RMAF's Sukhois to arrive in May — one year late
-
Originally posted by Skye2:
It has always been about systems. Just got more complicated and sophisticated. Dumbo...F-22 carries 6 Amraams and 2 sidewinders. 6 bvr missiles and 2 wvr missiles.Tells u a lot about where the battle will be. (By the way, f-35 can carry 6 AAMs internally
. Eat sheet invaders!! ) The reason why it is fast and maneuverable is that it is made to face hordes of russian fighters; just in case it has to get into a fight to get out.And just before you say, other western jets cannot make it in terms of wvr, understand that it`s about using their respective aircrafts, combat systems and tactical advantages best. They are all as good as the pilots, systems, systems inside planes, plane characteristics and tactics they use to maximise a win.
you are soooooo smart
-
Originally posted by Skye2:
Typhoon promo video. See how the typhoon kick the sheet out of the sukhoi. See how the wvr missile fly into the face of the sukhoi when the sukhoi was at the tail of the typhoon. What tactic and system is that? New western planes and missiles have that. Still want to get behind a western plane`s backside? Please lar. A lot of factors are involved. Know your plane and know what its advantages and weakneses are. And use the force multipliers which would be of tremendous advantage to you.
isnt this support my notion that modern fighter jet do indeed get in WVR dogfight? -
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Dude, u are seriously missing the point about the F-22. Its primary feature is Stealth, not supermanueverability. Its stealthy designs, LPI radar, and super computers are meant to help it achieve one purpose. To SEE and SHOOT flankers or any other aerial adversary before they even realise the F-22 is out there.Its super manueverability is a supporting feature to help it achieve its role of Air Dominance when closing with the enemy, which in the first place, should not happen. But because its an Air Dominance fighter, contingencies are always considered so that it can always come out on top.
Skye2, I haven't updated myself on the F-35, but last I checked, it has only internal A2A carriage space for 2 AMRAAMs. Other 4 will have to be carried externally. The main internal carraige is reserved for A2G ordinance. In other words, when stealth is required, the F-35 will only have 2 AMRAAMs loaded.
"which in the first place, should not happen"
this is not the way the american think....dogfight will happen, maybe the odd getting one with a Raptor is slim, you will never know.
shot gun, the F22 were indeed a superior aircraft becoz of its stealthtiness, but the american retain a dogfighting aspect in F22 because somewhere in the future someone might actually defeat the stealth, or maybe built another stealth plane to counter F22. For example the russian PAK FA..or the japanese new stealth fighter, or the chinese one...yada yada yada.Pak Fa- this is a model, mockup not even a full scale size.
korean stealth jet KFX-201
or the chinese xj-14...people were really catching up
-
Originally posted by tankfanatic:
"which in the first place, should not happen"
this is not the way the american think....dogfight will happen, maybe the odd getting one with a Raptor is slim, you will never know.
shot gun, the F22 were indeed a superior aircraft becoz of its stealthtiness, but the american retain a dogfighting aspect in F22 because somewhere in the future someone might actually defeat the stealth, or maybe built another stealth plane to counter F22. For example the russian PAK FA..or the japanese new stealth fighter, or the chinese one...yada yada yada.Pak Fa- this is a model, mockup not even a full scale size.
korean stealth jet KFX-201
or the chinese xj-14...people were really catching up
1. Then you can go ahead with your fantasy of going through the merge all you like. =) We already informed you that most air forces prefer not to merge and like to slug it out at BVR. No one wants to get into range for close fight. Who ever who chooses to do so will be the first to die. AMRAAMs just don't miss between 10 to 20nm @ hi- aspect (its called the NO ESCAPE ZONE and for a good reason too).
Even if you do get close enough, merging for a dogfight is a waste of fuel & time. The reason why we see so much development in super maneuverability is cos ppl actually want to finish a "dogfight " FAST. Pull the nose into off-boresight missile parameters and make like a bat out of hell.
2. The last image is so obviously photoshopped! They are not gonna build something that can remotely par up with the F-22 for the next 10 years. The Chinese can't even design / build their own engines, let alone an entire fighter.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
1. Then you can go ahead with your fantasy of going through the merge all you like. =) We already informed you that most air forces prefer not to merge and like to slug it out at BVR. No one wants to get into range for close fight. Who ever who chooses to do so will be the first to die. AMRAAMs just don't miss between 10 to 20nm @ hi- aspect (its called the NO ESCAPE ZONE and for a good reason too).
