Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Share
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  ahmedfire on Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:14 pm



    it's clear that NATO is on of the real enemies to russia...

    so, this comparison is in it's place...

    I saw some rafale and typhoon fan sites,they always speak about wrong things like (SU-35 have azero chance towards modern aircrafts like rafale or typhoon )

    wow seems su-35 came from 70 century !!

    they said that su-35 is just asu-27 ,,what's new ??!!

    they still believe that russia has no modern tech. to employ  Very Happy  

    also things like that !

    In simulated combat against a Sukhoi Su-35, the F22 shoots down 10 for every one of its own losses. The figures for Eurofighter Typhoon are just under half that capability (some 4.5 Su-35s for every Typhoon lost). The next best capability is the Rafale C which loses one for one
    http://www.tgarden.demon.co.uk/writings/articles/2005/050113hol.html
    ..........
    what i'm see here that su-35 has all specifications to face any european aircraft.

    modern electronics ( the prove here is that russians get in 5th gen aircrafts,,european doesn't !!), X-band radar that is superior in power than any european radar ,although rafale and typhoon will have AESA 1 to 2 years, but irbis-E has apower like any current AESA (20 kilowatt )...

    saying that rafale and typhoon is low observable than sukhoi,ok little LO but it will not make abig difference bec of this 20 KW of irbis-E ,can detect the two from big distances,

    Su-35 is superior in weappons amount,,damn ,it's far superior in that point..

    also in engine thrust,TVC,maneuver and detection range...

    the experience of russians in IR fight is more than (as i think ) than europe,,russians used these systems for along times in the same thime that europians  and americans neglect if for years (except france with OSF )..

    saying that meteor is superior than any russian one ,no evidences for that !!

    su-35 has R-172 ,anti awacs and tankers,,damn what will be asituation if an awacs destroyed ?!!
    it's abig advantage,could make the su-35 face F-35 ,coz F-35 depend alot on awacs to make asilent attack closing it's radar ,so destroying this awacs will force joint to open clearly it's radar..that's good i think..

    recent variants of the Flanker have an inbuilt data networking system, so each Flanker shares what it knows with its peers. Unlike the Flankers, which have impressive fuel reserves, smaller aircraft like the F-35 are heavily dependent on Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR) tankers for persistence, and AWACS for network centricity. The F-35’s dependency on front-aspect stealth for survival forces “nose cold” entry into combat and heavy reliance upon off-board AWACS data for situational awareness, lest it give its position away by using its radar. A few indiscrete sweeps could trigger the sensitive ESM systems of the Flanker E Plus.

    Your Ad Here


    So, the reality is that in an intensive air battle, these so-called ‘assets’ become ‘liabilities’ that must be protected since readily available Russian technology includes ‘AWACS killer’ missiles – such as the 200 nautical mile R-172 and the 160 nautical mile R-37 Arrow. While it is difficult to shoot down a networked Su-35BM, the network centric AWACS and AAR tankers are big, slow, defenceless, lumbering targets.

    In air combat scenarios, I always make the AWACS and AAR tankers the principal targets.

    The attack plan is a simple overwhelming swarm: Offensive Counter Air (OCA) Flankers engage the Combat Air Patrols (CAPs) protecting the AAR tankers and AWACS, while other sections of Flankers simultaneously kill the AAR tankers and AWACS. The fuel and missile payload advantage of the Flanker over the F-35 makes this easy to do.

    A probable scenario over vast areas of the Pacific Ocean where such air battles might rage, is that after the tankers are dropped, the F-35s exhaust their fuel and fall into the drink.

    If you fail to recognise the vulnerability of AWACS and AAR aircraft, and the risks in heavy dependency upon these exposed ‘assets’, then any reasonable person might ask “who is the one who does not understand future air warfare?”.


    http://www.defpro.com/news/details/5861/
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:16 am


    su-35 has R-172 ,anti awacs and tankers,,damn what will be asituation if an awacs destroyed ?!!
    it's abig advantage,could make the su-35 face F-35 ,coz F-35 depend alot on awacs to make asilent attack closing it's radar ,so destroying this awacs will force joint to open clearly it's radar..that's good i think..

