It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Best of the Best....Air superiority Fighters

page: 11
2
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Who said they lost? It is quite easy to say a shot is trashed by a manoeuvre when it isn't. And like I said, I'm sure the Indian's didn't fly in a full-up way either. Why wouldn't they? As soon as you give away your capabilities, someone will develop a counter. IR missiles arrived, along cam flare. Radar/chaff. Active missiles/towed decoys. It is standard procedure not to give away your capabilities while trying to learn the adversarys. I'm sure both the US and India got some good info out of the exercise.

Ok, so all we have to go on is unclassified press reporting. So the Indians won. There is no way someone with classified information is going to post it on here to counter that claim (other than vehement refutation). So it comes down to whether you believe the unclassified reporting is correct, or whether there is more to the story. Personally I believe there is more to the story. But that is simply my opinion. Both aircraft rock as far as I'm concerned. There is only one way we will ever find out for sure who will come out on top, and I really hope that never happens!




posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   
^^^ I see massive damage control is happening to put out the fires ignited in my mind..I'm soo ashamed..but i meant what I said w/o the profanities...
.....



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   
now a days, chaff and flares don't really work that well, unless you unload all of them at the same time, because when your running away from an IR missile, your afterburner is on full, and the IR tracker looks for the largest heat signature, which will obviously come from your own engines, if you drop a fuel tank though, that will definitely be larger, and you might get away, but then again, the tracker's are so advanced, they can distinguishthe difference between heat exhaust from engines, and a massive explosion, and will go after their intended target, the heat exhaust from the aircraft, missiles are very advanced now, its nice that you added a different dimension to this discussion, maybe the Indians weren't trying, that kinda makes sense though, because, no doubt, with all this publicity on the F-15's not trying, and how they were at a severe disadvantage, wouldn't India respond, but they didn't, maybe, because they weren't trying either



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by dtmfreak


why would the US not use its full capabilities in an aerobatic exercise? Making their jets lose is a stupid strategy as it may hurt the patriotic feeling that most of you possess about American jets. The government would never do that. I think the India-US exercise served as an effective reality check for the Americans.

In terms of aircraft that is currently in service, SU-30mki or Eurofighter take the crown. For those of you that definetely pledge that Eurofighter or Rafael are better then SU-30mki are jumping the gun too fast, those sneeky Russians always have tricks up their sleeves. When F-22 comes into service (which may be a long time especially because US just cut the budget on it due to the stupid war) then I think it will be the best air superiority jet. Although then again, you just never know.


Now that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard on these threads. No military uses their full capabilities in an exercise, so that their opponents don't learn their full tactics and abilities. The U.S. gov't doesn't care what people "think" of the military, it is what they (the gov't) know about it.

As said above, the F-15 pilots there were handicapped a great deal in that exercise; it was an agreement made with the IAF even to handicap them. The F-15s flew with a second-rate radar, they had no AWACS support, the IAF DID have AWACS support, and the IAF planes also flew with a good deal larger number of planes then the U.S. The purpose of the exercise was as a ploy for the F/A-22 and to learn more about the IAF without giving away to them our tactics.

Even when the U.S. does exercises with like the British, the British don't tell all their tactics either. No country does.

And as I just described, yes the IAF was trying; obviously not fully, but still a good deal more than the F-15s were. Had the American F-15's flown with the same number of planes as the IAF did, with AWACS support, the odds would have been a lot different. Had they flown with the newer radar, the odds would have been totally different.

But as said, no one wants to give away their full capabilities.

[edit on 8-1-2005 by Broadsword20068]



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   
i already mentioned all that, no AWACS support, outnumbered by 3, the Su-30MKI, would still come out on top though



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Sorry Dima, I disagree with you here. Flares are still very valid. New designs of flares are effective in decoying the seeker of IR missiles. That's why new generation seekers come along to counter the counter. And so it continues.

Also, if you get into a visual fight, you have to fight to the death. Running away generally isn't an option in this arena. Flares are employed prior to the merge, along with modulating the engines to reduce the seeker lock on range. Showing an adversary your tail in afterburner is a death wish. If you get into WVR, you are relying on out-turning the other guy, having enough flares to survive, and getting a shot off before the other guy does. Hence the utility of Helmet Mounted Sights. This is why BFM is still an important part of the fighter pilots syllabus. In the days of a heavy ECM environment, if you have to kill the enemy, you need to still get in close. Hell, that's why we still have guns! Good to see people are thinking about stuff like this. I'm enjoying the debate!



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:51 PM
link   
yea, and it continues, i know, they have counters for everything, even counters for electronic counter measures, ECCM, its crazy where all this is going, but, really, flares are usefull, but there isn't a high chance that they, that they will actually work, but anyways, maneuverability is crucial in dogfights, but dogfights are rather irrelevant now a days, only rarely will dogfights actually occur

you have to admit to that one sadly though, i much enjoyed dogfights, in the Korean war, those were the days



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dima
i already mentioned all that, no AWACS support, outnumbered by 3, the Su-30MKI, would still come out on top though


I disagree, with AWACS support, better radar, and more planes, the Su-30 currently would be troubled. The gap is closing though. But as long as the F-15s have superior avionics and weapons, the Su-30 is still evened out.

