Its good enough to know what they are not capable of doing, and an Su-30MKI is not going to sneak off anyone's radar. A Rafale will...
Maybe when they get AESA radars in a few years time they might but their own radar emissions will give them away. A minimum RCS of 1m^2 is hardly going to sneak off many modern radars.
A rifleman will pick your knife wielding ass off at a hundred metres. The same as a Meteor launched from a Rafale at a 100 kilometres. Different situations, same result, you're dead. Same as a 120D too.
So what you are saying is that the longest range weapon always wins?
RWR, RHAWs, active jammers, chaff, are all useless?
At 100km launch all the target has to do is a couple of changes in direction and the incoming missile will have no energy for terminal manouvers.
AGAT are also developing an active radar seeker head with home on jam capability that has a diameter of 170mm.
The only air to air missile that would currently fit is the R-73 and might be the Su-35S's answer to the F-22. Carry the same number of R-73s as the F-22 can carry AMRAAMs and the fight will go to close range where WVR missiles will mean the potential for imaging missiles with enormous guaranteed kill zones.
Anti BVR missiles... the logical solution to the western adopted tactic of BVR combat.
Equally the Russians have plenty of experience with rocket ramjet powered missiles, from the KUB (SA-6) through the various anti ship missiles like Moskit and Oniks and of course the Kh-31 series. The ramjet powered model of the R-77 should turn the tables on the meteor or at least redress the balance.
The Flanker will never get to launch position unless the 120D misses.
The figures I have seen for AMRAAM show a 50% success rate against targets that had no operating defencive systems. Obviously better than SPARROW, but hardly amazing.
MKI has a decent setup, but its signature is too large even for an Elta pod to mask effectively. An APG-79 or even RBE2-AA would be able to cut through their jamming rather easily. Do you know how hard it is to jam a 1000T/R module AESA? Pretty damned hard.
Which will be good news in about 5 years when the Su-30MKI gets AESA and 1 year when Rafale gets AESA.
The advert clearly states that the antenna was designed for Su-35s and Flankers.It is a radar, its purpose is to detect radar waves, not VHF/UHF data transmissions. Do you know how subtle those signals are? The antenna is not that sensitive.
Sorry, don't see what that blog comment has to so with picking up Link 16.
The only sensible purpose for fitting such an antenna to such aircraft is to enable them to detect targets their existing radars can't.
Yes, it is a radar, and like all radars it can be operated actively to send out a radar pulse and sense its return to scan an area. It can also listen for signals and determine where they came from. If it couldn't determine where signals came from it wouldn't be much good as a radar would it?
It should detect any emissions in its freqency range and that includes NATO aircraft using link 16 which operates in that frequency range.
Yes, if it turns away it won't be able to receive updates meaning the target will likely get out of the active homing sphere. That would defeat the purpose of giving it data links.
There is no reason why the launch aircraft couldn't turn away and in a few seconds turn back to scan for the target to make sure it hadn't deviated.
The thing is that every time the Flanker scans the target to make sure it is following a specific course it runs the risk of the target detecting the scan and realising it might be under attack.
I am sure there are plenty of companies that need a damn good kicking, but there were also a lot of companies that were not allowed to export because what they made was secret, or simply because no one was buying.
Remember you not only lost industries, you also lost captive markets when eastern european countries started buying NATO weapons and equipment.
Some companies were well managed and some were lucky that they ended the cold war in favour of the current government and with a product that was popular.
Many companies in the US survive because they have factories in certain senators districts... the US armed forces don't even ask for C-17s in the budget because they get them whether they ask for them or not. Incredibly expensive but very high tech you could get 3 An-124s for the same price but with rather better capability.
The point is the makers there are lucky with their product... a product that sells itself... you could hardly compare it with another company making another product.
S-400 would be nice if it was complete. Without the long range missiles it is nothing but an S-300PMU2 with its new radar. Although it does have a better OS...
Beginning to understand your frustration, but as mentioned in another thread until the money actually moves from government promises to the hands of the factories you can understand not much being actually made. Promises don't upgrade tools or hire workers or buy components and raw materials.
Stalingradcommando, you have a point, though you are making it indirectly... against most enemy aircraft currently in service the Su-30MKI is a very good aircraft.
Against a very small few, notably with AESA radars that are smaller or stealthy it has a few disadvantages.
A big aircraft also has advantages too of course as I would say the Su-30MKI is more likely to be able to trade some fuel for a high altitude high speed missile launch to increase the range of its weapons than a smaller aircraft like a F-18E/F or Rafale or Typhoon for that matter.
RCS has little to do with physical size and everything to do with corners and materials, the B-2 is much larger than a Su-30MKI afterall.
A Su-30MKI with AESA and wing mounted L band radar and ramjet powered R-77s or even R-37s/R-100/KS-172s, whatever enters service, is just as impressive as any other less than 5th gen fighter available today.