They need to get their tech out to Dubai or something. Hiding it all in China is pointless.
People's Liberation Army Air Force : News & Discussions
- Thread starter Aashish
- Start date
They need to get their tech out to Dubai or something. Hiding it all in China is pointless.
As usual Ignorants is all over the place.
There was an old GTRE-Snecma deal over a decade ago to replace the Kabini core with a French one; specifically the M88-3 core. The IAF got it junked.
HAL has nothing to do with F404, that was decided by ADA. HAL wants American production tech for all the new stuff like LCA Mk2, AMCA IOC/FOC and TEDBF. When the French tried to resusitate the old GTRE deal for offsets, pushed by GTRE as well, there wasn't much internal support for it, probably why they let it die. It's important to understand both forces and gov want GTRE to develop tech indigenously. Although GTRE is involved in AMCA's engine, the hot parts will still come from outside. So Kaveri has to be indigenous. Plus Kaveri re-entering LCA program will enable GTRE to hijack it.
This is a typical case of the designer/producer failing to understand the user's requirements. Allowing France into Kaveri means we will never develop our own tech. This could also be the objective. GTRE must develop Kaver on their own, and move to on more advanced technologies on their own. For example, it will be critical for GTRE to provide F414 hot parts when they show up for MLU.
No clue why Igno is talking about Paxtan and USSR, this is all recent stuff, since Rafale GTG. Man, all that confusion. F404 was never gonna be produced in India in the first place. Kaveri's initial failure allowed GoI to delink it from LCA, and ADA wants to keep it that way. HAL and IAF are happy about that too. It would mean proven engine + fewer roadblocks. Otoh, all three and GoI are completely supporting GTRE's IUSAV.
Bookish knowledge or not, at least start by reading the right book. Ignorants doesn't even have bookish knowledge. Can't absorb information even after someone else chews it and feeds it for him.
There was an old GTRE-Snecma deal over a decade ago to replace the Kabini core with a French one; specifically the M88-3 core. The IAF got it junked.
HAL has nothing to do with F404, that was decided by ADA. HAL wants American production tech for all the new stuff like LCA Mk2, AMCA IOC/FOC and TEDBF. When the French tried to resusitate the old GTRE deal for offsets, pushed by GTRE as well, there wasn't much internal support for it, probably why they let it die. It's important to understand both forces and gov want GTRE to develop tech indigenously. Although GTRE is involved in AMCA's engine, the hot parts will still come from outside. So Kaveri has to be indigenous. Plus Kaveri re-entering LCA program will enable GTRE to hijack it.
This is a typical case of the designer/producer failing to understand the user's requirements. Allowing France into Kaveri means we will never develop our own tech. This could also be the objective. GTRE must develop Kaver on their own, and move to on more advanced technologies on their own. For example, it will be critical for GTRE to provide F414 hot parts when they show up for MLU.
No clue why Igno is talking about Paxtan and USSR, this is all recent stuff, since Rafale GTG. Man, all that confusion. F404 was never gonna be produced in India in the first place. Kaveri's initial failure allowed GoI to delink it from LCA, and ADA wants to keep it that way. HAL and IAF are happy about that too. It would mean proven engine + fewer roadblocks. Otoh, all three and GoI are completely supporting GTRE's IUSAV.
Bookish knowledge or not, at least start by reading the right book. Ignorants doesn't even have bookish knowledge. Can't absorb information even after someone else chews it and feeds it for him.
The UAE is buying the L-15 AJT and might buy some Chinese drones like other GCC countries but that's about it. They won't do anything to jeopardize their chances of getting the F-35 at a future date.
The post in # 1062 is a sterling example of confirmation bias leading to wrong analyses , wrong conclusions hence wrong predictions which has been the bane of RST's posts most of the time .
I clearly stated the IAF was right in junking GTRE's suggestion of utilising SAFRAN / Snecma's M-88 core providing an overview of why the IAF decided the way it did . In fact I had to spell out the entire thrust behind our endeavours for Atma Nirbharta much before it became a catchy slogan issued as a clarion call by the incumbent government.
Further how did ADA decide in favour of the GE F-404 if there wasn't any deal between the governments of the US & India ? Are we to understand ADA is a completely autonomous supra entity with deep pockets , technology firms the world over dying to work with them even if their own governments prohibit participation in the ADA's program.