Now I do agree if you pit a plain ole F-15 against a plain ole Su-30, disregarding avionics, and just let the pilots dogfight each other WWII style, then yeah, the Su-30 is better, because it can maneuver better.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Yeah, with Link capabilities, AWACs and new Sensor to Shooter capabilities, there shouldn't be too many times that a guy has to get in too close. Unless, like I said, the aim is to kill the adversary, and you have capabilities that cancel out each others BVR capabilities. The old furball though is a thing of the past. Ah, the old world war 2 stoushes of 50 v 50. Those were the days of air combat!



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   
i already counted all the factors of the COPE India excercise, and in the end, just 1vs.1, the Su-30MKI came out on top almost 5:1

but, were there only dogfights at COPE India? or was there also BVR?

yea, i miss the old days, dogfighting, those exciting maneuvers



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I think there was some BVR. If AWACs were playing, that suggests there was. AWACs is useless for BFM.

You've hit the nail on the head. I actually (for my first post) wrote a fairly lengthy article on systems based analysis as a new post. No-one has responded to it, but that is what I try to use to determine which aircraft is better. When all is said and done, the SU-30MKI is a damn fine aircraft any way you look at it.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
who hit the nail on the head?



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   
I don't know about BVR but I know there was no Indian AWACS as they don't have any in service yet. That was why the USAF couldn't use AWACS to even it up, not to give India the advantage as some have said.

The confusion seems to have come from the fact that an An-26 'acted' as an AWACS but purely in the sense of giving the fighters a vulnerable plane to protect, it had no actual capability.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   
oh, no AWACS, then the Su-30MKI will destroy the F-15 almost 7:1, thats almost up to the claimed 9:1



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Broadsword20068As said above, the F-15 pilots there were handicapped a great deal in that exercise; it was an agreement made with the IAF even to handicap them. The F-15s flew with a second-rate radar, they had no AWACS support, the IAF DID have AWACS support, and the IAF planes also flew with a good deal larger number of planes then the U.S. The purpose of the exercise was as a ploy for the F/A-22 and to learn more about the IAF without giving away to them our tactics.

[...]

And as I just described, yes the IAF was trying; obviously not fully, but still a good deal more than the F-15s were. Had the American F-15's flown with the same number of planes as the IAF did, with AWACS support, the odds would have been a lot different. Had they flown with the newer radar, the odds would have been totally different.


I agree with you completely that countries never bring their full capabilities to exercises with other countries. However, and I don't mean to sound anal-retentive about this whole thing, as I've harped on it time and again, but every single one of the excuses you have given re: the exercises are untrue or disingenuous.

I won't bother people here by rehashing, unless requested/required, so please visit the following threads for a conclusive explanation of my points above.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567



Everyone with a brain knows that the US pilots were handicapped up to their eyeballs. Did your IQ just suddenly drop sharply recently? You gotta stop believing the BS man, the F-15C will own the Su-30MKI (or any variant)

And give that link a rest, it's the only source you have, pathetic.

[edit on 8-1-2005 by Hockeyguy567]



Arrgghh put a lid on it Hockeyguy!!! Maybe stealth spy used taht link too much but I've had wth you overzealous yanks who think that the F-15 avoinics is superior to the MKI stuff...I've completed many courses in radar tech/structures/design as a part of my engg. curriculum and IMHO the AESA and N011M similar in concept and design.So unless anybody with INSIGHT on the topic(flight avionics) can PROVE that F-15 avionics are superior to their MKI counterparts, I suggest all you F-15 enthusiasts shut the f*** up!!


[edit on 8-1-2005 by Daedalus3]


First off, I am not a "yank" I am russian, there I said it.

The F-15C has better avionics, radar, speed, height of climb, missiles, and pilots (most of the time)

The Su-30 (and it's variants) just have the edge on agility and higher aero alpha, that's it.

The point I am trying to make is that Stealth Spy only has one source (and a very, very biased one), and has shown us nothing else.

Now if you want to continue to live in a land of Oz, which is fine by me, but according to AvWeekly and Janes, the F-15C is superior to the Su-30, and they are very reliable sources. His site, isn't.

[edit on 8-1-2005 by Hockeyguy567]



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   
Its not about sites..its about the technology...the Janes article(s) you've been referring to are probably comparing the F-15 with AESA to the Su-30Ka..and not MKI...Mmoreover the MKI the IAF has is israeli avionics fitted, not plain old ruskie stuff...so comparisions based on technology are not conclusive because there is no scope for comparision, no level ground...also another thing the outnumbering of USAF aircraft in Cope India is a part of the Exercise not a ploy...offensive teams ALWAYS outnumber defensive ones by at least a 2:1 ratio to hope for any chance of success...



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 12:53 AM
link   
AvWeekly and Janes are magazines from what country? His website or your magazines, still unreliable info.

The avionics upgrade for SU-30mki thats better then plain old "ruskie" stuff was developped by Russian jews



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   
^^^^
....


what the hell are you talking about??



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 08:20 AM
link   
That post of mine in the previous page was published in AWST mag was published a long time before the Inod-US air exercises and is thus in no way relavent to the Indo_US air exercises .

It is authored by US citizens and aviation experts by David A. Fulghum and Douglas Barrie.

The article is titled "Su-30MK Beats F-15C 'Every Time' in USAF simulations

Read it for yourself :: vayu-sena.tripod.com...




top topics



 
2
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join