Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 07 Aug 2015 18:16

Singha wrote:given the distinct lack of interest in the 4 owner countries to fund the eurofighter updates vs the amt of effort usaf still puts to keep its F-16 and F-15 at the leading edge...one is doubtful if the meteor will be produced and deployed in numbers and same for the captor-M.

with no real war in sight and spain, royal navy and italy probably all going into a middle east or african war with JSF from their LPD ships....and the trusty old tornados ofcourse as paveway bomb trucks.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5098&p=1882525#p1882525

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Aug 2015 19:36

Folks whe one does not agree with another memebrs post stick to rebutting the content and not personal attacks on the member.
When is it a personal attack on the member? Well using normal standards when the member feels so and admins agree.

So keep it civil and npt get personal.

Thanks,

ramana

tired of babysitting high talent individuals.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 07 Aug 2015 21:02

Karan M wrote:Not a single credible Su-34 report in recent years states they have a portable chemical toilet or space for one. It seems to be a myth started when the program started and which has persisted. Pictures of its interior show it to be a fighter class pit as well, not some large surveillance bird.

I have seen it in a Russian documentary.

Its a basically a metal bottle that is fixed on the wall. Suited for #1 only. While standing.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 08 Aug 2015 02:10

So now that's the RAF has debunked IAF analysis and claims typhoon superiority in this exercise : Back to beginning ?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 08 Aug 2015 02:14

For the record:

Sources from the RAF state, however, that Indian planes were being 'bedded in' to new terrain and effectively shown the ropes. The RAF were "introducing them to the airspace", putting the Typhoons up against the Sukhois in something more akin to a pigeon-shooting exercise, rather than a combat exercise, so the Indian pilots could get their bearings.

Once the IAF were comfortable flying in foreign air space the Large Force Exercises (LFEs) began and subsequently the RAF Typhoons proved more than a match for the Indian SU-30's.

Speaking to Forces TV an RAF spokesman offered a polite rebuttal to the claims in the Indian press, saying:

"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."

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Aug 2015 02:15

RAF has debunked IAF analysis

Could you share the debunking?

Sources from the RAF state, however, that Indian planes were being 'bedded in' to new terrain and effectively shown the ropes. The RAF were "introducing them to the airspace", putting the Typhoons up against the Sukhois in something more akin to a pigeon-shooting exercise, rather than a combat exercise, so the Indian pilots could get their bearings.

Once the IAF were comfortable flying in foreign air space the Large Force Exercises (LFEs) began and subsequently the RAF Typhoons proved more than a match for the Indian SU-30's.

Speaking to Forces TV an RAF spokesman offered a polite rebuttal to the claims in the Indian press, saying:

"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."

How is this a debunking?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 08 Aug 2015 02:21

From a discussion with a rafale pilot a few years ago (who did red flag 2008 with indian sukhoi), the SU30 is all about brute force (big aircraft, big engines, big radar) but is lagging behind in terms of sophistication, ergonomics, situation awarness. In a complex dense environment it is difficult for the sukhoi.

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 08 Aug 2015 02:24

brar_w wrote:
RAF has debunked IAF analysis
Could you share the debunking?

Sources from the RAF state, however, that Indian planes were being 'bedded in' to new terrain and effectively shown the ropes. The RAF were "introducing them to the airspace", putting the Typhoons up against the Sukhois in something more akin to a pigeon-shooting exercise, rather than a combat exercise, so the Indian pilots could get their bearings.

Once the IAF were comfortable flying in foreign air space the Large Force Exercises (LFEs) began and subsequently the RAF Typhoons proved more than a match for the Indian SU-30's.

Speaking to Forces TV an RAF spokesman offered a polite rebuttal to the claims in the Indian press, saying:

"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."
How is this a debunking?

Well according to the raf, the 12-0,score does not mean anything in terms of aircraft comparison since those set ups were here to make IAF pilots confortable with the new environment. It is clear.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Aug 2015 02:28

So how has it been debunked again?

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 08 Aug 2015 02:31

Just read

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Aug 2015 02:42

I did (Again)..All i saw was that there are sources that dispute the claims. I see absolutely nothing in your lines quoted above that even remotely qualifies as being a " debunk" of the claims made by the NDTV article.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 08 Aug 2015 02:56

Okay which is it, Typhoons being forced to 'fight with one arm tied behind back', RAF kindly setting up clay pigeons for 'familiarisation', foggy recollection of Indian pilots or possibly due to the vast quantities of substances traditionally consumed by the English? Which dissimulation to choose?

