Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Share
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2967
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  max steel on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:14 am

    So having more precision bombs is the only factor which makes US army better in quality ? Whqt all precision weapons do they use ?

    I guess they are many factors .dunno


    I think one reason can be their troops are more battle hardened . Ofcourse they are better compare the deaths of soldiers in Afghan war .
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5679
    Points : 5707
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  TR1 on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:15 am

    Did not think it was you. I have a cabal of butthurt followers who try to down-vote anything not resembling Russia-strong posts.

    USSR never purchased massive precision weapons stocks, not for tactical aircraft. No one really did back then- just look how many guided bombs the US dropped in Desert Storm. A handful of the total. More laser guided, but still.
    Not to mention weapons bought in the 80s....its 2015 now.

    Plenty bomb kits shown at exhibits, but to date I have not seen any serial orders for them.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:15 am

    max steel wrote:So having more precision bombs is the only factor which makes US army better in quality ? Whqt all precision weapons do they use ?

    I guess they are many factors .dunno


    I think one reason can be their troops are more battle hardened . Ofcourse they are better compare the deaths of soldiers in Afghan war .

    Well, if one is constantly at war with someone, then I suppose they will have a lot more experience, so in that case, it does go to the US for sure. Not sure if that is good though.....

    I like the snap drills that Shoygu has pushed. Very useful.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:17 am

    TR1 wrote:Did not think it was you. I have a cabal of butthurt followers who try to down-vote anything not resembling Russia-strong posts.

    USSR never purchased massive precision weapons stocks, not for tactical aircraft. No one really did back then- just look how many guided bombs the US dropped in Desert Storm. A handful of the total. More laser guided, but still.
    Not to mention weapons bought in the 80s....its 2015 now.

    Plenty bomb kits shown at exhibits, but to date I have not seen any serial orders for them.

    Thanks for the info.

    Yeah, I have not heard a whole heck of a lot regarding the bomb kits. Something like these though could benefit Russia since it seems like Russia has a massive stockpile of dumb bombs. But since the stockpile is high, I imagine many are duds now due to being of old stock. Guided kits for newer dumb bombs could be beneficial. Could you please link me (if you got any) of the kits shown?

    Thanks.
    avatar
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2149
    Points : 2250
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Apr 04, 2015 9:45 am

    sepheronx wrote:Well, if one is constantly at war with someone, then I suppose they will have a lot more experience, so in that case, it does go to the US for sure.

    But it does not go into the head of US weapon making system, which is dominated by oligarchs, lobbyist, addicted gamers, and rabies dogs rather than scientists and technicians.

    Proof ? M16.

    The harsh truth is that teh US goverment does not wage war to win, but for the oligarchs to make money on blood and flesh of dead people... for example selling overpriced stupid weapons to the army.

    TR1 wrote:You have to be utterly delusional to not think the US has a massive lead in precision weapons.

    I don't really agree with you, thought. For example Tomahawk BMG-109 using GPS which can be easily jammed, or LRASM / AGM-158 JASSM, a copy of Kh-59 with sextoy GPS guided and camera. Not good weapons for me.


    Last edited by higurashihougi on Sat Apr 04, 2015 9:58 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Apr 04, 2015 9:57 am

    higurashihougi wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:Well, if one is constantly at war with someone, then I suppose they will have a lot more experience, so in that case, it does go to the US for sure.

    But it does not go into the head of US weapon making system, which is dominated by oligarchs, lobbyist, addicted gamers, and rabies dogs rather than scientists and technicians.

    Proof ? M16.

    The harsh truth is that teh US goverment does not wage war to win, but for the oligarchs to make money on blood and flesh of dead people... for example selling overpriced stupid weapons to the army.