Does HAL get to decide what will go into all those aforementioned programs or is it the remit of IAF & ADA primarily with inputs from HAL only as far as ease of production goes ?
I also clearly wrote that IF the reference of HAL pushing US tech was pertaining to the GE TFs - F-404 & its successor derivative F-414 , the reason behind it would be whatever information I've provided in the previous post describing the entire process along with the history , reasons & rationale behind those decisions in great detail including the role extraneous events like the the prevailing geo political situation played in our decision making process & RST comes up with - Duh ! Paxtan & USSR ?
This is another classic case of what I wrote when I said RST has ABSOLUTELY no experience of working in technology companies & has less than ZERO knowledge of how the top management decides .
All he has is bookish knowledge which he decides to inflict us with & in case of disagreements throws a tantrum lasting several pages or months or years whichever is longer , penning paragraphs with faulty logic , more like long short stories or novellas. Hence Resident Story Teller - RST.
His Modus Operandi - MO also extends to subtly changing his position , when he realises he's shot off his mouth far too much for his own good , ever so regularly such that eventually he adopts his opposition's position only changing his wording , emphasis apart from highlighting extraneous issues as justification. The first 20 pages of the thread on HTT-40 is a shining example of this behaviour.
It's like those Looney Tunes cartoons from our childhood featuring Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck starting from position A as opposed to position B of their rivals indulging in heated arguments only for the former to change their stance from position A to position B & vice versa except those RST argues with here hold their position while RST ends up adopting their position citing a whole different set of reasons as a fig leaf which reveals far more than it conceals.
Regurgitating bookish knowledge is an art only RST has cultivated in here without "application of mind" - a favourite phrase of our higher judiciary who themselves rarely follow their own advice . Besides how would 8 pm mind addled as it is think rationally when it hasn't done so the world over except parrot the same wonky logic repeatedly - a characteristic of 8 pm addled brains , resembling a kid throwing tantrums , hence manchild.
Funny how someone else years later , with no knowledge whatsoever of past events , correctly diagnoses the malaise & indirectly suggests a suitable profession where such talents can be better deployed, for - of what use is wisdom to the wise & talent to the talented , if one doesn't profit from it ?
I clearly stated the IAF was right in junking GTRE's suggestion of utilising SAFRAN / Snecma's M-88 core providing an overview of why the IAF decided the way it did . In fact I had to spell out the entire thrust behind our endeavours for Atma Nirbharta much before it became a catchy slogan issued as a clarion call by the incumbent government.
Further how did ADA decide in favour of the GE F-404 if there wasn't any deal between the governments of the US & India ? Are we to understand ADA is a completely autonomous supra entity with deep pockets , technology firms the world over dying to work with them even if their own governments prohibit participation in the ADA's program.
Does HAL get to decide what will go into all those aforementioned programs or is it the remit of IAF & ADA primarily with inputs from HAL only as far as ease of production goes ?
I also clearly wrote that IF the reference of HAL pushing US tech was pertaining to the GE TFs - F-404 & its successor derivative F-414 , the reason behind it would be whatever information I've provided in the previous post describing the entire process along with the history , reasons & rationale behind those decisions in great detail including the role extraneous events like the the prevailing geo political situation played in our decision making process & RST comes up with - Duh ! Paxtan & USSR ?
This is another classic case of what I wrote when I said RST has ABSOLUTELY no experience of working in technology companies & has less than ZERO knowledge of how the top management decides .
All he has is bookish knowledge which he decides to inflict us with & in case of disagreements throws a tantrum lasting several pages or months or years whichever is longer , penning paragraphs with faulty logic , more like long short stories or novellas. Hence Resident Story Teller - RST.
His Modus Operandi - MO also extends to subtly changing his position , when he realises he's shot off his mouth far too much for his own good , ever so regularly such that eventually he adopts his opposition's position only changing his wording , emphasis apart from highlighting extraneous issues as justification. The first 20 pages of the thread on HTT-40 is a shining example of this behaviour.
