Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy
You're right, its a lot more complicated than that. A successful BVR intercept isnt just fancy flying, its precision. Its knowing exactly what you have to do, what you're going to do, and when you're going to do it. And its maintaining situational awareness on everything going on around you while you count off the seconds/miles/switch actuations while the fit hits the shan. Oh, and actually following through with your plan accurately.
|
just to reemphasize the point about heavy duty manouvering involved in BVR, here is what an IAF jock had to say about working out with the RAF in the latest Indradhanush exercise
posted via BR:
Quote:
|
The typhoon and the Su-30 was a kind of stand off in the 1 vs 1.. the Su-30 in any case is not meant for that sort of fight in the first place..AWACS are being used..the typhoons biggest advantage is light weight i.e., high thrust to weight ratio, so good climb performance and very fast acceleration..so it can get out of trouble quickly..more importantly it can regain energy fast after a energy depleting manoeuvre..it was too evenly matched to really compare, Su-30 great on snap maneuvering but more energy depletion while lesser maneuvering by the Typhoon but lesser energy depletion...(in BVR type scenarios) there is still a fair amount of maneuvering, albeit at large distances, and a lot of stand offs due to missile defeating maneuvers at large distances, till such time that a merge takes place..so one guy locks the other break away, turn around, then some one locks or fire and the others avoid etc and a lot to do with keeping a high SA on who is where doing what in large number situations..and in these kind of situations when the Typhoon needs to maneuver aggressively it has a lot of power to enable it to do so..BVR is a lot of cat and mouse stuff, while close combat missile type is more messing around with gun combat taking the cake...the Typhoon has only been doing close combat till now. bigger stuff yet to take place..the pilots maneuver not just to try break lock-ons to them but also to to stay away from a know threat of better capability or also to defeat the missile after launch...remember the chaps are just not airborne to stay in one place and fight , they have an objective to reach, that necessitates a forward movement...that is the basic premise in BVR combat
|
Quote:
|
Getting into a turning fight might not be a bad idea, depending on what you're armed with and what your opponent is armed with. If your opponent has superior BVR capabilities but you own the WVR realm, guess what you want to do: You want to merge with that bastard and make his wife claim his hair, teeth and eyeballs in the morning. You dont want to engage at standoff range, I dont care how much fuel you have.
|
No doubt, precisely what above mentioned jock is getting at - you want to play to your strengths.
Quote:
|
Personally, I think you overstate the value of the Su-30's internal fuel load. On a stealth aircraft it would be a huge benefit. The Eurofighter's RCS would certainly have benefitted from it. But in a 4th gen fighter...yeah, it could be good, but if I were designing it, that wouldnt be my priority. Or even in my top 5.
|
Actually, one feels that you cannot emphasize this advantage that the flanker enjoys enough -
The su 30MKI is more than just a typical 4th generation a/c and its ability to carry HUGE amounts of internal fuel is definitely a strong factor that makes it so different from other 4 gen fighters. it is one of the key parameters in allowing the flanker series to evolve further. Most other 4th gen fighters such as the teen series (unless totally revamped ala Shornet) will get chewed up pretty easily by the likes of a typhoon or Rafale in almost every performance criteria. IOW, having large amounts of internal fuel results in
1) lack of EFTs thereby reducing drag
2) increased ability/hardpoints to carry weapons and still maitaining decent aerodynamic performance
3) Tremendous endurance to dictate engagement/egress
JMT.
Regards,
USS.