Su-27 vs F-16

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 02:22

Unfortunately Even the "New" M2 version of the MiG-29 can compare to a Block 4x or 5x F-16. Nor does any SU-3x. Although someday the Indians might get smart and put a real laser pod on it ( LITENING ) That still leaves you without cheap all weather PGMs. So good luck on that.

About F-16 performance. Well like I said the big SU is a threat, with the stress on it being BIG. R-77 ( AA-12 ) to some of you is unproven. AMRAAM on the other hand.... has a combat record. So if you even make it into WVR, after eating that, you still have that size thing again. SU is big F-16 is small. Who do you think will Tally first? hint hint. Hopefully environmental conditions allow for that IRTS to work. You'll need it. AIM-9x will be operational soon so any HOBS helmet heater combo there is a moot point. You can do airshow moves all you want, you'll just be dead.

What I would suggest is that because the FLANKER has some speed and gas that it stands off and avoids WVR. If you want to close in to AMRAAM and later HOBS AIM-9X range, go ahead, but you will give up any advantage you had by standing off.

Cobra = Strafe target, but go ahead and try it. Fortunately FLANKER has a nice ejection seat.

Big SU is a threat. I'd hate to pay the check for it's sustainment every year though. And I'm spoiled. If it can't do a J-Weapon for A2G, I don't really want to see it.

Cylon has some cool photos of a MiG28 over the Indian Ocean. He was with it in an inverted dive. But he can't show them. Restricted and all. Plus I think you can see his middle finger in the foreground of one of his photos. ( Gums did call him a prevert the other day ). Figures.
Last edited by elp on 20 Jul 2004, 09:40, edited 1 time in total.
- ELP -
Offline

parrothead

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3279
  • Joined: 10 May 2004, 23:04

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 05:44

Su-30MKI - The best aircraft in service today( has radar so powerful it is refered to as the Mini-AWACS in the RuAF )


Am I wrong, or does that powerful of a radar on a fighter just scream "HERE I AM!!!" these days? Call me crazy, but I would much rather have a real AWACS give me the info so I don't have to transmit myself. Remember, an enemy can detect your radar before your radar can detect him.
No plane on Sunday, maybe be one come Monday...
www.parrotheadjeff.com
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 09:52

MiG21bisHZS wrote:
Su-30K - A ground attack version of Su-27UB(compatible to F-16C/D)
Su-30MK - Used by Russia and India.. I dont know much about this variant
Su-30MKK - Used by Russia and China, this aircraft has all kinds of capabilities as the F-16(any type)
Su-30MK2 - Used By China .... it has good ground attack capabilities but not a lot of info on it.
Su-30MKI - The best aircraft in service today( has radar so powerful it is refered to as the Mini-AWACS in the RuAF )


Again this is a dream to think that the ground attack abilities can match an F-16.

Even an F-16 with both LANTIRN pods like a BLOCK 4x has full blown night attack ability with PGMs. ...... AND THAT IS OLD technology.

Take a Block-5x and SNIPER-XR and an NVG ( Night Vision Goggle ) jet and and NVG trained pilot. Add to that its ability to do J weapons like JDAM, and guess what? The best a SU-3x could pull off today would be an Allied Force 1999 style of scenario with LGBs or Optical bombs. And this is why I mentioned Allied Force 1999. ( which tech wise might as well have been 20 years ago the way we fight today) You show up with your SU-3x and optical / LGB bombs and guess what? If the target is clouded over by weather... you go home with the bombs still on your racks.

F-16 in USAF service doesn't suffer that problem. And with SU-3x you probably don't have enough $$$ to fire some of those magic bullet A2G missiles for more than a day or so. Good luck. The GLONASS assisted version of the KAB-500 PGM ? Good luck there. No secure topology for a very limited satellite network. Maybe another 10 years. China and India will probably beat Russia to that. I would recommend that India go with the French AASM. One version of that can INS bomb and not need GPS assist. Better than nothing.

