PDA

View Full Version : OT a bit: Indian SU-30s best US F-15s in excercise,BUT....



Enforcer572005
11-26-2005, 09:05 PM
but they outnumbered the USAF guys by 3 to 1. I saw this in the current issue of combat aircraft magazine and bought the thign despite its cost. The main relation to our forum here is, I think, the fact that the article author is making the same mistake, along with alot of other pundits, of thinking that the days of dogfighting are over (as has been said since jets came along and has been repeatedly proven wrong).

It described excercise "cope India" in which the indian AF requested some scenarios to work out with thier new SU-30s, which have vectored thrust engines. There was no simulation of BVR kills, which would be kinda redundatn since both planes are about equal in that regard (aim-120 vs AA-12). the SUs were armed with AA-11 archer and the F15s with AIM-9X, and both had new helmet mounted cueing systems for off boresight targeting.

It seems that the only actual conclusions tthat were made are that it is not good to be outnumbered by pilots that are equal to your own (at least) and flying equipment that is at least as good.

It does seem that the F-22 is pretty badly needed though, since the USAF has always trained to fight outnumbered at least 3 to 1, per the odds with the warsaw pact in the past.
The govt only wants 179 planes, but the AF is insistant that it needs at least 300. I tend to agree with the USAF leadership. It seems silly to build less than 300 of any tactical aircraft.

I was also amazed that the author continues to make the incredibly shortsighted mistake of thinking thta close in air combat training isnt needed anymore due to missles blah blah.....

Ive heard that nonsense before. ITs obvious that the closing speeds of modern fighters mean that only the opening salvos will be a long range, and they will close to gun and close in missle range (sidewinders/archers etc) in a couple of min.

There were even those "thinkers" in the late 30s who said that the G forces would be too great for there to be dogfighting like there was in WW1. Yeah, right.

I guess those who fail to remember the past are certainly condemned to repeat it.

Just thought Id put this out for any insights from you guys....... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

_VR_ScorpionWorm
11-26-2005, 09:14 PM
<span class="ev_code_RED">Indian SU-30s best US F-15s</span>

And the F-15 is how old compared to the Su-30?

Stupidest thing I've heard in some time. Things others go through for publicity ratings. LOOK WE BESTED F-15s!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Waldo.Pepper
11-26-2005, 09:46 PM
The days of dogfighting were never.

Shocking but true.

What is it 80-90% of kills you never see the guy who gets you!

Get a kill - run a away.

That's it. No dogfight.

Enforcer572005
11-26-2005, 10:04 PM
yeah, the 15, even updated, is alot older than the su-30. But it should be remembered tah the F-15s were outnumbered 3 to 1......I bet it could still hold its own pretty well with better odds.

While boom and zoom is the usual way many get it, if you dont hagve the training for close in combat (and that includes situational awareness), you get clobbered (besides, it is considered close in combat). It happened in Vietnam until the navy and air force started teaching the art of dogfighting again. If you dont know how to hassle in a furball, yer gonna get waxed. IN modern jet combat, close in fights are how the vast majority of the kills occur....from vietnam to the mideast, to now. the main reason many of the kills in the 91 gulf war were BVR is because most of the iraqi AF was running away.

The nature of modern jet combat eliminates the surprise factor....radar and radar warning, AWACS, etc. once a fight starts at long range,
the element of surprise is gone, and its not long before your are eyeball to eyeball in a turning fight. Such performance is still high on the designers list of priorities, but to advocate that there is no need for such training and equiping is not realistic.

Also, what happens when counter measures and tactics are discovered for such missles like Aim-20 and AA-12?

Several Iraqi pilots over the yrs have avoided destruction from AMRAAMS by using the correct tacticts and manuvering properly. Some, not all, not even most. Of course, they are, as usual, heading away or at least not actively engaging.

And only recently have more details on the IRan-Iraq war come to light about large dogfights, and how the F-14 literally vanquished its oponents in the close combat arena when missles ran short.

My point is that air combat can never be delegated to missles or computers...its been done repeatedly, and always fails.

I think the RAF needs to find the dough to buy the 27mm Mauser guns for its Typhoons, and our F-15s need to be replaced in the aircombat role.

The excecise was notable because its the first time the F-15 was bested on such a consistant scale...by anyone wiht any equipment. Time to re-equip I think....

Badsight.
11-26-2005, 10:48 PM
Originally posted by Enforcer572005:
The main relation to our forum here is, I think, the fact that the article author is making the same mistake, along with alot of other pundits, of thinking that the days of dogfighting are over there is a sim forum for this . .. . & it isnt IL2

much about that exercise is knowen - but there is still stuff that isnt , if you are thinking that the F22 Raptor was under threat but is now in Service - you are on the right track

DFing wasnt the way conflict panned out in Kosovo , or the first Gulf War

days of DFing are over

even a rusting mig-21 fitted with HOBS & HEATERS is a dangerous threat

Badsight.
11-26-2005, 10:54 PM
Originally posted by _VR_ScorpionWorm:

And the F-15 is how old compared to the Su-30? US F-15s are brand new updated & re-fitted with the latest that the USAAF standardises

dont go bringing up old design arguments

*cough*SU30isactuallya30yearoldSU27*cough*

darkhorizon11
11-26-2005, 11:07 PM
Well 2 things...

1. I believe the USAF did hold back some of their tactics and they held back a bit (I read something about this earlier).

2. The capabilities of the F 22 are wayyy beyond that of the F-15 so I wouldn't worry.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Enforcer572005:

It does seem that the F-22 is pretty badly needed though, since the USAF has always trained to fight outnumbered at least 3 to 1, per the odds with the warsaw pact in the past.
The govt only wants 179 planes, but the AF is insistant that it needs at least 300. I tend to agree with the USAF leadership. It seems silly to build less than 300 of any tactical aircraft.
QUOTE]


Well first theres no massive threat or worldwide arms race going on like the immediate years to World War Two and the Cold War. No new enemy that requires a massive armada of aircraft. Second at something like $90 million a pop there not exactly a dime a dozen. I'm surprised they built the 22 in the first place. I mean with the deficit spiraling, and the trillions going into Iraq, the war on drugs, education, and medicare, the US isn't exactly doing great financially.

Professor_06
11-27-2005, 12:32 AM
dogfighting for the future will be done with satellites and drones. Why on earth would you need vector thrust in a piloted plane. That is military thinking stuck in in "Mig Alley" era. Great for Lockheed. Days is over.

PBNA-Boosher
11-27-2005, 08:37 AM
Face it guys, the USAF is falling behind and everyone knows it. THey better step up their research and get going, or we'll be caught with another (modern) Seversky P-35 against Japanese Zeroes.

Bremspropeller
11-27-2005, 09:04 AM
Nah, don't exaggerate ! The F-22 will turn any Su-30 into a smoking hole in the ground.

huggy87
11-27-2005, 09:23 AM
Well, it is not really that the U.S. is falling behind. It is really that much of the third world and the FSU supplied nations are much better than we assumed, and they are catching up quick. The scary thing is not the SU-30, it is that the Indian pilots are much better than originally assumed. That was the big learning point from cope india. At least that is being realized now, before it is too late, unlike our racist western counterparts in 1941.

SkyChimp
11-27-2005, 10:56 AM
Old news. AFAIK, this is at least a year old, probably more.

BTW, I live near Langley AFB, Virginia, USA. That base has the first operational squadron of F-22s. Has anyone seen one up close? I saw a few flying overhead towards their landing approach. If you've seen one, have you noticed how it changes color when light hits it at different angles? Absolutley amazing to look at.

Opiate364
11-27-2005, 11:52 AM
You do realize that in a more realistic scenerio, the SU-30's would have never been able to fight the F-15's head on.



They would have been destroyed on the ground 2 days before.

Daiichidoku
11-27-2005, 12:14 PM
eventually ALL air fighting, BVR or balls out, will be old hat


UCAV

jarink
11-27-2005, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
Well 2 things...

1. I believe the USAF did hold back some of their tactics and they held back a bit (I read something about this earlier).

This wouldn't suprise me. Anything showing current equipement in even a slightly negative light would reinforce the USAF's arguments for additional F-22s.

The F-15 is still the only fighter in the world with over 100 kils for no losses in air-to-air combat. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

airdale1960
11-27-2005, 12:59 PM
Truth is the airframes are updated with avionics, but it is still an old design, there isonly so much you can do.
The best advantage for the F-15 is a AWACS bird, they can see you take off from miles away. And if they see you, you are good as dead.

airdale1960
11-27-2005, 01:24 PM
My 1st deployment was a combat air exercise between the USAF and the Hellenic AF in 1981 and the F1 Mirages did amazingly well against the F-15's. No AWACS were present.

