Red Flag IAF lecture.

This was posted on Touchdown News - still looking around for confirmation



Red Flag’ official apologises to IAF


Gautam DattFirst Published : 18 Nov 2008 02:04:00 AM IST
Last Updated : 18 Nov 2008 10:54:23 AM

ISTNEW DELHI: After a US Air Force (USAF) pilot was shown in a YouTube clip trashing India’s frontline fighter jet Su-30 MKI saying it failed to impress during the recently held Red Flag war games, the organisers of the exercise have apologised to the Indian Air Force (IAF) for the remarks. In a letter to Air Headquarters, an official of the Red Flag said it was the personal view of the USAF pilot talking in the clip and not of those
involved in the exercise.

The organisers are looking forward for the participation of the IAF in the
future editions of Red Flag, said the letter.
The appearance of the clip in the cyber space had embarrassed the IAF even as it was immediately rubbished. The clip shows a pilot apparently giving a presentation but there are no audience shown in the video.
The person, in uniform, talks about how the Su-30 MKIs were dominated by USAF’s F-15s and F-22 Raptors.
The person said in the clip how the aircraft lost out during dogfights and
singled out problems with its thrust vectoring and the fact that it took up
to a minute to arrange its take-off while the rest of the aircraft took only
seconds.

The official, however, praised IAF’s MiG- 21 Bison which has been modified with Israeli radar, active radar missiles and electronic jammers. He claimed MiG-21s were nearly invisible to the F-15 and F-16s, a fact which was demonstrated when the USAF fighters had taken part in joint exercises in India. After the clip surfaced, the IAF took up the issue with defence attaché in the US embassy and efforts were made to get it removed.

The officials said some of the technical claims made in the clip were incorrect and it was a pathetic attempt to prove a point. Aviation expert Pushpender Singh told to this website’s newspaper that it
was unfortunate that the most powerful air force in the world was resorting to such tactics. He said the video was full of inaccuracies. For example, the person in the video claimed that the MiG-21 Bisons were equipped with the Israeli radar.“It is wrong. The aircraft has a Russian radar,” said Singh.

The clip is being viewed as a ploy by the industry to prove a point. It might be an attempt to convince the US Government in ordering more F-22 Raptors. The US aviation giants Boeing and Lockheed Martin, the makers of F-16s and F-18s, are also competing with Russians for multi-billion dollar contract to supply multi-role combat aircraft to the IAF

Where is the post made by WestPoint23??.



I was going to reply to it but it seems to have disappeared

reply to post by chinawhite

---

That post was a draft which somehow ended up being posted. It's still being worked on.

reply to post by ajsr71

---

Here's a link, if anyone is interested.
Here

What a load of garbage.


No body trashed the Su-30 MKI. He said himself it's slightly better than the F-15 and F-16 - which is true.


A magical letter? How about providing a soure for the letter, not a 'red flag offical'. Morons.


They never flew against the F-22, and nobody said anything remotely close to that.


He gave a reason for loosing during dogfights. Post stall makes the plane drop, he said himself, sustained turn rate is very high. He said TVC is not used correctly which causes the plane drop. It never took a minute to 'arange' it's takeoff. It takes a minute for debris / dust to settle.


Because of a Youtube video, of a pilot expressing his experiance? There was no effort to remove the video. None. I removed the video myself, and t remains on youtube on other members accounts, even though they uploaded it just after me.


And is a pilot supposed to know all the technical details of aircraft they do not fly? Do you think they care if it is Israeli or Russian? From wikipedia, regarding the radar... "Russian advertise has claimed that this version is equivalent to early F-16.". Romanian Air Force Mig-21s have been modified by Elbit of Israel, so this mix-up is understandable.


Aviation expert? Change it to idiot, likely incapable of understanding basic English. It was a PILOTS point of a view, not the US AIR FORCE.


One, idiodic, example. Nice try. Debunk the rest. Try it.


Garbage. Maybe if you actually read what the industry actually HAD to say.


Wrong again retards. How might claiming F-15s dominating Russias greatest be a ploy to buy more F-22s?

[edit on 18/11/2008 by C0bzz]

i feel i should comment about the whole engine and FOD `issue` - which country , other than the place of origin actually have the facility to strip and overhalu a damaged engine?


do switzerland for its F-18`s? or saudi arabia for its Tornado`s?

the answer is no they don`t - when or if an engine gets damaged , then its taken out and returned - or a spare/replacement flown in

so its understandable for the IAF to be cautious - they don`t want there aircraft accidently damaged thousands of miles from home.

