Page 1 of 6

Su-27 vs F-16

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2004, 17:54
by KarimAbdoun
Another classic Russian-American comparison, 2 of the best fighters to be used during dogfights and interseptions each could be modified to do a variety of missions, at least one of them does.

Add your suggestions

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2004, 18:12
by SwedgeII
Well, I think the Su-27 is better then the F-15 and I think the F-15 is better then the F-16 sooooo The big draw back to the Su-27 is its a huge fricken aircraft, big target. I wonder how well the IRST works on that baby? It could use the IRST and wait for tell somebody turns on a radar and gives them selves away. Radar is a double edged sword, you turn yours on and you give your self away!!! Like shooting tracers… I was wondering about that on the F-22, it must rely heavily on AWACS for vectoring, cause as soon as it fires up its radar, its shouting hear I am stealthy or not!!! The F-16 being much smaller has an advantage in the stealth dept, but that goes away if it turns on its radar to search. And the SU-27 does have better radar. Bigger is always better for radar!!! But on a 1 v 1 with NO outside help the Su has the edge. A better match up is the SU-27 vs F-15… IMHO

Su-27 vs F-16

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2004, 18:39
by Wildcat
Even in BVR combat, the F-16 has advantages over the original Su-27:
1) The aperture of the Su-27 radar is only 60° horizontal and 10° vertical (compared to 120° horizontal for a F-16). It is better than the MiG-29 50° horizontal, but the F-16 radars till provides better situation awareness, though it is less powerful than the big Su-27 radar.
2) The main BVR weapon of the Su-27 is still the R-27, which has not proved to be a very effective missile (Elp should be there to say it :D ). Moreover the R-77 is still unproven as a real-world weapon, and it seems that it has not yet been largely fielded.

Anyway, I wonder if these comparisons between aircraft are really useful. Saying one is better than another does not often make sense: a good aircraft is the one that enables its pilot (knowing the strengths and weaknesses of his/her plane) to win.
For example, the Hornet is good at low speed and high AoA maneuvers, whereas the Eagle is the king a brute thrust and acceleration. So in a dogfight between a Hornet and an Eagle, each pilot would try to get to the situation in which he/she can use the best of its aircraft.
What is paramount is to have well-trained pilots who know how to use the qualities of their jets, THAT has made the difference in the history of air combat.

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2004, 19:41
by SwedgeII
any truth to the rumor that the S-27's tail cone contains a small Radar for a rear firing missile

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2004, 20:11
by elp
Problem now is you have Chinese made Su27s which at first had some QC issues but now expect them to be much better off. Also not just the Chinese R77 but some other active BVR missile they have ( indiginous ) that should work. So If you are talking old SU-27, It is no secret I don't like early R-27s. Now though it is getting kinda scary. Newer R-27s might actually work. If the R77 works as advertised it could be a problem. I am very hard on the Ru AF. People issues are what help make an AF work and in the case of the Ru AF, they have people issues with hair on it, so I don't know how consistant you are going to get their gear to work all the time.

WVR I would still pick the F-16. Hard to keep a tally on an F-16 when it is A: small and B: Your rear SU-27 visibility sux. The opposite for an F-16. WVR you will see the SU first. most likely keep a tally on it and your rearward vis is outstanding. Recent history has shown ( excerpt below ) that you can still have some deadly WVR jets on both sides show up against each other, and the one that sees the other guy first will get the kill.

The Knife Fight

By September 2001, the situation detoriated further, especially so after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, which made both the SyAAF and the IDF/AF extremely nervous. Exactly this provoked the so far heaviest incident in the recent history of Syrian-Israeli aerial clashes.

On 14 September 2001, an IDF/AF Boeing 707, equipped for SIGINT-reconnaissance, was on a mission along the Lebanese and Syrian coast, collecting Syrian defense informations, monitoring foremost telecommunications and radar tags in the Tarabulus (Tripolis) and Hamidiyali areas. The plane was underway at 520 knots and 30.000ft, and escorted by two F-15Cs, at least one of which carried the newest Python Mk.IV air-to-air missiles.

The IDF/AF flew similar missions in the area at least twice a week for quite some time, and – as usually – the SyAAF scrambled two interceptors to shadow the “ferret”: the Syrians would always monitor the operations of Israeli reconnaissance aircraft, sending either MiG-23s from Abu ad-Duhor AB, or – less often – MiG-29s from Tsaykal, forward deployed at al-Ladhiqiyah, would get the honor to fly such missions over the Mediterranean Sea. So far, the Syrians have always taken care to stay at least some 20 kilometers away from Israeli planes, and never showed any interest in attacking the Israelis.

