How would PAF deal with the possible threat from indian Su-30mki?

[iceman_f15]

:help Can the J-10 counter the Su-30MKI?

I don't think so... for features and capabilities of Su-30 MKI far exceed that of J-10...check the Web sites below for info on Su-30MKI

http://indianaf.tripod.com/su30mki.htm

http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/info-su30mki.html

http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/comparison-f16-f18-su30-1.html

There is one more link comapring the Chinese su-30 MMK and Su-30 MKI which I cannot locate will provide u when I locate.

 

[iceman_f15]

why do people keep stressing that there platforms are more superior then the others, remember the good old day when the person using the platform was suppose to be feared. sure the spear and the shield was a brand, which was honored but only to represent the warrior him self. well none of that has changed even the most high tech defense system have a minimum requirement for a man in the loop, this will never change (throw books at me but the day computers take over our defense is the day we surrender to the will of others, a word of a computer Scientist). So i say this again don't feer the platform feer the man that utilizes it to wage war. anyone fool can use a spear but if a real soldier uses the same spear then he can rage havoc on his enemy

Oh man , i think you are impressed by RAMBO movie and its character.

Well if i am not wrong SU-30MKI is also made to work as mini AWACS. :smokingc:

Ure right just visit the Web links provide inmy replies and ure will find more info on Su-30 MKIs

 

[Aussie Digger]

People are more important than platforms Adsh, but platforms do play a large part in the battle. An Su-30 would make quick work of a tigermoth for instance, no matter WHO was flying the Tigermoth...

 

[gf0012-aust]

More over pak is depending in 28 or more F-16 which will be no match for Su-30 MKI or MIG-29 as the types which PAF has does not have look down shoot down which only F-16 BLOCK 40/60 have...which PAF do not have.

True to some extent, except that when Pakistan brings in Eyrie, then she will have an air battle management system to co-ordinate the F-16's

The Su-30 as an autonomous platform has the radar advantage for depth - but air combat is not only about single platform capability. It's also about integration, training, doctrine etc....

 

[adsH]

If SU-30 had to intrude into PAF airspace, and suppose this was in and around 2015+, and lets assume PAF has eyrie and IAF has Falcons both have Managed Battle field with plenty of support, But in-order for SU 30 to effectively conduct strategic missions with the help of the support system it would require the falcons to be present in or around or even far but nearer to PAF airspace (i do understand AWACS do not fly in conflict zone but fly at a distance ) PAF would still have the added advantage of using its Jamming systems Airborne or ground base, to sever the SU30 Link with the flacons, i know what everyone is going to tell me the Falcon is this God sent platform that is impregnable to jamming, but nothing is invincible its quiet likely PAF might find a system that would at-least be able to block the Su-30 Link with the Falcon, just like IAF would be able to do with a F-16 flying in IAF territory with Eyrie Link.

and i think people here are missing the point, the SU-30 radar the forward and backward is like a torch it could be a wide angle torch but its looking out in the dark with a narrow vision it doesn't have the full Battle field information that an AWAC has, it may have nuclear powered Radar but it would only see in depth not breadth. So PAF F-16 would be able to coordinate their attack using the Eyrie management.

 

[Ethan]

Hi Guys: Su-30MKI is a very capable aircraft and armed with AA-12 missiles. These are very capable missiles (some have even suggested marginally better than the American AMRAAM). Either way, IAF took its time in evaluating the platform and having it developed specifically for its neeeds along with the right set of avionics from Russia, France, and at home. Russia signed an accord that binds it to net selling Su-30MKI fighter to any other nation including China. Rest assure that this fighter can go head on with EF-2000 and Rafales. In wargames it has beaten both the F-15E and the latest F-16s. The only fithers that have a clear edge over it are F-22, JSF and the fture joint Russian/Indian 5th generation fighter the PAK-FA which suppose to compete with JSF/F-22 in the international market.

Here are the choices I believe PAF has. JSF from USA, but I dont think it is gonna happen. The Russians certainly wont sell their 5th gen. fighter to PAF and the Europeans dont have a 5th generation fighter. The best choice would be from the good old reliable Chinese. There are two candidiates in this cateogory being developed for the Chinese Fifht generation fighter known as XXJ.

