Su-30s beat F-15Cs everytime...
-
Su-30MK Beats F-15C 'Every Time'
By David A. Fulghum and Douglas Barrie/Aviation Week & Space Technology - May 24, 2002
The Russian-built Sukhoi Su-30MK, the high-performance fighter being exported to India and China, consistently beat the F-15C in classified simulations, say U.S. Air Force and aerospace industry officials.
In certain circumstances, the Su-30 can use its maneuverability, enhanced by thrust-vectoring nozzles, and speed to fool the F-15's radar, fire two missiles and escape before the U.S. fighter can adequately respond. This is according to Air Force officials who have seen the results of extensive studies of multi-aircraft engagements conducted in a complex of 360-deg. simulation domes at Boeing's St. Louis facilities.
"The Su-30 tactic and the success of its escape maneuver permit the second, close-in shot, in case the BVR [beyond-visual-range] shot missed," an Air Force official said. Air Force analysts believe U.S. electronic warfare techniques are adequate to spoof the missile's radar. "That [second shot] is what causes concern to the F-15 community," he said. "Now, the Su-30 pilot is assured two shots plus an effective escape, which greatly increases the total engagement [kill percentage]."
THE SCENARIO in which the Su-30 "always" beats the F-15 involves the Sukhoi taking a shot with a BVR missile (like the AA-12 Adder) and then "turning into the clutter notch of the F-15's radar," the Air Force official said. Getting into the clutter notch where the Doppler radar is ineffective involves making a descending, right-angle turn to drop below the approaching F-15 while reducing the Su-30's relative forward speed close to zero. This is a 20-year-old air combat tactic, but the Russian fighter's maneuverability, ability to dump speed quickly and then rapidly regain acceleration allow it to execute the tactic with great effectiveness, observers said.
If the maneuver is flown correctly, the Su-30 is invisible to the F-15's Doppler radar--which depends on movement of its targets--until the U.S. fighter gets to within range of the AA-11 Archer infrared missile. The AA-11 has a high-off-boresight capability and is used in combination with a helmet-mounted sight and a modern high-speed processor that rapidly spits out the target solution.
Positioned below the F-15, the Su-30 then uses its passive infrared sensor to frame the U.S. fighter against the sky with no background clutter. The Russian fighter then takes its second shot, this time with the IR missile, and accelerates out of danger.
"It works in the simulator every time," the Air Force official said. However, he did point out that U.S. pilots are flying both aircraft in the tests. Few countries maintain a pilot corps with the air-to-air combat skills needed to fly these scenarios, said an aerospace industry official involved in stealth fighter programs. -
Those skeptical of the experiments say they're being used to justify the new Aim-9X high-off-boresight, short-range missile and its helmet-mounted cuing system, the F-22 as an air superiority fighter and, possibly, the development of a new long-range air-to-air missile that could match the F-22 radar's ability to find targets at around 120 mi. They contend that the Su-30MK can only get its BVR missile shot off first against a large radar target like the F-15. While it's true that the Su-30 MK would not succeed against the stealthy F-22 or F-35, neither would it regularly beat the nonstealthy (but relatively small radar cross section) F-16 or F/A-18E/F, they said. These analysts don't deny the F-22's value as an air-to-air fighter, but say the aircraft's actual operational value will be greatest in the penetrating strike, air defense suppression and electronic jamming roles.
At the same time, there may be more to the simulations than justifying new weaponry, say European analysts. Also at play are some tactical wrinkles being developed for the more effective use of new Russian missile versions.
The combination of Su-30 and R-27ER/ET (NATO designation AA-10), flown and fought in a competent fashion, also represents a significant threat. Even though the R-27ER is only a semiactive radar-guided missile, the extra maneuvering capability resulting from the large motor is a significant improvement over the basic R-27. Basic Russian air force doctrine has long suggested following a semi-active missile launch immediately with an IR missile launch, such as the R-27ET. Theory has it that the target aircraft's crew will be occupied spoofing the inbound radar missile, only to fall to the second missile.
The R-27ER, while only semiactive, also outperforms the baseline R-77 ( AA-12) in terms of kinematics. The R-77 motor has a simple, and short, burn profile, which has resulted in disappointing performance, piquing the Russian air force's interest in developing the K-77M rather than fielding the basic AA-12 in any numbers. The K-77M (K denotes a missile still in development, while R reflects an inventory weapon) is an upgraded R-77 with improvements that include a larger motor with a burn sequence profiled to increase range.
The oft-touted, but yet-to-be-fielded, R-27EA active variant of the AA-10 could further enhance the Su-30's capabilities, were an export customer to buy the derivative. In terms of one-on-one combat, the second-generation Flanker family presents a considerable threat to aircraft not designed from the outset as low observable, unless they are capable of extended-range BVR missile engagements. For instance, this threat drove the British selection of a rocket-ramjet missile to equip the Eurofighter -
Eagle driver can fire off an AMRAAM, as it enters the AMRAAM's Rmax1 or less, when the first R-77 is fired at it. The eagle can break away without guiding the AMRAAM till it goes autonomous. The AMRAAM seeker head would have a chance of picking up the Su-30 on its own, even though Pk would be much lesser without the launching aircraft does not guide it till it goes pitbull.
if done right, both the aircraft would be on defensive, with the Su-30 having a slight advantage in the R-77, that has a longer range than AMRAAM-Cs. Depends on the range, this can either be repeated over, or if it gets down to WVR combat, it'll be AIM-9X vs R-73, both high off boresight IR missiles that can be used with HMCS.
to me it seems like an even fight. the fighter with the higher thrust to weight ratio would have an advantage, and imo, maneuverability plays a small role in this. Does the F-15 or the Su-30 have a higher thrust to weight ratio? -
also, the F-15 can make a small turn to change its bearing to counter the Su-30 turning 90 into the clutter notch...
-
Erm, both aircraft may be on the defensive, but the odds are still stacked against the eagle. The sukhoi would have 2 adders on the eagle, while the eagle would only have 1 inaccurate amraam on the sukhoi.
I'm not sure if the clutter notch manuever works every time. It is not a problem that cannot be fixed by newer radars and software. -
Higher thrust to weight, should be the Eagle.Originally posted by sgFish:Eagle driver can fire off an AMRAAM, as it enters the AMRAAM's Rmax1 or less, when the first R-77 is fired at it. The eagle can break away without guiding the AMRAAM till it goes autonomous. The AMRAAM seeker head would have a chance of picking up the Su-30 on its own, even though Pk would be much lesser without the launching aircraft does not guide it till it goes pitbull.
if done right, both the aircraft would be on defensive, with the Su-30 having a slight advantage in the R-77, that has a longer range than AMRAAM-Cs. Depends on the range, this can either be repeated over, or if it gets down to WVR combat, it'll be AIM-9X vs R-73, both high off boresight IR missiles that can be used with HMCS.
to me it seems like an even fight. the fighter with the higher thrust to weight ratio would have an advantage, and imo, maneuverability plays a small role in this. Does the F-15 or the Su-30 have a higher thrust to weight ratio? -
why 2 adders on the eagle? if they both fired, both would be on the defensive, hence the flanker can't put the other adder up in the air. Furthermore, with the eagle having a higher thrust to weight ratio (as lazerlordz said), it can outclimb the flanker, and give the AMRAAM a greater range, evening the odds even more...Originally posted by Shotgun:Erm, both aircraft may be on the defensive, but the odds are still stacked against the eagle. The sukhoi would have 2 adders on the eagle, while the eagle would only have 1 inaccurate amraam on the sukhoi.
I'm not sure if the clutter notch manuever works every time. It is not a problem that cannot be fixed by newer radars and software. -
I'm not familiar with the avionics on the sukhoi, but lets try it this way.
If i have a range advantage (adder) over the amraam. I can simply squeeze off 2 adders instead of 1 right? (now i reduce closure rate and forward airspeed) After all, the lock-on maintains.
After i get a missile warning tone, I can still afford to wait a lil for my first missile to go autonomous before i try to evade yes? Since i have a range advantage, my first missile would already be well on the way while the amraam was just launched. I try to evade now, I still have 1 active adder. The other adder's pk may not be as high, but heck, the other driver has his hands full with 1 adder already.
Now the amraam is about just launched, the other driver has to worry about my incoming adder, and I have to worry about an incoming amraam. If the other driver chickens, I have a better chance of defeating the amraam. If he doesn't chances of my missile killing him is higher, while my chances of getting killed is also higher. But not as high as his, (He is still trying to get his amraam to pitbull) since I have already commenced my evasive manuever.... (beaming or running).
I would guess the norm would be to just launch the amraam, and commence evasive manuevers immediately, rather than to try to ensure a high pk amraam. What is not taken into consideration so far is the effectiveness of AWACS, which is a pivotal role in BVR combat. -
All this is provided the pilot of the Su-30 can pull of the move. Considering the US guys have more air time then almost everyone else
-
it's the driver, not the equipment..
