RSAF F-15SG
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Missile performance aren't absolute numbers. Airspeed / Altitude and aspect of the launching aircraft play a crucial role in improving those numbers.
I have doubts of that article's argument as I have trouble believing this statement : -
With a thrust vectoring engine capability (TVC), the Flanker driver has the option of making himself into a very difficult endgame target for the AIM-120 regardless of the capability of his jamming equipment.
I never truly believed how TVC can be used to avoid missiles. TVC when activated slows the aircraft down significantly. Slow targets are dead targets.
Also, if the current models of AIM-120s are in the air, his Jamming equipment will only serve as a bright beacon for the AIM-120 to home in on due to the "Home-On-Jam" capability.
The author is also biased the way he set up his scenario, allowing the Flanker to shoot at longer ranges with the R-27s, assuming that the defending aircraft has no self-protection jammers, while allowing the Flanker to have "modern DRFM monopulse" jammers. He might as well assume the target to be an unarmed Cessna 172.
If the target aircraft is an F-16C and above, its jammers would have denied the Flanker it's R27 shot opportunity, forcing the Flanker to fly closer to burn through the jamming signal.
The single biggest flaw of his whole argument against the effectiveness would be the issue of combat record. The AMRAAM has shot down Flankers, Fulcrums and Foxbats alike in Iraq and Serbia with good accuracy and effectivness. The reverse cannot be said about the R-27 (and all its SARH, IR, ARH and whatever fart-sniffing variant), and the R-77.
They cannot prove their effectivness by simply discrediting the AMRAAM's performance thus far. They can only prove it by matching or out-performing it, and they have yet to do so.
True enough, Russian BVR is largely mass and saturation of multiple seeker types. But thus far, none of their Missiles have proven to be effective in any measure. However, AMRAAM allows its equipped air force to handle such "mass" problems as well by Grinding larger formations away with just a few flights of aircraft supporting. And thats as far as I will go into tactical discussions of the AMRAAM.yeah, i did mention the report was slightly biased but its one of the few open source articles that i can quote from unfortunately.
anyway, i do agree the AMRAAM is definitely more capable and has a proven track record. unfortunately the russians didn't export their weapons to customers good enough to score some positive results for them. the only customers that have the Su-30 type that might get some results, the world policeman doesn't wanna go into conflict with them yet.
i was just trying to make a point that the combat effectiveness of the AMRAAM no doubt is good, but the hit probability of the missile decreases especially if you go up against BVR aware type of targets who possess similar type of missiles and self-protection. they might also emply similar weapon employment tactics, especially if they have also operate western aircraft, plus access to russian aircraft. maybe it s a rojak of everything for their tactics? might confuse them instead.
in any case, just fire more to guarantee a hit lor. :P hahaha.
-
It is quite strange to find the suk held up to this pedestal when the F-15 has better radar, equal maneuvreability, better avionics, ECM, ECCM and better munitions. Not to mention numbers advantage, more pilot training, better digitalisation reducing workload, better service support etc. Even if the RSAF went totally missing, potential aggressors would find it difficult to match the SAF's capability on the ground. SAM coverage will be improved esp if the Spyder M-R is acquired, not to mention area coverage with the asters on the formidables and the Hawk upgrades. Russki strike capabilities with moving targets is a little short-sighted (which means close in encounters vs M-R sams). FMS reports suggests SG imported another XXXk 155mm shell cartridges + almost equal numbers of fuzes and propellants. ST eng has been pretty busy ever since it acquired CIS. At least SAF won't be worried about ground munition shortage in a shooting war. Mindef has been spending quite a fair bit of taxpayer $ and the results at least from my perspective has been justified so far.
-
taken from Defence Tech X 2008,closed already.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2008/nov/04nov08_nr/04nov08_fs.html and Strait Times.
under right air intake is
Infra-Red Search and Track (IRST) System.
under left wing air intake is
Electronic Optics (EO) Suite.
weapons--which is which?
M61 20mm cannon
AIM-120 air-to-air missiles
AIM-9X air-to-air missiles
Maverick air-to-ground missiles
Laser-guided bombs
ddd
ggg
pl quote sources of photos ----sgforums.com
-
Surprising to see the F-15SG model is armed with only 2 LGB and 12 MK82 dumb bombs. I would have thought they would be armed with JDAMs and perhaps newer GBU-39 SDBs.