J-12: 611 Institute has been working on designs based on canard/tailless delta wing (Type-D or J-12) plus belly air intake layout since early 90s.
J-12 would be powered by two 8,500kg/RD-33 class "medium thrust" turbofan engines with trust-vectoring nozzles to fullfill its high maneuverability requirement. Consequently J-12 would have a 10t empty weight and a 15t normal TO weight, making it a medium weight fighter.

J-13: 601 Institute has been working on designs based on conventional layout (J-13). J-13 might be powered by more powerful 12,500kg/AL-31F class "high thrust" turbofan engines which results in a normal TO weight exceeding 20t, making it a true heavy weight fighter.

Whatever design XXJ will incoporate an advanced FBW system based upon the Active Control Technology developed by 601 Institute and tested on its J-8IIACT technology demonstrator. Its fire-control radar could feature an active phased array (Type 1475/KLJ5?). Russian assistance in this project has been anticipated too in terms of softwore support for calculating the RCS of various designs. The overall performance of XXJ is thought to be superior to EF-2000 and Rafale (stealth & agility) but still inferior to F/A-22 (electronics & supercruise).

 

[iceman_f15]

If SU-30 had to intrude into PAF airspace, and suppose this was in and around 2015+, and lets assume PAF has eyrie and IAF has Falcons both have Managed Battle field with plenty of support, But in-order for SU 30 to effectively conduct strategic missions with the help of the support system it would require the falcons to be present in or around or even far but nearer to PAF airspace (i do understand AWACS do not fly in conflict zone but fly at a distance ) PAF would still have the added advantage of using its Jamming systems Airborne or ground base, to sever the SU30 Link with the flacons, i know what everyone is going to tell me the Falcon is this God sent platform that is impregnable to jamming, but nothing is invincible its quiet likely PAF might find a system that would at-least be able to block the Su-30 Link with the Falcon, just like IAF would be able to do with a F-16 flying in IAF territory with Eyrie Link.

and i think people here are missing the point, the SU-30 radar the forward and backward is like a torch it could be a wide angle torch but its looking out in the dark with a narrow vision it doesn't have the full Battle field information that an AWAC has, it may have nuclear powered Radar but it would only see in depth not breadth. So PAF F-16 would be able to coordinate their attack using the Eyrie management.

Su-30 MKI uses secured Data Link to communicate with fellow aircrafs to pass teh traget coordiates and other vital info...I don't know but is the Data link is prone to jamming..Also since PAK airspace is too small if PAK AWACS is flying it will be the first target and since Su-30 MKI has a very capable radar and BVR missile it can intercept the PAK AWACS as it also will have inputs from Phalcons AWAC which has a better range and real time info which erieye does not have as it will rely the info frist to ground station and then to PAF aircraf...If the PAK AWACS flies near exterme west borber then it can only look in oak airspace and will give a very samll reaction time for PAF to intercept or counter the raiding JAGS, MIRAGES which will be accopaned by SU-30 MKI, MIG 29 and upgraded MIG-21 all with BVR and look down shoot down capability...I don't see that AWAC will be of much help to PAK... This is totally my view

 

[gf0012-aust]

I don't see that AWAC will be of much help to ... This is totally my view

The issue is that any AWACs, AEWC aircraft in a theatre is a force multiplier and projector by association until its neutralised.

AWACs, AEWC's can see missiles coming, they invariably have electronic countermeasures designed to spook, seduce or distract those missiles as part of their own self defence packages.

Until those platforms are out of the picture, they are a clear and present threat facilitator to any enemy aircraft intent on intruding

 

[iceman_f15]

I don't see that AWAC will be of much help to ... This is totally my view

The issue is that any AWACs, AEWC aircraft in a theatre is a force multiplier and projector by association until its neutralised.

AWACs, AEWC's can see missiles coming, they invariably have electronic countermeasures designed to spook, seduce or distract those missiles as part of their own self defence packages.

