Thread: Su-30 Versus RAAF alternatives

Originally Posted by lulldapull

Hey man, I know the exercises were handicapped for a reason! in the newer World Airpower Journal, it clearly and very explicitly states that in " one " of the exercise 4 F-15's were pitted against a dozen IAF fighters, which included 4 - 6 mig-27L's coming in low to simulate an attack! flying immediate cover were 2 Bison's/ 21-93's with RVV-AE simulation pods for acquiring the targets out to 50 miles! and flying top cover were 2 - 4 Su-30k's or 2 - 4 Mica equipped Mirage-2000H's!!

The strike configured Mig-27's didn't engage the F-15's! They just tried to get through the F-15'CAP! it was the bison's and Su-30's that totally out did the F-15C's with their fire and forget R-27/ 77 or Mica simulated shots!

Although i admit that without the handicaps of not having the AMRAAM simulation/ acquisition pods in that Particular exercise, it obviously had its effects!

Anyway here is a better article from one of the sources:

More details have come out about the "losing" performance of U.S. F-15Cs (from the Alaska-based 3rd Wing) against India's air force in the "Cope India" air-to-air combat exercise earlier this year. The Air Force and some members of Congress have used the "failure" of American aircraft to further justify the need for new F/A-22 and F-35 fighters. Some are calling the results a dramatic example of weakening of American air combat capabilities

Two factors have been cited as major reasons why the 3rd Wing took a drubbing. None of the participating American aircraft had the latest long-range AESA radars, although some of the F-15Cs of the Wing had this equipment. A decision had been made beforehand not to send the AESA equipped planes to India due to the additional maintenance package required to support them. A total of six F-15Cs were sent to India, each equipped with a fighter data link, short-range AIM-9X heat-seeking air-to-air missiles, and the U.S.'s helmet-mounted cueing system.

Secondly, at India's request, the U.S. agreed to mock combat at 3-to-1 odds and without the full range of capabilities of simulated long-range radar-guided AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. U.S. fighters could not use the active on-board radar capability of the AMRAAM, and the missile was limited to around 32 kilometers range and required the use of the F-15C's onboard radar to target Indian aircraft. In standard use, AMRAAM has a range of over 100 kilometers and is a fire-and-forget missile that doesn't require additional guidance from the F-15. Practiced tactics by the F-15 crews mix two AESA-equipped F-15Cs with two stock aircraft. The AESA aircraft take long-range missile shots to thin out and disrupt the formation of a numerically superior force before the two sides close up for closer fighting.

The F-15s flew in groups of 4 against packages of 12 Indian Air Force aircraft consisting of a mix of Mirage 2000, Su-30, Mig-21, and Mig-27 aircraft. The Mirage and Su-30 aircraft were used in the air-to-air role, while the Mig-27 was used as the strike aircraft with the Mig-21 providing escort to the Mig-27s. The Indians also had a simulated AWACS platform and the use of simulated active radar missiles such as the AA-12 and the French Mica, unlike the F-15Cs. This gave the Indian Air Force a fire-and-forget air-to-air missile capability that the U.S. fighters didn't have, a heavily unrealistic assumption in actual hostilities.

However, the U.S. pilots admitted that they did have problems with the simulated active missile threat and don't normally train against launch-and-leave threats. They also admit they underestimated the training and tactics of the Indian pilots. Indian air force planners never repeated failed tactics and were able to change tactics as opportunities became available, mixing things up and never providing the same tactical "look." Some of the Indian aircraft radars had different characteristics than U.S. pilots had seen on stock versions of the aircraft, including some of the Mirage 2000s.

Now that being said, you also gotto understand that India didnot use the MKI! It only used the K flankers!

The MKI's bars radar has a 300km range buddy! it totally outclasses even the AWG-9's wattage and power, and will most likely burn right thru any type of ECM just thru sheer wattage!! It is a mini AWACS all by itself! And the running joke in the IAF currentl is that the rear warning Sirena on the MKI/ 27M boasts a 60km warning range! Thats pretty much the forward range on PAF's F-7PG's Grifo-7's!!

Clearly you do not understand the capabilities of the AESA radar.