    This was most evident during the Iraq war more so than any other war, through groups like Haliburton and private military companies like Blackwater, Executive Outcomes, etc.  A lot of people became very wealthy during the war.  Then Lockheed obtained many contracts.  After the wars are faught, then the companies get further contracts - Iraq obtaining M1's, sales of F-16's (which they never obtained yet), more M16's and M4's, ammunition, etc.  Lot more money made.  I wouldn't say M16 is a bad rifle as it has its ups as well, but reliability was apparently an issue, but doesn't seem as so much now.  The M4 was a good contribution and models like the Canadian C7 was high quality, but apparently expensive.  That is the major issue of US made military gear vs any other (besides european) is the costs.  M16's, M1's, Bradly's, Humvees, etc are all quite expensive compared to the Russian and Chinese counterpart (AK-74M and newer models/Type 95, T-90A(AM)/Type 98, BTR-82, TigerM, etc) and while there are benefits to one, there are benefits as well to the others.  Worth the price differences though? Probably not since you can get a T-90A for a lot cheaper and AK's are made all over the world with various qualities at various prices, and a humvee was problematic regarding maintenance and protection even during Operation Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom.  Now the company who makes them, HUMMER, is a Chinese company.

    Edit: I think TR1 is aiming at the number of guided munitions really. Which may very well be true (I have no numbers so I don't know).
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16891
    Points : 17499
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 04, 2015 11:28 am

    Precision guided weapons are expensive and without the C4IR network to find enemy targets and pass that precise location data to armed assets there is little use for guided weapons.

    In the conflicts the Soviet Union and Russia have fought most of the time aircraft like the Su-24 and Su-25 bore the brunt of fighting and often delivered dumb weapons at targets they could see... and were generally quite effective in their role.

    Ironically the main precision guided weapon use was AAMs and anti ship missiles and of course strategic land attack cruise missiles that have had money spent on them.

    With the introduction of new aircraft and new training aircraft into the Russian AF there were claims that 14 different types of guided weapons have been introduced in numbers.

    Now I would speculate that at least 2 of those 14 types were Vikhr ATGMs and Krisantema ATGMs fitted to Ka-52 and Mi-28M attack helos respectively, but that leaves at least 12 weapons entering service in numbers... now that GLONASS works and much more capable aircraft are entering service the Russian military today is vastly more powerful than it was even in the late 1980s.

    Sure the US has rather more systems in service to murder people all round the world on the whim of whomever is currently in power, but those drones that are so effective in the third world would be useless in Russian air space, and much of the rest of their forces would likely not perform very well against a much more modern and capable force.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:36 pm

    TR1 wrote:Did not think it was you. I have a cabal of butthurt followers who try to down-vote anything not resembling Russia-strong posts.

    USSR never purchased massive precision weapons stocks, not for tactical aircraft. No one really did back then- just look how many guided bombs the US dropped in Desert Storm. A handful of the total. More laser guided, but still.
    Not to mention weapons bought in the 80s....its 2015 now.

    Plenty bomb kits shown at exhibits, but to date I have not seen any serial orders for them.

    This exactly is a perception created through the Iraq war propaganda. They filmed only rarely their B-52 Bombing campaigns where they just leveled areas with it old Vietnam style, just ball park figure and start throwing it, but for propaganda purposes they played the same videos over and over again, with some hangars, radars and fortifications how they used precision weapons. Both US and Russia have very thin stock piles of precision weapons for aircraft plattforms (Air-to-Ground). We need direct numbers to compare entire stockpile of bombs and how many of them are actual precision weapons and not some propaganda perception like the same perception they have created with invincible tank here and there, reality is much further away from believes and perceptions.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Exercise Indradanush IV: Su-30MKI overcame EF Typhoon

    Post  nemrod on Sat Aug 08, 2015 5:10 pm

    I closely follow this exercise since the beginning, and I waited for the result with great interrest.
    No matter the score -I think indian pilot is somewhere swaggered much  Very Happy , british pilots are very competent too  -, it is not the problem. The EAF Typhoon is one of the best western fighters beside the Rafale. The most interesting news is the russian fighter if there is a skill pilot could overcome any western fighter. No use to talk about the F-22, it will be sure the same result, because most of air combats will be dogfights, and not BVR. It proves again that Russia caught up the gap with west a long time ago. And with new Mig-35, and SU-35 could easily match every western fighter. It is a very good news for Russia.


    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/indian-air-force-beats-raf-120-in-training-exercise--using-russiandesigned-jets-10444466.html


    Indian Air Force 'beats RAF 12-0 in training exercise' – using Russian-designed jets



    India’s top guns have claimed they humiliated the cream of the RAF during a two-week exercise which offered British pilots a rare chance to go up against some of the latest Russian-designed fighter jets.

    Operation Indradhanush saw the Indian Air Force (IAF) bring four of its fleet of Russian-designed SU-30MKI Flanker fighter aircraft to RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire to face off against the RAF’s Typhoon FGR4 fighter.

