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

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post13 Dec 2004, 19:38

IDF/AF F-16D intercepted a unarmed Russian Su-27K, intruding Israel airspace, in Jan 1996? :shock:

article here. (sorry guys, it is in Chinese.)
Desmond
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1068
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post13 Dec 2004, 19:52

Thats usefull. How many here can read it?
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post14 Dec 2004, 19:24

lamoey wrote:Thats usefull. How many here can read it?


hi lamoey, there are 2 parts to the article. In the first part, the Chinese columnist extracted the article from IAF magazine and in the 2nd part, he provides his personal opinion. The following is a try on the translation (text in blue). I stand to be corrected on the translation. Alternatively, you can cut and paste some of the Chinese characters (拉马特·戴维) on google. It will returns alternate URL with translated text in English.

The following article is originated from Israel Air Force magazine.

27 January 1996, 15:00, 2 F-16D from 109 “Valley” squadron scrambled from Ramat-David Air Base, for Air Intercept mission after an intrusion alert was sounded.

The F-16Ds were vectored by ground C2 to intercept in the direction of Haifa. Radar contact indicated bogie’s altitude 1500 meter in the vicinity, east of Mediterranean Sea. 2 F-16Ds acquired visual at 15 miles (distance to target), and confirmed intruding aircraft was not armed with any air-to-air missile.

With the closing of the distance between the F-16s and the unidentified aircraft, Israel pilot confirmed it was a Russian-made Su-27. The F-16s continued to close in on the intruder (so close where the feature of the Flanker’s pilot was clearly visible), and the Israel pilot issued verbal warning using fluent Arabic. “You have violated Israel airspace! You’re to leave immediately.” Su-27 pilot appeared to have understood and headed in the west. The 2 F-16Ds returned to base shortly.

Shortly after the 2 interceptors have landed, intrusion alert sounded again. Unidentified aircraft was contacted violating the same area. Another pair of F-16Ds from 109 sqn was launched.

Radar contacted bogie, east of Haifa, heading south, in high speed. 2 F-16Ds approached the target as before. The intruder was again identified as Su-27 and unarmed. Unlike the first intercept, the 2 F-16Ds were armed with missile. Approximately, T-5sec, Su-27 changed course and headed west. With that, the F-16Ds aborted intercept and headed in the direction of Haifa. As the F-16Ds were flying toward Haifa, the Su-27 once again changed course and resumed intrusion path. F-16 pilot consulted C&C. With the instruction from C&C, the interceptors ignored the Su-27 and continued the flight path toward Haifa. A few minutes later, Su-27 changed course and headed west.

While the F-16Ds were about to return to base, upon the completion of combat air patrol, Air Defense radar again made contact of unidentified aircraft (25 mile, feet wet, altitude 5000 meter) approaching Israel. Once again, the F-16s turned to intercept at low altitude (300 meter).

Initial assessment concluded the unidentified aircraft was a Syrian Su-27 (not the same Flanker as per the previous encounters). However, upon a closer examination, the Viper pilot confirmed, the intruder was Russian Navy Su-27. To avoid any unnecessary, international incident, the Vipers broke stalemate and continued CAP in the North. Analysis concluded the Su-27 was probably from Russia aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov.


The following is the comments from the Chinese columnist.

Intrigue point from the article: It is difficult to comprehend why Israel pilots did not identify the platform of the intruder before they realized, it was not carrying any air-to-air missile. One explanation, we can deduce from the HUD picture above is, Israel pilot approached the Flanker at the six o’clock position. Hence, he noticed the absent of the missile before he could identify the platform. However, this leads to another question. How could the Flanker pilot allowed the Vipers to approach him to such proximity. In addition, it is difficult to picture the scenario, if the Vipers have approached in the six o’clock position, how could the Israel pilot be “so close where the feature of the Flanker’s pilot was clearly visible”. The author could have exaggerated the event. In any case, it was a 2 Vs 1 situation. One F-16 could have flown to the side of the Flanker while the other F-16 covering the six (one that has taken the above HUD picture). This speculation could also reason, how the Israeli has positively identified the Flanker belongs to the Russia Navy. The insignia on the tail is too obvious to be missed.

