Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future Dogfights

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21096
    Points : 21644
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 07, 2014 12:08 pm

    There is a difference between Su-30MKI program and FGFA program. Su-30MKI was a customized version of Su-30 with hi-tech features like TVC, better radars, canards etc. And Russians later used the same concept to export it to Malaysia, Algeria and even ordered over 100 units for themselves.

    The Su-30 is actually the Su-27UB operational trainer. The Su-30M was given a better radar and was used by the PVO as a mini AWACS type aircraft to operate with lighter fighters as an airborne GCI vehicle.

    The aircraft was used as the basis for the Su-30MKI because India wanted a multirole two seater aircraft and it was the obvious choice.

    Apart from the addition of canards there wasn't really much of a structural change for the aircraft from the Su-30M design.

    Most of the real changes was the internals and avionics and systems.

    Where the FGFA differs is that it is not a customized T-50 based on Indian needs. It is rather a JOINT-VENTURE, where India and Russia are paying equal amount of money for complete R&D.

    The T-50 is already pretty much designed... Indian money is not going to radically change it that much unless they want it to be even stealthier which might lead to increased purchase and operational costs.

    At the end of the Day the difference between the operational PAK FA and the operational FFGA is that the latter will be developed in the directions India wants with the electronics and systems in it that India wants.

    Current T-50 as per Sukhoi themselves is a 5(-) fighter, but FGFA is going to be a true 5+ gen fighter and Stage 2 variant of the vanilla T-50.

    Sukhoi haven't developed a shell, they will have been perfecting fully integrated electronics for the aircraft for the last decade. The Su-35S will have -5th gen avionics developed for the T-50 and the first T-50 prototypes will have those avionics installed with improvements developed and ready for the first serial fighters.

    India might go with those components or they might choose domestic or French or Israeli components too... Russia might choose some Indian made components but are unlikely to choose Israeli or French components for obvious reasons.

    [quot]
    I don't expect the final Indian and the final Russian variant of the T-50 to be that different. Perhaps the Russian variant may have slightly better avionics and missiles, but even that has to be seen![/quote]

    Better in this context is meaningless... India will get the avionics they want and the Russian AF will also get the avionics they want... there wont be better.

    even Su-30MKI, Su-35S, and even stage 1 T-50 all have 2D TVC that is mounted in a ---\ /--- V-axis and can generate both vertical as well as lateral force, and can provide thrust even in the yaw plane(apart from the usual pitch axis thrust).

    Hence some people call this kind of canted TVC as "virtual 3D "TVC, some prefer to call it 2.5D TVC.

    The butterfly tail of the YF-23 with 45 degree tail surfaces can in theory simulate vertical and horizontal surfaces, but is not totally efficient at the job so they are not widely used.

    TVC engine nozzles are the same... they allow some Yaw control at the cost of less efficiency with vertical and horizontal deflection effect.

    Lets see whether they can develop something like that. Cause if they can, it would mean all aspect stealth like F-22 along with post-stall manoeuvring of the super-flankers(if not like that of Mig-29OVT)

    My own personal opinion is that Full 3D TVC is more valuable than the minor advantage rectangular nozzles offers... note the F-35 does not have rectangular nozzles either.
    Indian Flanker
    Indian Flanker

    Posts : 159
    Points : 170
    Join date : 2014-02-28
    Location : India- Land of the Tiger

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  Indian Flanker on Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:33 pm

    My own personal opinion is that Full 3D TVC is more valuable than the minor advantage rectangular nozzles offers... note the F-35 does not have rectangular nozzles either.
    What if an engine with rectangular/flat nozzle has "virtual 3D " TVC Very Happy

    Can the Russian engineers do it?
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1787
    Points : 1782
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:38 pm

    Indian Flanker wrote:
    My own personal opinion is that Full 3D TVC is more valuable than the minor advantage rectangular nozzles offers... note the F-35 does not have rectangular nozzles either.
    What if an engine with rectangular/flat nozzle has "virtual 3D "  TVC  Very Happy

    Can the Russian engineers do it?
    That would be unlikely, unless the Russian engineers are able to create a thrust vector nozzle that can not only change directions, but also its very shape, if sought a nozzle were to be created it would resolve much of the performance vs stealth compromises that has been plaguing the development of these stealth fighters.  study 
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1145
    Points : 1146
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 22
    Location : Roanapur

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  collegeboy16 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 8:01 pm

    make it rotate is my guess
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21096
    Points : 21644
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:55 pm

    What if improvements in stealth design allow the stealthy creation of curved engine nozzles...

    Why flat nozzles only... what about hexagonal nozzles that are stealthy and still offer 3D thrust vector control?
    Walther von Oldenburg
    Walther von Oldenburg

    Posts : 1097
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2015-01-24
    Age : 28
    Location : Oldenburg

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:14 pm

    Isn't the concept of dogfighting obsolete anyway? Modern fighters fly so fast that it would be enxt to impossible for a human pilot to survive them.