    The exercise was relished by British pilots as an opportunity to train alongside Russian-designed aircraft, amid increasing tensions in the Baltic – where the RAF has deployed fighters following the conflict in Ukraine – and more frequent interceptions of Russian bombers off the British coastline.

    However, to the dismay of RAF officers, their Indian counterparts have reportedly taken the unusual step of publicly claiming to have come away from the exercise with a resounding 12-0 victory against their UK opponents.

    In an interview with Indian television, IAF Group Captain Ashu Srivastav claimed victory over the British aircraft during close-range dogfights – prompting an RAF source to label his claim “comical”.

    Group Captain Srivastav said the performance of his pilots was “exceptional”, while other reports in the Indian media said that IAF aircraft were able to defeat the more advanced RAF Typhoon aircraft not only in one-on-one combat, but also in situations where one IAF pilot was pitted against two Typhoons.

    Responding to the Indian claims, the RAF source they were clearly designed for the “domestic audience”. He told The Independent: “There must have been some clouded recollection on the flights back to India, as the headlines of the Indian press bear no relation to the results of the tactical scenarios completed on the exercise in any shape or form.”

    The RAF source also stressed that the Typhoons had effectively been fighting “with one arm behind their backs” as they did not make full use of their more advanced weapons systems.

    Tony Osborne, the London bureau chief of Aviation Week, also suggested caution when dealing with the Indian claims. “These cricket-style scores claimed by the IAF look impressive but should be treated with caution and certainly not as a realistic gauge of combat capability,” he said.

    “We have to view these scores through the haze of pilot bravado, national pride and also some political correctness. Nonetheless, the Su-30MKI is one of the aircraft that the Typhoon was designed to tackle and defeat, and no doubt in the right hands would present a potent challenge. Today [though] the aim would be to engage aircraft like the Su-30MKI from long-range before the two could come together in a dogfight.”

    Even the Indian pilot admitted the SU-30s were “less successful” in the longer-range combat exercises.

    Aviation experts also pointed to an exercise in 2011 when RAF fighters decimated the ranks of the visiting IAF pilots, prompting the then Air Chief Marshal of the RAF, Stephen Dalton, to comment: “Well, they lost.”

    A spokesperson for the RAF said of this summer’s exercises: “Our analysis does not match what has been reported, RAF pilots and the Typhoon performed well throughout the exercise with and against the Indian Air Force. Both [forces] learnt a great deal from the exercise  and the RAF look forward to the next opportunity to train alongside the IAF.”

    The RAF has seven frontline Typhoon squadrons equipped but it has recently been reported that the RAF’s fast jet fleet, which is set to shrink to its smallest size in history by the end of the decade, is stretched to the limit while carrying out operations in the Middle East and the Baltic.

    This week, Ministry of Defence officials granted another reprieve to ageing Tornado strike jets because of a shortage of aircraft needed to bomb Isis targets.
    Typhoon FGR4: Britain’s best

    Armament rating 8.0/10

    Manoeuvrability 9.7/10

    Max Rate of Climb 65k ft/min

    Service Ceiling 65k ft

    Max Speed 2.35 Mach

    Fuel Economy 0.68 km/l

    Unit Cost $125m

    Probability of winning cannon dogfight 66%
    Sukhoi su-30Mk1: Russia's best

    Armament rating 8.5/10

    Manoeuvrability 7.8/10

    Max Rate of Climb 60k ft/min

    Service Ceiling 56k ft

    Max Speed 1.90 Mach

    Fuel Economy 0.58 km/l

    Unit Cost $47m

    Probability of winning cannon dogfight 34%

    Source: aviatia.net

    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  medo on Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:03 pm

    Don't forget, that Su-30SM is more capable than Su-30MKI.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:33 pm

    medo wrote:Don't forget, that Su-30SM is more capable than Su-30MKI.