Somewhere in December 1995, Russia aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov was passing the Strait of Bosporus into Mediterranean Sea. The Flanker in the above encounters could be a Su-27K from Admiral Kuznetsov.

Another intrigue point: During the first intercept, the Flanker pilot seemed to have understood the warning issued in Arabic, leaving Israel airspace. It is a general knowledge, Arabic is not a common language. Most Russian aviator is not proficient in the language. During the Cold War, Russia consultants stationed in Egypt and Syria did not communicate in Arabic. Their Arab counterparts spoke only Russian for day-to-day interactions. Hence, if the Flanker pilot comprehended the warning issued in Arabic, it could be a Syrian, probably a Syrian test pilot. Last reason could be, the Flanker did not understand the warning, but figured it was a threat. Leaving the area after he realized the 2 F-16s approached him with hostile intent.


It was not mentioned about the label on the 3 HUD pictures. The number probably indicates the 1st, 2nd and 3rd intercepts. Hope this helps. Perhaps any Israel friends here could confirm the content of the article from IAF magazine. The Chinese columnist has probably translated it from Hebrew, that could be distorted.

cheers,
Desmond
Offline

dionis

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2005, 16:59

Unread post03 Feb 2005, 19:49

Again, like with the Mig-29 topic, people here are comparing the Su-27SK (Flanker B) vs the F-16 Block 50+ variants. Unfortunately, I bet the old Flanker could still be a tough challenge for the F-16E, but things aren't that simple anymore. The Russian Air Force (and Sukhoi) announced a new program for all Su-27SK (Series/Kommercial) variants of the aircraft, with the intent to modernize the aircraft. The possibilities are ALMOST LIMITLESS, but the Russian Air Force will upgrade their aicraft like THIS:

***Su-27SM***

New radar system N010-MSF (NIIR Zhuk-MSF Sokol) Phased Array radar system, capable of tracking large targets like AWACs at 400KM out..tracks 16 targets and engages 6. (Higher end upgrade) and SAR ofcourse..

The other possiblity is keeping the N001, but upgrading it with the Pero phased array antenna (giving 250Km range, 12 track, 4 engage possibility) gives SAR also..

This is still being disputed..any many people the better upgrade to truly make the Su-27 more effective

but both systems blow away any APG-68V(9) or APG-80..

then the ECM system is being upgraded (internally) and PODS are always available, the fly by wire system is being updated, and the cockpit is being updated to look like THIS:

Image

The engines are being upgraded to the AL-31FM versions, which are not thrust vectored but produce 13,100kgf of thrust. (vs 12,500)

2 new hardpoints have been added, making the plane have 12 harpoints. The plane can carry 8,000Kg of weapons (more than the F-16E) and has a much longer range, service ceiling, and is faster. The plane carries internal laser and IR targetting equipment.

Anti ground equipment includes KAB 500/1500 bombs (TV, Laser, GLONASS/GPS guided) YES.. Russian GPS guided bombs! Kab-500SE.. and these are comparable to the US made GBUs..

Kh-25/29 anti-ground missiles.. with all kinds of warheads (Kh-25 is longer ranged and similar in power to the AGM-65, while the Kh-29 is similar or slightly shorter ranged depending on variants, but packs at 4x - 6x more powerful warhead than the AGM-65)

The antishipping weapons can't even be compared, the AGM-84 Harpoon is a joke. The Su-27SM gets the medium long range supersonic Kh-31A, the subsonic long range Kh-35E, or the insanely powerful SS-N-27 Alfa.. of which it can carry 4. (350Kg warhead, 350Km range, subsonic to supersonic flight profile -- hi lo) Then it can carry the Kh-41 Moskit (supersonic, 150KM range antiship missile with 250Kg warhead).. or the insane SS-N-26 Yakhont missile, more advanced Moskit, with a range of 350Km, 250kg warhead and active,passive,IR, command, inertial, gps guidance all in 1, and even an inter-missile link.

The AGM-88 HARM is totally outclassed by the Kh-31P, which is much longer ranged and has a larger warhead.