Bremspropeller
11-27-2005, 03:16 PM
It's the man, not the machine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I've heard of a pair of Jags that slaughtered two Eagles in an exercise.

berg417448
11-27-2005, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
It's the man, not the machine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I've heard of a pair of Jags that slaughtered two Eagles in an exercise.

I read about that as well. Instead of coming in on a low level attack with just 2 pairs...the Jags came in with 3 pairs. The F-15's waited for the 2nd pair to pass and dropped in behind what they thought was the rear pair. Never assume!

airdale1960
11-27-2005, 03:55 PM
Dicta Bolke # 4. Always keep your eye on your opponent, and never let yourself be deceived by ruses. This is why the AWACS is so important in modern air combat. Radars have replaced eyes, way out of eye contact.

SkyChimp
11-27-2005, 08:50 PM
I hear two Sopwith Camels cleaned up a whole squadron of Eagles. And the Eagles had AWACS!

Daiichidoku
11-27-2005, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I hear two Sopwith Camels cleaned up a whole squadron of Eagles. And the Eagles had AWACS!

allow me to correct you

they were Sopwith "Baby"s

TX-Gunslinger
11-28-2005, 12:17 AM
OK,

I can't resist. If your serious about how the results of this 2004 Cope India exercise translate to F-22 procurement and national needs then maybe you should research the following questions:

1. Which organization published the results of this classified exercise?
2. Does the public routinely have access to Cope exercise results? Can you find reference to the results of any other exercises of this nature? Now I'm taking about mock engagement results against non-US hardware.
3. What was the timing of that "Cope India" press release with respect to Congressional and Executive Branch budgetary considerations?
4. What were the exercise restrictions placed upon the USAF F-15C A/C and crews who participated? Where they actually exercising as U.S. forces or as OPFOR?

Rather than state my opinion, I'd rather leave those that are seriously interested in this issue a set of questions to pursue on their own.

S~

Enforcer572005
11-28-2005, 04:53 AM
Interesting points guys. Regarding this forum not being the place for such subjects, I see threads on here every day that have NOTHING to do with military aviation, airplanes, or war. I think this diverse community is an excellent place to put such up for commentary, as most on here are fairly well versed on such (as can be seen in this thread).

While machines, tactics, and weapons change, Boelke's dicta remains the same; technology like
AWACS etc just introduces new factors and applications.

Through the yrs, the Pakistani AF has always been considered to be among the best piloted, the 2 wars in 65 and 71 giving them at least a 3 to 1 kill loss ratio over the indian AF while using inferior aircraft(this subj would make an interesting thread on its own). IAF seems to have evolved along interesting lines. There hasnt been much interaction between USAF and IAF until recently (unlike Pakistan and its excellent though underequipped pilots) so this makes such excercises interesting.

The F-15s assigned to air superiority roles are older C models, and even the E models are mostly over a decade old, and are much heavier than the Cs, being dedicated mainly to Attack roles. The C models are getting stress cracks in the airframes and are getting very expensive to maintain/repair.

In the early 70s,Senator Proxmire (and many others) advocated using the F-4 into the 21st century, claiming the F-15 and F-14 werent needed and were too expensive-sophisticated-would be slaughtered by large numbers of Mig-21s, no more dogfighting etc. I remember debating against this position in high school with several teachers who were relying on the American news media for thier info. History deos repeat itself it seems.

If the numbers were more equal, the outcome would certainly be affected, but USAF doctrine is to be able to win greatly outnumbered. Excellent pilots are a great equalizer, but despite the excellent showing by Pakistani F-86 and Mig-19 pilots in 65 and 71, Pakistan still was overwhelmed and defeated in both wars-soundly, and were totally unable to stop Indian AF from pounding thier ground forces.

I believe that history has shown repeatedly that assumption of threat absence is always disasterous-new dragons always replace slain ones.

The more you build of any machine, the less it costs, so cutting procurement by 60% only gets about a 15% savings (if that much). developement costs are the greatest part of procurement and have already been spent. To buy less than 300 at this point is not cost effective.

Equipment needs have to adapt/evolve, but blanket assumptions against dogfighting and maned fighters are taking a big risk. Relying solely on technology is asking for it, since such is always eventually countered or unforseen factors arise; ie the missle reliance in the 60s that proved to be disasterous in Vietnam and left Nato trying to catch up in the 70s. The Sparrow and Falcon missles were gonna end dogfighting-they were all but useless in actual combat.

