Sukhoi Su 30MKI

[Heat]

Tejas just completed it's 4000th flight without any accident in its flight history , even though it is a single engine platform.

Given that Tejas is a platform completely designed and manufactured under the supervision of HAL , it would be foolish to blame HAL entirely for failures of Russian twin-engined platforms.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Depends on the quality you're looking for. No western jet can match a Russian jet in terms of sheer manoeuvrability but then again, muricans are lay emphasis on Energy fighting ever since Zeros whooped their asses in WWII.

No, it actually depends on what aspect of agility you looking at, if we looking at post stall maneuver then sure, Russian aircraft surpass their American counterpart thanks to their TVC, but if we looking at something like acceleration, roll rate, sustain turn rate then no. For example: sustained turn rate at low altitude of F-16 with DI=0 is better than most
Manual data: (pay attention to the curve with Ps=0)
F-16C sustained turn rate top out at 23°/s

F-15, Su-27 sustained turn rate top out at 22°/s

Su30 can make almost instantaneous 180 degree turn and fly in the opposite direction whereas all other planes will need to take a round circle. If it detects a missile incoming, it can simply do pugachev's cobra and run back while other planes have to do big circles

No it can't
that not how it work. Pugachev's cobra change your nose pointing but it doesn't change your direction of travel, you only momentarily pitch very high AoA to slow down your aircraft

It can be helpful to gain firing solution in some turning fight, but you can't instantaneous flying in the opposite direction

Of course, there are maneuvers that allow you to kinda spin your aircraft in a circle but there are Western aircraft that can do that too. With that being said, post-stall maneuver are horrible if you want to dodge missiles because you basically deplete all your energy.

https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/EnchantingFarflungGrison

 

[binayak95]

What a class act clown ! Of the seven crashes of Su30MKIs, four, FOUR, were due to faulty fly by wire system! Sukhoi availability rates were fucking abysmal. Barely 40-47% of the fleet was available for duties at a time and even amongst them they had issues with pylons malfunctioning and ECM faults. Have you ever talked to an IAF pilot?

The situation improved when IAF and HAL decided to fabricate Spares in house and not depend on Russians who were looting us for poor quality products. Bloody wrenches bought from them cost us 2 lakh each.

And about the navy, you know nothing! It's not easy to maintain 24*7 deployment across the entire IOR ! We have managed to pull it off and maintain a standing force force for emergency tasking and dispatching ships to take part in exercises in far waters. And what accidents? Navy's safety record speaks for itself.

And stop vaunting the Russians. Hardly 10% of their Navy is operational. Their carrier breaks down every 50 nautical miles. Their pilots barely get any flight time. And even then manage to crash birds on a regular basis.

Blaming others has become the first response nowadays.
general opinion on Russian jets and western jets is that Russian built plan like a tank ( Su25 ) they can land on nonpaved runways, can be operated from uncleaned bases. still, some people see them maintenance unfriendly! unlike western plans which are like fine watches. America brought billions of dollar machinery to support their campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq why, if they were maintenance friendly? recently we have not seen the significant problem with Russian equipment in Syria so using the word like 'horrible' is a little exaggeration. by the way in Indian context maintenance means you are not taking care of equipment lying in your backyard properly and it could be anything
I am not only blaming IAF or Navy alone but the majority of the blame goes to them because of their attitude of looking at things from the sky
At the one side, our arm forces cry for the shortage of weapons and squadrons ( not including Army ) while another side frequent occurrence of accidents and mishaps then blaming others if somebody points a finger towards you then just say "it is even happening everywhere'. rather than sitting with DRDO/HAL to solve the problem they prefer to run for foreign equipment and after some time they say Dud to the very same foreign equipment

 

[vishnugupt]

You don't need to worry about ancient history. You can look at the last decade of combat operations across the world. France is second only to the US and far above Russia or anyone else in combat hours. We do it without high crash rates or fatalities because our equipment is of high quality. Russian air bases are only a few hundred clicks from their combat area while French fighters must fly thousands of kilometres to complete their operations and do so with far less failure rates even adding aerial refueling to the mission. Killing thousands of Islamic fundamentalists is lip service to you but it is saving lives to the people on the ground and the people of France who have suffered the horrors of that terrorism. Your point was not relevant as it is a brand new aircraft far from needing its first servicing and not even entered into IAF. That is where your argument lost validity and why Russia is to be blamed. Russia has engineers at HAL hired to do QC checks before induction so stop pretending they have no fault.