Until those platforms are out of the picture, they are a clear and present threat facilitator to any enemy aircraft intent on intruding

I totally agree with u. But inthe case of PAK the airspace is too narrow to deploy AWACS and in this case AWACS become a liability..as it costs fortune..
either pak have to delploy it over sea which will not be of great help for PAF or will have to flay in the Western region and given the range of detection and tracking of Eryie this will only provide info if aircraf intrudes PAK airspace... it cannot look deep into INDIAN air space and give advance info on the intruder. More even if it detected the intrruder in PAK airspace it has to rely this info to the ground base station which will update the PAF aircraf wasting the precious time and negeating the AWACS advantage as by then IAF will be on the way back home or will be very close to AWACs itself.. with the BVR missiles..

 

[iceman_f15]

reply to gf0012-aust

also I have one question...as posted in my earlier reply.

Can Secure DATA link be jammed?? if so how.. and does PAK have that technology...from what I have heard and read DATA Link is almost jam free.

 

[gf0012-aust]

reply to gf0012-aust

also I have one question...as posted in my earlier reply.

Can Secure DATA link be jammed??

any system will eventually be able to be compromised

if so how..

thats the 64 million dollar question - and the reason why countries commit acts of espionage.

and does PAK have that technology...

always assume that the other side is not asleep at the wheel

from what I have heard and read DATA Link is almost jam free.

at this point in time, some of the systems I'm aware of are believed to be resistant and secure. - see earlier comment.

 

[iceman_f15]

reply to gf0012-aust

also I have one question...as posted in my earlier reply.

Can Secure DATA link be jammed??

any system will eventually be able to be compromised

if so how..

thats the 64 million dollar question - and the reason why countries commit acts of espionage.

and does PAK have that technology...

always assume that the other side is not asleep at the wheel

from what I have heard and read DATA Link is almost jam free.

at this point in time, some of the systems I'm aware of are believed to be resistant and secure. - see earlier comment.

gf0012... i know technology is always in the devolpment stage.,.and nothing is impossible..what I am talking is in of currenty situations and battle field situiations and not the FX programs which US is devolping and testing new and far superior technologies... I am talking in prespective with PAF cabalities and think they still have long way to go in this sector atleast...what do u say

 

[gf0012-aust]

gf0012... i know technology is always in the devolpment stage.,.and nothing is impossible..what I am talking is in of currenty situations and battle field situiations and not the FX programs which US is devolping and testing new and far superior technologies... I am talking in prespective with PAF cabalities and think they still have long way to go in this sector atleast...what do u say

Matey, this is a predominately asia-minor/sub continental viewing audience - the last thing I will be doing is passing comparitive comment on actual technical platform comparisons for either side - especially on sensitive subjects such as force changers (eg AWACs and Nukes).

Sorry, you'll have to use your imagination on this one. I'm a Mod, not God

 

[iceman_f15]

gf0012... i know technology is always in the devolpment stage.,.and nothing is impossible..what I am talking is in of currenty situations and battle field situiations and not the FX programs which US is devolping and testing new and far superior technologies... I am talking in prespective with PAF cabalities and think they still have long way to go in this sector atleast...what do u say

Matey, this is a predominately asia-minor/sub continental viewing audience -

I think this dicussion was on topic How would PAF deal with the possible threat from INDIAN su-30 MKI so don't u think what I said was releated to sub continent as the topci itself was related to one.

the last thing I will be doing is passing comparitive comment on actual technical platform comparisons for either side - especially on sensitive subjects such as force changers (eg AWACs and Nukes).

The reason I asked because u too shared your views and expreise on this topic and I thought that u had a very good info on these matters.. sorry but u let me down.. I had more expectation from u. I though forums was for discussions and sharing the knowledge and information and updating ure self rather than using one's imagination..

Sorry, you'll have to use your imagination on this one. I'm a Mod, not God

 

[gf0012-aust]

The reason I asked because u too shared your views and expreise on this topic and I thought that u had a very good info on these matters.. sorry but u let me down.. I had more expectation from u. I though forums was for discussions and sharing the knowledge and information and updating ure self rather than using one's imagination..

Well, I appreciate the thought that I add something of value. and it's nice that you understand that as an International Mod, I have a responsibility to ensure a degree of neutrality and impartiality.