In medicine there is an aphorism to the effect that the ailment that has many remedies in fact has none.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 08 Aug 2015 03:25

RAF simply got its ass handed and is no crying like a sore looser. Its ok they will simply have to get used to it for the future.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 08 Aug 2015 03:52

Hate to be a party crasher, but everyone who attended the exercise learned something valuable. At the end of the day, regardless of the score, both sides have gained a fair bit of knowledge about the aircraft and the men who fly them. That is what these exercises are all about. For the IAF in particular, it just underscores what they already know...the Rambha is a formidable machine which can undertake her primary role of air dominance against our neighbours - China and TSP - with full confidence. Pride is important and there is no doubt our boys flew exceptionally well. Kudos to them.

In this context - please do not practice adharma (keeping score)...but rather dharma (lessons learned).

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 08 Aug 2015 05:24

As has been stated many times, the primary reason for the MMRCA contract is supplier diversification. There is a real possibility of war regarding Tibet (etc.) in the foreseeable future. Because of this, the GoI doesn't want to rely solely on Russian weapons. Anyway, this is off-topic.

Regarding this exercise, the RAF got thrashed. The Brits are being sore losers. It doesn't reflect well on them.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 08 Aug 2015 09:29

Avarachan wrote:Regarding this exercise, the RAF got thrashed.

What makes the Indian claim more credible than the British claim besides blind nationalism?

Avarachan wrote:The Brits are being sore losers. It doesn't reflect well on them.

If there is one side that comes off poorly, it's clearly the Indian.

Either they dramatically exaggerated the situation, which is of course poor, or they did indeed whip the British, in which case they broke courtesy by discussing results. Typically 'what happens at exercises stays at exercises'. That's why normally for such exercises all the comments are very generic and try to praise their opponent.

To say 'Naw, they sucked lol' is frankly rude to someone who was kind enough to host you and in general makes people less willing to exercise with you in the future.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2015 09:38

GeorgeWelch wrote:they did indeed whip the British, in which case they broke courtesy by discussing results. Typically 'what happens at exercises stays at exercises'. That's why normally for such exercises all the comments are very generic and try to praise their opponent.

Why dont you give the same advise to the RAF Chief who went publicly in 2009 Ex Ind and said IAF lost ....what about Chief courtesy and trying to praise opponent

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2015 09:41

arthuro wrote:From a discussion with a rafale pilot a few years ago (who did red flag 2008 with indian sukhoi), the SU30 is all about brute force (big aircraft, big engines, big radar) but is lagging behind in terms of sophistication, ergonomics, situation awarness. In a complex dense environment it is difficult for the sukhoi.

Right so we should buy the Rafale and Su-30 is just a big brute aircraft that wont survive in complex dense environment

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 08 Aug 2015 09:49

Let me be frank here.
Im tired of Indians being told how to behave, how to follow Dharma, how to be courteous, how to be gracious people.
None of such can be expected by Indians from other peoples. ( Remember, the its the other peoples who have a history of lies, deceit, brutal colonization & mass slaughter. And YES that is relevant here just as previous crimes of a person plays a role )
If its fair for someone from the British side to comment on the exercises last time around, it is fair for Indians to comment on it this time now. How,what, when is irrelavant. We need not stick to a template set by others on how to express ourselves. We are differnt people. If you dont like that , go kill yourself.
The bizarre thing is "Dharma" is brought into this. Reallly? Dharma? If war itself is seen as Dharmic in the Indian POV , "war-exercises" are the nearest thing to it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2015 09:51

shiv wrote:
Austin wrote:
When IAF says we were better off this time the usual folks here get a deep takleef accepting IAF pilots can achieve this and trying to run around with semantics....strange I can understand some Brits getting takleef with this result.
Time to put it on Twitter - which I have done

Shiv Thanks , The real takleef seems to be because IAF has done well in so many exercise using a non-western aircraft and how could that be , Some of comments seen here proves the point.