Right now for PGM versatility, the SU-3x can't even compete with a JDAM capable, LITENING pod equiped, NVG mod'ed, NVG trained crew, USAF Reserve Block 3x. This setup can all weather bomb and is part of an existing netcentric procedure and method of fighting. By the time SU-3x catches up to that, we will have moved on to something else.
- ELP -
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 16:25

Add to that: in a sales enviornment where the customer has the $$$ , They go with something Like an F-15E or F-16 because it is a complete combat system able to do all things well. Not a jet like the SU-3x trying to play catch up to our 80's air-to-ground tech and then still has some kind of issue that just doesn't smell good when the deal is presented. To assume that a SU-35 could do all the diverse types of missions an F-15K could in the Korea deal is complete fantasy.
- ELP -
Offline

habu2

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2810
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2003, 20:36

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 17:39

As for visual tallies due to size differences, every Su-27 (and MiG-29) I have seen in flight smoked like J79s in an old F-4 Phantom. The smoke trail was easy to spot, and led right to the jet...
Reality Is For People Who Can't Handle Simulation
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1101
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 19:07

What is the warmup/lineup time of all these new smart bubs relying on inertial guidance like the french AASM? I'm way out of date here, but I can imagine that you need to fire it up way in advance to get it to go where you want?
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 21:28

Warm up time for the INS on the weapon hanging on the jet? Don't know. I have some excellent educated guesses but maybe an ammo troop could answer that so you get the correct answer, unless it is restricted info.... ? Might vary by weapon also. I heard the AASM has been delayed another year but that is second hand info at least, so I don't know if it is true. They were supposed to get all the drops done on it this year and have it ready sometime in 2005.
- ELP -
Offline

viper31

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2004, 16:59

Unread post20 Jul 2004, 22:35

MiG21bisHZS wrote:
SwedgeII wrote:any truth to the rumor that the S-27's tail cone contains a small Radar for a rear firing missile


Yes thats true.... it is used for 360 degree coverage of the aircrafts surroundings.. limit is 40 miles.

Also use to fire AA-11B A backfire version of the Original AA-11A... it fires backwards.



Thought this wasn't true. The SU-27 tail cone contains a break parachute, nothing else. There are versions (two-seater, pilots next to eachother => SU-32/34) where you clearly see a larger tail cone than the one that can be found on SU-27 series. An Su-27 simply doesn't have the space to put a back-looking radar. I remember reading that is was being tested on the SU-32/34 series, but don't know if this can be used in real combat.

When speaking about F-16 vs Flanker variant, my 'guess' is (assuming pilot skills are equal,... ) Flanker will win the fight. Doesn't the Flanker have better long range capability and also in dogfight the helmet cued system (srr if spelled wrong) , So the pilot just has to look and lock , manouver a bit and shoot a short range missile.(R-73)

The only 'fighter-experience' I have is from the lock on combat simulation. Probably nothing like the real thing, but I really think it gives you an image of how things work a bit. And flying against SU 27/SU33 series is really hard, those long range missiles do work, in the game of course, dont know nothing about real life

Greetz, Benjamin :wink:
Attachments
su271.jpg
Su-32_03.jpg
Offline

DEX

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 28 Jun 2004, 20:19

Unread post21 Jul 2004, 03:00

I think it is unlikely that the forward looking radar would have an azimuth field coverage of 180 degrees. Azimuth field value is usually less than that, so even if there were a rear facing radar, it still probably wouldn't mean 360 degree coverage. The forward facing radar would cover a certain width and the rear facing radar a certain width.

Anyone have a more educated response regarding this aspect of the radar? Are there 27s with AESA? If they have AESA microwaves then the need to mechanically move the radar is eliminted. In this case, perhaps they do in fact have this coverage?


- Dex
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post21 Jul 2004, 05:03

viper31 wrote:

When speaking about F-16 vs Flanker variant, my 'guess' is (assuming pilot skills are equal,... ) Flanker will win the fight. Doesn't the Flanker have better long range capability and also in dogfight the helmet cued system (srr if spelled wrong) , So the pilot just has to look and lock , manouver a bit and shoot a short range missile.(R-73)




And it was the SU-27 that dominated the MiG-29 in Ethiopea v Eritrea, in close in work, an area the Mig-29 is supposed to be really good at ;) .

I am a simplton. I break down the R-73 ( AA-11 ) into two broad areas. Old ones and new ones. Old ones have less of a HOBs Helmet engagement zone. ( still way better than nothing ). The newer setup ( like what India ?? ) has, is a wider engagement zone.

Right now no F-16 in USAF service has a HOBS_Helmet_Heater setup. That is going to change very soon with the AIM-9x.