But, on this day, at 0914hrs, the two MiG-29s sent to shadow the Boeing 707 suddenly turned towards the Israeli aircraft and increased their speed. For the pilots of the two Israeli F-15s in escort this was not only surprising, but also an obviously aggressive maneuver. Due to the short range, there was no time to ask questions: the MiGs turned towards the Israeli planes in aggressive manner, and could open fire any moment.

The leader of the F-15-pair ordered the Boeing to instantly distance from the area and engage ECM systems, and then called his ground control for help and reinforcements (as a result of this call, six more F-15s and six F-16s were scrambled, along a single Boeing 707 tanker). Moment later, he warned the Syrian MiG-29 pilots on the international distress frequency to change their course. As the MiGs failed to response, the Eagles moved into attack.

One of the F-15s attacked the lead Syrian MiG-29 from above, closing directly out of the rising sun, and launching a single Python Mk.IV from an off-boresight angle of 40 degrees. The missile guided properly and hit the MiG above the left wing, immediately setting it afire.

The other MiG-29 banked hard right, apparently heading back to Syria, but it was too late, as the second F-15 was already too close: the pilot launched a single AIM-9M Sidewinder from a range of only 500 meters. The missile slammed into the target, crashing it into the sea.

Both Syrian pilots, Maj. Arshad Midhat Mubarak, and Capt. Ahmad al-Khatab, ejected safely and were recovered by Syrian ships. The names of the involved Israeli F-15-pilots remain unknown.

Other: Most Su-27s have an incomplete AWACs or nonexistant AWACs helping them. When you do something like this, you have to consider who has better support team members also.

IRST is cool. IRST was originally designed as a silent attack. GCI or what ever would get you into position ( obviously with your radar off ) and you could use the IRST to aquire the target once you got into range so as to position yourself. ( good for intercepting bombers ) IRST depends a lot on atmospherics / weather etc. Don't look at an IRST range figure and assume that that range is always "as printed", and don't expect the atmospherics to always cooperate with it's usefulness. I guess it is useful or they wouldn't put it on there. Just don't look at a range figure on the thing ( example 30km ) and assume that is a real number - every day - all the time.

The SU as mentioned is fast and has fuel. This means that assuming it has Situational Awareness, it can chose how it wants to engage and / or draw out the opposition. The F-16 has a little of this ability but not much. Depends on the scenarios- SU defending or offending? F-16 defending or offending? Try not to use a USAF comparison because an opponent in that situation will get sensory overload and / or denial from a wave of different manned.... and unmanned platforms before it even sees an F-16, assuming it's airfield didn't already eat a wave of GBU-31, JDAMs.

Unread postPosted: 20 Mar 2004, 20:36
by KarimAbdoun
Other: Most Su-27s have an incomplete AWACs or nonexistant AWACs helping them. When you do something like this, you have to consider who has better support team members also.

According to an article in AFM, air forces monthly, I quote" The Soviet Air Defense Forces were to a system of ground-controlled interception which removed decision-making from the cockpit and put it in the hands of those on the ground. This slowly changed around the same time the Su-27 Flanker entered service." and there is a picture of 2 Su-27s escourting an A-50 Mainstay AWACS

Unread postPosted: 21 Mar 2004, 04:57
by elp
Yeah and if I am not mistaken early A-50s had such computer problems that they were effectively a sensor with a datalink to a ground station to process the information. That is always the problem with sensor jets like AWACS, JSTARS etc. Getting all the onboard processing power to sing in tune. Thats why India went for an Israeli solution for their AWACs sensor / computer processing setup. Those A-50 pics do make for a nice photo anyway.

We have been using AWACs operationaly for over 30 years in high ops tempo environments. Decide which system is more useable when the shooting starts for yourself. The other end of that to is that a A-50 / SU-27 setup would be fighting a force famous for using SIGINT effectively to compromise whole familys of Ru Tech datalinks and GCI.

Unread postPosted: 20 May 2004, 16:04
by KarimAbdoun
Let's look at it in another approach, Su-27-35-37-33(derivatives)vs F-16

Unread postPosted: 20 May 2004, 17:48
by elp
Certainly you have to think SU-30.... as that is being fielded now/today. SU-35-37 so far have ended up just being demo birds.

SU-30. Well my first thought is that there are several versions of this jet. Add to that the $$$ needed to get all the weapons certified on it where you can declare it combat ready.