Originally Posted by lulldapull

Hey man, I know the exercises were handicapped for a reason! in the newer World Airpower Journal, it clearly and very explicitly states that in " one " of the exercise 4 F-15's were pitted against a dozen IAF fighters, which included 4 - 6 mig-27L's coming in low to simulate an attack! flying immediate cover were 2 Bison's/ 21-93's with RVV-AE simulation pods for acquiring the targets out to 50 miles! and flying top cover were 2 - 4 Su-30k's or 2 - 4 Mica equipped Mirage-2000H's!!

The strike configured Mig-27's didn't engage the F-15's! They just tried to get through the F-15'CAP! it was the bison's and Su-30's that totally out did the F-15C's with their fire and forget R-27/ 77 or Mica simulated shots!

Although i admit that without the handicaps of not having the AMRAAM simulation/ acquisition pods in that Particular exercise, it obviously had its effects!

Anyway here is a better article from one of the sources:

More details have come out about the "losing" performance of U.S. F-15Cs (from the Alaska-based 3rd Wing) against India's air force in the "Cope India" air-to-air combat exercise earlier this year. The Air Force and some members of Congress have used the "failure" of American aircraft to further justify the need for new F/A-22 and F-35 fighters. Some are calling the results a dramatic example of weakening of American air combat capabilities

Two factors have been cited as major reasons why the 3rd Wing took a drubbing. None of the participating American aircraft had the latest long-range AESA radars, although some of the F-15Cs of the Wing had this equipment. A decision had been made beforehand not to send the AESA equipped planes to India due to the additional maintenance package required to support them. A total of six F-15Cs were sent to India, each equipped with a fighter data link, short-range AIM-9X heat-seeking air-to-air missiles, and the U.S.'s helmet-mounted cueing system.

Secondly, at India's request, the U.S. agreed to mock combat at 3-to-1 odds and without the full range of capabilities of simulated long-range radar-guided AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. U.S. fighters could not use the active on-board radar capability of the AMRAAM, and the missile was limited to around 32 kilometers range and required the use of the F-15C's onboard radar to target Indian aircraft. In standard use, AMRAAM has a range of over 100 kilometers and is a fire-and-forget missile that doesn't require additional guidance from the F-15. Practiced tactics by the F-15 crews mix two AESA-equipped F-15Cs with two stock aircraft. The AESA aircraft take long-range missile shots to thin out and disrupt the formation of a numerically superior force before the two sides close up for closer fighting.

The F-15s flew in groups of 4 against packages of 12 Indian Air Force aircraft consisting of a mix of Mirage 2000, Su-30, Mig-21, and Mig-27 aircraft. The Mirage and Su-30 aircraft were used in the air-to-air role, while the Mig-27 was used as the strike aircraft with the Mig-21 providing escort to the Mig-27s. The Indians also had a simulated AWACS platform and the use of simulated active radar missiles such as the AA-12 and the French Mica, unlike the F-15Cs. This gave the Indian Air Force a fire-and-forget air-to-air missile capability that the U.S. fighters didn't have, a heavily unrealistic assumption in actual hostilities.

However, the U.S. pilots admitted that they did have problems with the simulated active missile threat and don't normally train against launch-and-leave threats. They also admit they underestimated the training and tactics of the Indian pilots. Indian air force planners never repeated failed tactics and were able to change tactics as opportunities became available, mixing things up and never providing the same tactical "look." Some of the Indian aircraft radars had different characteristics than U.S. pilots had seen on stock versions of the aircraft, including some of the Mirage 2000s.

Now that being said, you also gotto understand that India didnot use the MKI! It only used the K flankers!

The MKI's bars radar has a 300km range buddy! it totally outclasses even the AWG-9's wattage and power, and will most likely burn right thru any type of ECM just thru sheer wattage!! It is a mini AWACS all by itself! And the running joke in the IAF currentl is that the rear warning Sirena on the MKI/ 27M boasts a 60km warning range! Thats pretty much the forward range on PAF's F-7PG's Grifo-7's!!

I think one thing we agree on clearly is that there is no one aircraft that is better than another aircraft. There are aircraft CONFIGURATIONS that are better than other aircraft CONFIGURATIONS. Everyone knows that the F-15 and SU-30 are formidable aircraft. To determine which one is better would depend completely on their configuration.