Places like IDF have a nice Python HOBS setup on their F-16s.
- ELP -
Offline

KarimAbdoun

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 516
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2004, 19:47

Unread post21 Jul 2004, 23:30

Unfortunately Even the "New" M2 version of the MiG-29 can compare to a Block 4x or 5x F-16.

How about the newest version the SMT?
The fighter is not what counts, it's the one who's flying it that matters!
Offline

nico01a

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2004, 11:00

Unread post25 Jul 2004, 18:01

Hey elp you seem to be a specialist and awfully sure about what you all say about the Su-3x, do you fly it?

And you may just have the finest little gadgets in the world on your fighter with the most expensive lantirn pods and the most cash available to your military to go and make war ... wauw ... ever considered that the world is not all about that?
Offline

Lawman

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 356
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2003, 21:35

Unread post26 Jul 2004, 05:48

nico01a wrote:Hey elp you seem to be a specialist and awfully sure about what you all say about the Su-3x, do you fly it?

And you may just have the finest little gadgets in the world on your fighter with the most expensive lantirn pods and the most cash available to your military to go and make war ... wauw ... ever considered that the world is not all about that?


Its not cost effective to have an aircraft without the system to back it up. Spending millions of dollors on the weapons transportation to target means nothing if you cant 1. Avoid Enemy Defences (AWACS) 2. ID the target (Sniper/Lantirn/ATFLIR) 3. Destroy the target without tasking multiple aircraft to make up for weapon innaccuracy (PGM).

No Russian Aircraft has ever demonstrated an actual ability to do effective coordinated Strike Missions against a capable defence system. The conflicts over Isreal in the last half century would be a great example. The Syrians, Egyptians, Jordanians, had the planes to do it but never pulled it off. Why because striking targets isnt as simple as just telling pilots fly to here, drop on what you see. You have to be flexible enough to deal with any change in the battlefield, and have to know whats going on outside of your individual cockpit. On the other hand Western capabilities have been increasing exponentially in the last 35 years with the mentality of building smarter weapons. Individual Strike Packages, operating with command and control can destroy multiple targets from a single aircraft. Indiviual Weapons can destroy multiple targets using sensor fused technology. Just cause you have a great airshow plane doesnt mean your ready to take it to war.
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post26 Jul 2004, 08:43

nico01a wrote:Hey elp you seem to be a specialist and awfully sure about what you all say about the Su-3x, do you fly it?

And you may just have the finest little gadgets in the world on your fighter with the most expensive lantirn pods and the most cash available to your military to go and make war ... wauw ... ever considered that the world is not all about that?


We are doing a comparison: FACT: there are no cheap all weather dumb iron kits for the SU-27, 3x to do all weather bombing. If you can prove to me the GLONASS version of the KAB-500 has been fielded ( and not just a PDF file ) ..... So anyway.. Tossing PGMs with the Ru Tech birds has approached maybe the way we did things in the early-90s.. And we havent even begun to address the method of fragging targets in a timely manner which I doubt the command and control support is there for that either, so good luck on that too. Hope you like fair weather or clear night bombing, because that is all you are going to do, unless you want to use a bunch of sorties for one target in not so good weather. We are long past that. This means Ru tech is not in the targets per sortie club ( in any weather with a cheap PGM ) like an F-16 or F-18SH.
- ELP -
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 901
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2003, 21:12

Unread post26 Jul 2004, 22:01

Great discussion, guys. You guys sound right. I am no expert in the subject. I personally like both the Flanker and the Viper. Revert to habu2's comment on such X vs Y thread, I guess we can never achieved a conclusive if not unbiased studies, comparing 2 platforms, as air operations are really fighting as a networked arm these days. Not forgetting the many intangible factors.

Thus far, no real case case studies (Flanker vs Viper) can conclude our debates here. I am afraid, even if there is any, it is only good enough to conclude that particular scenario. Lesson can nonetheless, be learned from combined air exercises.

I am satisfied with the findings from Cope India 2004. Understand you guys have some theories about that exercise. To name a few, we have the F-22 bid and the exercise setup. Pretty much covered in the other thread here.

For the record, I would like to make an unbiased note. I feel the Flanker, particularly IAF Su-30MKI/MK, should be deemed as one of the most respectable adversay against the Viper. I hope any well trained, humble Viper pilot can always treat the Flanker with utmost respect, to survive the fight and live to meet another Russian-made adversay.

just my 2 cent, :)
Desmond
PreviousNext

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests