F-15 pilot talks about SU-30MKI at Red Flag

[Vivendi]

Hi,

a talk on SU-30MKI, F15, Raptor on youtube, in two parts:

part 1:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRIr2ak2IM0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRIr2ak2IM0[/ame]

part 2:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBEfUUoUC4k"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBEfUUoUC4k[/ame]

It is interesting what he says about the effectivness of the jamming. Also his non-comment regarding F-35 at the end of part 2 is interesting, in particular since he does talk quite a lot about the excellent F-22.

Any comments from the esteemed experts on this forum?


Vivendi

 

[DonG]

nice vid.

Welcome to the forum, see the rules about one lines.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It is interesting what he says about the effectivness of the jamming. Also his non-comment regarding F-35 at the end of part 2 is interesting, in particular since he does talk quite a lot about the excellent F-22.

He is probably worried about running over time... The thing about the F-35 in WVR is the DAS and LOAL will give it 360 degree shoot and scoot. It won't even need to maneuver.

 

[zeven]

He is probably worried about running over time... The thing about the F-35 in WVR is the DAS and LOAL will give it 360 degree shoot and scoot. It won't even need to maneuver.

i want to see that shoot, and i really want to see that pilot who will NOT maneuver when he have an enemy in his tail.

and yes, i have seen the marketing video.

 

[gf0012-aust]

i want to see that shoot, and i really want to see that pilot who will NOT maneuver when he have an enemy in his tail.

and yes, i have seen the marketing video.

What video??

You seem to have missed the discussion over the last few months about how sig management, systems co-operation and VLO gives the pilot the option to exit the fight.

Biggles manouvres finished years ago - it's why exercises such as Red Flag and Blue Flag are run - it enables air forces to redefine the way they can fight.

This thread (or posters) is/are going to have a very very short life if it continues down the "throw away" inane response path.

technology forces change - it's been that way since the B-45 triggered LO jet powered solutions.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

nice vid.

Some interesting tidbits in that presento. The Tumansky engine can’t handle FOD so FLANKERS can only take off 45-60 seconds after another aircraft has used that runway. No wonder the Chinese are building so many airfields, they need one for each fighter.

That the TVC on an F-22 causes so much drag its arse sinks and it can’t climb. That TVC on a FLANKER causes so much drag that the entire aircraft starts to fall out of the sky!

That without the right data links having an aircraft in your coalition air battle force is very dangerous as they will fratricide you.

Also some reinforcements of well known facts. The French are looking after the French first and they don’t mind showing up as long as they don’t have to participate and can sit around soaking up intelligence. That the Indians are professional and capable but hamstrung by some crap Russian kit.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

i want to see that shoot, and i really want to see that pilot who will NOT maneuver when he have an enemy in his tail.

I'm not sure what you are getting at about the enemy on the tail? The flight profile is two aircraft head to head flying past each other (like a game of chicken) which is called the merge. With current fighters they will each turn and try and quickly bring the enemy into their frontal arc for a missile or gun shot. Or do some other maneuver to achieve the same aim (why the buzz about the Pugachev Cobra).

Neither aircraft is on the tail of the other. The F-35 at the merge doesn't have to maneuver it just fires a missile over the shoulder at the other fighter that is trying to maneuver so it can engage the F-35.

 

[cobzz]

I uploaded the video. It was linked to me by a fellow aviation enthusiast! Not sure whether I should delete it or not? In either case, if I do decide to delete it, you can still view it here...: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKEa-R37PeU"]YouTube - Indo-US Red Flag Air Force Exercise Lecture 2008 Part 1[/ame]

The engines are NPO Saturn AL-31FP, not Tumansky.

This video shows three of them taking off in a little over a minute....?
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WKNXMlqBfQ"]YouTube - IAF SU-30MKI Launch and Recovery[/ame]

And I believe he was saying that the Su-35 is slightly better than legacy fighters, and only lost because relative inexperiance. They were going up against the Aggressors...

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The engines are NPO Saturn AL-31FP, not Tumansky.

This video shows three of them taking off in a little over a minute....?

That's a typical mistake from most defence professionals. You're actually considered pretty wired in the world of defence if you know what the name of everything actually is, ie defence is your job and your hobby.