-
Dec last year, Israel also got approval to manufacture the ADDS II CMDS for RSAF end use. Details of system I can be found here... http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jav/jav_1307.html
-
Can u cut and paste the paragraph... don't have access to Jane's
Thanks
-
Originally posted by slim10:
It is quite strange to find the suk held up to this pedestal when the F-15 has better radar, equal maneuvreability, better avionics, ECM, ECCM and better munitions. Not to mention numbers advantage, more pilot training, better digitalisation reducing workload, better service support etc.
Even if the RSAF went totally missing, potential aggressors would find it difficult to match the SAF’s capability on the ground. SAM coverage will be improved esp if the Spyder M-R is acquired, not to mention area coverage with the asters on the formidables and the Hawk upgrades. Russki strike capabilities with moving targets is a little short-sighted (which means close in encounters vs M-R sams).
FMS reports suggests SG imported another XXXk 155mm shell cartridges + almost equal numbers of fuzes and propellants. ST eng has been pretty busy ever since it acquired CIS. At least SAF won’t be worried about ground munition shortage in a shooting war.
Mindef has been spending quite a fair bit of taxpayer $ and the results at least from my perspective has been justified so far.
Agreed except for the manueverability part. The Sukhoi-30 has a pretty good turn rate such that an Eagle wouldn't want to get into a sustained turning fight against it.
-
Nah, that's the purpose of having the AIM-9X and the HMS. Turn rates are important to get into acquisition envelope (and the closer, the more important). With the introduction of off-bore sighted WVR missiles, this has made higher turn rates less important (and not that the Su-30 has that significant a turn rate over the F-15). Watching Aim-9X doing a 180 deg turn on you-tube is amazing. Good pilots will always maximise the aircraft's advantage even against superior aircraft. RSAF exercises with the IAF really benefits the local pilots. Missile performance and counter measures in such instances are vitally important. Doesn't make sense if one can get 4 missiles off but zero-hits when the other party fires 2 and get a hit.
-
Military shall not tired in cheating!!
-
-
Originally posted by slim10:
Nah, that’s the purpose of having the AIM-9X and the HMS. Turn rates are important to get into acquisition envelope (and the closer, the more important). With the introduction of off-bore sighted WVR missiles, this has made higher turn rates less important (and not that the Su-30 has that significant a turn rate over the F-15). Watching Aim-9X doing a 180 deg turn on you-tube is amazing.
Good pilots will always maximise the aircraft’s advantage even against superior aircraft. RSAF exercises with the IAF really benefits the local pilots.
Missile performance and counter measures in such instances are vitally important. Doesn’t make sense if one can get 4 missiles off but zero-hits when the other party fires 2 and get a hit.
I wasn't referring to weapons vs manueverability. I was simply stating that the F-15 is not superior in manueverability. It has about a 5-6 degree per sec disadvantage.
-
Originally posted by cheeze:
...leaving one or two remaining salvoes of BVR missiles on his rails, and the same Flanker driver will have modern DRFM monopulse jammers capable of causing likely much more than a 50 percent degradation of AIM-120 kill probability. With a thrust vectoring engine capability (TVC), the Flanker driver has the option of making himself into a very difficult endgame target for the AIM-120 regardless of the capability of his jamming equipment. Since all of the AIM-120s fired are identical in kinematic performance and seeker jam resistance, any measure applied by the Flanker driver which is effective against one AIM-120 round in the salvo is apt to produce the same effect against all AIM-120 rounds
Jamming resistance is greatly improved by using monopulse radar seeker. Monopulse radar seeker usually form several polarized beams at one pulse. Filters can be inserted to remove any signal that is either unpolarized, or polarized only in one direction. In order to confuse such a system, the jamming signal would have to duplicate the polarization of the signal as well as the timing, but since the aircraft with DRFM jammer receives only one lobe, determining the precise polarization of the signal is difficult. Especially the active radar seeker on AAM works only in terminal stage and the light up of the active seeker is pretty short in less than 1 min, in such a short time frame, the Assie funboy thinks the target plane’s RWR can locate the direction of the incoming AAM and then DRFM got enough dwell time to form exactly the same signal to jam the active radar seeker at a “50 percent degradation of AIM-120 kill probability?” He must got the result after a wet dream instead of any serious job. The beauty of monopulse radar seeker is not only to be difficult to jam but also, in case of successful jamming , it can seamlessly switch to “Home on jam” mode, which means the jammer itself will provide illumination for the AAM to home in if its own signal being jammed.
-
Are you talking about the current C-5s or Bs?