It's like those Looney Tunes cartoons from our childhood featuring Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck starting from position A as opposed to position B of their rivals indulging in heated arguments only for the former to change their stance from position A to position B & vice versa except those RST argues with here hold their position while RST ends up adopting their position citing a whole different set of reasons as a fig leaf which reveals far more than it conceals.
Regurgitating bookish knowledge is an art only RST has cultivated in here without "application of mind" - a favourite phrase of our higher judiciary who themselves rarely follow their own advice . Besides how would 8 pm mind addled as it is think rationally when it hasn't done so the world over except parrot the same wonky logic repeatedly - a characteristic of 8 pm addled brains , resembling a kid throwing tantrums , hence manchild.
Superior imagination isn't equal to superior IQ. In fact I'd suggested way back to RST to try his hand in poltics or conning which is the same thing & he blew a fuse.Reminds me of a western Tv serial "The Pretender", a super IQ person who can be doctor, engineer, banker, lawyer, soldier, scientist, anything & everthing.
(The Pretender (TV series) - Wikipedia)
Funny how someone else years later , with no knowledge whatsoever of past events , correctly diagnoses the malaise & indirectly suggests a suitable profession where such talents can be better deployed, for - of what use is wisdom to the wise & talent to the talented , if one doesn't profit from it ?
Congratulations, you're psychologist also now. Even engineering degree & industrial experience is total waste in front of youngsters like you.That's the problem. You bring in everything under the sun, never the point.
You've literally never argued a single point even once. It's called straw man.
A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.
Straw man - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Me: Russians define 6th gen that includes high speed, with ramjet or scramjet.
You: Ah, but DAS can detect a missile launch. So scramjet is unrealistic on fighters.
Me:What's that got to do with Russians defining 6th gen?
You: Ah, but scramjet has insane turn radius. Look at SR-71. Even Mig-41 will turn like SR-71.
There is literally no sequence to your thought process. You are just trying to find every excuse possible to dismiss not just me, but the Russians, Americans and Chinese, and specifically all the top minds of these countries.
I'm just exploring aspects of HySo tech but Coming to a point means concluding so i can't do that or again you'll accuse me
So I brought all aspects "under the sun", explained with pics, historical examples, whether it is DETECTION, COST-BENEFIT, SIZE, NUMBERS, etc while you simply ECHO the world using them to shield yourself & personally attack others instead of your personal opinion. When you cannot comprehend something then you call it "irrelevant" while i simply say "IDK".
B/w you & me, your diagram count = 0, pic count = 0, calculation count = 0 & i'm the "strawman"
You: Russians define 6th gen that includes high speed, with ramjet or scramjet.
Me: Just thinking/exploring the idea... its IRS would be high & detectable from long range.
You: What's that got to do with Russians defining 6th gen?
Me: 6gen is not officially defined yet, just unofficially outlined on Wiki for example, POTENTIALLY/OPTIONALLY/MAY BE having high supersonic, high altitude. INTERCEPTOR & FIGHTER design are different as Supersonic Area Rule affecting agility/turns. No official notion of HySo jet disclosed yet. 5 fingers different & Difference of opinion exist in Russia, America, Europe, China, everywhere among politicians, techies, citizens.
But eventually top nations like Russia, USA might make some in short #s.
So i didn't refute
You pass concluding statement on behalf of IAF but will you go against GoI/MoD/DoD/IAF when they challenged Su-57 & exited PAKFA/FGFA project? Why not part of PAKDP project?
You can search how many projects got cancelled, also proposed by top minds. At least i honestly say i'm low IQ techie while your profile is mystery.
Agreed, but what is that corner speed range exactly for different jet types - Interceptor vs Fighter, that matters. A tumbling TVC Fighter has zero corner speed.All aircraft have corner speeds.
Correct, but there are differences in Turbofan/Turbojet Vs Ramjet/SCRamjet, the former has 2 modes with & w/o afterburner while the it is still unclear about latter w/o moving parts how many burner stages would be there & they don't work at low speeds.
Anyways, Detection is not the point i said but also cost, benefit, numbers,
You can't do this F2F. So Please don't do this personal attacks using psycho terms just bcoz people can be safely anonymous online.
Agreed, MiG-25 & 31 were made to chase U-2, SR-71, B-52, etc but all the points might be true incl. large territory depending upon what sources we refer to. Since 1990s all documentaries + YT Vlogs, websites by Thinktanks & fans, etc have metioned all these reasons.