Now the MKI certainly has superior radar than the standard F-15C or even most F-15E models. I can take nothing away from the aircraft, it is a badass. However, if you're trying to decide which airframe is the best air superiority fighter, you would have to compare the best configuration to the best configuration. The F-15C's at Elmendorf with the AESA radar are going to get first look, first shot, first kill on an SU-30 MKI. The same goes for the F-15K's which will have an even further enhanced AESA radar, the latest and greatest avionics package, and the GE F110-P129 engines with greater thrust than the Elmendorf birds.

Originally Posted by jgetti

Clearly you do not understand the capabilities of the AESA radar.

Dude puhlese! Like I said the Aesa in the APG-63 V1/2 increases the situational awareness and combat potential for the F-15C driver! But as is the airframe for the F-15 is getting dated!

And having personally talked to the newer F-15E drivers with those large CFT's even they admit now that the aircraft loses its manouverability when toting those!

In a knife fight the sukhoi will bust the F-15 in the ass pretty much every time! The MKI's already can reach mach-2.4 ( with 2x R-73's and 2 R-77's) with the uprated AL-31F's! F-15 is limited to Mach2.0 with 2 large tanks and 2 Aim-9's plus 2 Aim-120's!

In the longer range RVR scenario, they boast a smaller RCS than the boxy and very reflective F-15. And I seriously doubt the effectiveness of the AMRAAM, which currently stands at par with the Aim-7, in terms for kills for launched missiles!!

Also the R-73 with the HMS negates much of the F-15's close in fighting capabilities! Ony recently rectified with the introduction of the Aim-9X.

INMO with the introduction of the Ks-172 Novatar missile, the USAF will be denied the traditional advantage of controlling the combat with the AWACS advantage! The E-3 or E-2 wont be safe anymore out to 300Kms!

Already Cope India showed that without the Awacs and ECM/ ELINT edge that the USAF enjoys, it quickly got down graded to just any other AF!

Jgetti, buddy, you gotto understand that not every AF in the third world is comparable to a defunct and isolated sanctions hit IraqiAF, where possibly none of the Aircraft were fully opeational with severely degraded GCI infrastructure.!

Believe me there are many competent AF's out there in the third world.

In the longer range RVR scenario, they boast a smaller RCS than the boxy and very reflective F-15. And I seriously doubt the effectiveness of the AMRAAM, which currently stands at par with the Aim-7, in terms for kills for launched missiles!!

Any evidence?

INMO with the introduction of the Ks-172 Novatar missile, the USAF will be denied the traditional advantage of controlling the combat with the AWACS advantage! The E-3 or E-2 wont be safe anymore out to 300Kms!

Any proof the KS-172 is effective? Hell any proof it has the range it does?

here is the latest article rom "inside the AF"

USAF: Indian Exercises Showed Need For F/A-22, Changes In Training

© Inside The Air Force

By Hampton Stephens

[June 4, 2004]

A recent exercise with the Indian Air Force is causing U.S. Air Force officials to re-evaluate the way the service trains its fighter pilots while bolstering the case for buying the F/A-22 as a way to ensure continued air dominance for the United States, according to service officials.

The surprising sophistication of Indian fighter aircraft and skill of Indian pilots demonstrated at the Cope India air combat exercise Feb. 15 through 27 at Gwalior Air Force Station, India, should provide a reality check for those who had assumed unquestioned U.S. air superiority, service officials who participated in the exercise said this week. The event was the first-ever air combat exercise involving the U.S. and India and the most active bilateral military exchange in over 40 years, according to these officials.

“The major takeaway for the Air Force is that our prediction of needing to replace the F-15 with the F/A-22 is proving out as we get smarter and smarter about other [countries’] capabilities around the world and what technology is limited to in the F-15 airframe,” said Col. Mike Snodgrass, commander of the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf Air Force Base, AK. “We’ve taken [the F-15] about as far as we can and it’s now time to move to the next generation.” Snodgrass, who has been selected to receive his first star, and two other wing officials spoke with Inside the Air Force June 2.
Exercise Cope India 2004 - IAF Su-30 and USAF F-15C in formation

The Air Force has been arguing the absolute necessity of the F/A-22 since the program began. But the performance of the Indians in direct competition against the Air Force’s best fighter, the F-15C, was particularly striking evidence of an endangered U.S. lead in air combat capability, the statements of service officials indicate.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. John Jumper told the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee in March that the results of Cope India were “very revealing,” although he declined to elaborate in a public forum. Privately, other senior service officials have pointed to Cope India as evidence that continued U.S. air superiority is dependent on the F/A-22.