Even if you do get close enough, merging for a dogfight is a waste of fuel & time. The reason why we see so much development in super maneuverability is cos ppl actually want to finish a "dogfight " FAST. Pull the nose into off-boresight missile parameters and make like a bat out of hell.
2. The last image is so obviously photoshopped! They are not gonna build something that can remotely par up with the F-22 for the next 10 years. The Chinese can't even design / build their own engines, let alone an entire fighter.
1. when you imply 'most air forces prefer not to merge and like to slug it out at BVR ' ...im impress. Your PR with 'most airforce' were great!
Well FYI i agree with you BVR is the rule, but for your information 'most airforce' take WVR and dogfight very seriously. Disregarding the art of dogfighting is a mistake, big mistake.
No one want to merge and dogfight, this i agree....but shotgun, the enemy dont usually want you to do what you are best of...isnt sun tzu said always fight on your terms not the enemy?
The reason why we see so much development in super maneuverability is cos ppl actually want to finish a "dogfight " FAST. Pull the nose into off-boresight missile parameters and make like a bat out of hell.
aha ! there is a dogfight afterall...even a short one still count.
2. it is photoshop.....its a concept.
The american were already out of enemy...that he can fight with advanced technologies...new weapon system were always questioned by its own people...for example can the f22 bomb Osama? it can...yet F16 also can...F22 were probably the last manned AC is not news too.
-
You really eat too much sotong lar you.
isnt this support my notion that modern fighter jet do indeed get in WVR dogfight?"
Nobody is saying that modern fighters will not get into WVR action. You seem to have asserted earlier that modern fighters always get into WVR fights after expending thier BVR missiles. This is what you wrote;
so what happen when both side have spent their bvr missile? RTB? of course not...you have to come close and eyeball the enemy and fight it...thats mean dogfight.
This is plainly wrong. The majority, if not all, of the action will be in BVR range. Planes will be shot down at BVR ranges. Maneuvres will be made at BvR ranges. Tactics will be played at BVR ranges. As pricey moving objects with a human at the heart of it, they will maximise thier chances to kill and not be killed; which can only be done at BVR ranges. You get into WVR only when you have no choice. But even then, modern jets like the Typhoons and F15SGs are more than able to kill off thier enemies using thier own advantages; especially so when leveraging on force multipliers like AWACs/AEWs and other systems. But why even bother when you can kill off your enemies at BVR ranges using a variety of strategies, tactics and systems.
Even the Russians know that which is why BVR missiles are being created with ever greater ranges. The Amraam 120-D can shoot from as far as 180 km. Check your map and see how far that is.
Also, planes from both sides do not simply form up in a line and fire bvr missiles and wait for them to come at you and then go for a dog-fight. It`s this kind of one-dimensional thinking that will get you killed; especially against air-forces with AWACs, modern systems,etc. It is bereft of strategy and tactics.
Shotgun has provided a useful example. Stealth fighters like the F-22s and F-35s do not even want to be seen when in combat; and correctly so. Anyway, it would be absolutely hard to see them if they go in nose-cold and directed by AWACs/AEW planes or UAVs. All the enemy is going to see first is a slew of BVR missiles coming at them. How many will survive? 1? 2? 3? The remaining ones might try to get in closer but again, the F35s/F-22s would have flown further than thier radar can track properly(plus stealth)and yet still be in position to let loose another slew of BVR missiles. But seriously, the enemy will pull back to save thier aircrafts rather then try and do a suicide mission. The same can be said of F-15s, Typhoons, F-16s, etc. While they lack stealth, they will be able to leverage on systems which will allow them to see first, shoot first and react first.
That is why modern air forces strive to to have the capability of seeing first and shooting first from long ranges. How do they do this? Answer: Good systems which combine an entire array of platforms. An entire system of sensors and shooters.
-
For example the russian PAK FA..or the japanese new stealth fighter, or the chinese one...yada yada yada.
That is right. Yada yada yada. Come back when they have a working and combat ready jet. Among the examples you have provided, the only one with any hope of succeeding anytime soon is the Pak-FA. And even so, it will be ready earliest sometime next decade. But as far as aircraft development go, this would mean that they will be ready for sales probably after 2020; after all tests are done. And that is assuming the Russians even want to sell them in the first place and risk proliferation issues like the F-22. But the F-22 might be available for sale then so we`ll have to see.
As far as I`ve heard, the Pak-fa will be the equivalent of the F-35 and will not be as stealthy as the latter with no internal carriage for weapons. Just lower RCS.
-
Well FYI i agree with you BVR is the rule, but for your information 'most airforce' take WVR and dogfight very seriously. Disregarding the art of dogfighting is a mistake, big mistake.
