Kalyani 155 million USD Artillery Export

[RASALGHUL]

For example in Cope India, IAF side which was Blue team was given AWACS support whereas USAF Red team was not provided AWACS and weren't allowed to use data-link. As a result, Flankers prevailed over F-15s.

Which Cope India exercises?

 

[Parthu]

Which Cope India exercises?

2004.

Cope India: when India's Russian jets achieved a surprising 9:1 kill ratio against U.S. F-15s

According to Indian media an air exercise held ten years ago "highlighted the innovativeness of Indian fighter pilots, the impact of Russian jets and the

theaviationist.com

 

[zinswinsin]

Artisan vs Mass production

 

[Lolwa]

View attachment 25238

Artisan vs Mass production

If only the Russians had the material quality and didn't make such braindead design choices. If only...

 

[Rajput Lion]

Have you considered that maybe its because J-20 is not as good as they claim it is or PLAAF is not comfortable in placing all its eggs in one basket?

For example, Russian nuclear submarines are typically nowhere as quiet as Western ones, but they are still far quieter than Chinese ones.

It may be good or bad, but we should never underestimate our enemy.

And Rafale destroyed F-22 in exercises. Doesn't mean its the better fighter.

Rafale destroyed F22 in exercise No plane has ever destroyed Raptor in a BVR battle. In WVR only one plane has forced it to back down and that was also a Flanker aka SU30MKM.

Both F22 and Rafale had several WVR guns only dogfight at Al Dhafra and most matches were draw with one gun-shot in favour of the Raptor.

These exercises are extremely subjective affairs and one must be mindful of the conditions set prior to engagement, and what handicaps each side was operating with. For example in Cope India, IAF side which was Blue team was given AWACS support whereas USAF Red team was not provided AWACS and weren't allowed to use data-link. As a result, Flankers prevailed over F-15s.

Similarly in the Rafale vs Raptor exercise. They were forced to engage at knife fight ranges, giving Rafale the upper hand.

But these are not realistic combat scenarios. The purpose of these is to impart Dissimilar air combat experience to pilots. Key word being dissimilar.

No, the Flanker vs Typhoon exercise was a very realistic exercise with no exceptional advantage to any side.

Our Sukhois destroyed Typhoons 12:0 in WVR battle and 1 single MKI even swatted 2 Typhoons once. This is unheard of ability, IMO. Read this:

Notably, in the exercise where a lone Su-30 was engaged by two Typhoons, the IAF jet emerged the victor 'shooting' down both 'enemy' jets.

And our Flankers also held the edge in BVR and LFE though they weren't as dominant as they were in WVR:

In subsequent Large Force Exercises (LFE) which featured combined Eurofighter Typhoon and Su-30 formations, the IAF jets were somewhat less successful but consistently held an edge over the Typhoon.

Read the full report here: Indian Air Force Sukhois Dominate UK Fighter Jets in Combat Exercises


So to claim that Flanker design is outdated is not correct at all.

 

[Parthu]

Rafale destroyed F22 in exercise No plane has ever destroyed Raptor in a BVR battle. In WVR only one plane has forced it to back down and that was also a Flanker aka SU30MKM.

Both F22 and Rafale had several WVR guns only dogfight at Al Dhafra and most matches were draw with one gun-shot in favour of the Raptor.

Videos showing Rafale in a good position for launching IR guided missiles are public.

Mock Combat: A French Fighter Pilot Once ‘Killed’ an American F-22

The simulated shoot-down is still a big deal for a couple reasons.

nationalinterest.org

The point however is that these mock combat results are meaningless.

In that same exercise a UAEAF Mirage 2000 scored a 'kill' against an F-22. Now you want to say M2K is better than Rafale & F-22?

No, the Flanker vs Typhoon exercise was a very realistic exercise with no exceptional advantage to any side.

Our Sukhois destroyed Typhoons 12:0 in WVR battle and 1 single MKI even swatted 2 Typhoons once. This is unheard of ability, IMO. Read this:



And our Flankers also held the edge in BVR and LFE though they weren't as dominant as they were in WVR:



Read the full report here: Indian Air Force Sukhois Dominate UK Fighter Jets in Combat Exercises

No such thing as a realistic exercise between non-Allied militaries. Nobody is going to be using their radars to their full capabilities, if not outright turned off:

India bans Su-30MKI fighters from using radars during 'Red Flag Nellis' exercise

India's defence ministry will block six air force Sukhoi Su-30MKI multirole fighters from using their radars during an August exercise in the USA ...

www.flightglobal.com

...only training mode which basically turns them into air traffic control radars, no targeting solutions or anything...which almost always forces everyone into WVR which in of itself is unrealistic - As if the MKI with its humongous RCS can sneak up on anyone and force then into WVR.