First of all, I am sorry for calling you Naive in the previous reply
The discussion was not about French plans or equipment. no doubt they are sophisticated. but one can not say that Russian weapons are just junk. given that large territory and number of plans, Russian jets cover more distance than french on the daily basis and frequently strikes in Syria from bases lie deep in Russia so there is no reason to believe that your flight hours are more than Russia. NATO mission more or less concentrated on the strategic positions where they can halt SAA advance. your claim of killing thousands of Terrorist is unfunded contrary to the fact you are, in fact, helping them ( that's why I called it a lip service ). On fatality point of view, NATO does not opt for the risky missions they just send " nice and smart missiles" which only 80% of them made to reach their destination ( 80%, when Russian equipment are not maintenance friendly otherwise it would have been approximately 100% )
People suffering everywhere because of terrorism !
But I object to your last sentence. Imagine, that we are buying Russian plan in knockdown kits assembling them under the supervision of Russian expert and then Again Russian do quality check ?? then the question comes in mind that what HAL do?? actually, they only assist whenever we ask for. No country will involve another country at this magnitude where everything is running by seller especially in defence ( except Islamic countries )

 

[aditya10r]

What a class act clown ! Of the seven crashes of Su30MKIs, four, FOUR, were due to faulty fly by wire system! Sukhoi availability rates were fucking abysmal. Barely 40-47% of the fleet was available for duties at a time and even amongst them they had issues with pylons malfunctioning and ECM faults. Have you ever talked to an IAF pilot?

The situation improved when IAF and HAL decided to fabricate Spares in house and not depend on Russians who were looting us for poor quality products. Bloody wrenches bought from them cost us 2 lakh each.

And about the navy, you know nothing! It's not easy to maintain 24*7 deployment across the entire IOR ! We have managed to pull it off and maintain a standing force force for emergency tasking and dispatching ships to take part in exercises in far waters. And what accidents? Navy's safety record speaks for itself.

And stop vaunting the Russians. Hardly 10% of their Navy is operational. Their carrier breaks down every 50 nautical miles. Their pilots barely get any flight time. And even then manage to crash birds on a regular basis.

Bhai isse puchna,kaha se aisa mast quality ganja lata hai.

=========================================================

 

[vishnugupt]

What a class act clown ! Of the seven crashes of Su30MKIs, four, FOUR, were due to faulty fly by wire system! Sukhoi availability rates were fucking abysmal. Barely 40-47% of the fleet was available for duties at a time and even amongst them they had issues with pylons malfunctioning and ECM faults. Have you ever talked to an IAF pilot?

The situation improved when IAF and HAL decided to fabricate Spares in house and not depend on Russians who were looting us for poor quality products. Bloody wrenches bought from them cost us 2 lakh each.

And about the navy, you know nothing! It's not easy to maintain 24*7 deployment across the entire IOR ! We have managed to pull it off and maintain a standing force force for emergency tasking and dispatching ships to take part in exercises in far waters. And what accidents? Navy's safety record speaks for itself.

And stop vaunting the Russians. Hardly 10% of their Navy is operational. Their carrier breaks down every 50 nautical miles. Their pilots barely get any flight time. And even then manage to crash birds on a regular basis.