When in the world did anyone say anything to that effect? The aforementioned posts stress the predominance of BVR warfare in air to air combat over WVR; now and the future. 
No one want to merge and dogfight, this i agree....but shotgun, the enemy dont usually want you to do what you are best of...isnt sun tzu said always fight on your terms not the enemy?
I dont like to squeeze people so sometimes i just leave arguments as they are; even if i feel strongly about them. But I dont exactly grasp the viability of your comment there. What are you exactly saying in the context of this little debate? Do this. Elaborate and expand your comment here using combat jets. Or this is one of your `airy-fairy' ideas again.
-
You really eat too much sotong lar you.bcoz sotong are delicious...
Nobody is saying that modern fighters will not get into WVR action.
yet you say...
This is plainly wrong. The majority, if not all, of the action will be in BVR range. Planes will be shot down at BVR ranges. Maneuvres will be made at BvR ranges. Tactics will be played at BVR ranges.
You seem to have asserted earlier that modern fighters always get into WVR fights after expending thier BVR missiles. This is what you wrote;
"so what happen when both side have spent their bvr missile? RTB? of course not...you have to come close and eyeball the enemy and fight it...thats mean dogfight."
ofcourse i wrote that...are you assuming nothing in this world can spoof long range BVR missile? you are the one say that its about the system...what if the system were meant to jammed and spoof the long range all aspect missile? what if the system work? the Rafale have such system...are you implying BVR Amraam were the ultimate killer that nothing will survive if engaged by it?
i will note dispute the rest of stuff that you wrote, because i agree with it. It just that im saying WVR and dogfight were still important and serious in air war, ignoring it is a mistake.
-
Originally posted by Skye2: When in the world did anyone say anything to that effect? The aforementioned posts stress the predominance of BVR warfare in air to air combat over WVR; now and the future.
I dont like to squeeze people so sometimes i just leave arguments as they are; even if i feel strongly about them. But I dont exactly grasp the viability of your comment there. What are you exactly saying in the context of this little debate? Do this. Elaborate and expand your comment here using combat jets. Or this is one of your `airy-fairy' ideas again.
allright...allright.....no 'airy fairy'...sigh so serious.
BVR can be spoof..if you know RGPO,VGPO,gate stealing,anti-VGPO ECCM....then you know there are ways to defeat BVR, and people are improving it.
-
Sotong makes u blur(pardon all cuttlefish lovers..the effect is subjective
).yet you say...
Learn to read?
...hmm, what does the "majority, if not all" means?ofcourse i wrote that...are you assuming nothing in this world can spoof long range BVR missile? you are the one say that its about the system...what if the system were meant to jammed and spoof the long range all aspect missile? what if the system work? the Rafale have such system...are you implying BVR Amraam were the ultimate killer that nothing will survive if engaged by it?
Not so easy to jam missiles. Easier to jam planes.
. And even so, why carry many bvr missiles when in air to air mode? Maximise kill lah. Duh. Secondly, you should never assume the enemy will throw 18 jets when you show off 18 jets. It could well be 40 coming at you. -
Why is the interface so buggy? Some of the fonts have gone crazy!!
And i cant seem to post sometimes;and sometimes doing double posts. Anyway..BVR can be spoof..if you know RGPO,VGPO,gate stealing,anti-VGPO ECCM....then you know there are ways to defeat BVR, and people are improving it.
Ya ya..already answered that in my previous post. You have not answered me. I asked for clarification as per your last post by using realistic examples/scenarios;
No one want to merge and dogfight, this i agree....but shotgun, the enemy dont usually want you to do what you are best of...isnt sun tzu said always fight on your terms not the enemy?
Explain yourself.
What are you saying? 
-
Sotong makes u blur(pardon all cuttlefish lovers..the effect is subjective).my delicious sotong!
-
Originally posted by Skye2:
Why is the interface so buggy? Some of the fonts have gone crazy!!
And i cant seem to post sometimes;and sometimes doing double posts. Anyway..Ya ya..already answered that in my previous post. You have not answered me. I asked for clarification as per your last post by using realistic examples/scenarios;
Explain yourself.
What are you saying?
i meant the enemy can some time trap and ambush you by deception. -
i meant the enemy can some time trap and ambush you by deception.
Yar lar. But how in the context of what you are talking about and using combat jets as examples? Hard right? Next time dont spout `airy-fairy' ideas again by trying to quote some long dead philosopher. Just diam diam and suck thumb.