Although service officials have been reluctant to detail how the Indians performed against the six F-15Cs from the 3rd Wing that participated in Cope India, Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) said in a Feb. 26 House Appropriations defense subcommittee hearing that U.S. F-15Cs were defeated more than 90 percent of the time in direct combat exercises against the IAF.

Officials from the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf did not provide specifics about how their aircraft fared, but said the experience is causing the service to reevaluate the way it trains its pilots for air-to-air operations.

“What happened to us was it looks like our red air training might not be as good because the adversaries are better than we thought,” Snodgrass said. “And in the case of the Indian Air Force both their training and some of their equipment was better than we anticipated.”

“Red air” refers to the way the Air Force simulates enemy capability in air combat training. Because the service has assumed for years that its fighters are more capable than enemy aircraft, the U.S. pilots that simulate the enemy, known as “red” forces, in air combat training are required to operate under rules that constrain their combat capability.

“We have always believed that our technology was superior to everyone else’s technology, that we would fight a somewhat inferior adversary, so we have had to supply a simulated adversary from our own resources; we call that ‘red air,’” Snodgrass said.
Exercise Cope India 2004 - USAF F-15C and IAF MiG-21 Bisons (MiG-21 Upgrades) in formation

As a result, Air Force pilots are used to flying against an enemy whose combat capability is deliberately limited.

“There are manoeuvering limits as well as weapons employment limits, what we believe enemy aircraft may be able to do with their weapons systems, so we try to simulate that in our own airplane with our own weapons,” Snodgrass explained. “It becomes very complex because instead of using the airplane the way it was designed, you now have to come up with rules of thumb that limit what you do and cause you to not perform . . . the way we really would want to in combat.”

The Cope India exercises consisted of air combat maneuvers in which pilots would practice their fighter tactics and fly against each other one-on-one, as well as simulated combat scenarios. It was during this simulated combat, which included both “offensive counterair” and “defensive counterair” scenarios, that the Indians proved the most formidable, according to the 3rd Wing officials. In the offensive counterair scenarios, a small number of F-15Cs would attempt to intercept an enemy strike aircraft en route to a target that was guarded by a larger number of Indian fighters. In the defensive counterair missions, the F-15s would attempt to defend a target against Indian fighters.

In these offensive and defensive missions, four F-15Cs were usually flying against 10 or 12 of the same model Indian fighter, according to Col. Greg Neubeck, deputy commander of operations for the wing’s 3rd Operations Group and exercise director for Cope India. The 3rd Operations Group is responsible for the 3rd Wing’s flying mission.

The Indians flew a number of different fighters, including the French-made Mirage 2000 and the Russian-made MIG-27 and MIG-29, but the two most formidable IAF aircraft proved to be the MIG-21 Bison, an upgraded version of the Russian-made baseline MIG-21, and the SU-30K Flanker, also made in Russia, Neubeck said. He emphasized the fact that U.S. forces were always outnumbered in these scenarios, but said the missions proved more difficult than expected.
Mirage-2000s and F-15s fly over the majestic Himalayas

“What we faced were superior numbers, and an IAF pilot who was very proficient in his aircraft and smart on tactics. That combination was tough for us to overcome,” Neubeck said.

One reason the Indian pilots proved so formidable is that their training regimen does not include a concept of “red air.” Instead, “they fly pretty much blue-on-blue . . . [a] full-up airplane with no restrictions against somebody else’s airplane with no restrictions, and that leads to more proficiency with your aircraft,” Neubeck said.

In addition to reinforcing the need for the F/A-22, therefore, Cope India demonstrated that the service might be able to immediately improve its air combat capability by changing the way Air Force pilots train.

