers will not have cataputs.
If you are talking about Rafales on StOBAR carriers, it is in the realm of possibility. the biggest issue here is power – and the RafaleM has more or equal to both the Su-33 and the MiG-29K, which operate from similar setups.
And if needed, a more powerful M88 is not out of the realm of possibility either.
uss noviceKhem… what?
First the block 52+ are nothing like the US Air Force block 50s produced in mid 90s – differed engine, differed radar and most of the systems, structural changes to the airframe, reductions in RCS, RAM coatings etc.
Second – MiG-21bison? Are you serious? It even doesn’t have proper radar as it is limited by the air intake. Even against Su-30MKI in BVR F-16 block 52+ has a fair chances to see Su first.
Khem this:
I was talking about Singaporean F-16blk50s. Still, perhaps they are not as advanced as the PAF vipers. But seriously, it does not matter all that much – the biggest difference is a better radar range. And such an increase is not going to matter vs. the Bars equipped MKI, which will almost always see the F-16 first, especially since it will have to be loaded down with EFT/CFTs to play with the MKI – compromising both RCS and maneuverability. Open sources suggest that the apg-68v9 (30% increase over v7) would have a range of about 130km for a 5msq target. The Bars can do the same at over 200km. IOWs, the F-16 will be very lucky to detect the Su-30MKI (10msq) @ 160-170km, and that is assuming a barn door RCS for the MKI. The MKI will comfortably catch it around 200km+. Remember, for detection range to double, RCS has to reduce 16X.
And this is assuming that the MKI did not have any RCS reduction measures employed (which it almost certainly does). WVR, it’ll be tougher for the MKI considering its massive visual sig.
And yes, the Bison was rated v.highly by both F-16 and F-15 pilots. The ability to shoot at BVR ranges coupled with a rather small RCS and a jammer made it hard to detect early. However, don’t get me wrong, I am not suggesting that the Bison is better than the blk 50. However, it has the potential to challenge, the F-16blk50+.
ANd no doubt, the MKI enjoys similar advantages over the blk50. The flanker has shown similar dominance in DACT vs. almost all such 4gen fighters – Tornadoes, Mirage 2000, F-15 etc from the original cope india (remember that one) to the Indradhanush and even the Garudas.
In any case, this comparison was with the Rafale F4?, which has none of the disadvantages of the MKI in terms of RCS, and supersedes the F-16 in terms of radar range and sensors available.
uss noviceEELightning and USS Novice, disqualified because of too many answers :p
Aww shucks!
uss noviceOK here goes nothing (my two cents anyways)
Swiss: Tiffy or Gripen
India: Shornet or Rafale, Dark horse: MiG -35
Brazil: Flankers or Rafale
Libya: Flankers of MiG-35s
Netherlands: F-35USS.
Heh, heh – not too far from the target either – ‘dem tea leaves be some powerful s***
uss noviceIn terms of pure hardware comparisons, not considering innovative tactics which can always be a pain in the rear:
The block 50/52 is a known entity – to most forumers via open sources and the IAF as well, via numerous exercises conducted with AFs such as Singapore, and the USAF. Don’t think there will be too many surprises there. IIRC, IAF Bisons were rather a handful for the blk 50s, and the MKI dominated.
Problem lies with J10B – I know little to nothing about it, and I doubt the IAF knows it as well as it does the F-16. Questions that come to mind:
1) What sort of RCS measures does it incorporate?
2) EW suite?
3) IRST?
4) HMS?
5) AESA? If so, any word on its capability?
6) SRAAMs? Any with IIR seekers? e.g. ASRAAM
7) MRAAMs? Any with IIR seekers? e.g. Mica IIR
8) LRAAMs? What kind of ranges are we looking at? comparable to R-77? Mica? Astra? Meteor?
9) Engine? WS-10? Mil power/Max power?
10) Empty weight?
11) TWR
12) Wingloading?
13) Endurance?