Had this been a Western Type giving the same result they would have jumped and latched on to it on how some xyz western aircraft improves IAF pilot ability to fight and win over some nameless shameless countries aircraft they have been using so far.Not to mention the type has not only many Indian system , Russian and even Western one and so much is planned ahead for upgrade involving many indiginous systems

Not to mention the type just didnt well in ex and consistently across many years with many countries but also maintained a good uptime in Ex Ind , things that would be more useful parameter in real war for the IAF. It is just difficult to accept and swallow this.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 08 Aug 2015 11:15

Austin wrote:Why dont you give the same advise to the RAF Chief who went publicly in 2009 Ex Ind and said IAF lost ....what about Chief courtesy and trying to praise opponent

I don't recall that incident, but if it's as you describe then I would say the same thing to him.

I do recall the one USAF officer talking about how they took advantage of the MKIs attempting to use TVC and he shouldn't have said that.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 08 Aug 2015 11:29

GeorgeWelch wrote:If there is one side that comes off poorly, it's clearly the Indian.

Either they dramatically exaggerated the situation, which is of course poor, or they did indeed whip the British, in which case they broke courtesy by discussing results. Typically 'what happens at exercises stays at exercises'. That's why normally for such exercises all the comments are very generic and try to praise their opponent.

Can you show me where the IAF made any disparaging remarks or implications about the RAF? The IAF not the reporter. Because I don't recall Gp Cpt. Ashu Srivastav saying 'we knocked out 12 EFs without a single loss during dogfighting'. What he actually said was 'our boys did fairly well'.

Was the individual (whoever it may have been) who made the disclosures to the reporter, unprofessional in his conduct? Yes. But he is no more a reflection on the organisation than any of still-serving fellows making similar claims on F-16.net.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 08 Aug 2015 11:35

GeorgeWelch wrote:I don't recall that incident, but if it's as you describe then I would say the same thing to him.

"Well, they lost," was Stephen Dalton's response when IANS asked how the Russia-developed India-manufactured Su-30MKI air superiority jets performed against the Royal Air Force's (RAF) Typhoons when they matched their wits during the joint exercises in recent years. - Link

To be fair though he was talking up the EF (this was back when it was still in the reckoning for the MMRCA contract) and tempered that by being effusive in his praise for the IAF's human element.

"I would say the IAF crew that I have worked with and seen are every bit as clever as any other air crew in the world, and in many cases better. It is all about the man as the machine that they operate," he added.
Dalton said the cooperation between the RAF and the IAF will continue, as Britain valued this relationship. "IAF has a lot of experience and I would like to suck that out and use it, quite frankly," he added.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 08 Aug 2015 11:38

Frankly I would be happier if the RAF had whipped the IAF in public and we go home with our tails between us because for one thing, this is an exercise and the point of the exercise is to learn from your mistakes so you do not make them where it actually counts... wartime. It is always my experience that if we are doing too well in an practice run or exercise, we are seriously overlooking something or our training is woefully lacking. What is the point of the exercise if we cannot find out our weaknesses and how to shore up against those weaknesses? We might as well as piss away money in a pissing contest of very little utility. When I train, I am not doing for this glory or chest thumping. I am doing this so I can make sure that in an actual conflict, the other guy dies, not me.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 08 Aug 2015 11:51

GeorgeWelch wrote:
Austin wrote:Why dont you give the same advise to the RAF Chief who went publicly in 2009 Ex Ind and said IAF lost ....what about Chief courtesy and trying to praise opponent
I don't recall that incident, but if it's as you describe then I would say the same thing to him.

I do recall the one USAF officer talking about how they took advantage of the MKIs attempting to use TVC and he shouldn't have said that.

Correct George. But there is one angle you (and all of indian posters) have missed. The IAF is releasing this obviously fake neuj to help a fellow air force in its hard times. Budgets are being cut and people are sitting twiddling thumbs. Its not just the nimrod and aircraft carriers that are rusting, the glorious british tradition that found and killed hitler in his den, that ruled with an iron thumb over india for 8 centuries has been reduced to losing to albania in a real war, let alone india with its superior back office, customer service, IT support and call centers.

This is a call to improve the budgets, so there can be numerous more EFs and many upgrades to make the EF, into super EF. 2009? Strong pressure rafaley order. Now the cigarette is out due to your probing and the RAF will just have to contend with being a glider air force.