Russia & USA are geographically separated, have fought cold war, drew in multiple countries into their side, chased each other in the Artic region which is not country but a neutral zone. That may or may not compare with Qatar & many other countries depending upon land-locked country or with big adjacant neutral zones. In the end how many countries, small or big have such a jet? So geography also matters. Instead of chasing slow bombers they can be intercepted by regular fighters. fied & mobile SAMs are there.
Many Indians would think that China also has H-6 bomber & coming up with H-20 but why we didn't use MiG-25 except for recon, why we didn't get MiG-31, why we didn't try to join MiG-41 PAKDP like the PAKFA? IDK, may be you do.
And you are impulsively forgetting that before 31 comes 29. MiG-29 is of same era designed in 1970s from LPFI program & also the Su-27 from TPFI program. Even w/o TVC these were very agile jets. While USA used all its fighters F-15, F-16, F-22 to intercept Russian bombers at Alaska border & elsewhere. Now who is the Strawman?
Yes, we don't know specifics so why are you using personal attacks? At least i'm trying my best to explore & understand using examples, pics, diagrams like i already showed how SR-71 would dodge SAMs just using speed, which i was expecting from you, but you never do it.
How would someone define agility to be understood by anybody?... sudden change in speed & orientation.
F-22, designed in 1980s, built in 1990s, inducted in 2000s enjoyed kinematic evasion advantage against certain missiles. I also explained that some missiles can be fooled as they use lead intercept point. All agile fighters with or w/o TVC can use some kinematic tactics, sometimes it works, sometimes not. But today's IADS, ABMs, ASAT weapons are different. Even Hyso AAMs & SAMs are being R&Ded. So IMO a HySo jet cannot have such inertial changes or agility or kinematics required to defeat a missile. So call the makers of those IADS, ABMs, ASAT weapons as "strawman"
But it might be able to use its smart AAM defensively or can try using DEW.
Well, you started it & passed concluding remarks on IAF's behalf. So call people nonsense, wrong, strawman, etc F2F & see the result.
Your action your consequences.If your derogatory words & lines are removed then our discussion would look great as if 2 people are working on a project.
So you are also aware of difference of opinions in the technologically most advanced nation. Same thing can be found in Russia, China, Europe, India, etc. So it is very tough to say "USA/USAF/Russia/RuAF/China/PLAAF thinks/says...". Regime changes, statement & decision changes.
But Russia & China being Communist nations are behaving like Totalitarian, very tightly controlling media & people.
With USAs R&D on X/Y series of jets, isolated land, secret labs & bases, global allies & bases, etc it is no wonder that their NGAD++ will come out in 10yrs but expecting it to be like SR-72 is too much. Let's not forget the big diff. b/w HiSu & HySo.
India cannot be compared until GoI/MoD/DoD show some serious official statements with a defined timeline at least.
"The Print"??... PleaseIndia's infrastructure, economy and scientific output is more or less where China was in the mid-2000s. So our human capital is yet to be tapped. Our R&D efficiency has been increasing alongside India's economic growth.
India has already carried out flight testing of the engine, but still requires work.
2019:
2020:
DRDO test-fires futuristic missile tech, but its success is in doubt
The DRDO carried out its maiden test of the indigenously developed Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle off the Odisha coast.theprint.in
But ISRO is ahead of DRDO in this area. ISRO's first full test was in 2016, they had tested a passive scramjet in 2010. Theirs is dual-mode ramjet, which can ignite both in subsonic and supersonic regimes.
The third test was in 2024.
There should be one more test before the SPEX launch. SPEX will be the main use case, ie, prototype, through Pushpak. Post which we will launch our first satellite into orbit with a scramjet.
For now our ramjet is already at flight testing stage in a prototype as of November. We will have our first domestic ramjet functional in a weapon in 2-3 years.
it is a generic media house. Our YT defence Vloggers are far better."in a weapon"... what eactly? A rocket/missile? UAV? Manned jet?
ISRO is testing air breathing ROCKET engine, could be for civil aerospace like Pushpak, etc or military HySo AAMs/SAMs.