-
Originally posted by Skye2:
Yar lar. But how in the context of what you are talking about and using combat jets as examples? Hard right? Next time dont spout `airy-fairy' ideas again by trying to quote some long dead philosopher. Just diam diam and suck thumb.
you are dense....deception and ambush in air battle is not new...the american have perfected it so does the british...for example flying total Emcon and slide in underneath an airliner, or sending first wave of AC to lure defender AC away from an airbase..so that the second wave can bomb it without being engage....air tactic, deception and ambush.or if doesnt satisfy that thick skull of yours i can give you example....there nothing airy fairy about it kid.
Deception and tactic Operation Moked, Destruction of Arab Air Forces...go learn and then shut up.
-
ROFLMAO. You`ve cracked up. Calling me dense ar? Allow moi to point out a few things then har. Dont get your pants on fire now.
....deception and ambush in air battle is not new...the american have perfected it so does the british
Nobody said deception is `not' new. Where on earth did you get that idea? Get your head out of the clouds. I have asked you to expound on your words of wisdom on deception which you said you got from Sun Tzu in the context of the discussion.
for example flying total Emcon and slide in underneath an airliner, or sending first wave of AC to lure defender AC away from an airbase..so that the second wave can bomb it without being engage....air tactic, deception and ambush.
And how do your examples relate to the BVR and WVR discussion up there? Hmm.. I gather you had simply did a google on conflicts regarding conflicts involving airforces. Putting together a string of copy and paste examples is not going to help. Any tom, dick and harry can come up with the above examples. Do you know that you patronize people by coming up with airy fairy ideas about how there is always deception in air combat and such. Are you so dense as to not appreciate the fact that people already know about this; much less air forces? I have to admit that im no pilot but your ideas are off the planet sometimes.
or if doesnt satisfy that thick skull of yours i can give you example....there nothing airy fairy about it kid.
Deception and tactic Operation Moked, Destruction of Arab Air Forces...go learn and then shut up.
Lol. Do a search on goggle and voila. ^ The only one person who should open his eyes more is you. A little bit more thinking before you open your mouth will help too or you will be opening yourself to ridicule. Finally, do not point an accusatory finger at others if you can`t take the comments that come after that.
And do not point at me hor. Im just a poor Ah beng who hate farmers. 
-
Relac lah guys. Both BVR and WVR are important. In an all out war with no ROE limitations, BVR will dominate. But how often do all out wars happen nowadays? More commonly, visual confirmation of the target is needed before weapons can be fired, and thus WVR maneuverability, and short range missiles like the AIM-9X are important. Ultimately, Air Superiority means superiority in both BVR and WVR combat.
-
Originally posted by Skye2:ROFLMAO. You`ve cracked up. Calling me dense ar? Allow moi to point out a few things then har. Dont get your pants on fire now.
Nobody said deception is `not' new. Where on earth did you get that idea? Get your head out of the clouds. I have asked you to expound on your words of wisdom on deception which you said you got from Sun Tzu in the context of the discussion.
And how do your examples relate to the BVR and WVR discussion up there? Hmm.. I gather you had simply did a google on conflicts regarding conflicts involving airforces. Putting together a string of copy and paste examples is not going to help. Any tom, dick and harry can come up with the above examples. Do you know that you patronize people by coming up with airy fairy ideas about how there is always deception in air combat and such. Are you so dense as to not appreciate the fact that people already know about this; much less air forces? I have to admit that im no pilot but your ideas are off the planet sometimes.
Lol. Do a search on goggle and voila. ^ The only one person who should open his eyes more is you. A little bit more thinking before you open your mouth will help too or you will be opening yourself to ridicule. Finally, do not point an accusatory finger at others if you can`t take the comments that come after that.
And do not point at me hor. Im just a poor Ah beng who hate farmers. well kid twist my word all you want...i have given my opinion.....from what what i have read from your post more like tong kosong, loud but kosong.
Any tom, dick and harry can come up with the above examples
i bet i am Tom, and you are Dick.
-
well kid twist my word all you want...i have given my opinion.....from what what i have read from your post more like tong kosong, loud but kosong.
Lol.Looks like this kid is `you.' Pretty obvious all your arguments went up in smoke because you were essentially confused. ;)
i bet i am Tom, and you are Dick.
Great comeback kid ! It does not hurt to make a fool of yourself anymore. :)
-
Skye2 forget it. I've said it before. Let him have his WVR fantasies.
He's bringing up 1960s examples of campaigns, a period where BVR was still science fiction.
