Iran to buy SU-30MK

I don't have nearly the faith in the inherent superiority of anything Israeli or American some here do

I think 250 Su-30's would be more than enough to keep the IAF in check - at least in terms of keeping the IAF out of Iranian territory. Especially considering that the Iranian AF, unlike most regional air forces, has a reputation for solid training, good morale, & innovative tactics.

It's also enough to make the US think twice about striking Iran. Unlike the Iraqi AF, it's a safe bet the Iranians will come up and fight with everything they have.

While I wouldn't go as far as predicting kill ratios, it's doubtful the US could launch an air campaign against an Iran equipped with large numbers of Su-30's without taking significant (and potentially unacceptable) losses.

Which is just as well, as the US has no damn business attacking Iran anyway. Israel's national security is Israel's problem, not the US's.

Right now there arent many F-15s with AESA, but consider this:

The current plan is to equip 178 F-15s with AESA. Apparently some people on this forum believe that 250 Su-30s can be made and delivered, with pilots trained on it, overnight. If this order went through RIGHT NOW it wouldnt be until well past 2010 for the aircraft to be fully delivered and operational.

By this time, there will be over 400 USAF aircraft fully capable of downing the Su-30, this would be the F-22, the F-15, and the F-35. All will have JHMCS, the AIM-9X and the AIM-120D, a combination fully capable of taking the Su-30 down, in both BVR and WVR.

So yes, I think that jumping up and down and screaming AESA AESA AESA is a fair point.

[edit on 30-7-2007 by BlackWidow23]

I dont know why people are thinking the iran will be on near equal terms. They will get swapped out of the sky because of 1 reason: force multipliers. The us has then the iran not at least afaik.

Ignore the force multipliers and then yes it might only be something like 0.25 us plane for every iranian plane or something. Why? well because by the time the Su30 is there the us will have plenty of F22's. The jsf and F15 wont perform so well i think actually. I personally even put more faith in a aesa F15 than a jsf in a AA fight.

kill count for the us without force multipliers(very unlikely)

F22 vs Su30: 0.1:1
F15 vs su30: 2:1
Jsf vs su30: 2.5:1

Bold statement to put ratios on your post and for that reason I will bother to comment even if its just to stri the pot a bit and purmote good conversation. The JSF was never designed to knock down the door and create the Air cover needed for attack aircraft and bombers. If you employ the JSF and the F-22 in the same way you aren't using you asset the way it should be and that is a fatel flaw in any tactics if not done with lots of planing and the like. F-16 where used to bomb the iraqi reactor and the way they performed the mission wasn't exactly what the plane was designed for but the planed and tested etc and thats what you need to do with the JSF be it A, B or C.

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]

Originally posted by Harlequin
well after the drubbing the IAF gave the USAF at cope india -

Still beating a dead hose I see? Time to move on and see that event and all like it for what they really are.

Originally posted by Harlequin
since the F-22`s are no where near the gulf - and the SU-30MKI (and MKM they are near enough the same aircraft anyway) `wtfpwn` them.

Did you actually think this post through? The force build up in the Gulf before an impending attack would be just like that of the Persian Gulf. And you should pay attention to the designation because it also denotes the origin of critical avionics and technology. Avionics and technology from countries that might not bee too keen to equip Iranian birds. Also, your claims of "wtfpwn them" are pointless and baseless, overall real world results indicate otherwise.

Originally posted by Harlequin
and before you jump up and down and scream ` AESA AESA AESA`

I don't need to say anything other than USAF and USN, (now and in the future) to think that the result is anything but certain is fantasy. Given a realistic war scenario Iran stands no chance, air superiority will eventually be gained no matter what Iran tries to do.

Originally posted by Harlequin
The Flanker with Archer IS better than the Eagle - the USAF say so themselves.

It's not that black and white but whatever makes you sleep well at night I suppose.

Originally posted by xmotex
I think 250 Su-30's would be more than enough to keep the IAF in check - at least in terms of keeping the IAF out of Iranian territory.

It won't keep them out of Iranian territory if they have to absolutely go in and Israel has a much more powerful (efficient) overall be air force with better overall systems. History has shown just what it is capable of... What is likely however is that it will be more difficult for the IAF to conduct offensive air ops over Iran and that they will likely suffer notable losses.

Originally posted by xmotex
Unlike the Iraqi AF, it's a safe bet the Iranians will come up and fight with everything they have.

The Iraqis tried that approach in the first Gulf War, having learned their lesson they did not even attempt such a move in OIF. Preferring their planes were buried rather than shot down.

Originally posted by tomcat ha
The jsf and F15 wont perform so well i think actually. I personally even put more faith in a aesa F15 than a jsf in a AA fight.

The USAF and USN (includes all systems )will work just well as a cohesive and well organized force, this includes the F-15's and F-35's too. And I do not know why you think an F-15 would be better than the F-35 in the AA role, public information available suggests otherwise.

1.If Iran gets ASEA Radars on those Su-30's
2. 2000 S-300PMU-2's or the even more devestating S-400
3. 1000 3M-54E KLUB Cruise Missiles
Iran would defenatly have a major chance of winning, but they won't get these things and so U.S. will win.