I'm aware of all these things:
But like i said, if it has to be made for IAF then 1st a ground test then on a manned or unmanned jet. We all know what is SPEX/Pushpak but not even a sketch of military version. And we have to send Kaveri engine to Russia to test on their IL-76. So which jet will be used for flight test R/SCRamjet? Su-30MKI? MiG-29? LCA? Or UAV TD? Where is the outline?
That's what i said - today's IADS are different & will imrpove a lot. If China sends such a manned or unmanned jet then what we will do?
I told you it was an analogy to caution you not to compare interceptor & dogfighter.OMG, again import? When they introduced J-20, did we import 5gen? Now for J-36 & J-50 & upcoming JH-XX what are we going to import - improved MiG-31?
MiG-41 is quoted HiSu not HySo but our discussion started on HySo. You've been mixing the 2. Where is Mach 3-4.5 & where is Mach 6-8?
And by the time Chinese will be deploying 4 Squadrons of 6th Gen fighter, IAF and DRDO gang will be looking for some new engine for 5th gen fighter in France , Russia or US. Even the EU.
If you ask AI what is the future of IAF, AI will give out more depressive answer. I am atleast hopeful.
Really? So it is war b/w employees of GTRE Vs IAF Vs HAL & we all income tax payers are getting sandwitched
Yeah already saw it. Numerous such vids on YT.
For American Bhaiyas
(many, not all), rest of the world are gaiyas
Their superiority complex & jealousy clearly reflects in their videos.
Really? So it is war b/w employees of GTRE Vs IAF Vs HAL & we all income tax payers are getting sandwitched
Ultimately good decisions were taken.
We have no choice but to get GTRE to develop everything indigenously. Currently, their engines are necessary for near-100% indigenous drones. As discussed earlier, our entire future resides on drones. AMCA could very well end up our last manned fighter.
HAL has nothing to do with F404, it was all ADA. As the main designer, ADA decides. But HAL is involved in F414, and they would prefer manufacturing with American tech rather than French ones, for reasons unknown to me. France's plan was to take over both F404 and F414 requirements with their own engine design.
Then what, France takes over LCA, MMRCA, TEDBF and AMCA Mk1? And then even AMCA Mk2 as the natural partner? That would be a ridiculous position to put ourselves in. Will be even worse if Ghatak and FUFA also end up with M88-related tech. And our indigneous tech in the rubbish bin.
We need two Western sources of engines to balance things out.
It's difficult to say how computers and electronics in aircraft will develop. Personally I'm not worried 'cause the gestation period of electronics is small and we have already made a lot of progress on that front.
It's an example of not listening to the user. Even Americans have this disease, probably more than anyone else.
General Tomanhus brings it up in the comments:
"We don't know anything about theirs yet but all we know is ours is better! "
Otoh, the USAF says their goal in future wars with China is not air supremacy but parity, and this is with the upgraded F-35, NGAD and B-21 at full strength. Which means, without NGAD and B-21, they will not even have parity. Well, at least B-21 is funded.
I see my ode to RST & his shenanigans here were deleted citing the reason - personal attack. Funny , for if I know RST well , he's never reported anything like that . To that extent he's pretty thick skinned in ways most people including myself aren't. Badnam huve toh kya naam na hua - is his motto as long as he's showered with attention & is the centerpiece of it.
Anyway , my own 2 cents is that the J-20 has achieved what we can term partial stealth with its shaping. What its avionics & sensors like EOTS , DAS & features like sensor fusion are capable of are unknown or at least their quality is .
Hence this isn't exactly the stealth FA the PLAAF was looking at to go head on against the USAF especially the F-22 & the F-35 . Therefore it follows that the next plane in their inventory would be a natural progression to full aspect stealth , be a system of systems , be very maneuverable , have long endurance , be equipped with a DEW , have a VCE besides generating enough power aboard to handle power guzzling electronics , etc
In the absence of a uniform definition of 6th Gen Stealth FA we can safely say the above parameters would feature as important ones to qualify a 6th Gen & if that's the case , the J-36 will definitely qualify to be either a quasi 6th Gen FA if not a 6th Gen FA. Given that the TFs to power this are still WiP & the duration the J-20 has taken to reach where it has today ( it still hasn't achieved FOC in spite of making thd first flight in 2011 , though I'm unaware as to the stages & formalities PLAAF follows to declare a FA FOC compliant ) we'd probably see a FOC compliant J-36 somewhere in the mid 30s.