    No matter SU-27-30 SM, MKI, SU-32-33-35, Mig-29-33-35, Mig-25-31, this is not the question. The important are facts, Russia's air fleet quality has at least the same western quality, and must be better than US. If now you compare Mig-35, and F-22, the Mig-35 will likely overcome the F-22. Obviously it depends the pilot's skills.
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2967
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  max steel on Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:36 pm

    Look at all the aspects independent mentioned Typhoon leads in each one of them but still they lost to Indians su-30 mki overwhelmingly . You know why ? Believe it or not but it happened only because of Indian AF pilots. IAF is cream of cream. Probably the second best ( after China) or best airforce in whole Asia and Oceania .
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Sat Aug 08, 2015 9:39 pm

    To Max.
    max steel wrote:Look at all the aspects independent mentioned Typhoon leads in each one of them ....
    If you read the western press, you will have believe :
    1- Soviet Union -as Russia nowadays- has scientists but in all aspect they were not able to produce modern aircraft.
    2- Hence they will have necessarily to copy West to build them.
    3- There are many goofies that still believe the Su-27 Flanker was merge from copy of F-14, and F-16
    4- West has necessarily the best pilots in the world.
    5- West has necessarily the technology in the world.
    6- All the rest of the world will have to necessarily copy the naive west.
    7- West could not loose against the rest of the world. Because the rest of the world are under men.
    etc...
    If I try to enumerate all shits that I believed in the past, the post will be to much long, and no one could read it, including you  Very Happy
    The west is blinded by two false victories -1991, and 1999-, and they imagine all that West will last for centuries and centuries, nevertheless the wake will be more harder. In engineering, soviet specialists were among the best of the world, in all areas, including radars, communications, electronics, nevertheless, Russia underwent one of its worse crisis during its history, it was during the dark era of 90's. After only few years Russia wake up, and now its hardware is in quality comparable, if not better than west, and this exercise prove that.  
    Do not take credit what west said, see only the facts.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  medo on Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:21 pm

    nemrod wrote:
    medo wrote:Don't forget, that Su-30SM is more capable than Su-30MKI.

    No matter SU-27-30 SM, MKI, SU-32-33-35, Mig-29-33-35, Mig-25-31, this is not the question. The important are facts, Russia's air fleet quality has at least the same western quality, and must be better than US. If now you compare Mig-35, and F-22, the Mig-35 will likely overcome the F-22. Obviously it depends the pilot's skills.

    It matter for RAF. If they lost with their best Eurofighters against export Su-30MKI with weaker engines and radar, than what trouble could do more capable Russian Su-30SM, not to say Su-35. They have more powerful engines and agility, more powerful radars and more powerful EW an ESM equipment. It would be also interesting to see results from similar exercise between Malaysian Su-30MKM and US F-22 fighters. For now it is only known, that Su-30MKM was the hardest opponent to F-22.
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5240
    Points : 5303
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:03 am

    medo wrote:
    nemrod wrote:
    medo wrote:Don't forget, that Su-30SM is more capable than Su-30MKI.

    No matter SU-27-30 SM, MKI, SU-32-33-35, Mig-29-33-35, Mig-25-31, this is not the question. The important are facts, Russia's air fleet quality has at least the same western quality, and must be better than US. If now you compare Mig-35, and F-22, the Mig-35 will likely overcome the F-22. Obviously it depends the pilot's skills.

    It matter for RAF. If they lost with their best Eurofighters against export Su-30MKI with weaker engines and radar, than what trouble could do more capable Russian Su-30SM, not to say Su-35. They have more powerful engines and agility, more powerful radars and more powerful EW an ESM equipment. It would be also interesting to see results from similar exercise between Malaysian Su-30MKM and US F-22 fighters. For now it is only known, that Su-30MKM was the hardest opponent to F-22.
    Not just the RAF but the USAF. Maybe there are some very good reasons the Flankers have not been back at Red Flag since 2008.

    This in an Indian view of 2008, like this RAF exercise their view is a bit different to that of the host.
    http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2014/03/10/dissecting_a_dogfight_sukhoi_vs_usaf_at_red_flag_2008_33623.html
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5240
    Points : 5303
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  JohninMK on Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:49 am

    avatar
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2149
    Points : 2250
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  higurashihougi on Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:40 am


    RAF claims is rubbish. They lost but they don't have the face to admit it.

    “Our analysis does not match what has been reported, RAF pilots and the Typhoon performed well throughout the exercise with and against the Indian Air Force. Both forces learnt a great deal from the exercise and the RAF look forward to the next opportunity to train alongside the IAF.”

    So lost 0-12 is "performed well" ?