The video does not show three FLANKERS taking off from the same runway in about a minute. It shows three FLANKERS flying out of a single airbase in about a minute. Each aircraft looks to be taking off from different parallel runways based on their size (ie distance from the camera) as they pass that first tree.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

And I believe he was saying that the Su-35 is slightly better than legacy fighters, and only lost because relative inexperiance. They were going up against the Aggressors...

Not at all. He was saying that with the right tactics SU-30MK TVC does not provide an WVR advantage because of the drag it causes. He was also saying the PESA radar is inferior and the FLANKER being a big, high RCS aircraft has to do a lot jinking and jamming to even get to the merge (which is wishful thinking).

 

[hellfire]

Not at all. He was saying that with the right tactics SU-30MK TVC does not provide an WVR advantage because of the drag it causes. He was also saying the PESA radar is inferior and the FLANKER being a big, high RCS aircraft has to do a lot jinking and jamming to even get to the merge (which is wishful thinking).

but he did conclude that it is overall a better fighter then legacy fighters and the su30mki will always win in a engagement vs f15,f16 and other fighters.
he said PESA was inferior to AESA, another thing is i never knew they had so much respect for the MIG 21 bison.

 

[gf0012-aust]

but he did conclude that it is overall a better fighter then legacy fighters and the su30mki will always win in a engagement vs f15,f16 and other fighters.

it was wrt conventional legacy platforms in those families - slight difference.

he said PESA was inferior to AESA, another thing is i never knew they had so much respect for the MIG 21 bison.

well, the RAF learnt that when they went OPFOR against the Romanian Israeli modified "Lancers" (Mod Mig-21's) a few years ago.

with experienced pilots they are still a lethal little plane - unfort they also have a propensity to kill new pilots and are unforgiving with inexperienced pilots. (eg India had a huge problem with her originals)

 

[cobzz]

Not at all. He was saying that with the right tactics SU-30MK TVC does not provide an WVR advantage because of the drag it causes. He was also saying the PESA radar is inferior and the FLANKER being a big, high RCS aircraft has to do a lot jinking and jamming to even get to the merge (which is wishful thinking).

This is what he said...:

Now, what I'm scared of, is congress is going to hear that and go 'great we don't need to buy any more airplanes... no no no, we used to be way ahead of them, now they're right up close to us and just a little bit higher. I say that they're just alittle bit better than us, is because when there pilots learn how to fly, they'll be abled to beat the F-16 and F-15, on a regular basis. Right now, they use TVC and just go into post stall.... so it's only a matter of time before they learn.

He said PESA is inferior to AESA, most legacy aircraft are MSA.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

This is what he said...:

Only in relation to WVR combat. The FLANKERS are going to get thumped in the first 1-3 minutes of ATA when its BVR.

 

[funtz]

So TVC sucks more than it helps, got that.

so now,

How is the data on PESA on SU-30MKI in the know? i believe IAF have never used the radars in a exercise?

What is IAF doing preparing for Israeli AWACS and with a data link that can not connect with an AWAC? (or is it a data link that can not connect to a US/NATO AWAC?)

Could someone explain the whole FOD thing with jet engines, and to what degree the FOD screens on SU-30s work/help (well apparently not good enough)?

It was wrt conventional legacy platforms in those families - slight difference.

what is that anything with out AESA?

 

[JohanGrön]

So TVC sucks more than it helps, got that.

Not quite, depends on the drag induced by the airplane and the inexperience of the crews in handling it right.

For example the F-22 wouldn't be able to have a ~28 (26-28) degree sustained turn rate without it's TVC and the Su-30 MKI wouldn't be able to have a ~24 (22-24) degree sustained turn rate without it's TVC (when/if mastered by it's pilots).

The problem arises when the ride is pushed beyond it's limits, then it have it's turn axis in the nose and the "ass" drops and in the case of the Raptor it starts to climb (not sustainable) and the opponent have a little timewindow (not sure if it's the correct english term, makes perfect sense in swedish though) when it can outclimb it and dive at it from above. In the case of the Su-30 MKI it's not even going to climb but simply falls out of the sky so the opponent just have to ease on the stick and dive in on it.