These are some data points where a comparison might be in order. Frankly, the J10B is a bit of an unknown quantity, if we consider what is known, the Rafale has a v.impressive system – an AESA from a renowned manufacturer, ditto with the IRST and Spectra EW suite, some v. exotic AAMs in the Mica IIR and the Meteor. We also know that the Rafale has proven itself in DACT vs. some rather powerful opponents, WVR and BVR. It has an excellent TWR thanks to the twin M88s, close coupled canards + lerx, which give it superb nose pointing ability. It can supercruise as well. Its basic design – low wingloading, canard-delta, high TWR all point to excellent performance high and fast as well as low and slow. My guess is that as of today, only 3 a/c have the potential to top it in the high altitude, high speed, BVR arena – Typhoon, F-22, and Su-35.
All of these are known capabilities. Some unknowns about the RAfale as well though – “active cancellation” and its focus on the discrete idea. It is actually a big part of the puzzle, because the bird it seems relies heavily on the discrete feature – an integral part of its war fighting capability.
A2A, in some DACTs as well as evaluations so far, it was rated higher than even the Typhoon. e.g. in the ATLC and the Swiss competition.
If we consider only that which is known, the Rafale as it is expected to be specced for the IAF, should be ahead of all other medium birds in the world, let alone the subcontinent. The J10B and the blk 50 have a job on their hands, no mistake.
uss noviceFan images:
That image is nice! Little doubt that the IAF gets two of most beautiful birds in the world!
uss noviceExcellent news for India , France , Dassault and its partners .
But not for me 😡
I NEVER wanted the Rafale to be sold abroad , but that ‘s just me …Cheers.
Bah, you are just a boor from the dinosaur age! :diablo:
uss noviceDo you mean jacko***** :diablo:
* Just for fun..no offence intended
😀 Now, now lets be polite – here’s to good ol’ jacko!
uss noviceYou done with your lamb chops already ?? I am barely through half my Old Monk premium (yes I saved a 12 year Old Monk premium bottle for NLCA flight but MMRCA happened)
Heh heh! I’m up for seconds, and thirds! Cheers!
uss noviceLet say it one more time: Typhoon sucks – it is miserable airplane.
Shh, not so loud. Lets not make it obvious :diablo: But seriously this is a great thing for Rafale, the bird (and french fans) were terribly put out without a single export order. I mean poor TMor almost committed the unmentionable.
No more can jacka** wise guys say, “oh look the Rafale – if it is soo good why not even a single export order?”. There it is – now it has the mother of all export orders.
uss noviceBurp! (lickin the chops) aah, now for dessert:
What does le weapons/sensor package look like? bring it on!
Sensors/EW:
RBE-2 AESA
Spectra – latest edition please
OSF – NG
Damocles?
RecoNG
Topsight HMS
Strike
AASM?
GBU/Paveway series
ASM:
Scalp?
Apache
Crystal Maze
Brahmos??
Nirbhay?
A2A: Mica IR, Mica EM, Meteor, Astra?
I doubt an American weapons package is going to be used unless Rafale is plug and play and integration costs are not an issue. Can I just say that this was the PERFECT choice – and a wonderful complement to the MKI, LCA, and M2k. Not to mention a super lead-in to the AMCA. I can see it as a derivative of the Rafale based on the Kaveri (read snecma-gtre) engines.
uss noviceExcellent! What a coup for France and Dassault. It has been a long time coming, but this was the mother of all export deals. The IAF couldn’t have gotten a better fit – lighter than the F-16blk60, and carries more than the Shornet!
Viva la France! Jaihind!
uss noviceTyphoon: 5 heavy wet points, integration of 2500 litre tanks before CFT, ASMP.
Rafale: Bigger nose, 110 KN M-88, ASRAAM.
Does such a thing even exist? And why would you want a 9.5 ton airframe to carry engines that would give it a TWR of over 2.0 on empty? Insane requirement mate.
The bigger nose, one can understand – but I think the small nose was purpose built – it seems all part of the “discrete” plan. The Tiffy is far more conventional – excellent TWR + large nose, but shaping wise, the Rafale seems to have the edge. So in an A2A battle, unless it is really high up, I don’t see the Tiffy offering too much advantage.
Sign In