    First of all, the purpose of such exercises is usually to study the opponents, learn their tactics and strategy, sometimes without showing the “enemy” the full extent of a weapon system capability (even though the latter is also the “excuse” air arms most frequently use to comment alleged defeats). Then, the kill ratio depends on how the scenario has been set up, with the Rules Of Engagement affecting the number of simulated kills.

    Oh so basically they means that they intentionally lost, and all the training is set up ?

    A**hole losers.

    In that case, the kill ratio was confirmed but it was also explained that the F-15s were defeated because they lacked an advanced active electronically scanned array (AESA) and were called to fight the Su-30s in scenarios that involved six Eagles against up to eighteen IAF aircraft with no chance to simulate any beyond visual range (BVR) missile shot (due to the Indian request of not using the AMRAAM).

    Pure masturbation.

    Again AESA is used as the s3xtoy to jerking off the fanboys, but it seems like they do not know what is the true advantage of AESA against PESA.

    First, Su-30 PESA already can use dynamic shifted phase, that means it can quickly oscillate the radar beam against the radar antenna. The oscillation speed of Su-30 PESA is slower than AESA, but that is more than enough.

    Second, PESA has the significant advantage against AESA in the purity, cleanliness, and power of the signal. Old generation AESA likes in F-22 suffers from the distortion of both frequency and phase. Newer generations AESA of Russia and U.S. today somehow managed to fix it, but still the power is not very high.

    Third, the true advantage of AESA against PESA is that, people can put the AESA radar on the aircraft's aerodynamic shape, and the AESA radar is no longer restricted to the traditional radar surface. That is the reason why Russia can put the 10 metre L-band radar on the wing edges.

    But the West only put AESA at the traditional position of PESA. Like somebody buys a TV but uses it only to emit light.

    Furthermore, since the drills took place during F-22 budget reviews, some analysts affirm the Air Force intentionally accepted the challenging ROE (Rules Of Engagement) to gain more Raptors…

    Ah, s3xtoy F-22. The problem is F-22 stealth cloak is even ineffective against Western weather radar. And it is damn expensive.

    In this case, for instance, dealing with the ROE, an RAF source said the Typhoons fought “with one arm behind their backs.”

    Another typical case of loser's masturbation.

    Moreover, WVR engagements, in which the super-maneuverable Su-30 excels, are less likely than BVR (Beyond Visual Range) ones where a Flanker would be much more vulnerable, as Indradhanush 2015 seems to have proved.

    Total bullshit.

    Maneuverability is critical for air fight, no matter whether dog fight or BVR. Super-maneuverability enable the fighter to quickly escape the incoming missile, or rapidly jump out of enemy's radar angle. Great maneuverability enable the hunted aircrafts can become the hunting one during a pursuit.

    Su-30 is super-maneuverable, while Typhoon and other EU canards cannot have high AoA since the vertical stabilizer will be blocked by the hull and wings at high AoA.

    And Su-30 has bigger radar (means greater angular resolution), and the radar vision angle is 240 degree. It can quickly escape the radar vision of Typhoon, while thanks to the 240 degree vision, it can still see and monitor the Typhoon during the drastic maneuverability. And as Typhoon losts the sight of Su-30, Su-30 begins to lock Typhoon.

    And that we still have not mentioned the powerful ECM system of Su-30.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  medo on Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:34 am

    JohninMK wrote:
    medo wrote:
    nemrod wrote:
    medo wrote:Don't forget, that Su-30SM is more capable than Su-30MKI.

    No matter SU-27-30 SM, MKI, SU-32-33-35, Mig-29-33-35, Mig-25-31, this is not the question. The important are facts, Russia's air fleet quality has at least the same western quality, and must be better than US. If now you compare Mig-35, and F-22, the Mig-35 will likely overcome the F-22. Obviously it depends the pilot's skills.

    It matter for RAF. If they lost with their best Eurofighters against export Su-30MKI with weaker engines and radar, than what trouble could do more capable Russian Su-30SM, not to say Su-35. They have more powerful engines and agility, more powerful radars and more powerful EW an ESM equipment. It would be also interesting to see results from similar exercise between Malaysian Su-30MKM and US F-22 fighters. For now it is only known, that Su-30MKM was the hardest opponent to F-22.
    Not just the RAF but the USAF. Maybe there are some very good reasons the Flankers have not been back at Red Flag since 2008.