[EDIT] In the case of the IAF Su-30 MKI the TVC has its own finite lifetime and warranty and the IAF only employs it when absolutely required. Dunno about the lifetime of the Raptor TVC though.

What is IAF doing preparing for Israeli AWACS and with a data link that can not connect with an AWAC? (or is it a data link that can not connect to a US/NATO AWAC?)

The MKI has its own data link which was/is/never will be intended to work with anything that NATO has, it was after all designed against them (of Russian manufacture). That does not mean that it does not work with what intended to work with: Phalcon and the DRDO AEW

 

[cobzz]

SU-30MKI is an unstable aircraft. In an unstable aircraft, the horizontal stab WILL be creating lift, even in a turn (Or else it would flip end over end)... Therefore, would pushing the tail down with TVC really help turn performance?

 

[Aussie Digger]

but he did conclude that it is overall a better fighter then legacy fighters and the su30mki will always win in a engagement vs f15,f16 and other fighters.
he said PESA was inferior to AESA, another thing is i never knew they had so much respect for the MIG 21 bison.

No aircraft is "always win in a engagement". Air combat depends on SO many variables. It is NEVER a case of aircraft A v aircraft B with both aircraft completely independent of any supporting systems.

GCI, AEW&C, Air to Air refuelling, other C4ISREW assets, supporting aircraft, GBAD / sea based systems etc. They ALL have to be added into the mix.

On top of this, this person was ONLY speaking of within visual range air engagements. He said nothing of beyond visual range air to air combat and THAT is what Western Air Forces concentrate on.

If you've got excellent detection capabilities and excellent long range missiles, why on Earth would you not use these capabilities, but rather go into the merge?

 

[funtz]

Not quite, depends on the drag induced by the airplane and the inexperience of the crews in handling it right.

For example the F-22 wouldn't be able to have a ~28 (26-28) degree sustained turn rate without it's TVC and the Su-30 MKI wouldn't be able to have a ~24 (22-24) degree sustained turn rate without it's TVC (when/if mastered by it's pilots).

The problem arises when the ride is pushed beyond it's limits, then it have it's turn axis in the nose and the "ass" drops and in the case of the Raptor it starts to climb (not sustainable) and the opponent have a little timewindow (not sure if it's the correct english term, makes perfect sense in swedish though) when it can outclimb it and dive at it from above. In the case of the Su-30 MKI it's not even going to climb but simply falls out of the sky so the opponent just have to ease on the stick and dive in on it.

[EDIT] In the case of the IAF Su-30 MKI the TVC has its own finite lifetime and warranty and the IAF only employes it when absolutely required. Dunno about the lifetime of the Raptor TVC though.

So its know what you do before you do etc. etc.

Well the money for the Red Flag came in handy, one thing they know not to do in combat.

The MKI has its own data link which was/is/never will be intended to work with anything that NATO has, it was after all designed against them (of Russian manufacture). That does not mean that it does not work with what intended to work with: Phalcon and the DRDO AEW

That is what is confusing me even more, all these different type of planes, Russians (Mig-Su), French (Mirage2K), lets assume US (from MMRCA), and a late induction of LCA, what happens to all the data links in all these platforms have to be made operational with the Phalcons and the DRDO AEW planes?

I think some time back in the A-50I program they must have thought of that, so what did they do about it?

What about the Logistics Problem, sending a engine to Russia for repair/modifications that has to be a whole six months at least, these problems seem to me to be more important than buying new planes.

 

[Haavarla]

What about the Logistics Problem, sending a engine to Russia for repair/modifications that has to be a whole six months at least, these problems seem to me to be more important than buying new planes.

[/QUOTE]



I would imagine they get a new engine in return "pronto" for the damage engine they send to Russia..
Still it's not an ideal situation for the IAF.

The Indian pilots(regulars) where inexperienced in the Red Flag.
The last Copa Air India was a different story, the Su-30MKI gave the F-16C's a decent fight.

One thing i don't understand is that the Su-30MKI has seldom use for ext fuel tanks given the big int fuel capasity, but the F-15 & F-16 often do..
Doesn't that give the Su-30MKI an advantage in the "Merge"?