Dont take this lightly, I base this on very persuasive facts:

1. The sukhoi can barely fly. Sitting on the ground it is amenable to firing of the ejection seats. There are more sukhoi crashes in recent times than EFs joining the RAF.
2. The sukhoi pilots would have been handicapped by the time difference with their call center in bangalore, kerala. There is no way 4 out 4 flew given that published availability is only 50%.
3. In some of the engagements where the sukhoi won, an RAF chappie would have been in the back seat. All he had to do was to wiggle the stick a bit and boom, no more 12-0. Now do you think the RAF would just willingly lose, 12-0 or wiggle the stick just a tad. Even with the knee. Wink wink? Nudge nudge?

Frankly, how can an air force that flies craft named "door-near" so they can jump out ever beat the RAF and then start gloating while still over mecca? Hain? It doesnt add up.

Egg-sir-sizes are just that, hat volume measurements. Now this will go viral and no more caps or promotion. So, stiff upper lip laddie, and see if the lords can find time to discuss a few upgrades between their love all children discussions.

Admins -- feel free to delete if you so wish.

Vishnu · Post by **Vishnu** » 08 Aug 2015 12:01

Hi folks ... Just so everyone is clear here ... I stand by my article 100 % ... I accept that there are sensitivities and yes, I was able to access more on-the-record information than many in the UK or perhaps even in some quarters of the IAF would have liked - but the information stands. This isn't to suggest that the Typhoon is not a great weapon. In a real combat situation, its AESA-Meteor combo may have been superior to what the MKI has presently certainly in some flight regimes ... as always, it all boils down to the skill of fighter-controllers, the pilots and of course the platform.

Also ... just so that everyone is clear, the scenarios were mutually decided ... its not as if the IAF designed the engagement scenarios all by itself. The people I spoke to are not lying.

Vishnu Som

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 08 Aug 2015 12:14

Vishnu wrote:Hi folks ... Just so everyone is clear here ... I stand by my article 100 % ... I accept that there are sensitivities and yes, I was able to access more on-the-record information than many in the UK or perhaps even in some quarters of the IAF would have liked - but the information stands. This isn't to suggest that the Typhoon is not a great weapon. In a real combat situation, its AESA-Meteor combo may have been superior to what the MKI has presently certainly in some flight regimes ... as always, it all boils down to the skill of fighter-controllers, the pilots and of course the platform.

Actually the AESA-Meteor combo will be operational only in 2022. As far as avionics are concerned the EF's true advantage here is the upgraded DASS, MAWS, towed decoy and sensor fusion. Coupled with its superior agility at higher altitudes and in the transonic & supersonic flight regimes. None of which of course has any impact on the outcome of a dogfight.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Aug 2015 12:42

Karnad on the "hammering" of the EuroFarter.

http://bharatkarnad.com/

Su-30 “hammered” Eurofighter
Posted on August 6, 2015 by Bharat Karnad

A squadron-minus of IAF Su-30MKIs (No. 2 Squadron, ex-Kalaikunda) are currently in a war-exercise with RAF Eurofighters in England. The predictable happened — the Eurofighters apparently got a “hammering” from the highly agile Indian Su-30s. Assuming IAF and RAF fielded their best, most experienced, pilots — this flight of Su-30s being led by Group Captain Srivastava — the combat aircraft was the difference, and resulted in many RAF Eurofighter “kills”. This is bad advertisement for the Eurofighter that UK and Germany so desperately tried to pitch to Delhi after the Rafale deal hit the skids. By the same token, the Su-30 once again proved it is non pareil — the best aerial fighter around, confirming DefMin Parrikar’s preference for an augmented fleet of this plane rather than buying Rafale. Unfortunately, he seems not to have displayed the strength of his convictions to fight for this option once PM Modi made the ridiculous Rafale deal on the run in Paris, which deal is still going nowhere.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 08 Aug 2015 12:45

What is interesting is how easily the egos are bruised.
Some indian newspapers report 12-0 win for IAF.
British one picks it up as an unbelievable story. Asks around ...almost as if it needs to be consoled.
RAF isnt too amused either.
Shows RAF has poor psychological abilities - they just couldn't handle basic facts that run counter to their petty views. This is bad for RAF in wartime. A few aircraft losses & they will go into tailspin.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Aug 2015 13:27

Viv S wrote: Actually the AESA-Meteor combo will be operational only in 2022. As far as avionics are concerned the EF's true advantage here is the upgraded DASS, MAWS, towed decoy and sensor fusion. Coupled with its superior agility at higher altitudes and in the transonic & supersonic flight regimes. None of which of course has any impact on the outcome of a dogfight.