“The Air Force is re-examining, from what I can understand, our concept of red air and how we might be able to provide red air to our fighter forces so that we get [the best] training we can afford,” Snodgrass said.

Neubeck said the service probably needs to “take off the handcuffs that we put on our red air training aids and allow them to be more aggressive and make the red air tougher than we have in the past.”

Although India is a friendly nation, the lesson of Cope India is that almost any nation could surpass the United States’ air combat capability if the Pentagon does not continue to invest in better training and technology, the Elmendorf officials said. At last count, for example, there were over 5,000 MIG-21s active in air forces around the world, Snodgrass said. Even American fighters, such as Boeing’s F-15, are being sold in upgraded versions to countries around the world.

“I believe what this demonstrates is that the capacity exists out there for any nation with the appropriate resources and the will to acquire technology and to train their aircrews to be very, very capable,” said Col. Russ Handy, commander of the 3rd Operations Group. “In the long term this could occur in nations outside of the Indian Air Force.”

The Air Force will get another chance to test its capabilities against the Indians in July, when the IAF will bring its Jaguar fighter-bomber aircraft to Eielson AFB, AK, for the Cooperative Cope Thunder exercise. The 3rd Wing officers said their pilots had not yet flown against an Indian-piloted Jaguar.

now don't get me wrong guys, in a any scenario BVR or Knife fight, the F-22 will strike down any Flanker!

Super cruise, combined with exceptional manouverability bestowed by excellent ( 3 dimensional) TVN along with the first ever FLIR/ IRST linked to possibly a new Gen IR missile! And above all a stealthy airframe over the Su-30! backed up by a new type of AESA radar much better than the Apg-63's V2!

The Pak-Fa will be able to handle the F-22! Not the Su-30.

Are you aware of the conditions under which the practice took place in India?

In most cases we were outnumbed by over 2 to 1. On top of this we did not use AWACS.

now don't get me wrong guys, in a any scenario BVR or Knife fight, the F-22 will strike down any Flanker!

Super cruise, combined with exceptional manouverability bestowed by excellent ( 3 dimensional) TVN along with the first ever FLIR/ IRST linked to possibly a new Gen IR missile! And above all a stealthy airframe over the Su-30! backed up by a new type of AESA radar much better than the Apg-63's V2!

The Pak-Fa will be able to handle the F-22! Not the Su-30.

The Pak-Fa also doesn't exsist yet.

Originally Posted by Praxus

Are you aware of the conditions under which the practice took place in India?

In most cases we were outnumbed by over 2 to 1. On top of this we did not use AWACS.



The Pak-Fa also doesn't exsist yet.

Yeah I know dude! but checkout the very first post in this therad! Read about the comparison of the Su-30 vs the JSF and the F-18E/F!

The outnumbering scenario was designed to replicate a strike package with escorts! The F-15C's were the defenders!

Not in all the aircombat scenarios were the F-15's outnumbered!

man I am just baffled about that 90% figure! Outnumbered or not thats a very high and ridiculous number!

Originally Posted by lulldapull

Dude puhlese! Like I said the Aesa in the APG-63 V1/2 increases the situational awareness and combat potential for the F-15C driver! But as is the airframe for the F-15 is getting dated!

And having personally talked to the newer F-15E drivers with those large CFT's even they admit now that the aircraft loses its manouverability when toting those!

In a knife fight the sukhoi will bust the F-15 in the ass pretty much every time! The MKI's already can reach mach-2.4 ( with 2x R-73's and 2 R-77's) with the uprated AL-31F's! F-15 is limited to Mach2.0 with 2 large tanks and 2 Aim-9's plus 2 Aim-120's!

In the longer range RVR scenario, they boast a smaller RCS than the boxy and very reflective F-15. And I seriously doubt the effectiveness of the AMRAAM, which currently stands at par with the Aim-7, in terms for kills for launched missiles!!

Also the R-73 with the HMS negates much of the F-15's close in fighting capabilities! Ony recently rectified with the introduction of the Aim-9X.

INMO with the introduction of the Ks-172 Novatar missile, the USAF will be denied the traditional advantage of controlling the combat with the AWACS advantage! The E-3 or E-2 wont be safe anymore out to 300Kms!