    This in an Indian view of 2008, like this RAF exercise their view is a bit different to that of the host.
    http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2014/03/10/dissecting_a_dogfight_sukhoi_vs_usaf_at_red_flag_2008_33623.html

    I remember, that in beginning of the nineties RuAF send their Su-27 in the US on their common exercise with US F-15 fighters and win their dogfights. Of course USAF or RAF will claim, they didn't fight with full capabilities, but IAF also didn't. USAF and RAF use all AWACS and data link network in their exercises, while IAF was limited, as they don't have their own A-50 AWACS with them and maybe even not using their own data link network as it is not compatible with NATO Link 16. There were other limitations too, which were equal for both sides.

    NATO likes to have exercises with using all AWACS and data link network capabilities against opponents, who doesn't have them and have to rely on their own sensors and than claim, how they are far superior against opponents. Problem is, that RuAF have AWACS planes and modernize them to A-50U and soon will also have A-100 and that their most important fighters as Su-35, Su-30SM, Su-34 and MiG-31BM have full data link network to share situation picture inside the group and with AWACS as well as SATCOM for longer distance communications. Same is true for Chinese AF, which also have their own AWACS planes and data link network and their J-11B is more capable than Russian export flankers.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Sun Aug 09, 2015 2:33 pm

    I wanted to be honest with you, for that reason I quoted all the article including this piece of shit :

    Typhoon FGR4: Britain’s best

    Armament rating 8.0/10

    Manoeuvrability 9.7/10

    Max Rate of Climb 65k ft/min

    Service Ceiling 65k ft

    Max Speed 2.35 Mach

    Fuel Economy 0.68 km/l

    Unit Cost $125m

    Probability of winning cannon dogfight 66%
    Sukhoi su-30Mk1: Russia's best

    Armament rating 8.5/10

    Manoeuvrability 7.8/10

    Max Rate of Climb 60k ft/min

    Service Ceiling 56k ft

    Max Speed 1.90 Mach

    Fuel Economy 0.58 km/l

    Unit Cost $47m

    Probability of winning cannon dogfight 34%

    Source: aviatia.net

    Aviatia.net claimed that the Probability of winning cannon dogfight is 66% for the Typhoon, and only 34% for Sukhoi, they dared to claim that the Typhoon is more manoeuvrable than Sukhoi. Well, if so, why didn't you win ? Another piece of shit subjective western pov. In front of the evidence of their defeat, they tried to justify by this uglly comment

    The RAF source also stressed that the Typhoons had effectively been fighting “with one arm behind their backs” as they did not make full use of their more advanced weapons systems.

    It is like football match,when the defeated team always invoke the referee, "if we loose, it is not because we loose, but because of the referee". What did they mean ? IRST ? We could assume that Typhoon's IRST could indeed detect the russian plane at 90 km, meanwhile the Sukhoi could only detect at 50 km. And after ? As we've seen previously, the air-air missiles are useless against either Typhoon, or Sukhoi. They could easily dodge them, as they are the two manoeuvrable. Radar ? We've seen that the air combat could only end in dogfight, hence with gun. What is the interrest of your radar, AESA or not ? You have a powerfull hardware, useless.

    In fact do not pay attention about these stupid uggly comments in all western media including inside a supposed neutral newspaper. They are all like that.

    medo wrote:

    I remember, that in beginning of the nineties RuAF send their Su-27 in the US on their common exercise with US F-15 fighters and win their dogfights. Of course USAF or RAF will claim, they didn't fight with full capabilities, but IAF also didn't. USAF and RAF use all AWACS and data link network in their exercises, while IAF was limited, as they don't have their own A-50 AWACS with them and maybe even not using their own data link network as it is not compatible with NATO Link 16. There were other limitations too, which were equal for both sides.

    Awacs, Elint are only useful against poor, isolated countries under blockade. Against Iraq and Serbia US outnumbered them, and all serbians, and iraqis secret hardware were between US hands. There were easy to jam them. In spite of that, the victory was hard for US. Moreover countries like Russia has its own powerful Awacs, Elint, and jammers.



    NATO likes to have exercises with using all AWACS and data link network capabilities against opponents, who doesn't have them and have to rely on their own sensors and than claim, how they are far superior against opponents.
    To say simple, Nato like to play against easy opponents, in order to claim an easy victory. But nobody is fooled.



