Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Su-30 Versus RAAF alternatives

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Su-30 Versus RAAF alternatives

    Hey folks here is that same article again from the Ausie magazine "Aviation Now" before that God-damn server shorted out last week! Goes to show some god-damn buffoons out there what the su-30 is really capable off, even against potential 5th Gen types like the JSF among others. Its a great read, and there is no need to panic. Just enjoy:

    http://home.gwu.edu/~adit/page1.jpg
    http://home.gwu.edu/~adit/page2.jpg
    http://home.gwu.edu/~adit/page3.jpg
    http://home.gwu.edu/~adit/page4.jpg
    http://home.gwu.edu/~adit/page5.jpg
    http://home.gwu.edu/~adit/page6.jpg

  • #2
    just wanted to add economic side of the game.....

    the price of JSF is 28mln+ while SU-30MK is in 28-35mln range (India in long-term will get it cheaper), while F-22 Raptor is 102-146mln range. Even without consideration of higher Australian economic power it may put 5 JSF agains 4 SU-30MK. If we add to the picture that Australia can support higher budget for hardware this ratio will be even higher. On other side Asian states can put against each F-22 Raptor slightly more than 4 SU-30MK withe same budget.....

    Hence in my view Australians are better off having 5 JSF instead of 1 F-22 Raptors, or at least have only few of Raptors. This arithmetics makes JSF a better response to growing number of SU-30ies in the region.

    Of cause the best would be simply having their own fleet of Flankers with advanced western avionics :)
    but it will require ability to think in new terms where Russia is not considered a potential enemy but rather a normal commercial supplier. Indeed NATO states are far away from this reasoning

    ps. Russia has won WWII tank battles with T-34 model more due to its low cost and fast manufacturing speed than just due to its undoubtfull superiority to German middle tanks

    Comment


    • #3
      Hey that makes sense Garry! good analysis. Even I agree that the su-30 series is getting a little too rich for these malaysia's and Indonesia's blood. Although for them nations that are 'damned' by the west the Su-30 represents the only response that has a very good chance of blowing an F-15E/ F-18E/F out into a pile of shit! :) Although the JSF will fare better than the super Honet or the Eagel, but still the Flanker can hold its own gainst it.

      The Raptor on the other hand will take down any Flanker..( they just aint got anything in the performance class of the APG-77, or atleast not until the PAk-FA matures )...in the newer world airpower journal I have been reading up on the work that seems to have been restarted on the pak-Fa project as well as the rival OKb Mig rejuvenating the LFS/ LFI concept. I about fell over backwards and went into god-damn convulsion when I first saw the picture of Irans new fighter with the ******ty ass name of "Shafaaq" .....Boy that was a dead give away......

      P.S. Hey what did you think of this article?
      Last edited by lulldapull; 08 Aug 04,, 06:27.

      Comment


      • #4
        More of fear mongering of the yellow people and their flankers…

        First off these Flanker fear stories from Australians have been going on before Indonesia got any and before Malaysia ordered any. Neither of those nations is hostile to Australia.

        Seems more like a handful of people want F/A-22s down under…
        To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by troung
          More of fear mongering of the yellow people and their flankers…

          First off these Flanker fear stories from Australians have been going on before Indonesia got any and before Malaysia ordered any. Neither of those nations is hostile to Australia.

          Seems more like a handful of people want F/A-22s down under…

          It is atypical for the pussy Aussie's to over hype the fear! Even though the Flanker is vastly superior to anything the Aussies currently boast off, the real reason lies in the long overdue JSF program to start delivering something. it also appears that Australia is so far the biggest foreign contributor to the JSF program with more than 175 milion invested in R&D alone.

          Man it must really feel like a kick in the nut-sack to know for certain that the now 20 year old Flanker design can bust their brand new JSF's in the ass! Hey Troung what do you think of this killer article? :)

          Comment


          • #6
            Hey Troung, Lulli. How's it going?

            Hey Troung what do you think of this killer article
            What article?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Rudolphuss
              Hey Troung, Lulli. How's it going?


              What article?
              Dude the links I have pasted up there in my first post! :)

              Comment


              • #8
                Im pretty sure the JSF cost is $40 million per plane (earlier figure was $70 mil each).

                Comment


                • #9
                  The RAAF is retrofitting newer avionics in their current F-18's to extend the lifespan closer to 2020.

                  Those RAAF F-111's with the AGM-142's did a sweet job in Iraq too.

                  I look at Australia as such a close ally that they can rely on the US to back them up if the need arises. I think it's wise for them to spend some cash to retrofit their current aircraft to extend the lifespan as opposed to blowing cash on new ones.

                  Let the US waste the money ;)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Se7eN
                    The RAAF is retrofitting newer avionics in their current F-18's to extend the lifespan closer to 2020.

                    Those RAAF F-111's with the AGM-142's did a sweet job in Iraq too.

                    I look at Australia as such a close ally that they can rely on the US to back them up if the need arises. I think it's wise for them to spend some cash to retrofit their current aircraft to extend the lifespan as opposed to blowing cash on new ones.

                    Let the US waste the money ;)
                    Yeah no kiddin man. Check this out:

                    Aussies hope “Pigs” fly until JSFs arrive

                    by Reuben F. Johnson

                    One of the oldest U.S. combat aircraft still operational in the world today is in the Asia/Pacific region. Ironically, how much longer it remains in service and the future for the air force that operates it depends on a new-generation fighter that will be largely built in the same Fort Worth, Texas aircraft factory where it was manufactured some 40 years ago.

                    The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) is one of the Level III partners on the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, but in the meantime it is holding on to its General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark–or “the Pig,” as RAAF pilots sometimes refer to it–and is the only air force still flying the aircraft today. RAAF pilots and planning staff have some long-stated reasons for continuing to operate the F-111.

                    “First, we have a tradition of going a long way for a fight,” said one RAAF pilot to Aviation International News. “Secondly, the Pig is the only platform that there is today that goes that long way, drops its load and then runs away fast.” What concerns RAAF officials is whether or not the F-35 will–as advertised–be able to replace the fleet of 35 F-111s and squadrons of 71 Boeing F/A-18 fighters. It is a major challenge for the F-35 to match the range/payload of the former and the air-to-air performance of the latter.

                    As a combat aircraft, the F-111 has an exemplary record. During 1991’s Operation Desert Storm in Iraq, strike formations of some 40 F-111Fs destroyed more than 100 armored vehicles in one night of concentrated air attacks. Over the course of the short conflict, the 66 F-111Fs that the U.S. Air Force deployed in theater destroyed 1,500 Iraqi tanks and mechanized vehicles. It was also the only aircraft in the conflict to deploy GBU-15 bombs and the 5,000-pound laser-guided penetrating GBU-28.

                    The RAAF is being very methodical and deliberate about the process of taking delivery of the F-35, and the current security environment has as much to do with what might seem like contrariness as the traditionally laborious RAAF decision-making process. As senior RAAF personnel look around the region, they see it turning into “a big lake populated by an increasing number of Sukhoi Su-27/30s.” Currently, India, China, Vietnam and Indonesia either have the Russian fighter in their inventories or will soon take delivery of them. Last year, Malaysia signed a contract for 18 Su-30MKM models.

                    These Su-27/30 acquisitions are what prompted Australian defense minister Robert Hill to scrap a plan to retire the Aardvark in 2006–far ahead of the original date of 2020 to withdraw the F-111s–and to keep the fighter-bomber in service for the time being. “I can make a strong case for keeping the F-111s,” he said. “It’s all about strategic risks.” He also said that it would be gambling to assume the F-35 would be delivered on time. The number of months required to train RAAF personnel, establish the appropriate information technology systems and integrate the aircraft into Australia’s inventory also remains a question mark.

                    Indonesia, which has traditionally been the major state of concern to Australian defense officials, has already taken delivery of two Su-30MKs and two Su-27SK models, and is anticipated to acquire more aircraft for a total of three to four squadrons within the near future. These Russian aircraft in Indonesia, continued Hill, “typify the modernization of capabilities that is occurring throughout Southeast Asia.”

                    The Su-27/30’s air-to-air performance leaves some RAAF personnel also questioning whether the F-35 is actually going to be an adequate replacement for the F/A-18s, as well. We are concerned, said one officer, that with the U.S. Air Force emphasis on using the aircraft for air-to-ground missions that the JSF may be “too much S and not enough F when matched against these Sukhois.”

                    Lockheed Martin, which now owns the Fort Worth plant where the F-111 was built and plans to assemble the F-35 in the same facility, has stated that while it understands the concerns of export customers, it is not worried about the vulnerability of the F-35 versus contemporary Russian fighters like the Su-27/30.

                    “The F-35 is beyond anything out there now other than the F/A-22,” said LM spokesman John Kent. “If it should get into a dogfight–which it should not, given its advanced radar and its BVR (beyond visual range) missile capabilities–it is still a 9g-

                    capable fighter like the F-16. The whole idea of the F-35 is not to back away from F-16 and F/A-18 aerodynamic performance levels but to add all modern advances now available today to complement that level of performance.”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Enough of the sales pitches already!

                      You guys seriously underestimate us Aussies! We were talked into F18's on the basis that 2 engines are better than one (er, built in redundancy, etc)... now were being talked into a single engined "paper" plane - the cost of which will very likely blow out and may not have long term competitiveness when it arrives. There are lots of us down here that are sceptical of this whole F35 deal. When we buy something we need to get maximum value-for-money.

                      The RAAF has, for a long time maintained a technical superiority over neighbouring air forces which is being rapidly eroded. The appearance of SU27/30's on our doorstep is causing quiet alarm - we need to buy aircraft that guarantee air superiority, and that's not something that the JSF can 100% promise - but then what are our alternatives?

                      I think F22's and Eurofighters are out of our price range and Russian aircraft would be too contentious for our politicians to stomach (dumb reasoning, I know). The US is leaning on us big time to go JSF (and, as somebody mentioned, we've stumped up development cash and promised to buy 100) - but there's quite a lot of people praying this aircraft doesn't turn out to be one giant white elephant.

                      Unfortunately I think that JSF is pretty much our only viable option.

                      As for F111's - yep, we love those suckers - but they're so old now it's getting hard (read expensive) to keep them combat worthy. Oz is going for cruise missiles as a stop gap (which the locals don't like)

                      Got any B1 Lancers you don't need lying around doing nothing?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by longbow66
                        Enough of the sales pitches already!

                        You guys seriously underestimate us Aussies! We were talked into F18's on the basis that 2 engines are better than one (er, built in redundancy, etc)... now were being talked into a single engined "paper" plane - the cost of which will very likely blow out and may not have long term competitiveness when it arrives. There are lots of us down here that are sceptical of this whole F35 deal. When we buy something we need to get maximum value-for-money.

                        The RAAF has, for a long time maintained a technical superiority over neighbouring air forces which is being rapidly eroded. The appearance of SU27/30's on our doorstep is causing quiet alarm - we need to buy aircraft that guarantee air superiority, and that's not something that the JSF can 100% promise - but then what are our alternatives?

                        I think F22's and Eurofighters are out of our price range and Russian aircraft would be too contentious for our politicians to stomach (dumb reasoning, I know). The US is leaning on us big time to go JSF (and, as somebody mentioned, we've stumped up development cash and promised to buy 100) - but there's quite a lot of people praying this aircraft doesn't turn out to be one giant white elephant.

                        Unfortunately I think that JSF is pretty much our only viable option.

                        As for F111's - yep, we love those suckers - but they're so old now it's getting hard (read expensive) to keep them combat worthy. Oz is going for cruise missiles as a stop gap (which the locals don't like)

                        Got any B1 Lancers you don't need lying around doing nothing?


                        Hey dude, as is out of the box the JSF or the F-18E/F are inferior to the MKI flankers current weapons/ radar suite! Its pretty much a certainty that the short legged and over weight JSF will have a tough time against the MKI. And wiith the newer batch of the MKI's sporting KH-31's or the moskits that will go to Indonesia next year the situation will get bleaker still. I still believe that strike capability wise the F-111's still represent a solid punch to any would be aggressor, and the tomahawks if introduced by the U.S. in the region will have a negative impact, as it would force the Indonesians or malaysians to counter that possibly by covert acquisitions of photo copied M-9/11's from Pakistan or North Korean Scud C's. So it will get interesting in the next few years. :)

                        P.S. To be honest with its current specifications the JSF just reminds us all of what the F-104 was purported by that idiot Kelly Johnson to "have been" Turned out that the F-104 was quite possibly the worst combat aircraft ever developed! Had there ever been a european war, these F-104's would have fallen out of the sky like flies!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by lulldapull
                          Hey dude, as is out of the box the JSF or the F-18E/F are inferior to the MKI flankers current weapons/ radar suite! Its pretty much a certainty that the short legged and over weight JSF will have a tough time against the MKI. And wiith the newer batch of the MKI's sporting KH-31's or the moskits that will go to Indonesia next year the situation will get bleaker still. I still believe that strike capability wise the F-111's still represent a solid punch to any would be aggressor, and the tomahawks if introduced by the U.S. in the region will have a negative impact, as it would force the Indonesians or malaysians to counter that possibly by covert acquisitions of photo copied M-9/11's from Pakistan or North Korean Scud C's. So it will get interesting in the next few years. :)

                          P.S. To be honest with its current specifications the JSF just reminds us all of what the F-104 was purported by that idiot Kelly Johnson to "have been" Turned out that the F-104 was quite possibly the worst combat aircraft ever developed! Had there ever been a european war, these F-104's would have fallen out of the sky like flies!
                          Whaddya expect from a plane with virtually no wings! I'm no pilot, but if I were, I reckon I'd like to have some gliding ability! F-104's were a kind of motorised javelin - not the sort of thing I'd like to be fighting MIG's in.

                          But seriously, whilst the F111's have been our "ace-in-the-hole" for a long time, they really are becoming increasingly difficult to keep combat ready. Some second-hand refitted and upgraded Tornado's might be a reasonable alternative...
                          although they're getting long in the tooth too, they have a good track record.

                          There doesn't really seem to be the choice of aircraft there used to be since the US aerospace industry cannibalised itself and the European's got into a big group-hug. Our needs are very specific and the Government seem to have thrown themselves into this one largely through a lack of choice.

                          The Sukhoi is one hell of a fearsome aircraft and why would you buy into something that was potentially obsolete before you'd even built it! Even if we could afford F-22's, there's no guarantee that we'd be allowed full-spec versions anyway - sometimes Congress doesn't like other nations to have access to leading-edge US military technology, best mates or not.

                          You made the observation earlier (haven't figured out the quote thing yet!)

                          "First off these Flanker fear stories from Australians have been going on before Indonesia got any and before Malaysia ordered any. Neither of those nations is hostile to Australia".

                          Fair enough - we don't have too many problems with Malaysia (although Mahathir Mohammed used to give us a hard time) - but Indonesia, hmmm, remember fundamentalists targetted Westerners in Bali and Indonesia is the worlds most populous Muslim nation. Whilst I'm not implying that all Muslims are fundamentalists, there is a distinct risk that an event could turn popular Indonesian opinion against Australia. We came very close to hostilities over East Timor a couple of years back. Sometimes I suspect it's only the ANZUS treaty (with NZ barely participating, does that make it the ANUS treaty?), and therefore potential US military intervention, that has prevented us from exchanging blows.

                          That besides, the "fear stories" turned out to be ACCURATE! :)

                          I'll agree that going for Tomahawks to replace F111's is a risky decision. So far everyone in the region (bar the PRC and DPRK) have avoided getting into missile races. We're possibly breaking that general goodwill and that's the last thing we need down here!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            At least as far as the Canadians are concerned, the CF-104s were worth their weight in gold. They were nuke delivery platforms (makes me wonder why we ever trained CAS with them).

                            And let's look at the other side. MiG-19s and MiG-21s. Hardly, Rolls Royce of the fighter world.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The problem of Matching Su-30MK is now all over Asia... US Millitary luckilly helped to Sukhoi by leaking information about Cope India Mock Fights. The original goal was to support F-22 but strong by side result was killing F-15 - US currently second major export warplane....

                              The problem is that too few may afford F-22 which is in range of US$100-142 m, and only few of those who may expect any deliveries by 2010......

                              So the situation may bring a handfull of new orders for Su-30MK.
                              For Sukhoi this is a unique chance to get enough resources for a developing new generation fighter with the cash brought by this opportunity.
                              - develop new engine with supersonic cruising
                              - develop and apply new antistealth radar
                              - upgrade frame to increase payload
                              - newer weaponry
                              _________________________________



                              Shooting down F-15 to save Raptor?