Where things are sensitive, I will make a judgement call on whether I can make public comment, or whether I ncan continue to participate.

This is one of those moments where I see it as necessary to exercise restraint from additional comments.

I'm glad you are attempting to understand that this can be an invidious but necessary position.

 

[adsH]

Su-30 MKI uses secured Data Link to communicate with fellow aircrafs to pass teh traget coordiates and other vital info...I don't know but is the Data link is prone to jamming..Also since PAK airspace is too small if PAK AWACS is flying it will be the first target and since Su-30 MKI has a very capable radar and BVR missile it can intercept the PAK AWACS as it also will have inputs from Phalcons AWAC which has a better range and real time info which erieye does not have as it will rely the info frist to ground station and then to PAF aircraf...If the PAK AWACS flies near exterme west borber then it can only look in oak airspace and will give a very samll reaction time for PAF to intercept or counter the raiding JAGS, MIRAGES which will be accopaned by SU-30 MKI, MIG 29 and upgraded MIG-21 all with BVR and look down shoot down capability...I don't see that AWAC will be of much help to PAK... This is totally my view

you have no idea what the eyrie the Pak/ Saudi Customized version of Eriye would contain if saudi is looking at replacing its modernized fleet of E3 then i would assume they are replacing them with a superior version. then again lots of assumption you assume BVR would be able to take down an AWAC, there is no proof for such an assertion. your logic about the Pak eriye being inferior is potentially flaud. its specs are still not available in the public domain, and do you think PAF would let loose its Awac without escort AC support. Oh please do some Homework before you come here to Reply. and when you would fly in PAF Airspace (10 -15 years down the line) you would expect some sort of Sam Air-defense network. YOu assume too much and you underestimate your enemy that is desperate for its Survival. desperation is not the best enemy that you'd want to confront. Ever wonder why the Home Force (defense) has the added advantage.

 

[iceman_f15]

reply to adsH Brigadier General

From what is available on internet..Eriye does not have 360 degress coverage.. As its radar being mounted on a rigid beam on the upper fuselage deck of the aircraft, the system offers optimal performance in 150-degree side sectors, therefore, it is almost imperative that one knows the likely direction of "threat" to maintain optimal air warning. Like airborne SLAR systems, there remains 'a hole" under the aircraft and in certain forward and rear directions changing aircraft flight directions offers protection in covering these coverage gaps but also raises the prospects of losing continuous coverage of previously detected targets on the prior course.

The aircraft system includes two mission consoles (CDCS) and necessary signal processing and datalink black boxes. As fitted on the Metro III, the concept Was based on Ericsson's Airborne Surveillance, Ground Control (ASGC) concept, whereby the airborne platform provides primarily the threat warning and reporting function, processing radar signals onboard and data linking to a central ground control centre for handling aircraft and missile warning, and intercept functions. The existing prototype Metro III has an endurance of 4 to 6 hours, on-station 185 kilometres from operating base. Such a system is probably quite suitable for patrolling straits (Taiwan, Malacca, etc.) and other over-water bodies of water (Arabian Sea, etc.) from where known threats are likely to come.

Source:

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LANCER/idr00012.htm

 

[gf0012-aust]

reply to adsH Brigadier General

From what is available on internet..Eriye does not have 360 degress coverage.. As its radar being mounted on a rigid beam on the upper fuselage deck of the aircraft, the system offers optimal performance in 150-degree side sectors, therefore, it is almost imperative that one knows the likely direction of "threat" to maintain optimal air warning. Like airborne SLAR systems, there remains 'a hole" under the aircraft and in certain forward and rear directions changing aircraft flight directions offers protection in covering these coverage gaps but also raises the prospects of losing continuous coverage of previously detected targets on the prior course.

Note references below: (also note that the above reference used is a 1995 dissertation - and is out of date in assumptions and technology parameters discussed). A 1995 paper would be referring to the earlier generation FSR 890/PS 890 radar system as designed for the Argus. Hence it lacls some technical accuracy.