Air to Air missile are comprised of the advanced AA-10s (R-27ER and ET) which are either semi active or infrared, but with increased range, and even the R-27EA can be made, an active seeker, and easily replace since the missile is modular.

The R-77/AA-12 Ramjet version is also coming into service soon, with a range of 120+ KM and a speed of Mach 5.

The aircraft can also carry the large R-37, which is a long range 300KM anti-bomber/AWACs missile.

The R-73M/M2 are longer ranged and more manuevarable than even the AIM-9X, thanks to their dynamic gas control engines.

We all know the Flanker is more manuevarable (wing size and aerodynamic design).

F-16 holds up? I don't think so..
Last edited by dionis on 22 Aug 2005, 20:57, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

DeepSpace

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1055
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2003, 18:26

Unread post03 Feb 2005, 20:07

Pumpkin wrote:IDF/AF F-16D intercepted a unarmed Russian Su-27K, intruding Israel airspace, in Jan 1996? :shock:

article here. (sorry guys, it is in Chinese.)


Pumpkin, it's indeed true. On the 27th of January 1996 three Su-27K (Su-33) violated the Israeli air space (one after another). The F-16's were scrambled from the Valley Squadron (F-16D) and from the First Jet Squadron (F-16C).

Here is the article from the IDF/AF Magazine (in Hebrew). It's pretty long, I'll see if I'll manage to translate it.
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post03 Feb 2005, 20:23

DeepSpace wrote:Here is the article from the IDF/AF Magazine (in Hebrew). It's pretty long, I'll see if I'll manage to translate it.


DeepSpace, good to have THE original article from the IAF magazine itself. I see that the site actually has a English version. Do they not have the article in English too?

Would certainly like to know more about the encounter. If my memories serve, that will be the second meeting between the Viper & Flanker.

cheers,
Desmond
Offline

DeepSpace

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1055
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2003, 18:26

Unread post03 Feb 2005, 20:30

Pumpkin, the website does have an English version, though none of the articles from the magazine itself are being translated, don't ask me why. I guess I'll have to find the time to translate it.
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post03 Feb 2005, 20:44

Thanks for the effort DeepSpace!
Desmond
Offline

ACSheva

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 442
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 04:48

Unread post04 Feb 2005, 02:09

Very interesting facts you brought to the table Mr Dionis. Ahh yes, the Russian 27-37 are all very formidable jets if in hands of a good pilot. I think that we can find common ground there.

Good Night

Shev
Offline

Pat1

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 235
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2004, 04:38

Unread post04 Feb 2005, 09:39

dionis, what exactly to you consider nonsense? Please point out specifics :roll:
Offline

dionis

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2005, 16:59

Unread post05 Feb 2005, 20:26

The Su-27 is '80s technology at best. F-16s have been continually upgraded during their service life, I don't think you can say the same for the Su-27s still in service. < non-sense #1

Again this is a dream to think that the ground attack abilities can match an F-16. <non-sense #2

and i'm too tired to look for more, but I bet I could find another example or two.
Offline

agilefalcon16

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 401
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2005, 20:59

Unread post07 Feb 2005, 20:53

How about the VISTA F-16? Would it have an advantage in a dogfight against the Flanker?
Offline

ACSheva

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 442
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 04:48

Unread post08 Feb 2005, 01:47

Is VISTA even operational in our service? or is it just a testbed for the test pilot school?
Offline

kacman

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2003, 16:37

Unread post08 Feb 2005, 02:38

None could match the Flanker (with canard and TVC) in terms of maneuverability I believe. But it doesn't really matter because it's all about technology and BVR missile, which Russian is pretty much lagging behind. All are claims but is it really true or proven?
Offline

ACSheva

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 442
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2004, 04:48

Unread post08 Feb 2005, 03:47

Russian is pretty much lagging behind


Doesn't the 27-37 have bigger radar than the 16? So it will get a first shot, since it will see the 16 first. Also the Flankers can carry more weapons,gas,and etc. And the manueverability does matter Kackman, if it gets to be a WVR scenario than the Flankers ability to turn will surely give him the edge over the little Viper. After all they are fighter jets.

Shev
PreviousNext

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests