Sukhoi Su-30MKI

[LX1111]

They have only 24 Su-35S. And even with 60% availability only 15 planes would be ready for action at any time. Hardly a concern for us. J-10C can also be tackled by our Flankers and Rafale.

The real problem for us is J-20 and J-16 combo. If J-20 uses its stealth and comes close then it would guide even PL-21s fired by the far away J-16 to take down our AWACS. Losing AWACS is a dreadful situation for us because we have got them in such low numbers.

Protecting AWACS should be our number one priority.

I guess the 9th Brigade already regretted getting those Su-35s, if they waited a few years, they should be able to get the J-20, given their status in the Air Force
From the sporadic information revealed in the past few years, the WVR of J-10C is stronger than that of J-16, and J-16 has an advantage in BVR by relying on better radar and ECM.

 

[LX1111]

The Russians are perfectly talking sense. The 2011 lecture/speech you're talking about was about old J-11(or baseline Su-27), thus 10m2 was correct.

I have already posted a chart from official Sukhoi presentation in this thread itself where they cut the frontal RCS with weapons from 10m2 to below 4m2. Go and check it out.

Impossible, it can’t be done by coating alone, unless SU-35 will use wave-transparent materials on a large scale like J-20, Russia’s exaggerated propaganda is very common, such as the 120KM R-77-1

 

[Rajput Lion]

I guess the 9th Brigade already regretted getting those Su-35s, if they waited a few years, they should be able to get the J-20, given their status in the Air Force
From the sporadic information revealed in the past few years, the WVR of J-10C is stronger than that of J-16, and J-16 has an advantage in BVR by relying on better radar and ECM.

Nope. I've posted interview of a PAF pilot who categorically said that J-16 is absolutely superior to J-10 in both BVR and WVR.

Even when your old J-11s got their a** handled to them in BVR by Thai Gripen, they still dominated Gripen in WVR. Flanker because of lifting body and powerful engines is a very dangerous foe in WVR.

PLAAF pecking order is like this: J-20>>J-16>>J-10C.

But for us, all three are dangerous because of their AESA radars, QWIP IRST and PL-15.

 

[LX1111]

None of that's needed. Based on what @Picdelamirand-oil said, SPECTRA simply makes a copy of the signal and retransmits the signal back with a cancellation signal superimposed. So it doesn't matter how much the carrier frequency hops, it's gonna get cancelled as long as Rafale keeps up with the processing needs and of course the antenna is able to match the fractional bandwidth for transmission. There should be various other modes available because the French have taken a significant lead here. The Rafale's hardware has to be as good or better than OPFOR's, and that's where it's very likely that the J-20 has taken the lead with GaN. GaN on J-20 is still only my assumption, and I hope I'm wrong.

Jamming currently is not advanced as you think. If a new signal is found, it cannot be jammed automatically, it currently requires 2 years to defeat an unknown signal (open source, much, much better in reality). That's the point of the F-35's MDF, it contains a library of signals specific to geography, and the F-35 can only jam known signals. Meaning, if the S-400 starts emitting unknown signals, then the F-35 can do jacksh!t about it.

In China, it is called echo cancellation technology, which is common in 4.5 generation fighters. The J-20, at least in its 2009 state, uses GaAs

 

[Rajput Lion]

Impossible, it can’t be done by coating alone, unless SU-35 will use wave-transparent materials on a large scale like J-20, Russia’s exaggerated propaganda is very common, such as the 120KM R-77-1

Use of more composites and RAM in the frame, compressor blades and inlets give them sub 1m2 clean frontal RCS. Su-35S can't compete with J-20 in RCS as the latter is a full-on stealth jet.

R-77-1's range is 110 km and that's what the Russians claim. I don't see any over-exaggeration! Maybe you're talking about old R-77? Yes, its effective range is only around 50/60kms vs claimed 80/100kms. But that was more Ukrainian than Russian.

 

[LX1111]

Use of more composites and RAM in the frame, compressor blades and inlets give them sub 1m2 clean frontal RCS. Su-35S can't compete with J-20 in RCS as the latter is a full-on stealth jet.

R-77-1's range is 110 km and that's what the Russians claim. I don't see any over-exaggeration! Maybe you're talking about old R-77? Yes, its effective range is only around 50/60kms vs claimed 80/100kms. But that was more Ukrainian than Russian.

The altitude of the aircraft is 10,000 meters, the speed is 1195km/h, and it is basically in a head-on state. The maximum range of the R-77-1 missile is about 72km, and the range of the missile power is about 38km.
This data is basically the same as the data of AIM-120A/B, far from the Russian propaganda

 

[Rajput Lion]

View attachment 27368
The altitude of the aircraft is 10,000 meters, the speed is 1195km/h, and it is basically in a head-on state. The maximum range of the R-77-1 missile is about 72km, and the range of the missile power is about 38km.
This data is basically the same as the data of AIM-120A/B, far from the Russian propaganda

Missile range is affected by altitude. 110 range would be for 15km altitude launch against slow maneuvering target. At 33k feet 72km is not bad.

