Comments on: Sharing the Indians’ Lunch—REMOVED

By: alan

alan — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:30:56 +0000

2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6AkCredy-o

By: alan

alan — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:29:58 +0000

2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6AkCredy-o

By: alan

alan — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:27:28 +0000

2nd part http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6AkCredy-o

By: tontochoc

tontochoc — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 21:53:17 +0000

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.

By: bola

bola — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 19:14:06 +0000

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

By: Kaltes

Kaltes — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 07:00:29 +0000

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.

By: RTLM

RTLM — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:06:37 +0000

Both videos are still up at youtube. The embed code was removed from part 2 for some reason.

By: askeru

askeru — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:42:06 +0000

i did post both videos on my youtube site and they arent coming down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piUZB6aEhFo

By: DC2 Jennings

DC2 Jennings — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:07:08 +0000

Kaltes,
Excellent commentary.
DC2

By: Kaltes

Kaltes — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:08:46 +0000

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.