The SU-27 design development was begun about 30 yrs ago, but its developement (as the F-22) was very drawn out. The most recent incarnations of SU-30 and SU-35 cant really be compared to the early Flankers, with thier vectored thrust engines of greater power, canard surfaces, and other improvements. Sort of like comparing the similiarly equipped experimental F-15 they tested to standard F-15Cs.

I realize this is year old news, but i keep us with this stuff and I had never heard of it or seen any mention of it in any discussion. I put it out there to see what you guys knew about it. Thanks.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

USAF_pilot
11-28-2005, 09:39 AM
Enforcer thats an absolute load of bull**** about Pakistani planes and pilots.You honestly expect us to believe you?Underequipped my ***.Pakistan had F86's armed with Sidewinders against Indian Hunters and Gnats which had no missiles.In 1971 also the Pakistanis had Mirage III's , F104's and MiG19's armed with sidewinders against just a handful of MiG21's armed with highly unreliable AA-2's.I would love to ask you what your definition of underequipped is?Pakistan is surely underequipped as of now but back then they had some of the best planes but still never ever had air-superiority.Its more like the Indians were underequipped but came out on tops.
In 1971 Indian MiG21's shot down 4 F104 Starfighters for no loss.The Pakistani use of the F104 has made sure its combat record will be put alongside the MiG29 in the hall of shame of aircraft.Pakistan will have a 3:1 killration in its dreams.BTW keep your nationalistic propaganda aside.This forum is an international forum not some kind for you to distribute propganda and false facts.
BTW Im ex-USAF having had dealings with the Pakistanis and I can tell you they NEVER ever had a 3:1 and they sure didnt have underequipped planes in 65 or 71.I can also tell you they gloat a lot and if you happen to be reading the official PAF sites , they quote kills of planes which did not even exist in the InAF during that period.So cut the **** out.Sorry for my tone but I just hate these arm-chair warriors who think they figured out history and give blatant lies.
Regarding this post I dont think it has any relevance to IL2.

Xiolablu3
11-28-2005, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by jarink:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
Well 2 things...

1. I believe the USAF did hold back some of their tactics and they held back a bit (I read something about this earlier).

This wouldn't suprise me. Anything showing current equipement in even a slightly negative light would reinforce the USAF's arguments for additional F-22s.

The F-15 is still the only fighter in the world with over 100 kils for no losses in air-to-air combat. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly what I thought when I read this. It would sure shake up the ' We dont need the F22' crowd

Bremspropeller
11-28-2005, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I hear two Sopwith Camels cleaned up a whole squadron of Eagles. And the Eagles had AWACS!

Man - I also heard of that ! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


The Camels musta been coming from above !

Enforcer572005
11-28-2005, 02:59 PM
USAF pilot...for a guy in who was in the military, you dont know alot about history. The pakistani AF was highly outnumbered and outequipped in both wars. You consider Hunters to be inferior to the F-86F? these werent even canadair sabres with the good engines...and only a third of them could carry equally unreliable B model sidewinders, and they had a pitiful supply of those. Most of thier kills were with the 50s....the british magazine air enthusiast did an article about a pakisani 86 pilot who nailed one hunter with a sidewinder, then attacked a flight of 5....who all broke in the same direction giving the guy a great line up of targets-no evasive action. he got all five with the 50s,and even if he didnt get 5, he at least got some of them . Also, the folland gnat is considered to have been an excellent aircombat dogfighter. The red arrows seem to have liked them quite well. Somewhat more advanced than an F model sabre.

The IAF also had large numbers of assorted models of Mig-21s with Atolls...in the same league as the obsolete B model sidewinder. They also rigged a 23mm cannon pod for them, and i remember newsfilm of these migs hitting pakistani positions wiht 50mm rockets...great film I wish i could find on tape. The hunter replaced the canadair sabres in the RAF, and those were much better planes than the F86F.

They had 50 Mirages in 71, less than 10 F-104s in 65, and anyone who thinks the 104 was a good dogfighter is incorrect-it was an interceptor. The USAF pilots ive talked to and know (you dont know beans about me sir) are all very complementary about the pakistani pilots they flew with/against. They were overwhelmed by superior numbers and more advanced aircraft like the Mig-21s...the 86s and 19s got a few, but they 21s could initiate and break off combat at will.