Same goes for stuff like jamming & ECM, none of that is used either.

Its ridiculous to consider these as realistic scenarios.

So to claim that Flanker design is outdated is not correct at all.

A plane that will struggle to put up 2 sorties per day is very much outdated.

 

[RASALGHUL]

A plane that will struggle to put up 2 sorties per day is very much outdated.

sources pls?

 

[Ashwin]

@Parthu please move off-topic posts to relevant threads.

 

[Parthu]

sources pls?

F-35B is designed for 4 per day.

How many do you think AL-31FP & a non-composite airframe can manage?

@Parthu please move off-topic posts to relevant threads.

You do it

 

[RASALGHUL]

F-35B is designed for 4 per day.

How many do you think AL-31FP & a non-composite airframe can manage?

Do you have any sources that maximum sorties a flanker can take is 2 in a day??

 

[Parthu]

Do you have any sources that maximum sorties a flanker can take is 2 in a day??

Like I said, I used the F-35 as a benchmark to extrapolate. The 35B is designed to be an improvement over older types like F/A-18 which could do like 2 per day.

So not possible for MKI to be much better, if anything, worse i.e. not all jets in the squadron will be cleared to do that 2nd sortie.

 

[RASALGHUL]

, worse i.e. not all jets in the squadron will be cleared to do that 2nd sortie.

And What will be the hindrance?
Engine??

 

[Parthu]

And What will be the hindrance?
Engine??

Multitude of factors. Engine is one, all-metal airframe is another. Composites are better at tolerating stresses without maintenance.

That is why Tejas is so important. The GE engine & composite airframe is what gives it the ability to log high sortie rates for air defence & combat air patrols.

 

[RASALGHUL]

Multitude of factors. Engine is one, all-metal airframe is another. Composites are better at tolerating stresses without maintenance.

That is why Tejas is so important. The GE engine & composite airframe is what gives it the ability to log high sortie rates for air defence & combat air patrols.

I agree with above mentioned statement, but max. 2 sorties a day for MKI is still undigestible.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Videos showing Rafale in a good position for launching IR guided missiles are public.

Mock Combat: A French Fighter Pilot Once ‘Killed’ an American F-22

The simulated shoot-down is still a big deal for a couple reasons.

nationalinterest.org

Yes, I've seen that video too. But point is it was a guns ONLY dogfight in which F-22 defeated Rafale once and rest were draw. No where it can be concluded that "Rafale destroyed F-22 in exercise."

In fact, there were rumours about a BVR battle between F-22 and Rafale in which F-22 thanks to AN/ALR-94 passively detected Rafales emissions and destroyed it. So actually the result was totally different.

The point however is that these mock combat results are meaningless.

In that same exercise a UAEAF Mirage 2000 scored a 'kill' against an F-22. Now you want to say M2K is better than Rafale & F-22?

In WVR our Mig 21 legit killed a F-16. Anything can happen in dogfights.

No such thing as a realistic exercise between non-Allied militaries. Nobody is going to be using their radars to their full capabilities, if not outright turned off:

India bans Su-30MKI fighters from using radars during 'Red Flag Nellis' exercise

India's defence ministry will block six air force Sukhoi Su-30MKI multirole fighters from using their radars during an August exercise in the USA ...

www.flightglobal.com

...only training mode which basically turns them into air traffic control radars, no targeting solutions or anything...which almost always forces everyone into WVR which in of itself is unrealistic - As if the MKI with its humongous RCS can sneak up on anyone and force then into WVR.

Same goes for stuff like jamming & ECM, none of that is used either.

Its ridiculous to consider these as realistic scenarios.

Nope. According to authentic reports, both SU-30 MKI and Typhoon had same set of rules and advantages in both WVR and BVR.

Our MKIs white-washed Typhoons 12:0 in WVR. That's as big a dominance as one can get.

And importantly even in BVR they held an advantage over Typhoons. And that's all one needs to know.

So even despite that if you feel that our Flankers are crap and outdated then lets agree to disagree.

A plane that will struggle to put up 2 sorties per day is very much outdated.

And in 2 sorties haul 16 tons of ordnance and stay 20 hours airborne with IFR. Nothing can touch it.

 

[Parthu]

Yes, I've seen that video too. But point is it was a guns ONLY dogfight in which F-22 defeated Rafale once and rest were draw. No where it can be concluded that "Rafale destroyed F-22 in exercise."

In fact, there were rumours about a BVR battle between F-22 and Rafale in which F-22 thanks to AN/ALR-94 passively detected Rafales emissions and destroyed it. So actually the result was totally different.

In WVR our Mig 21 legit killed a F-16. Anything can happen in dogfights.

