Imported Single Engine Fighter Jet Contest

[Sancho]

That also means that J20 can't detect AMCA either.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

Stealth fighters are not invisible, "just" very hard to detect, as said it boils down to who has the more capable sensors, or is supported by more and more capable force multipliers. More than AMCA we need AWACS.

 

[Screambowl]

Single vessels like a Frigate can be attacked, but a CBG is too much for LCA and Harpoon.

The combo sorties with Su30 i was referring to. Su30 can accommodate a Bmos

AMCA wouldn't detect a J20 any sooner than any MMRCA, since the technologies to detect it are the same and as limited (IRST, AESA, RWR). That means the only counter to stealth are advanced AWACS in high numbers, as well as improvements of ground radars and EO and EW sensors. The more powerful the sensor, the earlier can a stealth fighter be detected and a GaN based AWACS would beat any fighter radar in detction capability.

AMCA in passive mode can't be detected by J20 and vice versa unless until in a very close proximity.

But AMCA and an AWACS near by may detect the J20

 

[Sancho]

@Babloo Singh

Still a bit tricky, since it's not easy to find reliable sources for EW, or radar sizes, but I still added that part too and for comparison, also put the light class Gripen C in the mix as well:

As expected, the F16 scores highly in terms of load and multi role capability. Where it lacks are advanced passive sensors, EW or modern cockpit design. The upgrade potential of than old design is simply limited.
The light class Gripen C can't keep up, although it offers good capabilities for it's class, the lack of hardpoints is quite visible, you either have to justify fuel, or BVR missiles and therefore self defence capability:

The weapon rating as discussed, wouldn't had made much sense, but do you know anything else that could be added and that is verifiable with public infos?

 

[Rahul Singh]

AMCA wouldn't detect a J20 any sooner than any MMRCA, since the technologies to detect it are the same and as limited (IRST, AESA, RWR). That means the only counter to stealth are advanced AWACS in high numbers, as well as improvements of ground radars and EO and EW sensors. The more powerful the sensor, the earlier can a stealth fighter be detected and a GaN based AWACS would beat any fighter radar in detction capability.

Let me complete your post.

Any MRCA(SE/ME) with much larger RCS and IR signature will be shoot down before it could even get a lock on J-20 (considering it is truly what a LO fighter jet is supposed to be).

Detecting alone does not completes countering a 'Stealth' fighter. It needs to be neutralized. And only fighter to do this will be AMCA.

So again. The only real counter for J-20 is AMCA.

 

[asianobserve]

Let me complete your post.

Any MRCA(SE/ME) with much larger RCS and IR signature will be shoot down before it could even get a lock on J-20 (considering it is truly what a LO fighter jet is supposed to be).

Detecting alone does not completes countering a 'Stealth' fighter. It needs to be neutralized. And only fighter to do this will be AMCA.

So again. The only real counter for J-20 is AMCA.

Unfortunately, if Tejas is a sign of things to come for AMCA then you are looking at another 20 year development process, without any guarantee that it will produce a reliable 5th gen platform.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Unfortunately, if Tejas is a sign of things to come for AMCA then you are looking at another 20 year development process, without any guarantee that it will produce a reliable 5th gen platform.

Tejas is indeed signs of things to come. Those are:

A. Ability to develop a 4 channel FCS fighter from scratch without any mid-flight incident till date.

B. Ability to get Tejas manufactured with composite materials which is maximum by skin percentage and greater by overall percentage in comparison to its contemporaries..

C. Ability to conduct over 4000 flights with 3000 hrs in the air without a single loss. Which includes highly risky high AoA testing.

D. Everything has been done without any prior experience and even without most of the infrastructure and minuscule funding and political support.

Point is if Tejas can be done with all the difficulties that can be thrown at it. Then today, after Tejas, AMCA is much better placed. IAF has realised it, so it is backing it completely so much so that it does not mind dropping FGFA(PAK-FA) altogether.

 

[asianobserve]

Tejas is indeed signs of things to come. Those are:

A. Ability to develop a 4 channel FCS fighter from scratch without any mid-flight incident till date.

B. Ability to get Tejas manufactured with composite materials which is maximum by skin percentage and greater by overall percentage in comparison to its contemporaries..

C. Ability to conduct over 4000 flights with 3000 hrs in the air without a single loss. Which includes highly risky high AoA testing.

D. Everything has been done without any prior experience and even without most of the infrastructure and minuscule funding and political support.

Point is if Tejas can be done with all the difficulties that can be thrown at it. Then today, after Tejas, AMCA is much better placed. IAF has realised it, so it is backing it completely so much so that it does not mind dropping FGFA(PAK-FA) altogether.