    You can take the paper statistics and directly compare aircraft all day, but the results you get will not be very useful.

    On paper a Mig-29 should beat an F-16 every time in the 1990s, but in actual fact this was not the case because the F-16 pilots coming up against those Iraqi and Serbian Mig-29s had already practised and talked to German Mig-29 pilots. They knew what it could and could not do and developed tactics and strategies to defeat such a system.

    Their efforts to defeat them were further aided by the fact that the Mig-29s were generally not operating within a fully operational air defence system with working communications. The Serbian Mig-29s often took to the air with non functioning radar because of poor maintainece that led to a criminal case after the war against the general in charge.

    The point is that it matters not how brave or dedicated you are, when one side has fully operational C4IR and the other side does not then it is like an organised group against a collection of amateur individuals.

    Of course Russia is currently making efforts to improve its C4IR and make it fully integrated across the services, which will mean NATO would not have things its own way.

    To say the Typhoon is better than the Flanker is rubbish, just as it is rubbish to say the opposite.

    A NATO Typhoon fighting a Russian Flanker is not a serious matter because no matter who wins the fight the battle will be decided by nukes.

    A Libyan Su-35 vs a NATO Typhoon will be one sided because NATO comes in with all the C4IR force multipliers and Libya does not.

    Just as importantly a Libyan Typhoon against NATO Rafale would also fail for the very same reasons.

    Some things can make a difference and for the last 20 years it has been AMRAAM. Serbian and Iraqi Migs didn't have anything like AMRAAM so in combat with inferior western aircraft the western aircraft have won simply by hanging back, using AWACS to identify the target and then firing AMRAAMs outside the range of the R-73.

    This has been successful, though just after Desert Storm in the early 1990s it did lead to the destruction of two Blackhawks that were mistaken for Hinds because the F-15s were too afraid to get close enough for a proper visual ID.

    BTW Meteor looks to be an excellent missile, but to claim it out ranges all Russian missiles is just silly. The R-37 has been tested to a flight range of 300km and the R-37M for use against AWACS type aircraft has even greater range performance.

    There are extended range models of R-77 in development including ramjet powered missiles.

    I remember in the mid 1980s the Germans and French were going to get together and make a missile they were going to call the ANS. It was going to be a missile in the 600-800kg range with a 50kg warhead and a combined rocket ramjet propulsion with a range of about 100km and a flight speed of mach 2.

    The name changed and requirements changed a bit but it never got off the drawing board.

    In comparison the Kh-31, which is a 600kg missile with a 90kg warhead with a rocket ramjet propulsion system that can hit targets at 110km in the old anti radiation model version with a flight speed of mach 3 has been available for quite some time... including an improved model with more than double that range.

    The Soviets/Russians have plenty of experience with combined rocket ramjet missiles... starting with the SA-6 SAM and including a large number of other missiles.

    Right now I would guess they are working on Scramjet propulsion that should lead to even higher speeds and much longer ranges.

    Corrosion

    Posts : 195
    Points : 212
    Join date : 2010-10-19

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Corrosion on Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:38 am

    ahmedfire wrote:
    wow seems su-35 came from 70 century !!

    Haha U mean to say from deep future Razz or is it some different calender.