I think this is just a myth that persisted , At one point the Typhoon pilot said TVC on Raptor does not mean much

http://theaviationist.com/2013/02/21/ra ... yphoon-us/

It is a fact that against Eastern produced fighters provided with Thrust Vectoring, throughout the years the Typhoon has showed an embarasing (for them) kill-to-loss ratio

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Aug 2015 14:01

Vishnu wrote:Hi folks ... Just so everyone is clear here ... I stand by my article 100 % .
Vishnu Som

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Last time that Brit Air Marshal had no business to claim "They lost". Sore Losers.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Aug 2015 14:05

Hitesh wrote:Frankly I would be happier if the RAF had whipped the IAF in public and we go home with our tails between us because for one thing, this is an exercise and the point of the exercise is to learn from your mistakes so you do not make them where it actually counts... wartime. It is always my experience that if we are doing too well in an practice run or exercise, we are seriously overlooking something or our training is woefully lacking. What is the point of the exercise if we cannot find out our weaknesses and how to shore up against those weaknesses? We might as well as piss away money in a pissing contest of very little utility. When I train, I am not doing for this glory or chest thumping. I am doing this so I can make sure that in an actual conflict, the other guy dies, not me.

This is perfectly true. It was a Brit Air Marshal who said "Well they lost" last time despite the fact that they had not heard your words of wisdom: It is always my experience that if we are doing too well in an practice run or exercise, we are seriously overlooking something or our training is woefully lacking.

This time it showed up, just like you said.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 08 Aug 2015 14:36

Vishnu wrote:Hi folks ... Just so everyone is clear here ... I stand by my article 100 % ... I accept that there are sensitivities and yes, I was able to access more on-the-record information than many in the UK or perhaps even in some quarters of the IAF would have liked - but the information stands. This isn't to suggest that the Typhoon is not a great weapon. In a real combat situation, its AESA-Meteor combo may have been superior to what the MKI has presently certainly in some flight regimes ... as always, it all boils down to the skill of fighter-controllers, the pilots and of course the platform.

Also ... just so that everyone is clear, the scenarios were mutually decided ... its not as if the IAF designed the engagement scenarios all by itself. The people I spoke to are not lying.

Vishnu Som

Vishnu,

I want to distract you with something else. Can you provide a non-forum communication medium somewhere? Ask the admins to PM it to me, if you want.

shreeman

arthuro · Post by **arthuro** » 08 Aug 2015 15:01

Viv S wrote:
Vishnu wrote:Hi folks ... Just so everyone is clear here ... I stand by my article 100 % ... I accept that there are sensitivities and yes, I was able to access more on-the-record information than many in the UK or perhaps even in some quarters of the IAF would have liked - but the information stands. This isn't to suggest that the Typhoon is not a great weapon. In a real combat situation, its AESA-Meteor combo may have been superior to what the MKI has presently certainly in some flight regimes ... as always, it all boils down to the skill of fighter-controllers, the pilots and of course the platform.
Actually the AESA-Meteor combo will be operational only in 2022. As far as avionics are concerned the EF's true advantage here is the upgraded DASS, MAWS, towed decoy and sensor fusion. Coupled with its superior agility at higher altitudes and in the transonic & supersonic flight regimes. None of which of course has any impact on the outcome of a dogfight.

Have you read latest british parlementary report on the typhoon on unleashing its true potential ? Because EW and sensor fusion were pointed as weak areas.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 08 Aug 2015 15:31

arthuro wrote:Have you read latest british parlementary report on the typhoon on unleashing its true potential ? Because EW and sensor fusion were pointed as weak areas.