Those are indeed lofty words, it fattens your heart, still it does not change the fact that Tejas is woefully inadequate as a combat platform. It only goes to show that a fighter is still way too complex for it to do at the moment.

Perhaps India should adopt the Israeli model. Buy existing fighters and indigenize it to the extent that you essentially get a brand new and almost unique fighter. But when you say indigenize it means installing Indian critical systems not more imports.

India should focus instead on developing critical systems like radars, SAMs (no matter how advanced S-400 is it is still a compromised weapons system as far as India is concerned since Russia has also supplied China with it), A2A missiles, A2G missiles, new generation bombs, tanks, artilleries, small arms, night vision systems, etc.

Maybe 30 years from now if India has already enough experience in indigenization and developing other critical systems then it can already start developing its own almost 100% fighter, by then it would already be 6th gen. What I'm saying is India should be more prudent, patient and practical, and take a long look at the process of fighter development.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Those are indeed lofty words, it fattens your heart, still it does not change the fact that Tejas is woefully inadequate as a combat platform. It only goes to show that a fighter is still way too complex for it to do at the moment.

I don't know. Maybe it is, maybe it is not. But the obvious thing is the confidence that IAF has shown in the capabilities of the developers of Tejas wrt to its attitude towards AMCA. Something designers have earned though Tejas project.

As far as the limitation of Tejas is concerned. Well, whatever limitations that are usually spoken of are associated with the size of the airframe. The airframe which was selected for specifically replacing Mig-21s.

Today Tejas is much more than a replacement for Mig-21. Hence proving capabilities of the designers who are presently involved in the development of AMCA.

As far as capabilities of Tejas are concerned. Well, it has been spoken to be one of the best among its contemporaries many times by no less than pilots who have flown it and are flying it. People whose opinions about it matters most.

Perhaps the India should adopt the Israeli model. Buy existing fighters and indigenize it to the extent that you essentially get a brand new and almost unique fighter.

There is no such model. In past Israelis had attempted to develop its own fighter called LAVI. But had to abandon it under pressure from US, which acted for protecting commercial prospects of its F-16. Isreal being heavily dependent on the USA for everything had no option but to restrict itself.

Besides customization of foreign airframes with indigenously developed systems is not something we are not doing already. Jaguar upgrade, SU-30MKI. With the passage of time, indigenous content will further improve.

India should focus on developing critical systems like radars, SAMs (no matter how advanced S-400 is it is still a compromised weapons system as far as India is concerned since Russia has also supplied China with it), A2A missiles.

Already doing!

 

[Sancho]

Detecting alone does not completes countering a 'Stealth' fighter. It needs to be neutralized. And only fighter to do this will be AMCA.

Wrong, if you can detect it, the engagement is the same, no matter of you have a 4.5th or a 5th gen fighter.

 

[asianobserve]

Wrong, if you can detect it, the engagement is the same, no matter of you have a 4.5th or a 5th gen fighter.

Stealth technology results in shorter detection ranges against 5th gen fighters versus 4th or so called 4.5th gen fighters. This is especially true when 4th or so called 4.5th gen fighters are laden with missiles, bombs, EFTs and sensors that further magnifies their radar signatures.

This means that stealth fighters have a very significant tactical advantage in A2A and A2G engagements. They can dictate how the fight will unfold. As I said we are back in the 1970's USSR conundrum: should it improve and build more Mig-21s to counter the new American 4th gen teen series (F-14s, F-15s and F-16s) or build 4th gen fighters of their own (albeit, more complicated and expensive than their current Mig-21s). Just imagine if the USSR opted for improving and building more Mig-21s...

 

[Sancho]

Stealth technology results in shorter detection ranges against 5th gen fighters

No it doesn't, since for the detection, only the capability of the sonsors are important, not what kind of airframe you have.

 

[asianobserve]

No it doesn't, since for the detection, only the capability of the sonsors are important, not what kind of airframe you have.

The sensors of F-35 is way more advanced than any 4th or 4.5th gen out there. Besides, at BVR the primary sensor to detect opposing aircraft is radar. If a 4th gen is up against a 5th gen fighter the former's radar detection range is way shorter than the latter granting their radars were of the same performance. Hence, 5th gen can see and shoot first versus 4th or so called 4.5th gen fighters. And in air combat the first to see gets the first shot.

 

[Sancho]

The sensors of F-35 is way more advanced than any 4th or 4.5th gen out there.

No they are not, it uses AESA radar, passive IR sensors and RWR, just as any 4.5th gen fighter. The only difference is the stealth airframe, which however doesn't help you to detect the enemy.

If the Gripen E or EF would fly next to an F35, towards Chinese fighters, they would detect enemies in the same manner. The only difference is, the detection range (dependent on size and power of the radar) and the Field of Regard (dependent on the use of repositioned or side arrays). So a larger F35 radar might have more range to detect the enemy than a Gripen E, but in a far narrower area. The Gripen E can scan the larger volume, besides that it has an actual IRST, not some downgrade capabilities.