    In simulated combat against a Sukhoi Su-35, the F22 shoots down 10 for every one of its own losses. The figures for Eurofighter Typhoon are just under half that capability (some 4.5 Su-35s for every Typhoon lost). The next best capability is the Rafale C which loses one for one
    http://www.tgarden.demon.co.uk/writings/articles/2005/050113hol.html

    All these comparisons are based on certain conditions/assumptions which they seldom make public. Under certain conditions Mig21 defeated F-15 in cope india exercises. So my question is How many F-15 does Mig 21 Bison shoots down for every one of its own losses. Very Happy . Fighters seldom go one on one straight on. If it is BVR straight on without any AWACS or ground radar installations between Su-35 and F-22. I would say F22 would have a edge/higher chance of firing first. After that anything can happen depending on what the two pilots do. And BTW how much an F22 cost, 350 million or something according to news reports sometime back. That is one seriously expensive fighter plane, which only very very few countries can afford to operate that too in low numbers. I do not believe either EF or Rafale will have any significant edge over any latest flanker derivatives. It will be a fight. I think euro canards will have lower RCS than any Flanker out there based on open source data. But a lot also depends on what are they holding under their wings. Especially if it looks like this: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TB1j7iZ8Wy8/TcLenJUKNNI/AAAAAAAACcY/mIdM1thxkhs/s1600/Eurofighter+Typhoon+by+jet+planes+%25284%2529.jpg
    Unless weapons are carried internally RCS difference of so called 4th, 4+, 4++, 4+++ gen fighters is not enough to win u an engagement. It matters but is not the only thing out there.



    Corrosion

    Posts : 195
    Points : 212
    Join date : 2010-10-19

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Corrosion on Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:11 am

    EF/Rafale vs Flanker : One way of finding this out through peaceful way is maybe post 2015 when Indian MMRCA is inducted and Su30 goes through super 30 upgrade or even current level MKI standard. and some internal exercise is conducted to check the performance of MMRCA and results made public or some leak. There might be Something like this (Go to page 5 2nd para) http://www.scribd.com/doc/21520658/Mirage-2000-Vs-MiG-29-Rivals-from-the-same-team So if Su 30 out performs MMRCA then rest assured Su35 will out perform any EF/Rafale atleast airframe performace wise. Radar wise right now Irbis should beat Captor/RBE2.

    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  ahmedfire on Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:12 am

    The prob is some euro fans talked about things they can't prove !!

    somethings like efficiency of missile seekers,they always say that west seekers is far better that russian,so we can't compare ranges coz the effectiveness in west is more than russian !!

    things like quality of radar modules ,they said we could make aradar with 900 module that is better than russian 1000 module one !! claiming that modules will be more efficient and higher gain higher efficiency that give anice powerful electromagnetic beam...

    things like ECCM capabilities and that euro ones has alot of edges here, refale fans in every damn forum say that russians have no system like spectre on rafale

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 02, 2011 3:40 am

    things like quality of radar modules ,they said we could make aradar with 900 module that is better than russian 1000 module one !! claiming that modules will be more efficient and higher gain higher efficiency that give anice powerful electromagnetic beam...

    They have to say that because they know the Su-35 has a nose big enough to take a radar larger than anything the Eurocanards can use.

    Having a net centric air defence system that includes satellite based radar, ground based radar and aircraft based radar to detect and track threats in the air and in space above Russia suggests that the efficiency of an Su-35s radar is not going to be crucial.

    During tests in the 1990s a Mig-31M that had not been fitted with its upgraded ZASLON-M radar yet managed to hit a target at a missile flight range of 300km with the aide of a Su-30M that was flying much closer to the target that sent target information back to the launch aircraft so it could fire an R-37.

    The point is that it doesn't matter where that target data comes from... a satellite in space, and AWACS aircraft, ground radar, ship at sea... if you think the aircraft with the best radar wins then you will be dead before you know it.

    You can compare numbers on paper all you want but at the end of the day it is tactics that win battles.

    The Me262 on paper should have been invincible... high flight speed... enormous fire power... yet they got shot down in large numbers for lots of reasons that Germany could do nothing about and did not win the war for Germany.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2180
    Points : 3072
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sat Jul 02, 2011 7:17 am

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:02 am

    Nice vid, but it doesn't show anything the Su-35 can't do...