However that doesn't ease our problems . They'd still keep mfg various iterations of the J-36 improving its features with every iteration besides validating various systems & as it has been pointed out this will be based in Xinjiang and / or Tibet & will have the ability to carry a huge payload with the endurance necessary to fly all across our Northern & Eastern / NE territories with the kind of ease which is denied to the J-20.
Having said that our AMCA Mk-1 when it comes should mirror the J-20 in many characteristics including stealth except the weight class & possibly endurance. Since the Mk-1 has presumably completed CDR & is under fabrication , we need to relook our design of the Mk-2 from the perspective of tackling the J-36. It's either that or we launch studies for our AHCA program pronto.
Anyway , my own 2 cents is that the J-20 has achieved what we can term partial stealth with its shaping. What its avionics & sensors like EOTS , DAS & features like sensor fusion are capable of are unknown or at least their quality is .
Hence this isn't exactly the stealth FA the PLAAF was looking at to go head on against the USAF especially the F-22 & the F-35 . Therefore it follows that the next plane in their inventory would be a natural progression to full aspect stealth , be a system of systems , be very maneuverable , have long endurance , be equipped with a DEW , have a VCE besides generating enough power aboard to handle power guzzling electronics , etc
In the absence of a uniform definition of 6th Gen Stealth FA we can safely say the above parameters would feature as important ones to qualify a 6th Gen & if that's the case , the J-36 will definitely qualify to be either a quasi 6th Gen FA if not a 6th Gen FA. Given that the TFs to power this are still WiP & the duration the J-20 has taken to reach where it has today ( it still hasn't achieved FOC in spite of making thd first flight in 2011 , though I'm unaware as to the stages & formalities PLAAF follows to declare a FA FOC compliant ) we'd probably see a FOC compliant J-36 somewhere in the mid 30s.
However that doesn't ease our problems . They'd still keep mfg various iterations of the J-36 improving its features with every iteration besides validating various systems & as it has been pointed out this will be based in Xinjiang and / or Tibet & will have the ability to carry a huge payload with the endurance necessary to fly all across our Northern & Eastern / NE territories with the kind of ease which is denied to the J-20.
Having said that our AMCA Mk-1 when it comes should mirror the J-20 in many characteristics including stealth except the weight class & possibly endurance. Since the Mk-1 has presumably completed CDR & is under fabrication , we need to relook our design of the Mk-2 from the perspective of tackling the J-36. It's either that or we launch studies for our AHCA program pronto.
Last edited:
@Gautam @nair @Arvind @Milspec @Parthu
I'm simple, ordinary, low IQ guy here for some time pass, not interested in cricket, bollywood, politics. But this is too much to tolerate & traumatic actually. This is not how healthy conversation can take place.
I could be wrong but i think this member may be a YT Vlogger or a fresher journalist. devoting full time, so he does have lots of tracked knowledge but he seem to have lost control in last 1-2 days.
Any techie working in MNC like me can come F2F for LIVE discussion also if his social & professional accounts are not targeted. But he says he can insult others F2F also. After requesting him also he is not ready to calm down & stop being personal.
Everybody cannot know everything, hence people discuss. But all shared pics, diagrams, calculations which i merely convey have become fallacy for him. So I would be ignoring this member & would expect him to do the same. Time & life straightens everyone.
I'm going to report some replies having following personal attacks, hope they get deleted.
I'm simple, ordinary, low IQ guy here for some time pass, not interested in cricket, bollywood, politics. But this is too much to tolerate & traumatic actually. This is not how healthy conversation can take place.
I could be wrong but i think this member may be a YT Vlogger or a fresher journalist. devoting full time, so he does have lots of tracked knowledge but he seem to have lost control in last 1-2 days.
Any techie working in MNC like me can come F2F for LIVE discussion also if his social & professional accounts are not targeted. But he says he can insult others F2F also. After requesting him also he is not ready to calm down & stop being personal.
Everybody cannot know everything, hence people discuss. But all shared pics, diagrams, calculations which i merely convey have become fallacy for him. So I would be ignoring this member & would expect him to do the same. Time & life straightens everyone.
