Rafale versus Sukhoi 30--which is your favourite?

[Ray]

The Difference Between 4th and 5th Gen EW
The Difference Between 4th and 5th Gen EW | Intercepts | Defense News

 

[santosh10]

@santosh10, Dassault is NOT interested in technology transfer, this is the reason for so much 'nautanki'. So let us start with calling a spade a spade.

Now the issue is IAF has been clamouring for Rafale like an obstinate child. What is GOI to do with HAL unable to ramp up on Tejas??

sg, we generally talk, for any key operations, 10 Rafale + 10 LCA mech 2 standard, would produce as good result as 20 Rafale for any multi role operations. ....

and with higher side of upgrading of LCA to raising it above the mech 2 standard, we see 36 Rafale + 90 LCA mech 2 would be as good as 126 Rafale for any multi role air field operation as whole .... :thumb:

 

[santosh10]

The Difference Between 4th and 5th Gen EW
[//intercepts.defensenews.com/2014/10/the-difference-between-4th-and-5th-gen-ew/]The Difference Between 4th and 5th Gen EW | Intercepts | Defense Newsl]

sir, first we talk like a 'lay man' while discussing about an arm. and that is, "until an arm come in full operation, tested in war scenario too, all the claims of superiority is just in air. all bluffs...."

the so called 5th gen F22, with closed to 100% stealthy features if its armed with limited weapons, and US used it as a "strategic deterrence" only during the 90s.....

i always made an argument, "how did US developed a twine engine 5th gen aircraft, the F22, which had achieved its 'fitness landscape' in 90s itself, 'the minimum expected performance', while its still struggling to achieve IOC of its single engine F35 after 20 years since then????"
(you have worked in defence industry too, regardless how competent technologies have been introduced, we do know the difference between twine and single engine aircraft, isn't it? dont we know the basic difference between even single engine SAB Grippen and twine engine Mig35/Mig29VOT?)

=>

It's not difficult to see why the Navy might want to hedge the Pentagon's bet on the F-35. According to the GAO, the F-35 program—already plagued by cost overruns and delays—added an additional $4.3 billion to its overall price tag last year. Originally slated to join the combat fleet in 2012, the same report estimates the Marine Corps. variant won't reach initial operating capability—IOC in industry parlance—until this summer at the soonest. The Navy's aircraft carrier-capable version, the F-35C, won't reach IOC until at least 2018. And keep in mind that IOC describes the minimally deployable form of a capability or technology, not a fully developed combat platform. :ranger:

//fortune.com/2015/03/18/f35-joint-strike-fighter/

we never expected US to have its numbers like F16s, as it was never worth. US's manufactures always claimed that this twine engine aircraft F22 are very expansive, priced over $250 a bird, while even the latest single engine F35/JSF has price tag for well over $220 for its any NATO ally......

this 5th gen aircraft, and its publicity, all are fake, until they come on a proper operation, preferably on war scenario. while on paper, the only 5th gen aircraft in producton line, the F35/JSF, is compared with 4++ birds in the language as below
(this is the same SU30mki/SU-35, discussed in this thread)

Part of the presentation showed a computer simulation which calculated that the F-35 would be consistently defeated by the Russian-made SU-35 fighter aircraft. The defeat calculated by the scenario also showed the loss of the F-35's supporting airborne-early warning and air-to-air refueling aircraft. :ranger:

f-16.net/f-35-news-article4416.html

.

=> there was always enough reasons for Australia to buy more '4++' Super Hornets, until production line of F35/JSF is matured

Australia's A$ 10+ billion Super Hornet program began life in a storm. Australia's involvement in the F-35 Lightning II program have been mired in controversy, amid criticisms that the F-35A will (1) be unable to compete with proliferating SU-30 family fighters in the region, (2) lack the range or response time that Australia requires, and (3) be both late and very expensive during early production years.


defenseindustrydaily.com/australia-to-buy-24-super-hornets-as-interim-gapfiller-to-jsf-02898/

AUSTRALIA will almost certainly be forced to buy 24 new Super Hornet fighter planes at a cost of about $2 billion to plug a looming gap in its air defences amid delays in the purchase of the cutting-edge Joint Strike Fighter.

According to a leaked draft of the 2013 defence white paper, just two Lockheed Martin JSFs will be delivered to Australia by 2020.

The opposition defence spokesman, David Johnston, said the government had broken its pledge in the 2009 white paper to buy 100 JSFs, which would have "provided regional domination out to 2030". :ranger:

smh.com.au/national/defence-set-to-buy-super-hornets-over-cuttingedge-fighter-20130127-2df02.html

 

[Ray]

@santosh10

I did what best I could do.

I am not an aviation expert or an expert in ANY field.

As good as the next man Jack.

 

[santosh10]

@santosh10

I did what best I could do.

I am not an aviation expert or an expert in ANY field.