-
Just wanted to clarify that most modern RF missiles have monopulse seekers. Even the R-77/27 and AIM-7 has it. The difference between active M-R AAMs such as the Amraam and earlier SARH is the necessity to illum the target. Targeting can be done in track while scan mode which reduces the warning time for the target aircraft until terminal homing of the missile. Factor in AESA (agile beam) and radar detection is even more difficult. For a mach 4 missile to be detected at 20km means 15 second reaction time as compared to 80km which provides a minute of reaction time. 15 seconds doesn't give much time to tackle home on jam functions. Think what happens when stealth aircraft is factored in. Also important is the onboard software. Miniaturisation of processors mean powerful onboard computers that can identify differing scenarios and take on continually upgraded programming algorithms to tackle such scenarios. In layman's term, its like a computer playing chess that has its programmers continually inputing more possible moves and identifying which are the best moves in certain scenarios. Faster processors = faster reaction times = use of better software. Shotgun, noted on the manoeuvre bit. Me didn't say F-15 had better m, I used "equal" which in the case of performance envelope is a fair statement to make.
-
Also note ALQ-131(v) pods used for F-16 and F-15s. RSAF upgraded pods to block 2 standard in 1996-8. Additional updates every 2 years. http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solutions/alq131/assets/ALQ131.pdf
-
Correction: Dumb bombs aren't produced in Singapore as earlier mentioned.
-
We DO produce our own 500lbs bombs
-
I was not able to confirm that SG is license manufacturing this in SG from a public source and hence posted the correction. Although the following countries are noted to have licensed copies eg Brazil, Chile, Israel, Portugal, Romania, South Africa, Spain, and Sweden but I couldn't confirm this for Singapore via public source. Unless someone can post a valid public source, I'd prefer to regard this as a "no" or at most a "?" but that's not to say I'm right or wrong.
-
Sorry i dun know how 2 post scaned images on e forums, any help?
btw it a 250kg bomb not 500lbs,my mistake
-
Reproduction of newspaper report. Trust MSM to screw up the numbers. Should read 741m and not 7.41b.
http://www.dsta.gov.sg/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6073&Itemid=401
-
This would be better if Singapore had chosen Typhoon or Rafael as both of this is a later design not like the Eagle which is a 70's design. Anyway with all the upgrade this old design can still contribute.
-
The F-15SG is a low risk choice... and most probably a cheaper choice as well...
The Rafale and Typhoon wasn't as widely adopted when we made the choice. I know subsequent to our decision on F-15 the Typhoon made some overseas sale but who knows, right?
-
F-15SG is a Good Choice for RSAF, trust me.
-
Several factors favoured the F-15.
1) The other competitors did not have aesa at selection time. This means upgrade requirement that cost $ and not sure how performance will be like.
2) Munitions fit, cheaper JSOW was on offer. JSOW = US$3XXk. Storm shadow/SCALP would have cost $m+. Typhoon and rafale not integrated for JSOW.
3) Inter-operability. F-16 weapons and certain pods can be used for F-15. Sniper pod for Typhoon may need some changes before can use on F-16 or vice versa. Also include spares and logistics. Also no worry about integration with G550 AEW and other US-sourced military equipment already in service eg IFF with Hawk sam etc.
4) Training. Pilots benefit from US pilot training programme.
5) Protection money to big brother.
6) Similar aircraft means can borrow big brother airplanes if own ones not enough.
7) ST eng already familiar with similar engine servicing and maintenance techniques.
8) 100% Link-16 operability.
9) Re-basing. Can use all bases that currently support USAF/ROK/Japan/Israel F-15s. When going for exercise, no need to bring too much baggage.
10) Access to Israel’s EW gadgets already developed for their F-15s and future gadget.
11) Boeing discounts for keeping line open on a legacy aircraft.
12) Large number of existing F-15s means more spares, more available spares and cheaper spares.
13) Future of Typhoon and rafale programmes uncertain at point of selection.
14) Future US weapons will be integrated into US aircraft first. This means SG F-15s have first access to weapons. Will take longer to integrate into typhoon/rafale, if integrated at all.
15) Access to munitions. US maintains huge stocks of munitions available at a phone call. Pre-loaded ships pre-positioned in certain US facilities can be shipped very quickly. Want to get from UK , France, Russia, a lot slower.
16) Not sure what problems with Typhoon/rafale will crop up. Older aircraft = problems identified and fixed or solutions available.
17) Every avionics or electronic device on typhoon or rafale has similar equivalent in F-15 but not vice versa.
18) F-15 payload is larger than typhoon or rafale and more important can carry max load further with less penalty.
19) F-15 got CFT and hence better loitering with fewer tanker mission required.
20) S$ exchange rate with US$ low at point of selection vs Euro at record height.
Not enough factors, can list somemore.
-
F15 is counter Aircraft for Mig 29