Cobbz..

How can it be slightly better than the F-15 when the guy himself says:

1) AESA better than PESA.

2) F-15 (weapons loaded) dominated over clean Su-30s with both sides having having comparable flight hours.

There isn't much more than that to compare right? We know that weapons range/capability is not drastically in favor of the Su-30
(maybe weight-wise)

I mean.. what is the Su-30 better in then? Mileage?

and as for FOD.. Harlequin makes a good point..
I wonder if they will release the cam pod videos ever for that Mountain Home 1v1
naaaa.. I'm sure its deemed classified/comparmentalised and is under intense review from the likes of Charlotte Blackwood (Kelly McGillis in TopGun).

"Comparable flight hours"? Red OPFOR pilots at Nellis usually have flight hours in the thousands. And they get more DAC air time than practically any other unit in the world. In this case they have flown against even Raptors and know how to handle TVC fighters. The video makes it a point to show that the Indian pilots were to eager for the post stall, they had not yet learned that would make them vulnerable.

reply to post by WestPoint23

---

I'm going by what the guy said..I gathered that the engagements occurred between senior members from both teams..
Plus, the IAF clocks 150-180 flight hours per pilot annually averaged/ but yeah..
Hours on the a/c in question should be dissimilar..
Su-30s have only been operational since the turn of the millennium, and I believe some of the pioneering group was in this contingent. Having said that, the Su-30 has gone through so many version upgrades from K through MK through MKI 1/2/3, that involve avionics and structural changes as well.

Also I didn't know they were flying against aggressor sqn a/c and pilots. Did he say that in the video? I must've missed it.

The majority of F-15s are not AESA, but the APG-63 pulse doppler radar.





F-15s are getting AESA though.

reply to post by C0bzz

---

That is my point the AESA bit..



[edit on 19-11-2008 by Daedalus3]

ok..my bad on missing the opfor bit.
And yes.. the negative media exposure this has got is most unfortunate.. but thats the way the internet works.. public opinion is heard.. forcibly!
So I am actually glad this has come out and we all get to see what perceptions the other side has.. pilots, armchair generals et al

I WANT THE 1v1 ACMI POD FOOTAGE

Of much more interest is the conduct of the French AF. They sent thier Rafales to collect data on the IAF. According to AWST they would not participate in merges, but would rather fire off missiles and fly away

According to the article, they also did this in desert strom I

reply to post by FredT

---

Well if they were trying to gather ELINT on the Su-30s, that doesn't make too much sense, because:

1)The Su-30s never turned on the radars in operational terms as far as I know.

2)The Su-30s were at Istres AFB in 2005 for a whole exercise there (Garuda II IIRC). They would be much better suited to using heavy ground based listeners there, rather than using Rafales here. Maybe they wanted to have a look at the brand new radars on the F-15K? Which were turned on completely I believe.

Interesting read, thanks Vishnu!

[edit on 21/11/2008 by C0bzz]

reply to post by C0bzz

---

yea.. didn't put that on here myself, for some vague prejudiced reasons of my own!

After looking at the video I can yell this guy is exagerating, and I don't take him seriously. the Americans always speak about Rus's weapons like the way he talks.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by 121200]

A lot of this was made up as he went along apparently.

For example:
There was no 1V1 or thrust vectoring used during Red Flag.
The Bison uses a Russian radar, not Israeli.
The IAF did have some Fratricide, due to no links, and issues with understanding the American GCI controllers, but the USAF had just as many, with everything running.
70% of the Indian pilots were young, but within two weeks they had adapted to new rules, a new location, and new procedures. This shows that they were very comfortable with their aircraft, and knew what they were doing.
The IAF showed a 90% mission rate, the USAF and others all showed lower than that. Their 8 SU-30s flew the equivalent of 4 months flight time in India over 75 days.
When operating at Mountain Home, they were flying at 30 second intervals, but had some minor engine damage, so they reverted to 60 second intervals. This was briefed from the start, and everyone knew about it.
When operating at Mountain Home the IAF had about a 21:1 kill ratio against USAF forces (unconfirmed) in favor of the SU-30.

reply to post by Zaphod58

---

21:1 DAM!!

didn't quite comprehend that! Care to rephrase/elaborate?

And as for kill ratios, I've learnt to take ANY figure with a pinch of salt. Like I said, truth's in the ACMI pods, and beyond that it tends to get 'shaped' into various versions from various sources depending on various biased points of view coming from years of very 'directed' training regimes.

reply to post by Daedalus3

---

I mean that many of the things that he said were less than accurate or taken out of context.