Sukhoi has low availability because of the scarcity of spare parts and after new agrrement, HAL bought it in good quantity so availablity increased to nearly 70%. so tell me where is fault ? Tell me about F-35 , F- 22 availability? (Typhoon failed miserably in Libya ) Chinese made 5th generation plan still buying Su35 for a reason.
India has an almost same contract as Chines has for SU-30s ( TOT, Third party integration) but the difference is Chinese indigenized all its part while we are more or less a screwdriver
maintaining 24*7 deployment, that is why we call them professional or experts but most of the mishap happened on dockyard shows lack of professionalism
Look at investigations, most of the time they failed to specify the exact reason of accident
Lastly, thank god you allowed Russian to sit in the cockpit before crashing the bird. do people believe Russia is so dysfunctional state?? who kicks east and west on same time when 90% their Navy and Airforce are useless No sane military expert has never cast a doubt on the capability of Russia defence but here, you are not counting them even equal to Finland.
Again, I am telling you. Failure is a Chain reaction many people can be held responsible but every time you blame others not looking at yourself, is wrong. Largely we are at fault.

 

[vishnugupt]

Bhai isse puchna,kaha se aisa mast quality ganja lata hai.

=========================================================

hahaha..... Ganza stand nowhere when you are high on westen Propagenda

 

[binayak95]

I am going to ignore you. You quite clearly believe that the sun shines out of Putin's rear so no real point in arguing with you. But one last time, IAF is Fabricating it's spares. Understand what that means?


About Russian Navy:
https://southfront.org/russian-navy-problems-with-soviet-ship-upgrades/

The above article is form a Russian expert a bit like from the horse's mouth
https://www.businessinsider.in/Russ...lagued-with-problems/articleshow/63805021.cms

https://warisboring.com/the-russian-navy-is-on-the-verge-of-collapse/

Of about 270 ships on paper, only 45 are sea going ships and submarines in good shape.

In the strikes against Syria, can you name the ship classes involved? No you can't, because anyone who would have made the attempt to understand would have immediately understood the serious problems that bereft the Russian Fleet.

India operates the world's largest fleet of SU30s. I believe we have more experience with the bird than the Russians can hope to achieve in the next 10 years. Their Su30SMs are a derivative of our MKIs. We operate more T90T than the Russian Army. Their T14 Armata program is stalled. The vaunted Pakfa will never see operational service. Mark my words.

Sukhoi has low availability because of the scarcity of spare parts and after new agrrement, HAL bought it in good quantity so availablity increased to nearly 70%. so tell me where is fault ? Tell me about F-35 , F- 22 availability? (Typhoon failed miserably in Libya ) Chinese made 5th generation plan still buying Su35 for a reason.
India has an almost same contract as Chines has for SU-30s ( TOT, Third party integration) but the difference is Chinese indigenized all its part while we are more or less a screwdriver
maintaining 24*7 deployment, that is why we call them professional or experts but most of the mishap happened on dockyard shows lack of professionalism
Look at investigations, most of the time they failed to specify the exact reason of accident
Lastly, thank god you allowed Russian to sit in the cockpit before crashing the bird. do people believe Russia is so dysfunctional state?? who kicks east and west on same time when 90% their Navy and Airforce are useless No sane military expert has never cast a doubt on the capability of Russia defence but here, you are not counting them even equal to Finland.
Again, I am telling you. Failure is a Chain reaction many people can be held responsible but every time you blame others not looking at yourself, is wrong. Largely we are at fault.

 

[vishnugupt]

I am going to ignore you. You quite clearly believe that the sun shines out of Putin's rear so no real point in arguing with you. But one last time, IAF is Fabricating it's spares. Understand what that means?


About Russian Navy:
https://southfront.org/russian-navy-problems-with-soviet-ship-upgrades/

The above article is form a Russian expert a bit like from the horse's mouth
https://www.businessinsider.in/Russ...lagued-with-problems/articleshow/63805021.cms

https://warisboring.com/the-russian-navy-is-on-the-verge-of-collapse/

Of about 270 ships on paper, only 45 are sea going ships and submarines in good shape.

In the strikes against Syria, can you name the ship classes involved? No you can't, because anyone who would have made the attempt to understand would have immediately understood the serious problems that bereft the Russian Fleet.

India operates the world's largest fleet of SU30s. I believe we have more experience with the bird than the Russians can hope to achieve in the next 10 years. Their Su30SMs are a derivative of our MKIs. We operate more T90T than the Russian Army. Their T14 Armata program is stalled. The vaunted Pakfa will never see operational service. Mark my words.

