Thread: Is the SU-30MKI the worlds best fighter?

USS- wrt RCS of MKI vs. standard SU-27/30, there is no reason to assume the MKI has any significant advantage. Russian technology in RA coatings is not particularly advanced by Western standards, and ceramic coatings on such places intakes and fans have yet to be proven or implemented in any real terms. The claims of "plasma stealth" and other such BS have already been debunked. The MKI also has some rather sizeable canards that the standard 27/30 doesn't have. That also increases the beam range profile. Show me a real source, such as Janes, FI, AVLeak, etc, that says the MKI is anywhere under 10m^2.

The arguments regarding external weapons and RCS applies equally or more so to the SU-30, since it is larger and carries a proportionally larger warload. And both France and the US/UK have been putting a lot of effort into stealthing A2A weaponry over the last several years. With an AAM load only, no external tanks or bombs, the 0.1 M^2 RCS might be doubled at most. Only when you start adding bombs and external tanks will the RCS go up appreciably. (the 1000x was an exagerration, it's more like 100x for the Rafale)

Yes, the N011 is a more powerful radar, but detection is still dependent on the quality of the return. It doesn't matter how much power you are sending out- the only thing that matters is how much comes back. The SU-30 is a beacon on radar, just like the F-15 is. There is no way to avoid it. On a head on shot, the radar is looking right down the intakes at the comperessor blades. NCTR can count the blades and identify the AC just from the return from the compressor.

The USN has conducted operational sorties alongside the Rafale, and was impressed enough than the Rafales were given the lead slots, and F/A-18E's flew shotgun. That should tell you something.

I don't want to go into a detailed discussion on the missiles, I suggest you read the R-77 and AMRAAM and MICA threads on ACIG. But consider this- as I mentioned previously, the R-77 seeker has a 16km range against a 5m^2 target. This is from Vympel's own literature on the missile. Now, try to get a lock on a 0.1m^2 target. Range is a direct function of return strength- you are going to have to keep the target in the N011's gimbel limits until the missile is within a couple km, or you will lose lock (if the seeker will even lock at all). That means that you are very limited wrt evasive action. And the Typhoon or Rafale has AMRAAM or MICA, which are quite capable of tracking the SU-30 from 20-25km, and probably more.

AMRAAM, and (IIRC) MICA also fly a lofted flight profile, which gives them a top-down look at the target (increasing the RCS), and more energy in the terminal maneuver. R-77 doesn't do this- it flies a purely kinetic profile. As far as comparitive ranges, I already touched on that, it's a function of the launch parameters, so the stated ranges by manufacturers are worthless unless the launch parameters are compared at the same time. But I can tell you this- numbers like 70km are bullsh*t against a fighter sized target, especially a maneuvering one. The hype about the latticed control surfaces is just that- hype. They are not lower drag, aerodynamics is aerodynamics. Lift=Drag. What they do offer is short throw actuaters. The US experimented with such control surfaces in the '60's and discarded them because they gave no real advantage. The lattice structure actually increases parasitic drag because the entire wetted surface is not an optimum airfoil (leading edges that are vertical to the airstream do not generate turning forces in a bank-to-turn missile).

Wrt, TVC, I never said it was not useful, only in the context that most people try to justify it- i.e. the mongoose/cobra/kulbit bullsh*t energy-killing airshow maneuvers as being useful in WVR engagements. That's a pile of horsesh*t.

TVC is useful when entering into the BVR engagement, because it allows the AC to carry supersonic speeds into the maneuver without bleeding off energy due to deflected control surfaces. This is why it's valuable in the F-22, since that AC is cruising at M1.7. It gives the pilot a tactical advantage, because he can decide whether to engage or break off and re-enter under more favorable conditions. It's also useful in keeping a damaged AC in the air- adaptive FBW coupled with TVC can make up for missing or damaged flight or control surfaces. This can mean the difference between punching out or getting back to where the AC can be repaired.

So don't claim that I ever said TVC was only useful in F-22's and not SU-30's, but the reasons have nothing to do with outmaneuvering a HOBS heater that can turn at 40-50 G's. That's a fool's argument.

certainly much closer than any air-launched Brahmos on the SU-30, which is still just a pipe dream.

Pipe dream ?
It is under development.
If a product under development is to be termed as a pipe dream , then the whole frigging humanity is having a hell lot of pipe dreams at present.I am sure your America has quite a number of pipe dreams too.The bias shows.

The USN has conducted operational sorties alongside the Rafale, and was impressed enough than the Rafales were given the lead slots, and F/A-18E's flew shotgun. That should tell you something.

Ah , yes.
Now do we get to apply the same logic to Indo-US air exercises.
MiG-21s were supposed to have shot down your planes.Why , it was YOUR people who stated it.

Lets see , it was for propaganda purposes.To scare the Congress.Right ?
Then , the exercise you have described could also be termed as one.A propaganda exercise to make Rafales better than what they are.

So either the MiG-21s were scaring your fighters in Agra OR the US establishments do use - as every force does , a lot of propaganda too.

Originally Posted by Samudra

Ah , yes.
Now do we get to apply the same logic to Indo-US air exercises.
MiG-21s were supposed to have shot down your planes.Why , it was YOUR people who stated it.

I said operational sorties, not DACT. There is a big difference.

Originally Posted by Samudra

Pipe dream ?
It is under development.

I have already posted at length about fitting the Brahmos to the SU-30, and I'm not going to repeat myself. Do a search of the forum if you want to read my comments.

A not-to-scale model at an airshow is hardly considered "under development". Considering YOUR countries history of weapons development, I wouldn't be throwing stones here.

BTW- You can leave my name out of your pissing contests with Platinum.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...0&postcount=23

I said operational sorties, not DACT.

So says the US Navy.Why do i need to trust that ?
The Navy could have done that for propaganda value , as it was in the case of Fishbeds taking on F-15s.

The point is - there is as much propaganda carried out by the US forces as much as the other forces do.Your posts makes out like the Russians were always telling lies.

The SU-30MKI is the best aircraft of the current generation. unfortunately the next generation is almost here. It can best the eagles, but it doesn't have a chance against the Raptor or JSF. You can't hit what you can't see.

Originally Posted by Samudra

So says the US Navy.Why do i need to trust that ?

I have absolutely NO idea what you are going on about. Do you even know what I am referring to, or are you just carrying on for the sake it?

BTW- You can leave my name out of your pissing contests with Platinum.

I apologise if that post was offensive to you.
I meant no disrespect.