-
I would BVR tactics is more commonly practices that WVR tactics. WVR can be more dangerous, and more fuel consuming. =D
-
how many planes have F-15 and SU-30 shot down?
who really knows the max range of amraam and other russian missiles when fired from a non moving platform? -
you probably meant the pilot. wonder how the russian airforce school is training their cadets. do they get top-notch facility and such?Originally posted by the Bear:it's the driver, not the equipment.. -
can anybody explain the clutter notch manuever
-
if the 2 aircraft are head on, and one aircraft turns 90 degrees away, the resultant relative velocity of the aircraft that turns away would be equal to the speed of the ground. doppler radar is designed to filter out anything that moves at the same relative velocity as the ground when taken from the radar's point of view, hence the target is filtered out and is not detectable by the radar. this is to prevent the radar from showing the ground in the radar scopeOriginally posted by beavan:can anybody explain the clutter notch manuever -
Just a note. With an AESA radar, that clutter notch maneuver might not be very successful.
Well, no one really knows what the true range of the AMRAAM is. But it has already been admitted to be shorter than its Russian counterpart. And of course, no one really knows if the performance of these missiles are really as advertised. Except for the AMRAAM since its been used in combat already. But, I think it would be rather foolish to "discount" its advertised capabilities just because its not been combat proven.
The Russians are good at coming up with good missile designs and concepts. After all they sell some of the most numerous and effective SAM equipments world wide. I would give the adder its due credit. =D -
yep, we shouldn't discredit the adder on the basis that it hasn't been used in combat.Originally posted by Shotgun:Well, no one really knows what the true range of the AMRAAM is. But it has already been admitted to be shorter than its Russian counterpart. And of course, no one really knows if the performance of these missiles are really as advertised. Except for the AMRAAM since its been used in combat already. But, I think it would be rather foolish to "discount" its advertised capabilities just because its not been combat proven.
The Russians are good at coming up with good missile designs and concepts. After all they sell some of the most numerous and effective SAM equipments world wide. I would give the adder its due credit. =D
no doubt the AMRAAM has a shorter range than the R-77, however it is reported that the AMRAAM has a better ECCM capability. HOwever both missiles are still being improved upon, and there's always the MBDA meteor BVR missile thats up and coming. It should be interesting to see how these missiles evolve -
Name me an air war in which modern american made aircraft lost
-
While its true that Americans have not lost an air war, they are also prone to over confidence.
THe serb mig29 actually managed to sneak and shoot down some of the american F-16s using some really smart tactics. They flew low and only searched the skies with their IRST. I believe it was a viper that was lost to a heat seeker. Probably archer. -
i didnt know of any F-16 war lost... can provide link?Originally posted by Shotgun:While its true that Americans have not lost an air war, they are also prone to over confidence.
THe serb mig29 actually managed to sneak and shoot down some of the american F-16s using some really smart tactics. They flew low and only searched the skies with their IRST. I believe it was a viper that was lost to a heat seeker. Probably archer. -
Scott O' Grady shot down over Serbia.Originally posted by tripwire:i didnt know of any F-16 war lost... can provide link? -
When one talks about Active Radar Homing( ARH), MRAAMs, how come forget to mention the so called non-escape zone ( NEZ) of such deadly missiles. The NEZ means if the hostile fighter within that range of the ARH MRAAM, no matter how it maneuvers, the missile still will catch it. Imagine an AIM120 roared towards your fighter in Mach 4 speed and can make a tight turn in 50g, you just know no matter how can you plane maneuver, it canÂ’t out run such missiles. The NEZ for AIM120 grade missile is roughly 40kms, thatÂ’s a terrible range. I think Russian R77 would get a similar NEZ.
Just imagine if your plane and the hostile plane both equipped with ARH MRAAMs approaching the 40 kms in range head-on, thatÂ’s really terrified experiences.
-
thought that was by a SAM ? ....Originally posted by LazerLordz:Scott O' Grady shot down over Serbia.
-
AIM120C max range is longer than R77 if at the same altitude( 10000meters) and both the launching planes and opponent plane flying at the same head on speed ( Mach1.2)Originally posted by tripwire:how many planes have F-15 and SU-30 shot down?
who really knows the max range of amraam and other russian missiles when fired from a non moving platform?
Under such conditions, AIM120C is around 70-75km max range , However, since C5, Yankees keep their max range data on AIM120 latest version a secret.
the advertised Russian R77 max range of 100km is measured at a high altitude of 20000m and carrying plane's head on speed @ mach1.5. -
Err, 70-75 km if both aircraft continue on a head on course. Which wont happen. And to launch at such a range, PK is VERY LOW. A change in course or altitude can put the target aircraft OUTSIDE the effective envelope of the weapon.