    Those rocket power assisted laser guided bombs are nice but the Kh-29 comes in TV and laser guided versions with a range of up to 40km in the later versions.

    AS-18 KAZOO missiles (Kh-59M) have a range of about 240km and have a 900kg warhead with TV guidance and a digital data link to the launch aircraft, so you can fire one towards a target area and when it arrives in the target area it sends back a video view of the target area. The weapon officer in the launch aircraft uses a joystick and moves the cross hair onto the target they want the missile to engage and commands the missile to attack the target from hundreds of kms away.
    The AS-13 KINGBOLT (Kh-59) could do the same over a range of about 120km.

    The Russian AF has already ordered the Damocles targeting pod too.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3191
    Points : 3281
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  medo on Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:21 pm

    things like ECCM capabilities and that euro ones has alot of edges here, refale fans in every damn forum say that russians have no system like spectre on rafale
    [quote]


    Really? About ECM capabilities, Su-35 could use the same SAP-518 and SAP-14 ECM pods as Su-34, what gives Su-35 capabilities similar to EA-18G Growler. Su-35 also have IRST, RWR, LWR, MAWS, data link, PESA Irbis radar and digital computers to fuse all those datas in one picture, so there is nothing in Rafales Spectre, that Su-35 don't have.

    Pervius

    Posts : 249
    Points : 271
    Join date : 2011-03-08

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Pervius on Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:16 pm

    [quote="GarryB"]


    The point is that it doesn't matter where that target data comes from... a satellite in space, and AWACS aircraft, ground radar, ship at sea... if you think the aircraft with the best radar wins then you will be dead before you know it.

    You can compare numbers on paper all you want but at the end of the day it is tactics that win battles.

    US couldn't get JDAM bombs to hit targets in Afghanistan because mountains blocked satellite signals. If you are relying on satellites, AWACS, ground radar, ships at sea......what are you going to do when they aren't there for you?

    Likely when Air to Air fighting really starts the fiber optic cables/ocean cables will be cut....Satellites destroyed.....then maybe when it's just fighter to fighter over your own airspace....yes the jet with the best radar wins. Hence why the US is going to those little tiny Dorito planes...harder to see aren't they?

    They aren't going to rely on all that technology that could disappear when they need it. Hence why Russian big radar would be needed to see them.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 03, 2011 6:52 am

    US couldn't get JDAM bombs to hit targets in Afghanistan because mountains blocked satellite signals. If you are relying on satellites, AWACS, ground radar, ships at sea......what are you going to do when they aren't there for you?

    That is different.

    JDAM uses Navstar, so it needs at least 3 satellites to be visible to get a signal from them to triangulate its position from launch to impact with the target.

    Because of the orbital heights of the Navstar satellites obviously that was not possible because of the height and shape of the mountains in question in the context of the height and position of the Navstar satellites above Afghanistan at the time.

    The positioning of the Navstar satellites means that near the poles it is difficult to get good readings from 3 or more satellites so Glonass is actually more accurate in those regions because they have eliptical paths coming in close and going up very high as they go around the Earth.

    In context of what I was talking about above space based radars will have similar eccentric orbits and there will be quite a few of them to at least cover Russia and their paths should allow no blind spots.

    Likely when Air to Air fighting really starts the fiber optic cables/ocean cables will be cut....Satellites destroyed.....then maybe when it's just fighter to fighter over your own airspace....yes the jet with the best radar wins. Hence why the US is going to those little tiny Dorito planes...harder to see aren't they?

    Cutting fibre optic cables and shooting down satellites would be the worst possible situation for the US because it is totally reliant on satellites for recon and communications. There is the issue of AWACS and ground based radar and electronic support vehicles and EO systems supporting the air defence. NATO airfields are fixed so in the first few seconds of a conflict they will be targeted too.

    And in a decade or so those Eurocanards will be flying with F-35s but they will be up against T-50s.

    I would think in such a case the superiority of the second line aircraft is less important if the first line aircraft clears the skies of the opposing forces second line aircraft...