    Ok, so I'll be mor specific. I mean effectiveness of AF in two distinct situations when
    1) Enemy does not have good hard AD but possesses good passive AD (things like Nakidka, Shtora, jammers and other devices) - basically Serbia of 1999 with better passive AD.
    2) The enemy possesses both modern active and passive AD

    I am not generally interested in shooting down enemy aircraft but how effective can these things be in preventing enemy ordnance from hitting ground targets - basically a situation when the enemy theoretically does possess control of the sky but still can do shit.
    jhelb
    jhelb

    Posts : 577
    Points : 668
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  jhelb on Tue Aug 04, 2015 12:26 am

    Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Isn't the concept of dogfighting obsolete anyway? Modern fighters fly so fast that it would be enxt to impossible for a human pilot to survive them.

    Ok, so I'll be mor specific. I mean effectiveness of AF in two distinct situations when
    1) Enemy does not have good hard AD but possesses good passive AD (things like Nakidka, Shtora, jammers and other devices) - basically Serbia of 1999 with better passive AD.
    2) The enemy possesses both modern active and passive AD

    I am not generally interested in shooting down enemy aircraft but how effective can these things be in preventing enemy ordnance from hitting ground targets - basically a situation when the enemy theoretically does possess control of the sky but still can do shit.

    Dogfighting is certainly not obsolete. Say a F 15 detects a Su 30 at a distance of 100kms and fires a AIM missile. However it fails to hit the Su 30. By the time the F 15 can fire another missile the Su 30 is already up close with the F 15, because these aircraft are travelling at speeds of Mach 1 and above.

    Tactical responses to air defenses vary, with European air forces favoring low altitude penetration, in contrast to the preference of the American Air Force for medium altitude penetration facilitated by air superiority and jamming.As a general rule, the US Air Force is pursuing programs that will allow greater reliance on stealthy systems rather than reliance on jamming to penetrate air defenses.

    While accuracy, speed and invulnerability to counter-measures is obviously important, the primary measure of merit for air defenses is range.The longer the range of the defensive system, the larger the "foot print" attacking aircraft need to defeat or avoid. Effective air defense combines and synchronizes the actions of all available air defense assets to form an integrated air defense system (IADS). IADS effectiveness results from shifting from one degree of control to another. The selected degree of
    control depends on the ROE, the air picture, and the ability to communicate with the weapons systems. The degree of control can vary from centralized to decentralized. Under certain conditions, air defense units may conduct autonomous operations. Effective coordination of air defense assets must occur.

    http://in.rbth.com/economics/2014/05/12/5_of_russias_most_advanced_aerial_defence_systems_35131.html

    Susceptibility to electronic attack can be minimized by understanding the enemy’s electronic warfare capabilities and training, and by employing proper electronic protection; e.g., using decoys, brevity codes, chattermark procedures or frequency hopping radios.

    Check out this forum thread. Some great guys and some great discussions

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t3374-russian-air-to-air-ground-missiles
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21096
    Points : 21644
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:43 am

    In Vietnam dogfighting was supposed to be obsolete because modern fighters had short and long range missiles that made dogfighting obsolete.

    the problem there was that missile technology was still flaky so dogfights happened.

    Today missile technology has moved on and is rather more capable but then missile defence technology has also moved on so the chances of an aware enemy defending themselves against your missiles is still there... and when missiles fail there is dogfighting.

    Good dogfighting capability with your aircraft means higher kill probabilities with missiles and with guns.

    For instance an R-73 fired from directly behind a target is more likely to get a kill than one fired head on... but thrust vectoring and helmet mounted sights means when a Flanker or Fulcrum pilot sees an enemy aircraft they can turn their nose and therefore also their missiles directly at the target before firing... which means the missiles fuel is used to accelerate the missile towards the target and not wasted turning hard on launch.

    If your missile hits him first then you have a much better chance of surviving than if you have to keep watching your enemies aircraft and firing missiles at him and trying to track any missiles they have fired at you.

    When all the missiles miss then you have to be able to get cannon on target... again manouver capability is critical...

    Assuming modern Russian jammers work against AMRAAM and DIRCM jams IR guided missiles a fight between an F-35 and Su-35 or MiG-35 will start with missiles and then end up with guns. If the F-35 is stealthy then it will have 6 AAMs at most, if it is not then it will have more missiles but will not be stealthy so engagements can be started earlier.

    Assuming both can defeat the others missiles then it will come down to the gun... and manouver capability.. in which case my money is on the Russian fighters.

    Sponsored content

    Future Dogfights - Page 2 Empty Re: Future Dogfights

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:19 pm