You have a serious problem of comprehension. How can you say I am praising Putin? Actually you are contradicting yourself
There is atleast two occasion Russian fleet attacked with cruise missiles, one from Caspian sea and one from Mediterranean sea.
Do you really believe that We understand Su-30 more then Sukhoi company ?? Then what are Russian expert doing here in side HAL ??
Presently Russia struggling on economic front that's why things giving you a sense like programmes are stalling but surely no country is stupid they know their priority.
Like I said before , it is not about Russian or French. it's all about blame gaming and accepting mistakes

 

[Sancho]

The problem is not the sensor, AWACS can always get a bigger and better sensor to detect the stealth plane. The problem is those non-stealth fighter that carries hunting-killing missions. Their sensors are not better than those on the stealth plane. Before they are getting close enough to lock the stealth target with their own radar/sensors, the stealth plane generally already shoot out the AA missile and fly away.

Exactly and that's why I said you are wrong and that the counter a stealth fighter is not another fighter, but larger and more sensors.

 

[Armand2REP]

First of all, I am sorry for calling you Naive in the previous reply

You can call me any adjective you wish, it doesn't offend me. I am more disturbed by your lack of understanding of French combat actions in recent history. We do not have to look back to Napoleon to find military success. As a soldier who has fought and bled for France that is the greatest insult. I fought the war on terrorism off and on for 15 years, I would like to think my actions helped to make the world a safer place.

The discussion was not about French plans or equipment. no doubt they are sophisticated. but one can not say that Russian weapons are just junk. given that large territory and number of plans, Russian jets cover more distance than french on the daily basis and frequently strikes in Syria from bases lie deep in Russia so there is no reason to believe that your flight hours are more than Russia. NATO mission more or less concentrated on the strategic positions where they can halt SAA advance. your claim of killing thousands of Terrorist is unfunded contrary to the fact you are, in fact, helping them ( that's why I called it a lip service ). On fatality point of view, NATO does not opt for the risky missions they just send " nice and smart missiles" which only 80% of them made to reach their destination ( 80%, when Russian equipment are not maintenance friendly otherwise it would have been approximately 100% )

I think the record of Russian origin crashes per flight hour justifies my statement referring to Russian aviation products as "junk". They are four times more likely to crash than a French aircraft per flight hour. That is quite telling. Russia has several airbases in Syria, it is a very low percentage of combat sorties that originate outside of Syria proper. France has to fly from UAE for Rafale to get there or Jordan for Mirages. Fighters are not the only aviation products, also helicopters for Russia are not 100km from the action, in the Sahel French spec ops are flying 1000km regularly with aerial refueling and have a much safer record than Russian helicopters that are really their best aviation product.

Rafale and Mirage bombing Daesh are doing so with Paveway II and AASMs, it is not a cruise missile that you can launch from another country. Our fighters are going into the heart of the terrorist enclaves and loitering several hours on patrol for when airstrikes are called in. In order to put so many hours without incident you need quality engines, it is not something Russian fighters excel at. They go up from their base for 30 minutes then land again while a French sortie is half of the day.

People suffering everywhere because of terrorism !
But I object to your last sentence. Imagine, that we are buying Russian plan in knockdown kits assembling them under the supervision of Russian expert and then Again Russian do quality check ?? then the question comes in mind that what HAL do?? actually, they only assist whenever we ask for. No country will involve another country at this magnitude where everything is running by seller especially in defence ( except Islamic countries )

HAL does what they are paid to do. I think at this point most of the air-frame is fabricated by HAL but what comes in the kits are everything that isn't made in India, engines, flight controls ect. Russia has engineers at Nasik who conducts inspections and installation of some of these systems. You don't think that Russia would allow themselves to be held liable for work they didn't check do you? You will find these kinds of advisory positions in every license production agreement the world over again. There are representatives from Naval Group checking the Scorpenes, there are reps from Boeing checking the P-8s. Who is being naive?