    They aren't going to rely on all that technology that could disappear when they need it. Hence why Russian big radar would be needed to see them.

    Indeed they are used to force multipliers being available to them in combat, and careful use of force initially is applied to make sure their opponents lack similar support.

    They can do it to small armed forces but when the opposing force is Russia then they will have as much problem killing mobile targets as they did in Kosovo, except Russia has missiles and weapons that can hit NATO countries directly and of course they have the air defence missiles that can reach out and touch NATO air power too.

    A totally different ball game.

    (BTW I also agree with Medo, but if Eurofans want to think Su-35s are export model Mig-21s in terms of self defence avionics then that is their pilots funerals... If Libya had purchased some old model S-300s on the cheap and had bought Su-35s NATO would not have chosen to intervene... especially if they had a few Bastion coastal defence missile batteries with Yakhonts... I am sure other countries unpopular with the west for not letting the west rape and pillage their resources like Iran will take note... )

    KamovHelicopter

    Posts : 6
    Points : 10
    Join date : 2011-10-15
    Location : Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  KamovHelicopter on Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:11 am

    Su-35 is superior in armament,technology and avionics but not in maneuverability. Rafale have small wing-loading and great thrust/weight so it have better maneuverability. Sukhoi is also great in that point. In BVR fight Su-35 is (for now) lot better, but problem is when NATO finish MBDA Meteor AAM missile, because it is better than Russian Vympel R77M (best Su-35 missile) - but maybe than Su-35 use new Russian/Indian Novator missile and again is lot better than Rafale!! Laughing .

    So point is,

    for 25 million LESS you got better fighter - Su-35 scratch

    Rafale vs Sukhoi SU-35 - Data Comparison

    Well, against Eurofighter Typhoon same story. Eurofighter is little better than Rafale, better technology, almost like Su-35 and great avionics dunno
    For now same story with AAM missile - MBDA Mateor vs Novator K-100.

    Eurofighter vs Sukhoi SU-35 - Data Comparison
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:46 am

    Su-35 is superior in armament,technology and avionics but not in maneuverability. Rafale have small wing-loading and great thrust/weight so it have better maneuverability.

    I disagree... wing loading and thrust to weight ratio are important, but fully operational 3D thrust vectoring mean the Su-35 should be able to do things the Rafale can only dream about.

    Also the RVV-BD is the export version of the R-37M long range AAM, and it will be fully compatible with all new Russian fighters... Mig-31BM, Mig-29SMT, Mig-35, Su-27SM, Su-35, and PAK FA.

    The difference of course is that it will not be limited to 200km range engagements and it is slightly heavier at about 600kgs vs 510kgs for the RVV-BD.

    Having said all that there are no guarantees and a Rafale could beat an Su-35 or vice versa.

    The Flanker will have the advantage of larger fuel capacity so when it lines up an enemy aircraft to launch a missile at it can climb and accelerate to supersonic speed to give its missile a longer reach.
    It could also fire several missiles like an R-27ET IR homer and an R-27ER SARH missile plus an R-77 ARH just to make things really difficult for the target.

    The high altitude high speed launch will give the missiles max reach and the launches will be timed so that after manouvering to evade the first missile the target will then have to evade the next missile and will be so low on energy as to require afterburner which might make it worthwhile firing the IR guided missile last.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  TR1 on Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:59 am

    Rafale has marginally better better TWR in both dry and AB at empty, and loaded weights (using the available figures at least), but the Su-35 is better by a larger gap when talking about MTOW. Of course the problem for Rafale is how much of that is in external, draggy fuel tanks.
    avatar
    SOC

    Posts : 583
    Points : 632
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 39
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  SOC on Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:40 am