As good as the next man Jack.

sir we both have the same category, i myself try not to discuss technical specifications in details, we lack any expertise here, true...

little bit AESA radar, bit more about the size-speed-ferry range, .... not much i discuss, other than some logical arguments....

=> @sgarg

the very first criterion to fall among the '4++' aircraft, is to have AESA radar, commonly accepted...... has any of the Chinese aircraft, including J10, got this radar yet????? while the size of AESA radar, how powerful the Chinese one going to be, is also another issue :ranger:

 

[sgarg]

@santosh10, I do not like berating Chinese fighters. Just because Chinese are not fighting a war, does not mean Chinese cannot build a good plane. I would take PLAAF very seriously.

This is the reason I prefer to compare overall numbers of similar technology planes. The following numbers (taken from Wiki) are relevant for India:

J11 - 205
J10 - 240
Su-30MKK - 73
Su-27 - 75

Even if a third of the above inventory is used against India, this is like 200 very capable fighters.

There is very good reason for IAF and GOI to be worried, when "aid" from both USA and China is reaching Pakistan in the form of free F-16 and JF-17.

 

[santosh10]

@santosh10, I do not like berating Chinese fighters. Just because Chinese are not fighting a war, does not mean Chinese cannot build a good plane. I would take PLAAF very seriously.

This is the reason I prefer to compare overall numbers of similar technology planes. The following numbers (taken from Wiki) are relevant for India:

J11 - 205
J10 - 240
Su-30MKK - 73
Su-27 - 75

Even if a third of the above inventory is used against India, this is like 200 very capable fighters.

There is very good reason for IAF and GOI to be worried, when "aid" from both USA and China is reaching Pakistan in the form of free F-16 and JF-17.

i clear it bit more. as per your post#34, i just answered that there is 'none' of Chinese Aircraft, fall among the '4++' category like Rafale or EFT Typhoon

and i also asked you a question, has China developed AESA radar, widely accepted as the first measure of '4++' aircrafts? along with its size, and how powerful radar they developed, and whether that radar is ready to be working with any of their top gun, J10?

from here, J11, a 'clone' of Su27s of 80s, is hardly compared with F16 block30/ Mig29k, a true 4th gen aircraft of 80s

i would upgrade J10s to '4+' category, but certainly its not as good as the same '4+' category F16 block52 or '4+' Mirage2000-5mk2, we may discuss it also ....

China's Su-30MKK again fall among the '4+' gen aircraft, similar to the India's Su30s bought by late 90s, which has been upgraded too to '4++' Super Sukhoi standard

Su-27, which were cloned by China to J11, is again a true 4th gen aircraft, of comparable to F16 block30 and Mig29k of its time of 80s, hardly

 

[santosh10]

@Ray

you have mastery on the issues related to CHina, how you see my evaluation of their combat birds? post#47

 

[Ray]

@Ray

you have mastery in the issues related to CHina, how you see my evaluation of their combat birds? post#47

I am not into aircraft.

I am satisfied if it delivers.

 

[arya]

We are in sleeping mode till now modi has to act fast he is good but nation need more China is serious future problem they will get su35 and new missle battery from Russia . we are runing slowly god some one give a slap on babu's face

 

[archie]

Both are of different categories

SU 30 MKI is mainly an air superiority platform.

Rafale is mainly a deep strike aircraft.

MKI is an Multirole platform .. What exactly do you mean strike?? Rafael cant even fly as far or as long as MKI .. MKI would be able to reach further inside enemy territory than Rafale.

 

[SajeevJino]

MKI is an Multirole platform .. What exactly do you mean strike?? Rafael cant even fly as far or as long as MKI .. MKI would be able to reach further inside enemy territory than Rafale.

sir do you know lo-lo-lo

 

[archie]

sir do you know lo-lo-lo

Low flying profile of a mission

Are you saying su-30MKI is not capable to such low flying mission?

My Hypostisis is if it cant even fly as long range as it can what good is it in a strike role? Mki woule be able to fend off with its Air to Air capabiliy and drop mutions with its sir to ground capability. With 10 T of fuel it might be able to stay on station for some time

 

[Srinivas_K]

For low flying missions recently upgraded mirages can be used.

 

[Khagesh]

For Su-30MKI the Maximum flight range (with 2xR-27R1, 2xR-73E launched at half distance), at sea level the quoted range is 1270 km, while at height (most probably at around 11-12 km height) 3000 km
I am expecting this to be done at around 0.7 mach almost the same as below for Rafale

Sukhoi Company (JSC) - Airplanes - Military Aircraft - Su-30ÌÊ - Aircraft performance


For Rafale the Dassult pdf says:

Endurance is excellent, even at low-level where we can fly at 450 knots for 1 h 30 min in a clean configuration.