 

[no smoking]

Exactly and that's why I said you are wrong and that the counter a stealth fighter is not another fighter, but larger and more sensors.

No, that is not what you said. You suggest the AWACS armed with larger and bigger sensors will be able to help forth generation fighter to counter a stealth fighter.
If your solution is to equip the F-15, Su-27 or J-10 with bigger and better sensors to make them capable of shooting first, the question is: there is nothing to stop stealth fighter from integrating the same level of sensors.
Based on today's technology, it is highly unlikely

 

[StealthFlanker]

Exactly and that's why I said you are wrong and that the counter a stealth fighter is not another fighter, but larger and more sensors.

If your solution is to have a bigger plane with bigger radar then I would have to say it is quite impractical. In real combat, there will be some sort of jamming employed by both side. When talking about jamming whether brute force or deceptive. You ALWAYS need to generate a certain level of J/S (jamming/signal) ratio for jamming to be effective

The calculation of J/S ratio is as follow:

As you can see, if J/S is kept constant, then the output power required for jammer and RCS of aircraft will be inversely proportional. In other words, for example: if you have an F-15 with RCS around 10 m2, and an F-35 with RCS around 0.001 m2. Then F-15 will need a jammer that is 10.000 times more powerful than F-35 to achieve same effectiveness. Another vital factor when discussing jamming effectiveness is distance. Since jamming signal only has to travel one way, as the distance get bigger, the jammer has more advantage than the radar because jamming signal decrease at a slower rate than aircraft reflection. In short: for self-protection jamming the further the jammer is from the threat radar, the easier it would be for that jammer to jam the radar. As you get closer, there will be a distance where radar signal is so powerful that your jammer can't reach the needed J/S ratio, and the radar effectively burn-through your jamming. This called the burn-through distance.

The relationship between burn-through and RCS is following

The photos tell it pretty nicely, in non jamming situation, conventional aircraft is already at a disadvantage regarding detection range, but in jamming situation, it come from bad to worse.
Ok, so how about using a big aircraft equipped with Home on Jam missiles ?. Well unfortunately, there are many ways to overcome HoJ missiles:
1-Blinking jamming

Blinking jamming is an effective jamming tactics against monopulse radar seeker and home on jam missiles. It causes line-of-sight angle to step continuously between the two angular positions through 2 jamming assets emitting by turns.The 2 assets can send returns to hostile radar at the rate close to servo bandwidth( typically a few Hz), this can cause resonate at radar target and result in large overshoot, if apply again HoJ missiles , it would cause missiles to yaw wildly and miss both targets.

2- Terrain bounce jamming

Normally the electromagnetic beam from jammer is transmitted toward the victim radar in a direct path thus,home-on-jam missiles will be able to track the angle(direction) of the jammer signal and fly at that direction. Terrain bounce tactic exploits the fact that ground/sea surface can reflect radio waves .Jammer operator will direct the jamming beam toward these surface instead of directly at the hostile radar so the jamming beam will come from a different direction from the actual jammer. As a result, this tactic can be used to trick HoJ into believing that the jammer located somewhere on the ground.

3-Expendable decoys

 

[Kshithij]

No, that is not what you said. You suggest the AWACS armed with larger and bigger sensors will be able to help forth generation fighter to counter a stealth fighter.
If your solution is to equip the F-15, Su-27 or J-10 with bigger and better sensors to make them capable of shooting first, the question is: there is nothing to stop stealth fighter from integrating the same level of sensors.
Based on today's technology, it is highly unlikely

If your solution is to have a bigger plane with bigger radar then I would have to say it is quite impractical. In real combat, there will be some sort of jamming employed by both side. When talking about jamming whether brute force or deceptive. You ALWAYS need to generate a certain level of J/S (jamming/signal) ratio for jamming to be effective

The calculation of J/S ratio is as follow:

As you can see, if J/S is kept constant, then the output power required for jammer and RCS of aircraft will be inversely proportional. In other words, for example: if you have an F-15 with RCS around 10 m2, and an F-35 with RCS around 0.001 m2. Then F-15 will need a jammer that is 10.000 times more powerful than F-35 to achieve same effectiveness. Another vital factor when discussing jamming effectiveness is distance. Since jamming signal only has to travel one way, as the distance get bigger, the jammer has more advantage than the radar because jamming signal decrease at a slower rate than aircraft reflection. In short: for self-protection jamming the further the jammer is from the threat radar, the easier it would be for that jammer to jam the radar. As you get closer, there will be a distance where radar signal is so powerful that your jammer can't reach the needed J/S ratio, and the radar effectively burn-through your jamming. This called the burn-through distance.