And where is my nationalistic propaganda? I just advocated the long held principle of modernization and proper training of military aviation, made an accurate observation about cost effectiveness in procurement, and was promoting a little exchange on a region that little info is usually heard on-if you arent interested in such, then EXCUUUUSE ME (picture Steve Martin). I get so tired of people badmouthing the us military and and America in general...none of you critic guys knows a thing about history...nothing, yet you politicize any post you can work it into. your post above shows you hve no knowledge whatsoever on the subject of military aviation, and that's all i was promoting in my post...a discussion on modern military aviaion. THere was little political about it, ohter then the mention of some idiotic statements by some politicos in the 70s that bears mentioning in a thread on an article that promotes the unsupportable idea that air combat is passe. Jeeese. Talk about sensitive.

I think you would find pac man more suitable for a computer game. its far more PC. Do you close your eyes when you see a swastika on a luftwaffe plane?

As for this armchair insult sir, I will put up my knowledge of military aviation and history in general against yours anyday (your ignorance of such is blatant in your post). I get my info from sources other than the us newsmedia, Gene Laroque, or michal moore-including international publications. If you were really in the USAF, you werent paying attention. I got diabetes halfway through college and couldnt be an AF officer, but i certainly know the subject matter.

The excercise was held at the request of the indain AF, not the americans, and wasnt intended for promoting the F-22....if it was, there would be alot more info provided. I merely added that because of the age of the 15s and the AF tactical policy which is straining the F15 force. If the shooting had been real, my money would still be on the USAF. They would have found a way to improvise something.

My post does prove that Santana was right...
"those who fail to remember the past are condemned to relive it." Give me a break with this revisionist bollshoy you are spouting that you cannot support sir. And get some books....

I guess my thread will be locked up now. So much for promoting stimulating conversation on military subjects on a forum concerning military aviation. Nationalistic blah blah my ### http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

AND SINCE WHEN DOES THIS FORUM NOT HAVE STUFF NOT RELATED TO IL2!?!???

on this page alone there are many of them not related. I see a billion page job about music, what cars you drive, football, dead musicians and ball players, reletives who've served in teh military, etc. Its very common. you didnt read my response ot that comment above (surprise). Pay attention.


You need a vacation.

Professor_06
11-28-2005, 03:21 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Daiichidoku
11-28-2005, 04:03 PM
RAF used canadair sabres? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif



anyhow, yes, canadair sabres were regarded as better, with 5-6 wings, and much more powerful orenda engines

the americans found them to be a bit of a pain, though, US practice was to de-rate those better engines to give spec power, orenda, on the othe rhand, did not, thus, formation flying with them was a pain, as some examples gave more thrust, and also made fuel comsumpion highly varible

Enforcer572005
11-28-2005, 04:35 PM
yup, again, Air Enthusiast magazine in the 70s (some really great stuff) had a series of articles by an RAF pilot with tons of pics...they used them for just a couple of yrs (i think)until the hunter came on line. Even wiht the Orenda engine the RAF guys complained of the lack of thrust, but liked the plane in general-certainly better than meteors or vampires.

The hunter came along and the RAF loved it...lots of thrust, and huge firepower. one of the most popular planes in RAF history, and CERTAINLY FAR SUPERIOR to the F-86F, even wiht AIM-9Bs. Hunters were also easily modified to carry sidewinders. I believe that an Indian AF pilot shot down at least 3 pakistani F-6s (chinese Mig-19s) in the 71 war, but cant find much info on it, unlike the incident over Sarghoda with the Pak F-86 getting 6 hunter kills (or at least several) in 65.

the RAF Sabres were painted in the period (54-56 I think) grey and green camo. Looked good wiht brit roundels on them.

the article author said they would open the canopies shortly after landing since they heated up so quickly in the sun......he kinda forgot to duck one time and it grabed his visor and dragged his head backwards while he was still hauling A down the runway. Said it required a bit of peddle work to avoid catastrophe. They also wanted cannon instead of the 6 5os, preferring 20mm.

They sure got thier wishes fulfilled wiht the 4 30mm adens of the hunter.

Gibbage1
11-28-2005, 05:37 PM
16 F-16's vs 4 F-22's in mock combat. All 16 F-16's were enguaged and shot down without ever detecting an enemy. Only 2 of the 4 F-22's took off for the mock dogfight.

F-15 is old hat mates. A new player is in town, and it will eat Su's for a snack and ask for 2nds.

Gib