Su-27 or F-15?

[Jedi_Iatros]

I'll concede that the Flanker is better aerodynamically, younger, faster, and armed very well....but the Eagle is 105 to zero in aerial combat!!! To me, records speak for themselves.

The Eagle, however, has better electronics (JHMCS, AESA, etc) and with it armed with AIM-120 and AIM-9X? I'll vote on the Eagle on this one.

[Jedi_Iatros]

as far as i can tell, F-15 may have good avionics but the Sukhoi have superior maneuverablilty. overall, i say Su-27 family wins this.

The Mig-29 is pretty manueverable, but that didn't mean squat when it got shot downed alot in Yugoslavia and Iraq by NATO powers. This ain't WW1, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam anymore with all the Red Baron stuff....it's about killing your enemy beyond visual. This is something the U.S. IS VERY GOOD AT more than any country that uses Russian fighters. Just imagine the record the Raptor will have when it's deployed overseas in combat?

[canoe]

I vote for the Su-30 MKI;

The US Air Force claims the F-15C is in several respects inferior to, or at best equal to, the MiG-29, Su-27, Su-35/37, Rafale, and EF-2000, which are variously superior in acceleration, maneuverability, engine thrust, rate of climb, avionics, firepower, radar signature, or range. Although the F-15C and Su-27P series are similar in many categories, the Su-27 can outperform the F-15C at both long and short ranges. In long-range encounters, with its superior radar the Su-27 can launch a missile before the F-15C does, so from a purely kinematic standpoint, the Russian fighters outperform the F-15C in the beyond-visual-range fight. The Su-35 phased array radar is superior to the APG-63 Doppler radar in both detection range and tracking capabilities. Additionally, the Su-35 propulsion system increases the aircraft’s maneuverability with thrust vectoring nozzles.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-15.htm

I was poking around online and according to the sites I've checked the Su-27's Russia has have not been upgraded with the phased radar array yet. Infact there is no word yet on if any of the Floggers have been upgraded to the Su-27SM standard. The last time I read about it they were supposed to have the ones they intended to upgrade done by 2008. So its possible by the time the Floggers are upgraded some of the F-15 will be equipped with AESA as well.


*Another Note* Most of the F-15's in service are equipped with the APG-70 not the APG-63.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-27
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su27/
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/airdef/su-27.htm

[Jedi_Iatros]

That's so cool. F-15s that are still very capable and dangerous with our Raptors. Laughs on the Russian fighters.

BTW, I was wrong about the Flanker being faster than the Eagle.

[-{SpoonmaN}-]

I'll concede that the Flanker is better aerodynamically, younger, faster, and armed very well....but the Eagle is 105 to zero in aerial combat!!! To me, records speak for themselves.

Have they ever come up against Flankers or indeed anything else comparable to themselves in combat, that were flown by properly trained pilots?

[Captain Drunk]

The Bison is a formidable aircraft, make no mistake. Its an ancient airframe and engine, but that's about it. Everything else on that plane is modern.

The AA-10 is a BVR missile, especially the C model. It is still outclassed by the AMRAAM.

Under certain conditions, the Su-27 (in general) can outmaneuver the F-15C/E. USAF wants to engage BVR, and in that case we win.

Not if the case is with the AA-9 Amos and AA-10C Alamo missiles that arm Mig-29s, Mig-31s and Su-27s. In that case the Russians win totally. Then there is also the Novator KS-172 AAM-L (R-172), russian ultra long-range air-to-air missile capable of 400 km range and top speed of Mach 4, developed in Russia being offered to India for their Flankers, also possibly to be deployed on Mig-1.42. The KS-172 was first shown as a mock-up at an air show in Abu Dhabi in 1993, but with post-Soviet funding problems, the program was put on hold. Now, India is launching an Indo-Russian co-venture to produce the missile, which would then arm IAF Su-30MKIs.

[Jimmy]

In long-range encounters, with its superior radar the Su-27 can launch a missile before the F-15C does, so from a purely kinematic standpoint, the Russian fighters outperform the F-15C in the beyond-visual-range fight.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-15.htm

That quote is an excellent example of why FAS is not always a reliable source. Whoever wrote that apparently has no idea what "kinematics" means. Hint: it has nothing to do with radar. In fact, a lot of their numbers on a lot of different systems are jacked up.

Not if the case is with the AA-9 Amos and AA-10C Alamo missiles that arm Mig-29s, Mig-31s and Su-27s. In that case the Russians win totally. Then there is also the Novator KS-172 AAM-L (R-172), russian ultra long-range air-to-air missile capable of 400 km range and top speed of Mach 4, developed in Russia being offered to India for their Flankers, also possibly to be deployed on Mig-1.42. The KS-172 was first shown as a mock-up at an air show in Abu Dhabi in 1993, but with post-Soviet funding problems, the program was put on hold. Now, India is launching an Indo-Russian co-venture to produce the missile, which would then arm IAF Su-30MKIs.