I am all for long range BVR missiles. Thing is though to quote a friend of mine: OSW/ONW has shown us that the farther away you shoot..... the more you miss. ( O.T. an advantage of F-22 is that it can get into a resonable range and get a good PK with AIM120 ) . Most Iran/Iraq war AIM-54 Phoenix kills were against an opponent who had lousy or non-existant threat warning. They never had a chance and were not much more than range drones. An AIM-54 ain't to fast far out, and I doubt that the R77 has much energy way way out based on it's over-hyped range.

So anyway, think about that. Ru-tech BVR doesn't do anything for me. Show me... not a paper diagram with a chart showing a missiles parameters... looks real pretty, but can it fight?

The big SU is ... well... big.... An F-16 can be hard to see WVR, not so with something as big as a SU-3x and that big frame means IMHO that you, the F-16 user, are going to see it first not only WVR, but on radar, far ... far away.

The air to ground stuff again still has a long way to go. The gold standard for combat utiltiy/usefulness/Swiss Army Knife/Versatility is the F-16 Block 5x jet with both fancy HARM ability AND the latest software upgrades, gizmos to do modern PGMs ..... and the wonderful SNIPER pod. I don't just look at A2A, I look at the whole system. Call me when the SU-3x can do near all weather bombing on the cheap.

Again, as for the big SU's performance, it has it, but my other comment is: "Boy... dem big SU's with just a dinky bit of internal fuel in dem, sure dooo put on a fine airshow demo." Also things like the "Cobra" = strafe target. An AIM-9x will stomp that airshow trick stuff out in about 4 or 5 seconds. WVR will become a bloodbath if both sides have high-off-bore-sight heaters. Having said that, not too long after 911, 2 IDF F-15s chopped down 2 Syrian MiG-29s in WVR. They never saw them until it was too late. All the fancy tech is great but in that example.... blah blah blah.... :D

Unread postPosted: 19 Jul 2004, 02:31
by MiG21bisHZS
KarimAbdoun wrote:Let's look at it in another approach, Su-27-35-37-33(derivatives)vs F-16

There is no Su-37 anymore.The only Su-37 crashed and Russia has not built one since.The Russians are gonna go ahead with the S-37( Su-34 ) Golden Eagle project.

The Su-27/30/33/35 models are better than the F-16.The F-16 Block 50/52 is the only one that puts up a challenge.

USA and India held A2A exercises and the Su-30MKI prooved very leethal to any USA Aircraft.

Someone said earlier that F-16 can beat an Su-27 (An early model) :roll: .. well u r wrong.An F-16 tangles with a pure Cold War Killer it will lose.The Su-27 is built for Speed and extreme manouverability.The F-16 cannot match the Su-27/30/33/35 T2W Ratio and it certainly is not capable of killing it.The Flankers can do souch manouvers like the Cobra ( Puts you 6 o'clock on the plane chasing you), Hook Manouver.This aircraft beats the F-15C, the USA's primary Interceptor.

People, you should do your research befor starting a thread about how a short-medium range fighter can defeat a supermanoeuverable long range fighter/interceptor.

Unread postPosted: 19 Jul 2004, 04:04
by habu2
Spoken like someone who has flown and fought in a real SU-27 no doubt... :roll:

Unread postPosted: 19 Jul 2004, 04:12
by MiG21bisHZS
Well who says I haven't :wink: !

I'm only kidding. I only flew in a MiG-21.

Unread postPosted: 19 Jul 2004, 21:36
by Pumpkin
hi MiG21bisHZS, the news on the only 37 is something new to me. Certainly one interesting subject for a careful research.

MiG21bisHZS wrote:The Su-27/30/33/35 models are better than the F-16.The F-16 Block 50/52 is the only one that puts up a challenge.

The Block 50/52 was highly mentioned here (was mentioned once in the Fulcrum comparsion thread). And you emphasized it is THE only block that is able to put up a challenge.

I stand to be corrected. I am under the impression, the 40/42 differs the 50/52 counterparts in the capability to carry the HARM. Perhaps a slight difference in the variant of the FCR. (V5) vs (V9)?

Appreciate if you can share your research with us, what are the qualities of the 50/52, that stand out from the 40/42, to have earned the respect in the comparsion against the Flanker family.


Unread postPosted: 20 Jul 2004, 01:32
by MiG21bisHZS
Exactly how to give a good chalange in A2G mode.... the Su-27 is not good in A2G combat at all..... it was made for the long range interception

Now the Su-30 vs the F-16 Block 50 in A2G mode is a bit of a pickle to explain....

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 )

Unread postPosted: 20 Jul 2004, 01:37
by MiG21bisHZS
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.