                              By Peter Spiegel The Straits Times (Singapore)Asia News Network
                              800 words
                              11 August 2004
                              The Korea Herald
                              English
                              (c) 2004 The Korea Herald

                              It started as one of the dozens of military exercises the Pentagon conducts with friendly governments each year - operations that are as much about bilateral diplomacy as about testing military capabilities.

                              However, the exercise carried out in February, involving mock combat between the United States and Indian air forces over the skies of Madhya Pradesh in central India, has taken on a life of its own. The reason? The U.S. lost.

                              Not only did the U.S. aircraft lose, but they lost repeatedly. According to one member of Congress briefed on the exercise, the U.S. Air Force's top fighter, the F-15 Eagle, was defeated more than 90 percent of the time in simulated dogfights with Indian pilots.

                              As a result, reports on the exercise have not only reached the highest levels of the Pentagon and Capitol Hill but have traveled around the world to military procurement agencies in Singapore and South Korea. As details gradually leaked out, the exercise has become one of the prime topics of gossip at global air shows and arms fairs.

                              It has also opened a rare window into the overlapping loyalties and increasingly cut-throat competition that mark military procurement in an age of shrinking defense budgets.

                              The exercise, known as Cope India, was conceived almost two years ago as part of thawing relations between New Delhi and Washington. Some Pentagon officials saw improved diplomatic ties with democratic India as a way to balance the growing strength of communist China. It was the first combat training exercise between the two air forces in more than 40 years.

                              However, Pentagon planners also had an important military goal: U.S. air force pilots had never gone up against the Su-30 Flanker, the latest Russian-built fighter designed by Sukhoi, which India began to acquire in 1997.

                              Many Cope India details remain classified. Accounts conflict: Some say the F-15s lacked the U.S. Air Force's most sophisticated radar, others that the Indians used special helmet-mounted targeting systems unavailable to U.S. pilots, and yet others that the Americans were outnumbered at least two to one.

                              Whatever the reasons, the U.S. Air Force might normally be expected to keep such a defeat under wraps. But in recent weeks, senior officers have begun leaking information about the exercise, freely admitting their technical inferiority. "We may not be as far ahead of the rest of the world as we once thought we were," said General Hal Hornburg, head of the U.S. Air Combat Command.

                              The reason for the sudden candor has little to do with the F-15, and much more to do with another high-performance aircraft: the $72 billion F/A-22 Raptor, a new stealthy combat jet the U.S. Air Force is desperate to save from congressional and Pentagon budget cutters.

                              The craft has come under fire from those who say the U.S. no longer needs a fighter originally designed to fight the next generation of Soviet MiGs. So senior officers have decided the risks of revealing the inadequacies of the F-15 are outweighed by the opportunity to convince the government to keep buying the higher-priced fighter.

                              "Something like Cope India, when we find some of our advantages aren't as great as we thought they might be, leads me to remind people we need to modernize our air-to-air capability," said Gen. Hornburg.

                              Lockheed Martin, the prime contractor on the F/A-22 Raptor, has been more than happy to play along. In recent briefings, senior executives have made thinly veiled references to Cope India.

                              "The bottom line is, the U.S. no longer has a technological combat advantage, based on aircraft versus aircraft," said Mr. Ralph Heath, the Lockheed executive overseeing the F/A-22 Raptor.

                              It would seem only natural that the F/A-22 Raptor's largest sub-contractor, Boeing, would play along too - except for one problem: Boeing makes the F-15. The company recently won a competition to produce F-15s for South Korea and is engaged in a heated contest to build 20 for the Republic of Singapore Air Force.

                              "We were concerned," said Mr. George Muellner, head of Boeing's air force business.

                              In an effort to save the F-15 from the Pentagon's self-inflicted wounds, General John Jumper, the air force chief of staff, recently briefed Singapore officials on the Indian exercise.

                              Caught in between is Sukhoi itself, which does not seem to know what to make of the mixed American messages.

                              "We feel part of a game," protested Mr. Alexander Klementiev, Sukhoi's deputy director-general. "But we are not participants in that game."

                              Document KORHER0020040810e08b00007

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X