    I've always admired the Rafale. Not as much as the FLANKER, but still... If Rafale has something going for it, especially compared to the EF-2000, it's that far more attention was paid to forward hemisphere RCS reduction. Plus, the EO suite should be a pretty good tool to have. They've flown the Rafale M over Afghanistan, which is a pretty good spot to trial something like that. There aren't any SAM threats to worry about at medium altitude, and you can see what the system does in a real-world environment, tweaking future production blocks as required. Beyond that, some of the other rumored ECM/ESM systems aren't something to laugh about either, particularly if the active cancellation system works even 25% of the time. None of this is in any way indicative of how I do or do not think the Rafale would match up against a modern FLANKER derivative like the Su-35 or Su-30MKI, however. But if somebody told me I had to outfit my air force with the Rafale, I certainly wouldn't be complaining about it!

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Austin on Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:30 am

    Rafale won the Indian MMRCA contest Laughing

    Now coming back to the itchy question , how does it compare with Su-35S ?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  TR1 on Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:57 am

    Gimme both, fuel, weapons, and airspace to test them out in, and I will get back to ya. Wink

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Austin on Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:25 am

    Weapon Load and Imp System
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  GarryB on Fri Feb 03, 2012 12:00 pm

    Interesting, but they haven't been updated to include the RVV-BD, or its domestic equivalent.

    The export missile has a range of 200km against an 8g target and 280km for an 8 g target for the domestic model.

    You would assume against a non manouvering large aircraft like AWACS or inflight refuelling tanker, that the effective range would become about 300km for the export missile and perhaps 350km for the domestic against 2g targets.

    Also the fact that Rafale has a slightly better thrust to weight ratio and lighter wing loading does not change the fact that the Flanker has 3D thrust vectoring that should allow it to perform manouvers that would stall a Rafale.

    Even if it was fitted with 3D thrust vectoring nozzles the Rafale would have the disadvantage of having its engines close together, which would greatly reduce the effect of differential thrust.

    In other words if you pull your nose up and stall so the airflow isn't moving over your wings or your control surfaces then the only way you can manouver the aircraft is by directing the thrust and getting the plane to turn in response. In a full stall the control surfaces no longer push against the air flowing over them and turn the aircraft so to roll the aircraft one engine nozzle goes down and the other goes up and the aircraft rotates. By separating the engine nozzles you increase the turning force they apply to the aircraft, so even with the same amount of power the Flanker would roll faster than the Rafale in the stall and would get its nose onto targets faster.
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1938
    Points : 2103
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Sergei Bogdan on the Su-35 vs Rafale

    Post  Cyberspec on Sat Jun 29, 2013 12:52 pm

    Is a fighter better than ours, let us say, the French Rafale? -

    I would not really want to answer the following questions - it's a very philosophical question, but rather a matter of tactics ... But if you do not become personal, - regarding the French Rafale or the American aircraft F-xx - is something I'm still going to tell you. Our plane is classified as heavy fighters, accordingly, it may take a large amount of fuel - 11.5 tons, which is two tons more than can take Su -27. At about the same cost in fuel consumption it can last longer in a air battle. Another point, the Su-35 has a 14-point suspension, we can take on board eight tons of weapons.

    There are other points, but I do not want to hurt anyone's feelings. Once again I want to stress the importance of the tactical use of the aircraft.

    http://ria.ru/interview/20130622/945066770.html
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 811
    Points : 1310
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  nemrod on Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:07 pm

    Cyberspec wrote: Is a fighter better than ours, let us say, the French Rafale? -

    I would not really want to answer the following questions - it's a very philosophical question, but rather a matter of tactics ... But if you do not become personal, - regarding the French Rafale or the American aircraft F-xx - is something I'm still going to tell you. Our plane is classified as heavy fighters, accordingly, it may take a large amount of fuel - 11.5 tons, which is two tons more than can take Su -27. At about the same cost in fuel consumption it can last longer in a air battle. Another point, the Su-35 has a 14-point suspension, we can take on board eight tons of weapons.