 

[Lolwa]

Impossible thing, the Russians are talking nonsense, 70% of the RCS value of the fighter is determined by the shape, 30% is determined by the material and coating, PLA mentioned in the speech about 2015 J-11 and JAS-39,The RCS value of Su-27 is 10-12m²，Su-35, Su-30 are basically the same number

The su-30 has an rcs of 5 sqm rcs. Public known numbers.
The su-35 has an RCS of 1-3 sqm RCS. Su-27 is an extremely dated design.

 

[LX1111]

Nope. I've posted interview of a PAF pilot who categorically said that J-16 is absolutely superior to J-10 in both BVR and WVR.

Even when your old J-11s got their a** handled to them in BVR by Thai Gripen, they still dominated Gripen in WVR. Flanker because of lifting body and powerful engines is a very dangerous foe in WVR.

PLAAF pecking order is like this: J-20>>J-16>>J-10C.

But for us, all three are dangerous because of their AESA radars, QWIP IRST and PL-15.

It only mentions that the J-16 is better than the Saudi F-15. I haven’t seen a specific comparison with the J10C. Anyway, the J-16 will mainly be used as a multi-purpose fighter in the future.
For air-to-air, it still needs to be handed over to J-20. As for J10C, oh, the new era of MIG-29, the mounting capacity is too low

The su-30 has an rcs of 5 sqm rcs. Public known numbers.
The su-35 has an RCS of 1-3 sqm RCS. Su-27 is an extremely dated design.

Is there any difference in their design, at most add a canard (accurately called the front wing)

 

[LX1111]

Missile range is affected by altitude. 110 range would be for 15km altitude launch against slow maneuvering target. At 33k feet 72km is not bad.

According to Russian standards, this data is obtained at 20,000m and Mach 1.5. In fact, no one will fight at this height and speed

 

[Rajput Lion]

It only mentions that the J-16 is better than the Saudi F-15. I haven’t seen a specific comparison with the J10C.

Here it is:

Omar also said that the avionics system of the J-16 fighter is very advanced, and the continuous maneuverability is very strong, making it an excellent fighter.

Continuous maneuvering much stronger than J-10C.

More:

He also praised the J-16 fighter, believing that the J-16 fighter is stronger than the F15SA, and the J-16’s continuous hovering ability and mobility are very good, saying that if he is himself, he would rather encounter the J-10C fighter than face the J-16 fighter.

So he would rather face J-10C but not J-16 meaning that in his view, J-16 is a more potent fighter.

If you read the entire article, according to PAF pilot J-16>>F-15SA>>J-10C. You've to look at the context of what he was saying.

Source: Chinese J-10C is good at sneak attacks, but there are many problems – Defence View

Anyway, the J-16 will mainly be used as a multi-purpose fighter in the future.
For air-to-air, it still needs to be handed over to J-20. As for J10C, oh, the new era of MIG-29, the mounting capacity is too low

Lol, you're Chinese and you're oblivious of the fact that J-16 is the ONLY PLAAF fighter cleared for PL-21. That missile is a serious threat to both IAF/USAF HVT fleet.

Is there any difference in their design, at most add a canard (accurately called the front wing)

Not much difference. That's why I said at max only 20%(could be even less in reality) between Su-30MKIs' and Su-35S' clean frontal RCS.

According to Russian standards, this data is obtained at 20,000m and Mach 1.5. In fact, no one will fight at this height and speed

You're getting confused between RVV-AE and RVVSD's range. Anyways, R-77M has gone into full scale production from late last year and that thing has very long range with AESA seeker. Very soon Su-30SM and Su-35S will get it too. That will make R-77-1 redundant.

 

[randomradio]

In China, it is called echo cancellation technology, which is common in 4.5 generation fighters. The J-20, at least in its 2009 state, uses GaAs

The limited production models are really old and are likely irrelevant without an upgrade.

 

[randomradio]

View attachment 27368
The altitude of the aircraft is 10,000 meters, the speed is 1195km/h, and it is basically in a head-on state. The maximum range of the R-77-1 missile is about 72km, and the range of the missile power is about 38km.
This data is basically the same as the data of AIM-120A/B, far from the Russian propaganda

72 Km at 10Km altitude sounds about right for a missile with 110+Km range at 12+Km.

 

[Rajput Lion]

@LX1111

Check this video:

It shows the R1 range of the same missile as 90kms at 12.9km altitude:

In fact, looking at these Su-35S real life HUD shots, Russians are very honest with their 110kms range for R-77-1, just the contrary to what you're saying.

Chinese, on the other, should better live up to their claim of PL-15 super duper missile, lol.

 

[LX1111]

@LX1111

Check this video:

It shows the R1 range of the same missile as 90kms at 12.9km altitude:

View attachment 27371

In fact, looking at these Su-35S real life HUD shots, Russians are very honest with their 110kms range for R-77-1, just the contrary to what you're saying.

Chinese, on the other, should better live up to their claim of PL-15 super duper missile, lol.