Already Cope India showed that without the Awacs and ECM/ ELINT edge that the USAF enjoys, it quickly got down graded to just any other AF!

Jgetti, buddy, you gotto understand that not every AF in the third world is comparable to a defunct and isolated sanctions hit IraqiAF, where possibly none of the Aircraft were fully opeational with severely degraded GCI infrastructure.!

Believe me there are many competent AF's out there in the third world.

You're blowing smoke up the wrong person's ass, I'm an engineer on the F-15.
I regulary converse with pilots from all over the world who fly this bird. I know this aircraft inside and out, understand it's capabilities and the capabilities of it's competitors very well. CFT's ENHANCE the aerodynamic characteristics of the jet. Any degradation of performance would only be due to the additional bomb stores available on the CFT's for the E models, which the C models DO NOT have. I'll give you that it has a horribly large RCS. However, the SU-30 doesn't exactly leave a small footprint in the sky either. The dated airframe arguement says nothing about it's maneuverability characteristics, and I'm confident that you do not know it's limitations. and you CERTAINLY do not know the limitations of the AESA APG63 V2 radar, so don't even pretend to snow people with your holy grail of aircraft knowledge.

Originally Posted by jgetti

You're blowing smoke up the wrong person's ass, I'm an engineer on the F-15.
I regulary converse with pilots from all over the world who fly this bird. I know this aircraft inside and out, understand it's capabilities and the capabilities of it's competitors very well. CFT's ENHANCE the aerodynamic characteristics of the jet. Any degradation of performance would only be due to the additional bomb stores available on the CFT's for the E models, which the C models DO NOT have. I'll give you that it has a horribly large RCS. However, the SU-30 doesn't exactly leave a small footprint in the sky either. The dated airframe arguement says nothing about it's maneuverability characteristics, and I'm confident that you do not know it's limitations. and you CERTAINLY do not know the limitations of the AESA APG63 V2 radar, so don't even pretend to snow people with your holy grail of aircraft knowledge.

Okay man you know it all! I am just a dumb ass, as is this article, or the dozens of articles ppl posted here!

And as a reminder about CFT's that they do have a weight and performance penalty! They do extend range, but the manoeverability is affected due to the thousands of pounds extra weight! And a weight that cannot be jettisoned while in combat! its only a good loadout for the f-15E, configured for the Air to ground role.

Originally Posted by lulldapull

Okay man you know it all! I am just a dumb ass, as is this article, or the dozens of articles ppl posted here!

And as a reminder about CFT's that they do have a weight and performance penalty! They do extend range, but the manoeverability is affected due to the thousands of pounds extra weight! And a weight that cannot be jettisoned while in combat! its only a good loadout for the f-15E, configured for the Air to ground role.

Point taken,, I was refering to the aerodynamic improvement. CFT's reduce aerodynamic drag on the aircraft, increasing its cruise capability under MIL power, as well as aerodynamic performance. But you're right, F=MA.

CFT's were originally created for the C model (air to air role only). Naturally they add more weight to the aircraft, but unlike drop-tanks, they improve aerodynamic performance. While they increase wing loading (when filled), they reduce aerodynamic drag. The CFT's in essence add more INTERNAL fuel holding capability. Any aircraft full of fuel will not perform as well as an aircraft that's got less. An F-15C with CFT's of equivalent weight to and F-15C without will perform better than the F-15C without.

Originally Posted by jgetti

Point taken,, I was refering to the aerodynamic improvement. CFT's reduce aerodynamic drag on the aircraft, increasing its cruise capability under MIL power, as well as aerodynamic performance. But you're right, F=MA.

Alright.....


Hey I was gonna tel you that this guy in our IPMS chapter whi is a ANG F-16 driver told us when he was giving us a tour of the ANG station out here near Glenview about what one of the F-18 drivers did with his F-18!

The Russians were doing cobra's and tail slides over his base, and he just told his sqd. mates, that he ain't gonna let no russian impress the crowds on his base!

He got up, got in his F-18 took it staright up while the Su-27's were landing, Did a full nose high tail stand at 100knts, followed by a quick cobra! All in one shot!

Ppl couldn't god-damn believe it! He did get reprimanded/ written up by his boss when he landed though! The F-18 is not built to take those types of structural stresses caused by those abrupt manouvers!

