Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

why SU 35 would nt pose any serious security threat to india's RAFALE ,

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by DrSomnath999, Mar 16, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ASHRAF

    ASHRAF FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    also when ur in standoff range u can guide ur friends and ur in safe place ,,,, it depends on ur isr and awareness capability
     
  2. ASHRAF

    ASHRAF FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2

    but f-16 , mirage2000 , tornado , a-10 where shutdown and they still have trained pilots and same enemy , f-15 didn't or not same rate ???
     
  3. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Every measure has countermeasure... AESA isn't magic, principles are well known.
     
  4. Vritra

    Vritra Major ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    908
    The missile itself has been designed to generate very low heat, but past a certain range, even its exhaust will be detectable by fighter-borne IRST. Some of the more modern ones will detect the flare of energy released when the missile is launched.
     
  5. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    The range at which a Su-30MKI can shoot WVR is more than the range at which it gets detected visually by day by naked eyes and far more by IRST.
    The game of aircombat has only one motto for victory, See first, shoot first, keep shooting. Su-30s lose out on that by many miles w.r.t. Rafale.
     
  6. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Can't say for others, but according to USAF, neither F-15 or F-16 have ever suffered a loss in air to air combat. I did find claims to the contrary (for both), but keep something in mind: there were 2230 F-16s and 867 F-15s in service over the years, and F-16s usually flew 20% more sorties than same number of F-15s, which means that F-16s flew 3 times as many sorties as F-15s. Also, both F-15 and F-16 have suffered losses to SAMs.

    Same goes for jamming aircraft. And keep in mind that, as radar is farther, jammer needs less power; and dedicated jamming aircraft have far more power avaliable than ordinary fighters, which automatically means that aircraft using radar has to come closer. Plus, you can never be certain how long range is of missiles enemy has on his aircraft, and aside from possibility of EW suite guiding IR missile towards your aircraft with active radar, there might be some dedicated anti-radiation missiles in play (though these are primarly useful against fixed radars and dedicated AWACS platforms).
     
  7. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    I have always kept myself updated with latest tech in aircombat. I do know that many people here are not actual defense professionals but enthusiasts. They love defence forums and are avid readers. I respect them and salute them. I also have limitations as I can't divulge many things for being a professional. But within my limited sphere, I try to give out my best opinion.

    Rafale is not just about what it is today, but how it can revolusionise aircombat of future. If you believe me, we are going back to the days of first world war wherein we had nothing but only eyes to shoot. The sensors will make it nearly imposible to be switched on for detection and only passive means will bcum primary sensors.
    But as I stated, the next frontier in aircombat is not within atmosphere, but in space. winged aircraft capable of operating in space is wht we need now. They will not need only kinetic energy weapons but combination of directed energy weapons and kinetic energy weapons that too space based. You may probably know that a space based laser has unlimited range while an earth based laser has a range of no more than 100 kms.
     
    3 people like this.
  8. ASHRAF

    ASHRAF FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    RCS works against AAM and SAM >>>>so why f-16 , tornados a-10 mirages were shotdown and f-15 didn't and all face same enemy if rcs determine who will be victorious ?? , RCS is not constant figure it depends on many factors not the real physical surface area
    modern even some old fighters use emcon to control radar emissions and with aesa and (wild field view ) you can get closer enough to shoot first and leave specially with tvc ,high speed ,
    higher speed , powerful radar can give you authorization to launch earlier and to disengage at any time ,
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2013
  9. ricky123

    ricky123 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    352
    Country Flag:
    India
    su35 will be superior to rafale ... but india will not field rafale against it anyways ... for that india is getting the super su30mki which will be much better then the su35 ...... india is getting some 40 super su30 ..since china has also ordered some 48 su35 ... but later india might just upgrade all of the su30mki ....india will always have the edge with china in fighters..the only thing they will have is numbers .. hopefully tejas will fill that gap for us too ...
     