That's why all that counts to "detect" enemy stealth fighters, is the capability of your sensors and not to be stealthy.

 

[darshan978]

Wrong, if you can detect it, the engagement is the same, no matter of you have a 4.5th or a 5th gen fighter.

lolwa ..............................................

 

[darshan978]

No it doesn't, since for the detection, only the capability of the sonsors are important, not what kind of airframe you have.

hey so called defense expert 5th gen fighter wil be detected by any fighter at around 10 to 20 km with current radar tech on fighter jets but 4 gen or 4.5gen fighter will be detected earlier so there will be no engagement lol 5th gen fighter will shoot down your gripen e , f16 or Rafael or any 4.5gen so called fighter

 

[Sancho]

hey so called defense expert 5th gen fighter wil be detected by any fighter at around 10 to 20 km with current radar tech on fighter jets but 4 gen or 4.5gen fighter will be detected earlier so there will be no engagement lol 5th gen fighter will shoot down your gripen e , f16 or Rafael or any 4.5gen so called fighter

Why don't you read up the discussion first, to understand the topic before you reply to something you evidently didn't understand?

The point was not when stealth and non stealth fighters detect each other, but if an AMCA can detect a J20 earlier than an MMRCA. Since both use the same AESA technology, or passive sensors, all that differs is the performance of the sensors. That's why the counter to stealth is improving radar and passive sensors. GaN radars and RWR, long range spherical IR detection, proper long range IRST and most of that is 4.5th gen technology.

 

[Armand2REP]

hey so called defense expert 5th gen fighter wil be detected by any fighter at around 10 to 20 km with current radar tech on fighter jets but 4 gen or 4.5gen fighter will be detected earlier so there will be no engagement lol 5th gen fighter will shoot down your gripen e , f16 or Rafael or any 4.5gen so called fighter

Not really because IR sensors can pick it up at BVR ranges. The F-22 does not have very good thermal reduction. A BVRAAM like IR Mica would be plenty to take it out at range.

 

[Tactical Frog]

Rafale, Gripen, Typhoon, were never meant to counter true 5 th generation fighters for the good reason that the only one in service anywhere in the world was the F-22. They were supposed to deal with the Su 30- 35 family and other 4 th generation jets.

No need to panic about J-20 yet. It is unlikely it comes even remotely close from F-22 in terms of stealth , and its sensors are most definitely way inferior to those of Rafale, especially FSO. Rafale can dodge a few incoming Chinese AA missiles . Can J-20 dodge Meteor ? Game is on .

 

[Sancho]

Rafale, Gripen, Typhoon, were never meant to counter true 5 th generation fighters

They were meant to counter Su 35, but the systems they employed are the same systems that US fighters now upgrade to counter stealth fighters. Modern IR sensors and advanced RWR.

 

[Sancho]

Translated

Saab reveals Finland's price for its fighters - the promise of a completely different class than the F-35 that conquered Europe

Replacing the existing 64 Hornet fighters in Finland for Saab's new Gripen E / F fighters would cost around EUR 10 billion in 30 years, says Magnus Skogberg, a Swedish company HX campaign.

The price can be considered very low in the range of fighters, as Finland has reserved only € 7-10 billion for the acquisition of new fighters. Maintenance, software updates, and other lifecycle costs can even triple the total purchase cost.

-We do not have any problems with 64 fighters in that cost. We have a good margin for 10 billion, which is the bottom of that fork, Skogberg says to New Finland.

-It means that it's not terribly wrong to say that the cost of about 10 billion is the size class for Gripen throughout the life cycle.

This would mean that the other lifecycle costs of the machine would be only one-third of the total purchase of Gripen, when usually the relationship may be reversed.

Gripen is one of the five types of fighter equipment offered to Finland. In addition, the HX project includes American F-35 and F / A-18 Super Hornet, French Dassault Rafale, and Eurofighter Typhoon, a British-based European co-worker.

In recent years, acquisitions in Europe in Britain, Holland, Italy, Norway and Denmark have already come to an end with the F-35 fighter equipped with deluxe features. It has also been estimated to be the most expensive option in the competition as a whole. US President Donald Trump complained before the inauguration of the plane's costs for the blind .

The Norwegian Ministry of Defense has estimated that the acquisition of 52 F-35 fighters will cost about EUR 7.6 billion, estimated at the 2015 rate. The 30 year lifecycle costs, namely maintenance, upgrade, and operating costs, increase the price to 28.6 billion euros...

https://www.uusisuomi.fi/kotimaa/24...i-luokkaa-kuin-eurooppaa#.WocPFelY998.twitter