Precisely. So why do you place so much importance on the result of some mock combat exercise where MKI happens to hold the upper hand?

Nope. According to authentic reports, both SU-30 MKI and Typhoon had same set of rules and advantages in both WVR and BVR.

Your own article negates this. According to it, both factions were only allowed to use radar in training mode...which effectively means they use it as little more than an IFF aid - which is exactly what we did at Red Flag as well.

You cannot remove the MKI's biggest weakness in BVR (its huge RCS) from the mix and then claim they had equal advantages. It just doesn't work like that. Same goes for Jamming & ECM - they are among the most highly classified frequencies and NEVER operated amongst non-Allied factions. How exactly are you simulating how well MKI's radar can function in a heavy jamming environment at BVR ranges without such elements being in the exercise?

And in 2 sorties haul 16 tons of ordnance and stay 20 hours airborne with IFR. Nothing can touch it.

You do realize Rafale which is actually smaller & lighter than MKI can carry more payload than it? Even with 2 x 1000-litre tanks its still more than MKI.

The Flanker had large internal fuel tanks because the USSR's geography demanded it. That is not relevant to our theatres.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Precisely. So why do you place so much importance on the result of some mock combat exercise where MKI happens to hold the upper hand?

Because our Flankers whooped Typhoons(arguably the best Euro-Canard in air to air fight) dry in both WVR and BVR. It wasn't a coincidence.

Your own article negates this. According to it, both factions were only allowed to use radar in training mode...which effectively means they use it as little more than an IFF aid - which is exactly what we did at Red Flag as well.

Even in training mode BARS is extremely powerful and so is CAPTOR.

You cannot remove the MKI's biggest weakness in BVR (its huge RCS) from the mix and then claim they had equal advantages. It just doesn't work like that. Same goes for Jamming & ECM - they are among the most highly classified frequencies and NEVER operated amongst non-Allied factions. How exactly are you simulating how well MKI's radar can function in a heavy jamming environment at BVR ranges without such elements being in the exercise?

MKI's biggest weakness RCS comes up ONLY when it's going against a real VLO plane like Raptor or F-35 or J-20 and not against planes that hang their weapons outside.

Veteran pilot @HVT sir has already confirmed that a heavily loaded light plane is detected at the same time as mildly loaded SU30 MKI. That should have ended all RCS related doubts.

You do realize Rafale which is actually smaller & lighter than MKI can carry more payload than it? Even with 2 x 1000-litre tanks its still more than MKI.

The Flanker had large internal fuel tanks because the USSR's geography demanded it. That is not relevant to our theatres.

On internal fuel no plane till date can match the range, combat persistence and endurance of the Flanker. Even in our context it's very important. During multiple exercises like Gagan Shakti our Flanker has proved how it can engage PAK threat from Assam and China threat from Western India.

It provides India with amazing flexibility. And during all our exercises like Iron Fist 2013/2016 and Gagan Shakti our Flankers have displayed incredible serviceability and turn around time.


Anyways, we have gone way off-topic here. If you believe that Flanker is junk like many then so be it. I know what an amazing asset it's for our airforce.

No more from me on this topic.

 

[Parthu]

Because our Flankers whooped Typhoons(arguably the best Euro-Canard in air to air fight) dry in both WVR and BVR. It wasn't a coincidence.

So you're admitting that you place importance on this just because the Flankers 'won'? If the Typhoons won you'd say what I'm saying now?

Even in training mode BARS is extremely powerful and so is CAPTOR.

What exactly do you think training mode is?

MKI's biggest weakness RCS comes up ONLY when it's going against a real VLO plane like Raptor or F-35 or J-20 and not against planes that hang their weapons outside.

Veteran pilot @HVT sir has already confirmed that a heavily loaded light plane is detected at the same time as mildly loaded SU30 MKI. That should have ended all RCS related doubts.

Now add Jamming & ECM into the mix which any real battlefield would have, and the sensor degradation that brings.

Do you think everyone is an idiot for working so much on RCS reduction for planes without IWBs like Rafale, F-15EX or F/A-18SH?

On internal fuel no plane till date can match the range, combat persistence and endurance of the Flanker. Even in our context it's very important. During multiple exercises like Gagan Shakti our Flanker has proved how it can engage PAK threat from Assam and China threat from Western India.

So can Rafale. Direct transfer of assets from Ambala to Hasimara is possible. Your argument that Flanker is good because it has a large fuel tank is extremely foolish.

Besides I keep saying it - the Flanker's range was designed keeping USSR distances in mind. For our context, it makes no difference.

Paris & London were 700 kms from Soviet airspace. Rawalpindi is 90 kms from Indian airspace.

It provides India with amazing flexibility. And during all our exercises like Iron Fist 2013/2016 and Gagan Shakti our Flankers have displayed incredible serviceability and turn around time.