The relationship between burn-through and RCS is following

The photos tell it pretty nicely, in non jamming situation, conventional aircraft is already at a disadvantage regarding detection range, but in jamming situation, it come from bad to worse.
Ok, so how about using a big aircraft equipped with Home on Jam missiles ?. Well unfortunately, there are many ways to overcome HoJ missiles:
1-Blinking jamming

2- Terrain bounce jamming

3-Expendable decoys

The idea is to use ground based radars and AEWACS which are much more powerful than jet based radar, not use more powerful radar on another jet. If the other jet can employ a more powerful radar, the stealth jet also can employ the same. But no jet can employ a radar that can match the ground or AEWACS radar that can have power in Megawatts and track everything clearly. This is how stealth planes are to be intercepted. It is possible to intercept stealth planes only on your own territory and not on enemy territory as ground radar and AEWACs need protection

 

[StealthFlanker]

But no jet can employ a radar that can match the ground or AEWACS radar that can have power in Megawatts and track everything clearly.

The thing is, they don't have to.
Stealth aircraft only need to detect IADS radar/AWACS before they are detected. And while AWACS have much more powerful radar, their RCS is also much bigger. One thing people always forget, you do not need to have a jammer more powerful than the radar to jam it. That why tiny jammer like RT-1489/ALE, BRITECLOUD, ALE-55, ALE-70 can work even though they are tiny and very weak . Because the jammer is not competing against the full output of the radar, it only competing against the reflection of the aircraft, which is a really small fraction of radar power and jammer signal only travel one way while radar signal have to travel 2 ways.

You might still think the much more powerful radar of AWACs will allow them to detect and target stealth aircraft first before they became the prey?. Well no, assuming the hypothetical AWACs has a radar with the average transmitted power of 1MW (ways more powerful than what available now), and the hypothetical stealth fighter has a radar with the average transmitted power of 3 kW (readily available in the market). That makes the AWACS radar 333.3 times more powerful than the stealth fighter radar. Unfortunately, that is still not enough, because common AWACs such as A-50 or E-3 have RCS around 20 dBsm or 100 m2, which is 100.000 times higher than a stealth aircraft. In short, if you put the number into at the equation that i gave earlier, it is highly impractical for AWACS to detect stealth aircraft first. (note: Pt= transmitting power of radar , σ = Radar cross section)

https://books.google.com.vn/books?i...bAhWEppQKHZIfDmoQ6AEIZTAG#v=onepage&q&f=false

Ok, so how about ground radar?. Practically, you can make them as powerful as you want, and because they are hiding within ground clutter so they would be the silver bullet against stealth aircraft?. Not really, since RWR exists. RWR can't replace radar in air to air role, because while they are totally silent and can give very accurate angular information, like all others passive system, against moving airborne target, they have very hard time quickly measuring the distance to target, or their velocity/heading/altitude. So a firing solution for BVR missiles can't be made quickly. On the other hand, ground targets have certain characteristics that makes geolocating them very easy. https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/rwresm-and-passive-geolocation/

Another issue with ground radar is radar horizon, due to the curvature of the earth, there is a limitation on how far a normal radar can see depending on the altitude of the aircraft. Of course, there are OTH radar but they are highly inaccurate and also very massive, making them very easy target for cruise missiles

http://members.home.nl/7seas/radcalc.htm
P/s: modern cruise missile can fly very far

 

[Sancho]

If your solution is to have a bigger plane with bigger radar then I would have to say it is quite impractical. In real combat, there will be some sort of jamming employed by both side.

Jamming as a countermeasure is not restricted to 5th gen fighters, but was effective with Mig 21 Bisons too, so that has nothing to do with how to counter stealth designs. The point was, that fighter sensors are often not powerful and too restricted to counter stealth designs and that's where larger planes with more powerful sensors will provide advantages.

 

[Sancho]

The thing is, they don't have to.
Stealth aircraft only need to detect IADS radar/AWACS before they are detected.

Wrong, because detecting it at long range doesn't mean it can engage it at the same range too, because that is limited by the missiles!
An MKI can't take out an A50 Phalcon with R77 missiles at maximum detection range of the BARS radar, but within the no escape zone of the R77 missed. So the fighter has to get far closer to counter the AWACS, while the AWACS can guide escort fighters to the MKI, as soon as it has detected the enemy and the same goes for stealth fighters. So the more powerful an AWACS sensor, the greater the distance when it can detect low RCS targets and the earlier countermeasures (fighters, air defences) can be activated.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Jamming as a countermeasure is not restricted to 5th gen fighters, but was effective with Mig 21 Bisons too, so that has nothing to do with how to counter stealth designs. The point was, that fighter sensors are often not powerful and too restricted to counter stealth designs and that's where larger planes with more powerful sensors will provide advantages.

Did you even look at the equation at all?
The whole reason i mentioned jamming is because it "scales" so well with low RCS which is what stealth is all about.

Jamming as a countermeasure is not restricted to 5th gen fighters, but was effective with Mig 21 Bisons too

The thing is: stealth aircraft can use jammer that is 10000 times weaker to achieve the same effectiveness or if they use similar kind of jammer, then the burn-through range against them is effectively few hundred times shorter. If you have a radar that can burn-through jamming to target Su-30 from 400 km, then that very same radar will burn-through J-31/F-35/PAK-FA jamming from 4 km. I'm pretty sure any sane person will see the tremendous advantage

Wrong, because detecting it at long range doesn't mean it can engage it at the same range too, because that is limited by the missiles!
An MKI can't take out an A50 Phalcon with R77 missiles at maximum detection range of the BARS radar, but within the no escape zone of the R77 missed. So the fighter has to get far closer to counter the AWACS, while the AWACS can guide escort fighters to the MKI, as soon as it has detected the enemy and the same goes for stealth fighters. So the more powerful an AWACS sensor, the greater the distance when it can detect low RCS targets and the earlier countermeasures (fighters, air defences) can be activated.

Except that AWACS aren't fighter, NEZ of any individual missiles against an AWACS is not the same as against a fighter. Furthermore, there are many extremely long range missiles that stealth fighter can carry like AIM-120D, RVV-BD, Meteor, PL-15 so they can effectively detect and engage the AWACS from hundreds of km away, while AWACS will be lucky to to detect stealth fighter dozen km away in jamming condition

 

[Sancho]

No, that is not what you said. You suggest the AWACS armed with larger and bigger sensors will be able to help forth generation fighter to counter a stealth fighter.

And what I said in the part you quoted:

the counter a stealth fighter is not another fighter, but larger and more sensors

 

[Sancho]

Did you even look at the equation at all?
The whole reason i mentioned jamming is because it "scales" so well with low RCS which is what stealth is all about.

Which again, is nothing new because that exactly was the case a decade ago for Mig 21s too. The combination of low RCS and jamming is the most efficient one, no denying there, but that is not what we are talking about. The point was what the most effective counter to stealth designs is and that another fighter, with limited performance sensors, is not the key, while more powerful and diverse sensors are.

Except that AWACS aren't fighter, NEZ of any individual missiles against an AWACS is not the same as against a fighter.

Lol right, because AWACS are not equipped with countermeasures and jammers? Even active decoys like Brite Cloud are now offered for larger aircrafts, so the missile have to evade those first, before they can attack the aircraft. Not to mention that the maximum range of most current BVR missiles is just around 100Km, while the engagement range is lower. But the AWACS can detect and guide escorts far earlier.