Let me correct myself over my last post. There is a difference between merge and dogfight. The merge is the entry into close range combat. If I were to merge and blowthrough, I would not enter a dogfight since I'm gaining lateral seperation from my enemy. Hence technology today allows a pilot to target high-aspect weapons on the merge and allows them to blow through without having to "Turn" and formally enter the "dogfight." The window for escape at that point is still rather wide, however the moment I have to turn, my window for escape closes, and I either have to win a turning fight or die trying.
Air Combat Doctrine in most Air Forces revolves around destroying enemy aircraft at Beyond visual range. MOST. The rest of the air forces do not practice that simply cause they do not have the latest generation of BVR weapons like the AMRAAM. I'm simply saying, Air Forces with BVR weapons, will fight BVR. Period.
tankfanatic, I found your posts extremely annoying, ill-researched and full of fantasy-situations. Before you continue this discussion, please read up on topics such as F-Poles, A-Poles and "Grinder" and think of how it will impact an Air to Air engagement given to forces equipped with Active BVR Missiles such as the AMRAAM.
-
Originally posted by Skye2:
Lol.Looks like this kid is `you.' Pretty obvious all your arguments went up in smoke because you were essentially confused. ;)
Great comeback kid ! It does not hurt to make a fool of yourself anymore. :)
i think you are the one who is lost, kid. -
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Skye2 forget it. I've said it before. Let him have his WVR fantasies.
He's bringing up 1960s examples of campaigns, a period where BVR was still science fiction.
Let me correct myself over my last post. There is a difference between merge and dogfight. The merge is the entry into close range combat. If I were to merge and blowthrough, I would not enter a dogfight since I'm gaining lateral seperation from my enemy. Hence technology today allows a pilot to target high-aspect weapons on the merge and allows them to blow through without having to "Turn" and formally enter the "dogfight." The window for escape at that point is still rather wide, however the moment I have to turn, my window for escape closes, and I either have to win a turning fight or die trying.
Air Combat Doctrine in most Air Forces revolves around destroying enemy aircraft at Beyond visual range. MOST. The rest of the air forces do not practice that simply cause they do not have the latest generation of BVR weapons like the AMRAAM. I'm simply saying, Air Forces with BVR weapons, will fight BVR. Period.
tankfanatic, I found your posts extremely annoying, ill-researched and full of fantasy-situations. Before you continue this discussion, please read up on topics such as F-Poles, A-Poles and "Grinder" and think of how it will impact an Air to Air engagement given to forces equipped with Active BVR Missiles such as the AMRAAM.
look point which part in my post is fantasy.
and when you said 'most'...that sounds a lot, in reallity majority of airforce around the world didnt have the latest BVR and trained their pilot in WVR and they wary the existance of AMRAAM...and a lot of them do figure out ways to defeat it.
-
tankfanatic, I found your posts extremely annoying, ill-researched and full of fantasy-situations. Before you continue this discussion, please read up on topics such as F-Poles, A-Poles and "Grinder" and think of how it will impact an Air to Air engagement given to forces equipped with Active BVR Missiles such as the AMRAAM.
sigh...yes, yes...i never dispute the advantage of BVR! i only said in the event the enemy were hell bent in attacking you and both side have spent their BVR...it is inevitable the fight will turned into a dogfight....
and BVR missile can be defeted, and easier jammed than an aircraft..obviously skye is in other word lack the copy and paste skills....by saying this:
Not so easy to jam missiles. Easier to jam planes.
very funny statement, so who is airy fairy now?
-
and when you said 'most'...that sounds a lot, in reallity majority of airforce around the world didnt have the latest BVR and trained their pilot in WVR and they wary the existance of AMRAAM...and a lot of them do figure out ways to defeat it.
Wrong again. All modern airforces have BVR weapons and the latest ones too. Lol. More airy-fairy ideas. You are losing credibility fast. Im pretty sure air-force pilots invest a lot of time in tactics to maximise gain and reduce losses. The problem with you is that you are unable to swallow the fact that your airforce is poorly equipped at the moment. As such, you try and paint a better picture of it via WVR combat using general ideas which amounts to nothing. Im sure you we have already agreed on these points;
1) Aerial warfare is no longer about individual platforms but entire systems. Systems are force multipliers which allow individual platforms to perform significantly better than without it. See first, shoot first, track first, etc, etc.
2) BVR will dominate air combat from now henceforth.
3) In WVR, Western jets are just as capable if not more capable than the Ruskies via thier own niches. In the case of Western combat jets, the greater emphasis is on systems and weapons. For example, the current Amraam 120-C5s/C7s and the incoming 120-D are already better than the Russian equivalent. The AIM-9X and Asraam are much much better than the R-73s.
What is there to argue any more?