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/08/Fox_Three_nr_8.pdf


So that would be around 600 km round trip for Rafale, with added perk of sight-seeing. :thumb:

 

[sgarg]

@Khagesh, who in his right mind will fly Rafale at tree-top level? It is a goddamn 120M plane!
Lo-lo missions will be flown by Jaguars and Mig-27 (and LCA if it is available in numbers).

Rafale in India will be in the same slot as Su-30.

 

[Khagesh]

Yup nobody would.

What use is the goddamned AESA, Data fusion, IRST, datalink if you are only gonna fly like a fast airborne Tank.

I wrote it only because it was asked and I figured it will be 'appreciated' .

 

[Srinivas_K]

MKI is an Multirole platform .. What exactly do you mean strike?? Rafael cant even fly as far or as long as MKI .. MKI would be able to reach further inside enemy territory than Rafale.

MKI becomes effective when the guidance system is upgraded to that of Mirage or Rafale level.

Rafale and Mirage are the best when it comes to flying low undetected to the enemy radars and striking the targets with accuracy and precession. When the targets are down they can climb to high altitude at a quicker rate because of delta wing and come back.

Su 30 MKI needs upgrades in this regards, But MKI is best suited for air superiority. Sukhois can take on enemy aircrafts while the strike fighter jets are on their way to their targets.

Rafale can strike the targets as well as effectively dog fight. Add to that the missiles and technologies that are integrated to Rafale which gives an edge over other fighters.

I heard that Rafale can fly at 20 m (approx) above the ground for 900 KM with minimal effort needing from the pilot, such is the terrain hugging capability of this jet.

For Su 30 MKI to achieve that, it require upgrades in it radar, guidance and weapons package.

 

[archie]

MKI becomes effective when the guidance system is upgraded to that of Mirage or Rafale level.

Rafale and Mirage are the best when it comes to flying low undetected to the enemy radars and striking the targets with accuracy and precession. When the targets are down they can climb to high altitude at a quicker rate because of delta wing and come back.

Su 30 MKI needs upgrades in this regards, But MKI is best suited for air superiority. Sukhois can take on enemy aircrafts while the strike fighter jets are on their way to their targets.

Rafale can strike the targets as well as effectively dog fight. Add to that the missiles and technologies that are integrated to Rafale which gives an edge over other fighters.

I heard that Rafale can fly at 20 m (approx) above the ground for 900 KM with minimal effort needing from the pilot, such is the terrain hugging capability of this jet.

For Su 30 MKI to achieve that, it require upgrades in it radar, guidance and weapons package.

First off Rafael

F1 standard was pure Air to air
F2 included air to ground and recon capability
F3 is Nuke capable (Curent standard)

Only advantage is terrain mapping radar thats just one component(that gives a + not an absolute that same radar can be incorporated into Su30 if need be)

Wepons SU30 MKI has the capacity to take a whole load of mutions Guided , Unguided and it can be modified just as how bahamos was intergrated that will never happen for Rafel
with Thrust to weight ratio of 1.0 its as good as rafel.

Air-to-surface missiles:
3 × Kh-59ME TV guided standoff Missile, 115 km
3 × Kh-59MK active radar homing anti-ship missile, 285 km
4 × Kh-35 anti-ship missile, 130 km
6 × Kh-31P/A anti-radar missile, 70 km
6 × Kh-29T/L laser-guided missile, 30 km
4 × S-8 rocket pods (80 unguided rockets)
4 × S-13 rocket pods (20 unguided rockets)

VS

MBDA Apache or
Storm Shadow-SCALP EG or
AASM-Hammer or
GBU-12 Paveway II or GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II
GBU-24 Paveway III
AS-30L

Can you tell me launching brahmos in air to land mode .. is that strike mission or Air-Air combat mission??

All that aside Rafel carrying drop tanks and mutions is not going to give the performance that is advertised and either way its range is way lower than that of SU30-MKI which is a bigger aircraft carrying more fuel all intenally
For the price they are offering its not worth the perfomance it gives . SU 30 can do the same job. For the price of a singe Rafel you can probably upgrade 2 more SU30-MKI to super sukoi standard with Zhuk radar

All i am saying here is SU-30MKI is a versatile Multi Role platform and not just a Air superiority fighter . SU-27 was designed as one but has grown to be a multirole aircraft. Just as Rafel that started in the design as being air dominace fighter and then became a multi role aircraft(Omni Role is a marketing term)

BTW im sure Su-30 MKI can fly at 20 m

 

[SajeevJino]

For Su-30MKI the Maximum flight range (with 2xR-27R1, 2xR-73E launched at half distance), at sea level the quoted range is 1270 km, while at height (most probably at around 11-12 km height) 3000 km

Sir that is Range, combat radius is better

For Rafale the Dassult pdf says:

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/08/Fox_Three_nr_8.pdf


So that would be around 600 km round trip for Rafale, with added perk of sight-seeing. :thumb:

Sir this is not we call Round trip, It's combat Radius