    There are other points, but I do not want to hurt anyone's feelings. Once again I want to stress the importance of the tactical use of the aircraft.

    http://ria.ru/interview/20130622/945066770.html

    If the Rafale is better than the SU-35 ? It is very difficult to judge, as the Rafale is an excellent aircraft, as the SU-35, the difference is only the pilot's skills. Training, training, tactic, a good Phantom II's pilot could down a SU-35, Mig 29, Rafale, as a good Mig 17's pilot could down an F-22, F-35, Typhoon.
    Didn't we see, during a recent US-Indian exercice, a Mig 21 bison outclassed F-15, and even if US dared, a Mig 21 bison could easily downed an F-22.
    As The indian pilots are very well trained.
    For me the SU-35 with a good pilot is able to overcome any western aircraft. Unfortunetly, the contrary is true too.
    Could russians design a new aircraft like SU-35 without pilot abble to overcome any aircraft ? I know, I dream, but it would be helpfull respekt 

    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1334
    Points : 1341
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:07 pm

    nemrod wrote:
    If the Rafale is better than the SU-35 ? It is very difficult to judge, as the Rafale is an excellent aircraft, as the SU-35, the difference is only the pilot's skills. Training, training, tactic, a good Phantom II's pilot could down a SU-35, Mig 29, Rafale, as a good Mig 17's pilot could down an F-22, F-35, Typhoon.
    Didn't we see, during a recent US-Indian exercise, a Mig 21 bison outclassed F-15, and even if US dared, a Mig 21 bison could easily downed an F-22.
    As The Indian pilots are very well trained.
    For me the SU-35 with a good pilot is able to overcome any western aircraft. Unfortunately, the contrary is true too.
    In the case of the Rafale and Su-35 i agree, when the technical level of the aircraft are similar the decisive factor for victory or loss will be the skill of said aircrafts pilot.
    In the case of so called lower class or previous Gen aircraft against the next Gen, the decisive factor would not only be the pilots skill, but also the level of modernization of the aircraft as well,  lets say your flying a Mig-29 with little to no ECM/MAWS/ACM, mid range radar/missiles, Short range IRST and stationary ground Radar support  against an invading F-15 with long range radar/missiles, advance EW systems, and AWACS support, the result of the engagement is clear, unless the Mig can close the gap although without proper ECM/MAWS/ACM that is unlikely. (ala Iraq)Sad 

    Could Russians design a new aircraft like SU-35 without pilot able to overcome any aircraft ? I know, I dream, but it would be helpfull respekt 
    Don't think so, the idea of unmanned aircraft being able to do the job of manned aircraft is interesting and all, but in my opinion as long as your fighting an adversary the has strong EW capabilities, the possibility of your flying robot death machine being turned against you will always be their.Neutral
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2180
    Points : 3072
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon Jul 01, 2013 6:54 am

    Who knows?  Considering a Rafale can defeat an F-22 with TVC, it can probably hold its own against Su-35 as well.  



    One must realise, French fighter pilots fly 180hrs a year, our pilots only get a fraction of that unless they are instructors.


    _________________
    The true value of life knows only the paratrooper. For he is more likely to look death in the eye.  -- Vasily Margelov
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jul 01, 2013 7:06 am

    Currently French pilots are getting tops around 150 hours per year....and with current cuts, only 40 of those will be on fast jets!

    Russian units that fly new birds will be flying at least that (Kursk pilots already flew 150 hours pr year in 2012) and AFAIK that is all in fast jets.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:04 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:Who knows?  Considering a Rafale can defeat an F-22 with TVC, it can probably hold its own against Su-35 as well.  



    One must realise, French fighter pilots fly 180hrs a year, our pilots only get a fraction of that unless they are instructors.  

    I read somewhere that around last year, the average flight hours was around 120h for Russian pilots, which is a huge step up from the average of 80 or less in less than 10 years ago.

    Sponsored content

    Re: EF Typhoon/Rafale vs Su-35S

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 18, 2017 6:28 pm