Agreed, the US would have a very hard time with that. I doubt anything short of an all out war would be able to counter a force like that, however I dont think that even Russia has that many PMUs and S-400s. Those are expensive pieces of equipment, I doubt very much that Iran will buy a TENTH of that.

Well i think the F15 will outperform the jsf in a AA fight is because the F15 is an air superiority plane is the JSF one? No... Yes the JSF has stealth but because in a no force multiplier situation the chances are that the most stealthy part of the JSF will be facing the SU30 most of the time are rather low. Even still then it is not as stealthy as the F22 and last time i read something about its stealth it was said that it had near F117 levels of stealth which is a design from the late 70's early 80's.

Oh and the ratios are kind of estimated guesses dont take em to serious.
Also an other reason for these ratio's being slanted towards the SU30 is because it fights a defensive air war.

The US will still win a real war easily because of force multipliers though. Allowing them to use stealth to full effect. In such a war Iran wouldnt perform allot better than iraq in GW1.

Originally posted by BlackWidow23
Agreed, the US would have a very hard time with that. I doubt anything short of an all out war would be able to counter a force like that, however I dont think that even Russia has that many PMUs and S-400s. Those are expensive pieces of equipment, I doubt very much that Iran will buy a TENTH of that.

"Officialy" Russia has 1600 S-300PMU-2's but unoficially I don't know?

Originally posted by The Winged Wombat
emile,

While they have oil, they have plenty of money to buy whatever they like. You forget that Iran is a VERY rich country!

The Winged Wombat

Their people are poor, rich for their Mulah.

Originally posted by BlackWidow23
Right now there arent many F-15s with AESA, but consider this:

The current plan is to equip 178 F-15s with AESA. Apparently some people on this forum believe that 250 Su-30s can be made and delivered, with pilots trained on it, overnight. If this order went through RIGHT NOW it wouldnt be until well past 2010 for the aircraft to be fully delivered and operational.

By this time, there will be over 400 USAF aircraft fully capable of downing the Su-30, this would be the F-22, the F-15, and the F-35. All will have JHMCS, the AIM-9X and the AIM-120D, a combination fully capable of taking the Su-30 down, in both BVR and WVR.

So yes, I think that jumping up and down and screaming AESA AESA AESA is a fair point.

[edit on 30-7-2007 by BlackWidow23]

Maybe the pilots have been trained completely, the order was anounced by now? Forming 250 Su-30 to be force must need 3-5 years, but deliver such amount aircraft didn't take too long.

Originally posted by YASKY
"Officialy" Russia has 1600 S-300PMU-2's but unoficially I don't know?

Can I see a source for that?

Originally posted by emile
Maybe the pilots have been trained completely, the order was anounced by now?

Trained on the Flanker? No. It would have to be done in Russia and the logistics as well as the scale would be noticeable, you could not keep something like that under wraps.

Originally posted by emile
Forming 250 Su-30 to be force must need 3-5 years, but deliver such amount aircraft didn't take too long.

Training aside, it would take more like 5-10 years to deliver a production run that large.

The point is that even if it was only 5 years from now, it is still going to take longer to become fully operational than it will take to upgrade 178 F-15s and make 180 F-22s not to mention the new generation of super hornets getting AESA, the F-35, and the AIM-120D/AIM-9X/JHMCS combo to top it off.

I remain where I was before, by the time Iran gets them in the air, the US will be more than capable of bringing them down.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Can I see a source for that?

I'm too lazy to find the source right now but Russia does operate about 2500 SP Sam's TEL's of which 450 + are S-300PMU-2 are optimized for air defense and another 200+ S-300V which are optimized for BM defense. That is around 2000 ready to fire missiles, assuming they are all operational and in the field at the time , with probably half as many as reloads.

Trained on the Flanker? No. It would have to be done in Russia and the logistics as well as the scale would be noticeable, you could not keep something like that under wraps.

I don't know who is going to build 250 Su-30's , any decade soon, but if anyone figures that out let me know.

Training aside, it would take more like 5-10 years to deliver a production run that large.

I would be quite surprised if this deal happens and then far more so if the Russians are willing to build even 25 planes a year. They might license the building of such in Iran, as in China( India?), but once again i am not sure if Iran could build Su-27's even under contract. Whatever the case may be 250 Su-27's, of any description, is not going to change Iran's fortunes and especially not in ten years time.

Stellar

[edit on 1-8-2007 by StellarX]

Originally posted by bodrul


and it is correct Israel has the track record of giving away US tec to third paries.

and on Iran getting this new Bird

all i have to say great one more hurdle for the US and Israel to pass before they can spill more blood

Bodril,
Have you ever missed an opportunity to slag Israel off?
To counter yours and many others view regarding Israel's "giving away tec". I would like to ask why Britain has never sought vengence against the French for selling to the Argentinians Exocet missiles, which took the lives of 32. The fact of the matter is that there is no loyalty in the arms market. It is merely a matter of making as much money as possible.