If the AA-6/7/9/10 was so awesome, why dont coalition aircraft get shot down? How the hell do we get close enough to launch the horrible short-range AMRAAM?

And do you really think the US is sitting still on the missile front? I highly doubt that our forces are so completely satisfied with the AIM-120 that we're not working on a follow-up.

[Bill]

Its flat out better than the AIM-9M. 9X is mostly classified, I believe, so we wont even bother with that one, except to re-mention the JHMCS..

According to open source info AIM-9X is a 90g missile with an approx 25nm range in an ideal closing engagement.

[Bill]

That quote is an excellent example of why FAS is not always a reliable source. Whoever wrote that apparently has no idea what "kinematics" means. Hint: it has nothing to do with radar. In fact, a lot of their numbers on a lot of different systems are jacked up.

FAS really is terrible.

If the AA-6/7/9/10 was so awesome, why dont coalition aircraft get shot down? How the hell do we get close enough to launch the horrible short-range AMRAAM?

And do you really think the US is sitting still on the missile front? I highly doubt that our forces are so completely satisfied with the AIM-120 that we're not working on a follow-up.

The USAF is messing with an air-breathing version of AMRAAM that can supposedly exceed Mach 6+ while also extending range considerably.
It was called the AMRAAM VFDR program, but i think they're calling it something else now.

[Jimmy]

FAS really is terrible.




The USAF is messing with an air-breathing version of AMRAAM that can supposedly exceed Mach 6+ while also extending range considerably.
It was called the AMRAAM VFDR program, but i think they're calling it something else now.

Interesting...I'm in the middle of some research into the AMRAAM right now, but I havent run across anything about this...looks like I've got some more reading to do.

[HistoricalDavid]

Not if the case is with the AA-9 Amos and AA-10C Alamo missiles that arm Mig-29s, Mig-31s and Su-27s.[/b]

AA-9 Amos is only on MiG-31, just like Phoenix is only on F-14.

In that case the Russians win totally.

So the AA-10C is better than the latest AMRAAM? OK.

Then there is also the Novator KS-172 AAM-L (R-172), russian ultra long-range air-to-air missile capable of 400 km range and top speed of Mach 4, developed in Russia being offered to India for their Flankers, also possibly to be deployed on Mig-1.42.

The 1.42 was cancelled.

Can fighter-sized targets be detected at 400km? Certainly not the F/A-22. Mach 4 is also not that fast for such a large AAM.

The KS-172 was first shown as a mock-up

Great. A mock-up.

at an air show in Abu Dhabi in 1993, but with post-Soviet funding problems, the program was put on hold. Now, India is launching an Indo-Russian co-venture to produce the missile, which would then arm IAF Su-30MKIs.

I could just point to M21's Mach 6 AMRAAM... We are talking about future programmes, after all.

[Franco Lolan]

Even with their super manuverability, they can't outmanuver a missile that can pull excess 20gs. Also most air forces try to hit from far away. Meaning that they'll launch their missiles from a good distance and not engage the enemy fighters in a dogfight. So that doesn't matter. Avionics is what matters.

The Su-27 has a larger engagement parameter than the F-15 due to its ability to carry R-77's, AA-10's, and possibly in the future, KS-172's, all of which have longer range than AIM-120C's.

[The_Burning_Kid]

The Su-27 has a larger engagement parameter than the F-15 due to its ability to carry R-77's, AA-10's, and possibly in the future, KS-172's, all of which have longer range than AIM-120C's.

A missile is as good as the pilot. The Su-27's radar is inferior to the F-15, so it will have to detect the F-15 before it can launch its missiles. But by the time it detects the F-15, the F-15 will have launched it's missile and hit the Su-27.

[Firral]

Super manuverability doesn't matter in fights. Even with their super manuverability, they can't outmanuver a missile that can pull excess 20gs. Also most air forces try to hit from far away. Meaning that they'll launch their missiles from a good distance and not engage the enemy fighters in a dogfight. So that doesn't matter. Avionics is what matters.

So already thought when projected F-4 an onboard gun. After battles in Vietnam with northern Vietnamese the MIG on it at once have put М61 Vulcan

[hello]

I could just point to M21's Mach 6 AMRAAM... We are talking about future programmes, after all.

I think its AMRAAM VFDR(Variable Flow Ducted Ramjet) or something like that.
By the way, F-15 is about 15 years older than Su-27 and nearly 20 years older than the Su-30.