Originally posted by Srbin
hmmm I’ll bet my money on the F-15C! Why? Cuz of superior American pilots. If the Americans were flying the Su-30K I’d still bet on them!

Just like the Israelis used their F-16s to beat the crap out of American F-18s and other planes. Superior pilots should win.

If you consider DACT with other airforces and experiences in stuff like that, the americans are definetely much better off. On the other hand, not only is the IAF training extremely tough, the Su-30s are piloted by the most senior and experienced pilots who no doubt have their own share of foreign experiences indirectly. In WVR, they should easily wipe out their counterparts while I’ll expect them to lose in BVR. This is because the APG-63 is no doubt superior to the N001, at least in technology, concentration of USAF pilots in BVR combat, not to mention the AMRAAM missile, unless the SU-30Ks have R-77s. Then again, we’re talking R-27ERs extended range and radar and electronic systems completely new, so may not to be easy!

But yet again, we’re talking about Alaskan eagles with APG-63V3 AESA and AIM-9X! With AMRAAM, the eagle could probably declare a kill with normal tracking wheras the Mech would require the flanker pilot to go into single target track to do the same.

PS Israelis beating the crap out of anyone in DACT is exaggerated. They once again claimed an 80-0 kill but a clearer pic emerged. Check ACIG related thread.

China having “no choice” is just plain BS. If you’re having so much trouble with the the earlier types, you would’nt have produced them in the thousands and continue production today. China also has Dauphins and Super-frelons among some western aircraft. It has several options of western fighters from countries which were’nt exactly showing the US attitude. Even american stuff could be exported before tianamen.

On top of which, decades of aircraft requirements were met with thousands of either directly purchased or reverse engineered types. It’s not just the russians who downgrade their export variants but also western suppliers. Different design philosophies would also affect russian aircraft as they had no real multirole aircraft until the Su-30, hence never produced anything as useful as a Mirage-2000, dictated by their own requirements.

Russian stuff is crap. Blaming the pilots for 0-100s is idiotic.

Ignore the situation won’t you? No one was blaming anybody but instead pointing out that better trained pilots would win at the end of the day. Had the USAF been flying Mig-29s with IFRs and Su-27s, they too would have scored. 0-100 claims are laughable BS where one side’s claims are give precedence over the others with no gun camera or wreckage photos to prove them. The Israelis claimed something like 89 kills against the syrians for no losses but these are widely disputed.

They have indeed got whacked by Mig-23s. Go read the Mig-23 article at ACIG. Perhaps chinese pilots and technicians simply cannot cope?

Oh goldendragoon, if it were’nt for those crappy russians, you would’nt be where you are today. I see a pattern of deluded nationalistic chinese and a few indians, trying to diss russian tech in lame attempts in trying to prove that they are better today! 😀

The deal is already signed. This was also confirmed by AFM Dec 2003.

Which begs the question-if it’s that up-to-date, why aren’t we seeing more of it?

I don’t really get you. It’s pretty basic to see that the sustained ramrocket propulsion is better for instance. You don’t need to mess with that part. And you ARE seeing more of it in the Akash. Decades later, we’re seeing Kh-20 concepts being used in the most modern AsHM in existance.

Hmm, i am thinking it was a pun, or a joke. not to be taken seriously.

Wow matt! I’m impressed! Hope you get a prize for figuring that out! 😀

Originally posted by h177
1.Detection range of F-16 and Mirage radar is an excess of 100Km. No body launches missles at maximum range. Fro BVR missle the launch range is usually around 20 to 30 KM even F-7PG can do it.

2.A missile is a bomb.
A bomb is not necessarily a missile

3.These Scientist issue was brought by an India person who claimed that he went to a Denel representative and received a personal assurance regarding non transfer of technology to PaK.

4.Now where is your technical knowledge.

Hahahahahahhahaaa…..are you writing this BS on purpose or are you really that dumb?

An F-7PG is not armed with anything of 20-30 km range. Even if you detect a big Flanker at the max advertised 72 km uplook range for the APG-66, you’ll need to track him to provide midcourse updates. That’s typically 50-70% of the detect range, assuming he’s flying in a straight line. Where’s the claimed 120 km for your H-4 missile then? You really should’nt eat up everything your country tells you.

India has more muslims oh really? ok boy proove it ..

Now this is weird. You refuse to believe basic geography while everything pak newspapers say is true I suppose?

As for the steaming India vs Pakistan debate, IMHO this is’nt really the place. Pakistan can balance out all of india’s superiority in numbers, equipment, training, experience blah blah with simple nuclear weapons. If you think the IAF is under less pressure because the PAF is 20 times weaker, think again. They have to go hunting MRBMs.

Negative, the Oniks/Yakhont/Brahmos is based on the P-700/3M45 Granit (SS-N-19 SHIPWRECK). The Kh-20 is the AS-3 KANGAROO.

As for the SA-6 being the most “modern” missile design of right now…that’s a serious misconception. The missile is based on early 60’s technology. If it was that modern, we’d see more of it, wouldn’t we?

The Kh-20 was the first to incorporate an inlet design like the one that the Oniks uses now.

About the SA-6, we are’nt talking about it’s electronics and guidance systems here, just the basic aerodynamic design and ramrocket propulsion, which is a superb one. With a modernised guidance system, it should make an up to date missile.

Malaysia is paying $60 million per piece for it’s MKMs and I doubt the Su-35 could be any cheaper. I’m starting to think that Russians tend to make their stuff cheap after stripping this and that, increasing maintanance costs and thus having the user run back to the source and pay the additional costs for having all the stuff repaired. India claims it can make an MKI for under $40 mil. It’s understandable because of low labour cost in that third world country. If the same aircraft were built and marketed by say, France, it could sell at upto $80-$100 million.