    JohninMK wrote:
    It would be also interesting to see results from similar exercise between Malaysian Su-30MKM and US F-22 fighters. For now it is only known, that Su-30MKM was the hardest opponent to F-22.
    I could certify that it will be the same. Americans are well aware about their hardware's capacity.


    JohninMK wrote:
    Not just the RAF but the USAF. Maybe there are some very good reasons the Flankers have not been back at Red Flag since 2008.

    If they are back one day. Nobody is fooled, and everyone knows very well about the full capacity of US air fleet.

    JohninMK wrote:
    This in an Indian view of 2008, like this RAF exercise their view is a bit different to that of the host.
    http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2014/03/10/dissecting_a_dogfight_sukhoi_vs_usaf_at_red_flag_2008_33623.html

    It is not only the indian pov. In nearly all exercises US have problems, but they cleverly hide them. There is a long time ago, nearly 30 years ago. There were exercises between belgium F-16 and french Rafale. The Rafale easily outmanoeuvred all F-16. There was a shame for US.
    In fact european countries at the end of 60's understood that all US hardware could not match with soviet hardware in order to protect them. The Vietnam, arab-israel wars demonstrated that the ability of US military industry to overcome soviet hardware was doubtful in the best case. If not a disaster. For that reason, UK, like France, Germany, Italy developed their own aircraft industry. Do not forget that the F-4 Phantom II was a disaster, like Corsair II, the F-105 was cancelled. The credibility of US industry was very low in all matters. The ability of the F-15, F-16, F-18 to overcome all soviet hardware contrary to what it seems was, and still is doubtful. The only aircraft that could match with soviet was F-14. But its price was too much expensive.
    Well you are going to tell me that see Gulf War I, and Serbia's war. Yes, but see the context. In Gulf War I, Meanwhile Iraq had only few hundreds of modern aircrafts, no more than 200, US built up 3.000. The losses for Iraq including its Mig-23 ML, Mig-25, MIg-29 was around 40. US losses acknowledged 40. The real scale of US losses was around 100.
    During Serbia's war it is really important to not forget that Serbia could barely build up 6 of its malfunctionning Mig-29. All of them lack of spare parts, their radars could not run etc..If Serbia could build up just 50 aircrafts it was a feat. US coalition built up.....900.


    Since the begining I believe that soviet -russian- hardware could easily match to all western hardwares.



    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:58 pm

    There are no typhoons with IRST or AESA.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3247
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  medo on Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:15 pm

    Werewolf wrote:There are no typhoons with IRST or AESA.

    Only Tranche 1 is without IRST, the rest have them. For AESA radar, I'm not sure if they are in serial planes yet.

    nemrod wrote:It is like football match,when the defeated team always invoke the referee, "if we loose, it is not because we loose, but because of the referee". What did they mean ? IRST ? We could assume that Typhoon's IRST could indeed detect the russian plane at 90 km, meanwhile the Sukhoi could only detect at 50 km

    As I know, OLS-30 IRST in Su-30 could detect a target at a range of 90 km, same as OLS-35 in Su-35, also they have laser designator inside to mark ground targets and TV for ground targets and for visual ID of aerial targets.

    I also read, that Indians claim, that Su-30MKI Bars-M radar could detect F-16 blk52 at range of 350 km and track at range of 200 km. I don't think Rafale or Eurofighter have much smaller RCS than F-16 blk52. Could anyone confirm those claims? If they are correct, than we could only guess, at what ranges Su-35 could detect and track them.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Su-30K vs western fighters

    Post  nemrod on Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:23 pm

    Werewolf wrote:There are no typhoons with IRST or AESA.

    Thx Werewolf for your remarq. Even though I heard about an aesa radar for the EAF, and Typhoon's IRST's name is "Pirate" this is not important. In air combat, AESA is useless, because it will end in dogfight. As you can see, with a good pilot the russian origin fighters match with the western's state of the art fighter. Against the F-22, there will be the same result, SU-30 will easily overcome it, because at first with its useful IRST it could easily detect the F-22, before F-22 switch on its radar. And even though the F-22 will detect at first the SU-30, and fired its missile, it will immediately be detected. The AIM 120 D will be useless too, because this exercise demonstrated how the SU-30 could be manoeuvrable, hence it will be able to easily dodge every western air to air missile. This exercise prove again that west must be worried.