Oh, I suppose you think putting up a burst rate of operations is unique to the MKI and somehow a Western jet cannot do it proportionately even better?

Anyways, we have gone way off-topic here. If you believe that Flanker is junk like many then so be it. I know what an amazing asset it's for our airforce.

Oh sure it is. It was a good option to add numbers at the time (though pound for pound, more Mirage 2000s would have been a smarter choice but politics played a hand as is always the case with the Russians).

But do be mindful of the time period when we bought it, and what our financial & geopolitical positions were at that time.

Today, unless we can deploy the Super upgrade, the MKI will reach complete platform obsolescence toward end of this decade. Unfortunately, the upgrade still won't fix the airframe. There's a reason why beyond a point, even the USAF thought it better to buy new-build F-15EX instead of keeping on upgrading F-15Cs.

No more from me on this topic.

Me neither.

 

[randomradio]

The size of the order is secondary. Let's see them deliver the batch first.

You cannot delay the production of an aircraft for 7+ years and claim there was no tech problem and no money problem. When our programs like Mk-2 Tejas is delayed by 2 years, we know it was because we took too long to release the full quantum of funds needed.

What was the Russians' issue?

Low oil revenues pushed back their plans.

Su-57 series production supposedly started in 2019. Till now they delivered 6 LRIP aircraft out of a batch order of 76 and the final configuration of the onboard suite is still undergoing flight tests.

In short, this doesn't look like series production at all. At a rate of about 1.5 ac/year that's not even LRI production. They're just building more prototypes.

Yeah they have the capacity to build more jets...just not this jet cuz there is still so much stuff to figure out with it.

It's a normal rate for an aircraft still in development. It's under LRIP.

Well we have ALL other stealth aircraft following one rule and the Russians doing something else. So either the Russians know something nobody else does (but somehow MiG doesn't) or stealth isn't a priority for their design.

In fact we can infer a lot based on the sensor setup they have chosen. The concept of using L-band to gain early warning about VLO threats was a program developed for Su-35, cuz the Flanker knows it has the disadvantage wrt RCS so the enemy will see it first anyway, no harm in constantly blasting the radar & with the longer wavelength, it at least has a chance to see the VLO threat much sooner than it otherwise would have.

On a supposedly VLO platform though, this setup makes zero sense. Unless the plane wasn't meant to be VLO.

That small L band capability on Flankers is not sufficient to detect stealth aircraft. It's mostly IFF.

They don't say anything about how that is achieved though. It's very likely active cancellation is involved because the F-35 actually has the computational power to pull it off.

Passive stealth. Their passive measures are superior to what's being used on the F-22 and Su-57, at least externally.

In order to successfully operate via pings & bursts however - you need pre-existing knowledge about the general direction & location of a target. You gain that knowledge either through offboard sensors (AEW, SATCOM, etc.) or via EODAS or other passive means (interferometry). After that you can shoot the LPI pencil beam to gain an ID & exact range to target at that point. You now have a firing solution. You can let go of the missile.

When the missile is already underway, you can pulse a 2nd beam that can update the AAM via datalink. Beyond this point you can become radar silent again - the missile's own seeker takes over and if a two-way link is present, tells you what happened. But all this while EODAS is constantly monitoring the target & can see an explosion even if no two-way link is there.

The aircraft that does the pinging & the one that launches the missile can be different.

This isn't how the Russians plan to operate though...at the very least, their L-band is constantly operating at maximum power scanning a wide FoV otherwise it won't get the early warning it needs to survive. The Russians cannot afford LPI. At the very least, one of the jets in a strike package is constantly visible, and once you know their direction, not hard to train other sensors to focus on that sector.

Stealth doesn't work for Su-57s. The Russians know it.

AWACS or drone AEWs. IR doesn't help.

How much heat is generating by the array depends on how much power its consuming. You don't consume much power in this application.

Power is relative to the TRM, not combined power of the entire radar.

I've read the claims - they say it can track 40 objects at 100 kms. I've never heard anything more absurd.

It's normal. It's all software. 100Km is relative to the RCS of the target, even this is normal.

I mean a BVR AESA seeker cannot even acquire the target from that far off and thats in a non-cluttered environment like the sky where the only thing it has to focus on is the target. And those seekers operate in the same frequency as this radar (Ka-band).

A seeker doesn't function like a radar, it has its own distinct role.

 

[randomradio]

For example in Cope India, IAF side which was Blue team was given AWACS support whereas USAF Red team was not provided AWACS and weren't allowed to use data-link. As a result, Flankers prevailed over F-15s.

Um, there were no AWACS in the exercises. Only a transport pretending to be one on the Blue Team.