I'm going to report some replies having following personal attacks, hope they get deleted.
Last edited:
That's the problem. After 2000, India thought multi-role fighters could solve everything, but in the war between Russia and Ukraine, VKS's SU 30SM did not have any outstanding performance, from the current video and reports, control mainly rely on MIG 31 and SU 35, Mainly dependent on the SU 34
I've heard some people associated with the PLAAF evaluate the Rafale and the Typhoon, and they think the Typhoon is far more maneuverable than the Rafale, The same is true of many European pilots, with Rafale mainly below 15,000 feet have an advantage . The Sino-Indian border is more than 5000 meters above sea level
Last edited:
It's true. The Typhoon won MMRCA technical round due to its superior performance. Rafale has slightly inferior supersonic and climb performance but is a better dogfighter.
The Rafale is better for the more dangerous flying conditions. It has better slow-speed handling, better landing and takeoff characteristics, far better angle of attack etc. It's all round better for the Himalayas. Its control laws are superior too.
Even though Su-30SM is multirole, this is the first time they are operating such a jet. They still need a decade or more to figure out how to use a multirole jet, which is when adequate training and infrastructure can be managed for multirole operations.
Imagine the level of work necessary where command, the pilots, and ground crews have to learn about more weapons, more mission types, more electronics, more maintenance procedures etc, and base planners have to cater to multiple bases supporting a squadron with different types of weapons and spares. To build a multirole force, you need extremely high quality manpower. So just having a multirole fighter isn't enough. How long do you think Russia will take to acheive this?
Our previous air chief.
Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria, PVSM, AVSM, VM, ADC – Defstrat
www.defstrat.com
In any case, Russia's air force has failed in Ukraine. They don't have sufficient ISR and more advanced weapons. The Su-30MKI has both because of Israel. One such example: https://www.iai.co.il/p/elm-2060p
Plus Russia's air force was built up as a defensive force meant to challenge a NATO offensive. Their mission was air denial. The minute they had to undertake offensive operations, we saw that they did not have the ability, like that pod above. Western-led propaganda made people believe that Russia was a military threat to Europe, but the Russians never had the weapons for it, never mind the fact that there was no will either. They attacked Ukraine without any impactful offensive capabilities against ground troops.
Anyway, the Russian Su-30SM needs an Indian EW suite and Israeli offensive targeting capabilities along with MKI-specific weapons like the new ballistic missiles we have recently inducted for relocatable targets. What they have is suitable only for air denial and strike missions against fixed targets.
Once you need some air to ground support, Rafale has the edge, by far.
EF2000 was studied for air to air superiority, ans marginally air to ground, when Rafale was studied to be very good (but somewhere not perfect) in all missions.
They are already preparing the American public for the reality of future wars.
Air Force Report Warns of Air Superiority Loss | Defense Media Network
The Air Force's Air Superiority 2030 Flight Plan warns of losing air superiority in the future and suggests new acquisition and development processes.
So:
In denial about denial: why Ukraine air success should worry the West - Middle East Transparent
Ukraine’s success in contesting the skies turns the West’s airpower paradigm on its head — it offers an alternative vision for pursuing airspace denial over air superiority. Despite having one of the largest and most technologically sophisticated air forces in the world, Russia has failed to...
middleeasttransparent.com
General Hinote: "Hey, air denial is a good thing."
Wargames Show Air Force Isn't Accelerating Fast Enough, Hinote Says | Air & Space Forces Magazine
The Air Force's futurist says recent wargames show the service is not accelerating fast enough to keep pace with adversaries, such as China.
www.airandspaceforces.com
Mutual Denial of Air Superiority Could Benefit US in Future Conflict, Top USAF Planner Says | Air & Space Forces Magazine
Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote, deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration, and requirements, spoke about air superiority in the Ukraine war.
www.airandspaceforces.com
And this was in the past. But, while B-21 is a given, the question now is whether NGAD is sufficient 'cause it's on hold.
Anyway, I can't find the exact quote, but the USAF essentially said both are necessary to maintain their new "fight in contested airspace" strategy. You can argue they said it for the sake of funding, but we are at that point already.