It now looks as if the “user” who posted these videos removed them from YouTube…if anyone knows how to dig up cached versions please let me know and we’ll post again.
This is one of the most fascinating lectures I’ve seen in a long time.
Remember when the aviation press (and we) splashed across their pages the fact that the Indian Air Force had scrubbed the floor with US Air Force F-15s and F-16s in their shiny new export Su-30s back in 2005?
Well, this guy flew in a more recent air training battle with the Indians out at Red Flag and talked about the ins and outs of the Su-30 vs the F-15. I won’t pretend to try and explain his comments for you, take the time to watch his presentation and see for yourself the treasure trove of information on one of Russia’s most impressive combat aircraft.
He also talks about some of the reasons why the US did so poorly in ’05 over in India.
(And make sure to watch minute 8:18 on part one for a look at how to kill a Raptor)…
(NOTE: New Link)
And Part II…(REMOVED FROM YOUTUBE)
(Gouge: NC)
– Christian
If the USAF really cares for the air-to-air fight, they will be developing the Follow-On-to-AMRAAM Right NOW! Instead, they’re more fighter jocks that they are, satisfied with the mediocre slammer that they have, and focused on that sweet ride of an F-22.
I wonder what comments will be had on the F-35…though he didn’t really say anything, he way he dodged the question and his tone of voice gave (IMHO) the impression that he was NOT impressed.
You’re mighty cheeky to run this with no hat tip to the Dew Line or Ares or ELP’s blog.
I don’t know if he is unimpressed with the F-35 Lightning II. However I am sure he recognizes that it cannot substitute a good sized fleet of F-22A Raptors. Also at the moment the F-35 can only carry 4 missiles internally. There is certainly the capability for 6 missiles to be carried internally but I believe that is planned for a later date. Plus due to cost reasons the F-35 does not have a thrust vectoring nozzle.
After listening to the speakers comments I have a couple questions. Considering that older aircraft can be upgraded with hardware and weaponry that can make them competitive to the point where the technological advantage is largely negated, wouldn’t it make more sense to put money into training and upgrades for our numerically larger fleet of legacy aircraft.?
The video is no longer available on youtube; anyone knows where it can be found?
our legacy aircraft have limited airframe life left.
Building brand new legacy fighters doesn’t present the same value for dollar as building new new fighters.
it’s not to say that every new fighter has to be a high dollar LO aircraft, but there are lessons we can learn and incorporate into clean sheet conventional 4/4.5 gen designs and get a better effectiveness per dollar than restarting old lines with uprated black boxes.
Christian, the videos don’t work, can you replace them or get a backup or something?
I’ve always shared my impression on the mediocrity of the F-35, and I’ve been bashed here for that. Good to see a real pro share similar views.
Damn, JSF bashing and I can’t see it!!!!!! What a useless airplane.
Found one of the 2 videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-CRINeb9_A
There’s very little concrete JSF bashing, guys, just a comment at the end that seems like it supports the scuttlebutt– Lightning II ain’t no knife fighter. The French get a lot more abuse.
The comments about the upgraded MIG-21 are cool, as well as the importance of a really good jamming suite.
ALL THE GOOD INFO HERE:
1. now we know how cope india was misreported:
– India flew its top pilot “all stars” against a mostly inexperienced f15 squad from alaska
– The rules in effect drastically handicapped our side, which we already knew
2. the top end su30s are a little better than the f15/f16, but far inferior to the f22. the speaker declined to comment on the f35.
[bear in mind that the su30 is much bigger and more expensive than the f15 and f16: (1) su30mki costs 47 million, f15 30 million, and f16 20 million, (2) operating costs of the su30 are far higher, and (3) the su30 is much larger, loaded weights: f16 26,500 lbs, f15 44,500 lbs, su30 76,100]
3. the french are horrible cowards, and always held back, waited until fighters were already engaged, and then fired missiles and ran away
4. it is considered to be a bad tactic to rely on thrust vectoring in turns, because the increased drag when vectoring kicks in causes massive altitude loss, allowing the non-vectoring fighter to get above the vectoring fighter for a kill. the speaker says that newbies who rely on vectoring too much leave themselves open briefly to getting shot up by guns from above.
Kaltes,
Excellent commentary.
DC2
i did post both videos on my youtube site and they arent coming down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-CRINeb9_A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piUZB6aEhFo
Both videos are still up at youtube. The embed code was removed from part 2 for some reason.
siconik,
Haha, you obviously don’t know how different the MKI is from the standard su30. The info I used was for the su30 MKI, not the basic su30, because the MKI is what is being discussed in the videos. The MKI is a lot better than the stock su30. The takeoff weight is higher, in part because it carries a lot more fuel.
The cost figures I used were roughly accurate in a relative sense. Although these prices vary in actual purchase contracts, the fact remains that the f16 is one of the most cost effective combat aircraft in the world, which is why it has been so widely adopted by foreign nations and used so heavily as a workhorse by the US.
Although the f15 is not cheap, it has been around for a long time, and it is a lot cheaper than the MKI, which is a top-of-the line version of the su30, and is a lot more expensive than the standard su30.
It is very hard to get reliable, consistent price information on fighters, but in all the different credible figures I see, the MKI is very expensive both to purchase and to maintain, because India and Russia decided to use top of the line electronics, more expensive engines, etc.
As the speaker in the video noted, because of maintenance and reliability issues with the MKIs, they could not even take off rapidly. The MKI is very sensitive and fragile, unlike past Russian fighters.
In order to beat the f16 and f15, both of which are over 30 years old, Russia and India had to build a much larger aircraft, with a huge radar cross section.
That is why the speaker praised the Mig-21 Bison: the fighter might be old, but it was small enough to sneak up on them, while the MKIs were seen far away and had to rely heavily on jammers.
the reputation of the SU-30 and and family vectoring jet was built on airshow not in war events.
It is very stupid to believe that making cobra manoeuver and many of somethings make you uper!!!
the first vectoring yhrust appeared with the harrier and family.If really it given a decisive advantage British and US would adopted very soon or they ould used it with typhon or F-15E.Vectoring thrust is useless in areal war .It is good for the airshow
Again dont compare USAF with a big experience of air war with IAF.USAF is only comparable with sraeli air force .They marked history of air war
Indians generally have an aristocratic ‘chip on their shoulder’ when they face the West in anything and an inflated sense of self worth that they can’t be beaten. Like in the cricket, the Indians change the rules to suit themselves.
The USAF would have learnt a lot more about the Su-30 than the Indians did about the F15. Secondly when was the last time the U.S. went into combat without AWACS and jammer support. You don’t last long against AMRAAMs when can’t see let alone hit an opponent as your radar and comms is jammed and the other guy can see you clearly.
2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6AkCredy-o
2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6AkCredy-o
2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6AkCredy-o