    Why the SU-30 will easily overcome any F-22, please read this
    https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/f-35-analysis/

    All Su-27 variants, as well as most modern Western fighters, carry IRST as a part of their sensory suite. Russian OLS-35 is capable of tracking typical fighter target from head-on distance of 50 km, 90 km tail-on, with azimuth coverage of +-90 degrees, and +60/-15 degree elevation coverage.

    Fighter supercruising at Mach 1,7 generates shock cone with stagnation temperature of 87 degrees Celsius, which will increase detection range to 55 km head-on. Not only that, but AMRAAM launch has large, unique thermal signature, which should allow detection of F22 and missile launch warning up to 93+ kilometers, while AMRAAM moving at Mach 4 could be detected at up to 83 kilometers. That is worsened by the fact that F35 cannot supercruise, therefore additionally increasing its IR signature by requiring afterburner.

    ....
    Moreover, these systems do not adress fact that air around aircraft is heating up too – whereas, as mentioned, shock cone created by supercruising aircraft is up to 87 degrees Celzius hot, air temperature outside is between 30 and 60 degrees Celzius below zero....

    Hence if you have a radar and you cannot swithc on because it nullifies any stealth advantages, you cannot fire missile because you will be immediatly detected, moreover, as we've already discussed the air to air missile will be inefective. The only advantage will be in the SU-30 because all radars will detect the presence of the F-22. I mean specifically F-22 -that is supposed the western state of the art-, and not F-35 as everyone is well aware that it will be the next sitting duck, and the will have the same F-105's fate.

    avatar
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2149
    Points : 2250
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Electronics of F-15 is inferior to Russian fighters like Su-30/35 and MiG-25/31.

    Post  higurashihougi on Mon Aug 17, 2015 4:23 am

    Walther von Oldenburg wrote:That guy hated the F-15 and used to say all it's advanced electronics is uselses etc. And F-15 ended up being aircraft with the highest kill ratio in the history of aviation.

    Electronics of F-15 is inferior to Russian fighters like Su-30/35 and MiG-25/31. Su-30 and MiG-31's radar are bigger, means angular resolution is higher. Su and MiG also have PESA dynamic shifted phase, while F-15 does not.

    And none in the West can outcompete Su-30/35's ECM system... yet.

    And it was defeated by Su-30 and Su-27 in military training events.

    Still, F-15 is indeed a competent fighter.

    ==========
    ==========

    http://sputniknews.com/military/20150816/1025799961.html

    Don't be fooled by the sounds of champagne corks popping, there is nothing to celebrate about the newest F-35 stealth warplane whom defense analyst David Axe calls a "second-rate" fighter "seriously outclassed by even older Russian and Chinese jets" let alone cutting edge aircraft.
    avatar
    BlackArrow

    Posts : 131
    Points : 111
    Join date : 2013-05-17

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  BlackArrow on Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:45 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:

    Electronics of F-15 is inferior to Russian fighters like Su-30/35 and MiG-25/31. Su-30 and MiG-31's radar are bigger, means angular resolution is higher. Su and MiG also have PESA dynamic shifted phase, while F-15 does not.

    Nonsense. Have you no idea of the the avionics and weapons fit of the latest F-15s - AESA radar, AIM-120C7, AIM-9X etc.

    Guest
    Guest

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Guest on Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:21 pm

    BlackArrow wrote:
    higurashihougi wrote:

    Electronics of F-15 is inferior to Russian fighters like Su-30/35 and MiG-25/31. Su-30 and MiG-31's radar are bigger, means angular resolution is higher. Su and MiG also have PESA dynamic shifted phase, while F-15 does not.

    Nonsense. Have you no idea of the the avionics and weapons fit of the latest F-15s - AESA radar, AIM-120C7, AIM-9X etac.
    AESA radars are only fitted to a select number of F-15Es. As far as I know radars on newer Russian aircraft outclass the APG-82 on Strike Eagles in an a2a role. But the F-15E hasn't been used for an A2A combat role for some time now. Russian and American missiles are more or less on the same levels. So the tech is broadly comparable, but I would put money on Russian aircraft since their role remains to win dogfights, not bomb ground targets.

    Sponsored content

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:11 am