Originally posted by emile
What a stupid discussion! Just bomb Iran till they have no more money to buy Su-30MK.

Alas Emile bombing a rogue nuclear state is a somewhat similar sceanario to waking a Rotweiller while standing naked.

Originally posted by xmotex
I don't have nearly the faith in the inherent superiority of anything Israeli or American some here do

I think 250 Su-30's would be more than enough to keep the IAF in check - at least in terms of keeping the IAF out of Iranian territory. Especially considering that the Iranian AF, unlike most regional air forces, has a reputation for solid training, good morale, & innovative tactics.

Ignoring these theoretical aircraft. No matter how rigorous your training is, there is only so much you can get from a handful of MiG 29s, F-4s, F-5 and a few f-14 which are probably little more than gate guardians at this point. Past that their most numerous AA platform would be to fit their hinds with

What is more, the IAF is undoubtabley one of the more elite airforces in the world. Not only do they carry world ratio records but also have more active combat experience on the F-15 and F-16 than the USA even.

In addition to all this is a support structure with some the the most advanced AEW and AWAC suites in the world. This provides a support structure that would give Israel an additional edge against any serious threat.


Finally to actually get to the topic at hand. The F-22 would be unsuitable for Israel anyway as they are looking for long term replacements for their f-16s. Using an F-22 in way that Israel uses their F-16s would be a complete waste of such advanced technology. The F-35 are perfectly sufficent for their needs.

Jensy

If what you say is true, the F-35 is an even WORSE choice. The Israeli air combat doctrine calls for getting in close and using a gun. They practice this over and over again and they are probably on par with the likes of even the US NAVY at it. They are excellent dogfighters, and given the oppertunity will kill something with their gattling gun even when they have a sidewinder or two left.

This is something the F-35 is JUST NOT DESIGNED TO DO. It doesnt have the F-16s roll rate, or turn radius, and it cant compete with one in a dogfight. The Israelis are going to be given hell by the SU-30, becuase agility is what the SUs are KNOWN for.

Sure it can kill it in BVR, but the Israelis HATE doing that, they HATE it.

Originally posted by jensy
To counter yours and many others view regarding Israel's "giving away tec". The fact of the matter is that there is no loyalty in the arms market. It is merely a matter of making as much money as possible.

That really does not explain anything and the fact of the matter is that Israel's very existence, military, economically, socially and politically has largely depended on the US (which has kept it afloat for the last 50 years). As such it would be wise not to sell us down the river for a few bucks. Considering that we give Israel the money which they then use to buy our own systems we are making very little profit. That's not why we do it, we feel we have a responsibility to keep this state alive, yet they seem very unappreciative (historically).

Originally posted by jensy
Alas Emile bombing a rogue nuclear state is a somewhat similar sceanario to waking a Rotweiller while standing naked.

Not really, but would you rather like to hang by your brass ones throughout your life?

Originally posted by jensy
Not only do they carry world ratio records but also have more active combat experience on the F-15 and F-16 than the USA even.

No they do not, although they are highly trained and experienced they do not have nearly as much operational and combat experience as the US with those systems.

[edit on 6-8-2007 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by jensy
Bodril,
Have you ever missed an opportunity to slag Israel off?
To counter yours and many others view regarding Israel's "giving away tec". I would like to ask why Britain has never sought vengence against the French for selling to the Argentinians Exocet missiles, which took the lives of 32. The fact of the matter is that there is no loyalty in the arms market. It is merely a matter of making as much money as possible.

The exocet was a French missile... it was not designed with British technology. It is now built by MBDA, but that organisation only came into being in 2001.


Its also worth noting that France stopped exporting the exocet to Peru, as they believed it would be handed on to the Argentinians.

Originally posted by jensy

Bodril,
Have you ever missed an opportunity to slag Israel off?
To counter yours and many others view regarding Israel's "giving away tec". I would like to ask why Britain has never sought vengence against the French for selling to the Argentinians Exocet missiles, which took the lives of 32. The fact of the matter is that there is no loyalty in the arms market. It is merely a matter of making as much money as possible.

The Exocet was a French missile, fired from a French aircraft, sold by French arms dealers.

The HMS Sheffield was hit by British WW2 surplus bombs sold by the UK dropped by US reconditioned A-6 aircraft sold by the US.

The General Belgrano was an ex WW2 US Navy cruiser sold by the US.

The SAM systems surrounding Port Stanley and other locations were using Swiss radar systems.

The aircraft that attacked the British Expeditionary Fleet sailing toward the Falklands was refueld by KC-130 aircraft sold by the US.

So why highlight the French here?

And anyway, theres a world of difference between arms dealers selling technology they legitimately have a right to sell and a country selling technology that they had no right to sell under agreement.

Originally posted by jensy
Bodril,
Have you ever missed an opportunity to slag Israel off?

nope, i take every opertunity that i get
and its bodrul not Bodril

and the other guys have explained the rest

edit: on a side note i like your sig
"With open ears and a closed mind"

so you support Israel with a closed mind

[edit on 6-8-2007 by bodrul]