  10. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    You think I don't know that? RCS used is usually frontal RCS, which is most relevant as radar emissions get detected and fighters turn nose towards them. And better get up to speed with what I am talking about.

    F-16 flew several times more sorties than F-15. And MiG-23 is claimed to have shot down F-15:
    The MiG-23 combat record

    Theoretically, but not in practice. By time you detect opponent with radar, he will already have fired a missile on you completely passively.
     
  11. smestarz

    smestarz Lt. Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    4,653
    Likes Received:
    1,803
    I do agree with most view, but Tejas might be something like MiG-21 (not the accident records), it will be an interceptor and dog fighter, it would not have long range of the twin engined planes, thus a strategy that was used for MiG-21 would be modified for present situation and used. If you pit Tejas 1 on 1 against Rafale, or EFT or Su-30 MKK or Su-35, there is higher rate of probability that Tejas will lose (therotical aspect based on weapons avionics etc) it might do much better against Gripen.

    So knowing that Tejas has limitations when it comes against the above planes, IAF would have to use tactics where a flight of Tejas is used in such a way that they can team together to be effective, rather a different stategy has to be employed based on strengths of Tejas and the weaknesses of the above planes,
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. ASHRAF

    ASHRAF FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    shooting missiles passively in BVR mode is not possibile always or it is easy as you think , so radars still have the advantage even if ur opponent was alerted , for mig-23-(mig-25(irag vs usa) ) there is sources claiming that it shot israeli f-15 and this can be true for many reasons but even f-15 have high RCS with few losses but with powerfull radar and agility its to be considered most successfull fighter in real combat
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2013
  13. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Shooting missiles actively is even harder, and far riskier for several factors:
    1) you loose element of surprise. Since only fraction of radar's output returns back to sender, and that fraction has to get to enemy aircraft, reflect off it - loosing lot of power in process, even with barn-door-RCS aircraft like F-15 - and then return back to sender, radar can be detected by RWR at several times its own effective range. While larger fighters usually have larger RCS, they can also carry heavier electronics, so this RWRs advantage is preserved regardless of fighter's size. Further, aircraft that are nominally within radar's detection range, but are at such angle that they can't actually be detected by radar's main beam, can still detect side lobes.
    2) it is easier to fool active than passive sensors, for one simple reason: detection process is more complex. Radar specifically is vulnerable to quite few countermeasures, such as brute force wide-bandwidth jamming, as well as pulling off range gate. Active cancellation is another possibility, which reduces aircraft's effective RCS.
    3) in a true shooting war, there will always be EM interference. This will automatically reduce radar's performance.
    4) aircraft that are designed solely or primarly around radar-based BVR combat tend to be larger, heavier, more expensive and more maintenance-heavy. This means that very few can be fielded, and those that can, can't fly as often. Since pilot quality is usually most important factor in air combat (as long as one side doesn't have massive numerical superiority), it is even more damaging to force's capability than simple numerical comparision would suggest.

    So no, radars don't have advantage, regardless of wether missile can be shot passively at BVR or not. If you can't shoot missile passively in BVR, get at opponent's six o' clock and shoot it passively from WVR.

    So, "my assertion is correct despite information I based my assertion on being potentially false"? That's a logical fallacy, you know.
     
  14. satya

    satya Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    94
    Picard
    What is the width of sector european IRST systems can track? And How does it compare with that of any normal aesa radar?
    Radar can detect and track multiple bogeys in the sector, what about IRST?
    Besides don't you think due to camera type nature of IRST detection becomes erratic if your aircraft is maneuvering rapidly
     
  15. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    IRSTs are currently like mechanic radars; they can rotate to keep target in sight. For PIRATE, "field of regard" is given as 140 degrees. For fixed AESA radars, it is regularly around 120 degrees, but swashplate increases it to 200 degrees.

    PIRATE can track up to 200 targets, whereas modern fighter radars can track from 30 to 100 targets, depending on radar.

    If aircraft is maneuvering rapidly, you are typically already in situation where your own eyes are the only sensor you need. But yes, it is a problem.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page