I still believe the the F-18 is the most manouverable type in service!, and thr E/F will be the definitive version! The F-16 cannot even do a tail stand!

Originally Posted by lulldapull

Alright.....


Hey I was gonna tel you that this guy in our IPMS chapter whi is a ANG F-16 driver told us when he was giving us a tour of the ANG station out here near Glenview about what one of the F-18 drivers did with his F-18!

The Russians were doing cobra's and tail slides over his base, and he just told his sqd. mates, that he ain't gonna let no russian impress the crowds on his base!

He got up, got in his F-18 took it staright up while the Su-27's were landing, Did a full nose high tail stand at 100knts, followed by a quick cobra! All in one shot!

Ppl couldn't god-damn believe it! He did get reprimanded/ written up by his boss when he landed though! The F-18 is not built to take those types of structural stresses caused by those abrupt manouvers!

I still believe the the F-18 is the most manouverable type in service!, and thr E/F will be the definitive version! The F-16 cannot even do a tail stand!

Wicked! I'd love to see that! The LEX's on those birds sure keeps the AOA pretty limitless. I've seen the Blue Angels perform a few times and they rock ass! Naturally, they keep the G's within spec though. I think the Navy is really gonna love the Superhornet,,, it's finally giving them the legs they wanted with the original one. Now if they could just do something about those F414 engines..... Probably isn't too much you can do with a fixed geometry inlet though.

Originally Posted by longbow66

Yeah, well that doesn't make me sleep any easier... this whole JSF thing kinda stinks... Frankly, I think the US aerospace industry has lost the plot...

CAN ANYBODY OUT THERE OFFER US AUSSIES A COMBAT AIRCRAFT THAT WILL GUARANTEE AIR SUPERIORITY? (cue: sound of crickets chirping)

Trust me, all the crap articles out there slinging mud all over the F-15 are just what that article title says,, killing the F-15 to save the F/A-22. There are lots of big dogs in the Pentagon that are afraid the F/A-22 program will be cut (it narrowly escaped the chopping block more than once),, and with good reason. It's so damned over budget and behind schedule it's pathetic,,, AND as those same pentagon big whigs know that the longer the F-15 is around, the more likely the F/A-22 will be cancelled (or at least reduced to a smaller specialty fleet like the B-2's). Opponents of the F/A-22 in US congress want to kill it because it's so damned expensive, and they see it as unjustified because the F-15 can still maintain air superiority over anything out there. That's the pentagons biggest fear,,, NOT that the F-15 can't maintain air superiority anymore.

They want their new airplane and they want it bad. Even if it means killing the best thing currently around in the process. COPE India was the perfect opportunity to secure the F/A-22's fate,,, throw some less than top of the line C models out there, limit the capabilities they do have,, and let the liberal media take care of the rest. It had NOTHING to do with the performance (or lack thereof) of the F-15,, it was all politics. The F-15E's have very similar capability to the F-15C's in terms of air superiority (let alone AESA which IS an option for an F-15E derivitive i.e. the F-15K. The E model is frequently written off as a strike aircraft with diminished air superiority fighting capability which is untrue. The E retains the air superiority role, only decreased by it's increased payload capabilities for strike.

You wouldn't believe the internal termoil at Boeing (McDonnell Douglas) on the issue of the F-15 and F/A-22. All the guys in St. Louis (heritage McDonnell Douglas) want to keep the F-15 alive as it is an outstanding strike fighter which can fly very long distances, loiter, bomb the crap out of things, and fight it's way back home (and it's made in St. Louis). All the guys in Seattle (where the Boeing portion of F/A-22 is based) want the F-15 dead. It isn't that the boys in St. Louis want the F/A-22 cancelled or don't think it's justified, it's more that they don't want their strike fighter killed in the process. Are they saying that the F-15 is a better air superiority fighter than the F/A-22??? HELL NO. Only that it is still better than anything else out there.

For whatever reason, an F-15E derivitive wasn't chosen to replace the F-111's. However, it is by far the closest thing out there (let alone a B-1) that can match it's strike capabilities in terms of range and payload. In addition, you could have gotten long range air superiority capability similar to that of the F-15C.