ERIEYE Specifications as on Air Force Technology (Industry Reference Site)
ERIEYE has been developed by Ericsson Microwave Systems. The system comprises an active, phased-array pulse-Doppler radar including integrated secondary surveillance radar and identification friend or foe (SSR/IFF), a comprehensive, modular command-and-control system, electronic support measures (ESM), communications and datalinks.

Rather than conventional rotodome antenna system, ERIEYE has a fixed, dual-sided and electronically scanned antenna mounted on top of the fuselage. This places much less demand on aircraft size and is designed for mounting on commuter-type aircraft. The ERIEYE is capable of 360° detection and tracking of air and sea targets over the horizon. The instrumented range is 450km and a typical detection range against a fighter aircraft size target is in excess of 350km.

The system uses advanced solid-state electronics, open-system architecture and ruggedized commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware, including general-purpose programmable workstations and full-colour LCD displays. The ERIEYE radar is already in service with the Swedish Air Force and is in series production for Brazil and other customers.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/emb/

technical papers:
ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/6938/18642/00858889.pdf

The ERIEYE AEW&C Mission System features an active phased array Doppler radar. The antenna is fixed and the radar beam is electronically scanned in 360°. The beam is controlled by an intelligent and automatic energy measurement system which has the ability to transmit in any direction from pulse to pulse. It optimizes the beam position providing for quicker detection verification, increased range and improved tracking, compared with a rotodome solution.

http://www.ericsson.com/microwave/aewc/press/990612.shtml

One critical point to note which is being ignored - is that the performance specs insist on 360deg coverage - which is actually achieved in a MESA/AESA system set up like ERIEYE etc... There are over 200 sensor processers on the system, the mistake being made is that there are no forward facing scanners (as in what the Israelis have designed) or that the beam is not wide enough for full coverage. The assumption is that the only detection is occurring at the sidescan level - and that is not the case.

This system has been trialled and passed for acceptance by some very fussy users. Failure to meet the military specs in tender terms means non compliance - and it wouldn't have been selected (by Sweden, Brazil or Greece for example.)

Finally - India is in the process of initiating a purchase of 5 of these systems herself (DefenseNews USA) to fulfill the role previously taken by the HS748's.

 

[Jacob]

Its the man that counts more than the machine

Sometimes that's not true.Even an average Indian Pilot in an MKI can destroy the best Pakistani pilot in an F-16.

Wars of the 21st century will be fought on technology.This is not an ancient world where people fight face to face.Wars are won on advavced weaponry.

The most recent examples are those of the US in Afghanistan & Iraq.Iraq claimed to have the best of the pilots & soldiers.But what they didn't have was technology.The same fate may meet Pakistan if doesn't modernise its forces.

 

[ajay_ijn]

Sometimes that's not true.Even an average Indian Pilot in an MKI can destroy the best Pakistani pilot in an F-16.

F-16 is never to underestimated like that,Its still one of the potent fighters in the world.
India was worrying for many years about Pak F-16 till they got MKI.
Although India inducted Mirage-2000 and Mig-29 but still IAF was worrying about F-16.

Iraq claimed to have the best of the pilots & soldiers

I don't think there traning will be better than the US.
US not only has technology but also has excellent traning,C3I,logistics,Good strategy,tactics etc and many other fields in which US is better.
Never think US military win's mostly becoz of technology.

Wars of the 21st century will be fought on technology.This is not an ancient world where people fight face to face.Wars are won on advanced weaponry.

I don't agree with u.
Wars are not only won on advanced weaponry but many other things.Planning,Tactics,Strategy,C3I(Command ,Control, Communication and intelligence).
Though war happened in 500BC or in 21st Century.Factors like C3I,Strategy and tactics are the most important rather weapon technology.

I can give u a example,During initial stages of world war 2 German Army was considered invincible,Where ever german army went they were victorious.
They occupied nearly the entire mainland of europe.It becoz of their Blitzkrieg strategy not becoz of their technology.
After 1942 they began falling becoz blitzkrieg needed Surprise which they did not achieve.
In the end Even though they made Wonder weapons like V-2,V-1,Tiger,Me-262 etc which are far more superior than allies weaponry.
Still they lost the war.