The range of PL-15 is very clear. PL-15E is at 145KM, and PL-15 is at about 200KM. This is what the director of the development unit recently revealed. The Chinese standard is 10000m. Mach 1.2.

 

[Rajput Lion]

The range of PL-15 is very clear. PL-15E is at 145KM, and PL-15 is at about 200KM. This is what the director of the development unit recently revealed. The Chinese standard is 10000m. Mach 1.2.

So Chinese domestic version has 200kms range if fired at 10km altitude and at 1.2 Mach?? Impressive! Why is the export model range capped at only 145kms, any reasons?

 

[LX1111]

Here it is:


Continuous maneuvering much stronger than J-10C.

More:


So he would rather face J-10C but not J-16 meaning that in his view, J-16 is a more potent fighter.

If you read the entire article, according to PAF pilot J-16>>F-15SA>>J-10C. You've to look at the context of what he was saying.

Source: Chinese J-10C is good at sneak attacks, but there are many problems – Defence View

Lol, you're Chinese and you're oblivious of the fact that J-16 is the ONLY PLAAF fighter cleared for PL-21. That missile is a serious threat to both IAF/USAF HVT fleet.

Not much difference. That's why I said at max only 20%(could be even less in reality) between Su-30MKIs' and Su-35S' clean frontal RCS.

You're getting confused between RVV-AE and RVVSD's range. Anyways, R-77M has gone into full scale production from late last year and that thing has very long range with AESA seeker. Very soon Su-30SM and Su-35S will get it too. That will make R-77-1 redundant.

There are many aspects of aircraft maneuverability. Different aircraft have their own ranges. As a delta-wing fighter, the ability to hover continuously is indeed a weakness.
Besides, the report itself is suspicious. I have seen him from different places, but I have not read the original version.
At least in the golden helmet air battle, the J16 pilot clearly mentioned that he should take advantage of his radar and ECM.
To be honest, pure mobility is meaningless in the future. J10-C pilots mentioned that they need to use the aircraft's avionics advantages and data links for fleet operations.
As for PL-21, of course it is now called PL-17, it is indeed threatening, but it can only play a role in system combat, such as KJ-500, J-16D, Y-9D,,
Because the range of the PL-17 has exceeded the radar range of the J-16

 

[LX1111]

So Chinese domestic version has 200kms range if fired at 10km altitude and at 1.2 Mach?? Impressive! Why is the export model range capped at only 145kms, any reasons?

You can find it on Twitter, I can only give you Chinese,

 

[Rajput Lion]

There are many aspects of aircraft maneuverability. Different aircraft have their own ranges. As a delta-wing fighter, the ability to hover continuously is indeed a weakness.
Besides, the report itself is suspicious. I have seen him from different places, but I have not read the original version.
At least in the golden helmet air battle, the J16 pilot clearly mentioned that he should take advantage of his radar and ECM.
To be honest, pure mobility is meaningless in the future. J10-C pilots mentioned that they need to use the aircraft's avionics advantages and data links for fleet operations.

Every single tech that is present on J-10C is there on J-16 as well plus in much larger size. J-16s larger AESA radar plus PL-15 combo is good enough to swat J-10C from far.

Regarding maneuverability, Deltas have amazing Instantaneous bat like turn, but their sustained turn rate sucks. In comparison, Flanker's aerodynamics is so good that it has amazing ITR but its EM and sustained turn rate is equally good. Plus factor in its almost 10 ton of internal fuel load and it can harass smaller fighters in both BVR and WVR. PLAAF is no fool to induct J-16 in such large numbers despite a delta-canard like J-10C in their service.

As for PL-21, of course it is now called PL-17, it is indeed threatening, but it can only play a role in system combat, such as KJ-500, J-16D, Y-9D,,
Because the range of the PL-17 has exceeded the radar range of the J-16

Yes, read somewhere that its max range is over 500kms. Very dangerous missile for our AWACS, Tankers etc.

You can find it on Twitter, I can only give you Chinese,
View attachment 27372
View attachment 27373

Sorry bro, but my knowledge of Mandarin is as good as big fat zero. Kindly summarize what's written here. I would also like to know if PL-15E also has an AESA seeker like the Chinese domestic version? Yes or no?

 

[Saaho]

Folks, lets close these forums... Its no point talking all these things. Leave modern missiles etc... Have you seen HAL Sitara Project? Its just ..... a....... Subsonic TRAINER! HAL has been making it since 1997!!! Its 2023 now and it has not yet been introduced.

China and Pakistan in 1987 started a subsonic trainer program. It was done by 95. Till now there are .... 500 produced, used and exported.

I... mean... I don't what to think anymore. Whats the point of AESA this or that when this is how things are done. We are about 30 years China behind even if airforce accepts Sitara today.

Let be honest and admit. We can not do things that fly. NONE!

Imagine folks... In 1997, Shanti and Swabhiman were still running on DD-1! Pentium MMX 200 Mhz was a decent processor... Nokia FUKKEN 3310 was not ... even introduced.... Mohara movie songs were sexy and Aishwarya Rai had no sign of ageing.