You're thinking of the recent RUSI report not a parliamentary committee report. And it identified the active component of the EW system as requiring an upgrade. The passive component i.e. the ESM system was considered good enough to geolocate AESA emitters, after the DASS upgrade. Newer sensor fusion software and ECM components are included in the P4E upgrade that is scheduled for 2020 (likely involving GaN TRMs).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Aug 2015 15:42

GeorgeWelch wrote:Even great advantages in aerodynamic performance only lead to minor variations in success rate WVR

The absolute best you can hope for is something like a 75/25 advantage, and that's against a complete dog of an aircraft, which the EF is not.

When you know so little, its a wonder you make such funny claims, 75:25 or this or that.

We have categorical statements and a lot of corroborating evidence from people who have much more experience, and knowledge than you have:

1. V Som
In all dog fighting exercises, IAF Sukhois were able to turn sharply into the extremely agile Typhoons using their thrust-vectored engines to keep the RAF jets locked in their sights

2. Gp Capt Ashu Srivastav
Leader of the Indian Contingent was Grp Capt Ashu Srivastav, a previous ‘Flanker’ squadron commander responsible for bringing the jets into IAF service and holding over 2,200hrs on the type. ‘Comparing the two fighters I have to be politically correct; both have got their plus and minus points, but I am going to say that the ‘Flanker’ probably has more plus points due to its super-manoeuvrability and BVR system is very good’ he said. ‘We are highly manoeuvrable in close combat and we employ the vectoring whenever we need to depending on the combat situation – generally speaking, we use it when we feel that the opponent is in a position where it cannot manoeuvre but we can, and so we can use TVC to still get the shot. We have had no restriction on IRS-T or the radar usage’. But Grp Capt Srivastav was keen to sing the Typhoon’s praises, saying ‘Typhoon is extremely good in high rates of turn and that has been great to see…’ before adding with a wry grin ‘But we have a counter for that…!’

3.Ares, Aviationweek
The Flanker pilots were also able to use their thrust-vectoring control (TVC) “super-maneuverability” capability activated by flipping a switch in the cockpit. One pilot told Aviation Week that they had used the yaw capability of the TVC to remain inside the tight turn radius of the Typhoon in order to keep the Typhoon in missile launch parameters.

5. RAFs tacit admission they got wiped out in the WVR battle trying to keep a stiff upper lip.

6.WingCo Bharti of the Su-30s explaining the combination of TVC+Su-30

7. IAF's experience at Mountain Home where they wiped the floor with your precious F-15s after Youtube Terry was caught fibbing

(demeaning or otherwise, it is understood that the kill ratio (at Mountain Home AFB) was 21 : 1, in favour of the Su-30MKIs).

In short, the IAF has good experience with dealing out some good lessons with the combo of TVC, HOBS missiles and HMS in combination.

I'll take those results any day over the words of self appointed amateur experts on internet forums who are sore that the IAF refused to select their favorite obsolete platforms, and then spend all their time coming up with silly excuses to somehow run down the IAFs achievements.

1. No aerodynamic advantage can completely guarantee you getting the first shot
2. Even if you get the first shot, if they can their shot off before getting hit, you're just as dead.

1. Anybody with any sense would not its not about complete guarantees but an overwhelming advantage
2. Sure, the dead pilot will respawn, turn his aircraft around and take the second shot. In short, rubbish.

As before, you are completely wrong and clueless on both points.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Aug 2015 15:48

shiv wrote:
Vishnu wrote:Hi folks ... Just so everyone is clear here ... I stand by my article 100 % .
Vishnu Som
MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Last time that Brit Air Marshal had no business to claim "They lost". Sore Losers.

Not just the Brits, you can see the other folks here with the standard refrain here "west can only win, goldurnit how did'em 'eathens with their russkie machines do this, dangnabbit". Jokers are biased like heck but think that everyone else can't see through their rabid self image of being "winners" 24/7, whereas they go around calling everyone else as biased.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Aug 2015 15:55

Neela wrote:What is interesting is how easily the egos are bruised.
Some indian newspapers report 12-0 win for IAF.
British one picks it up as an unbelievable story. Asks around ...almost as if it needs to be consoled.
RAF isnt too amused either.
Shows RAF has poor psychological abilities - they just couldn't handle basic facts that run counter to their petty views. This is bad for RAF in wartime. A few aircraft losses & they will go into tailspin.

You said it. The sore losers gang in full flow.

Way back in 2004, the then exercise commander from the US side was willing to admit:
"The outcome of the exercise boils down to [the fact that] they ran tactics that were more advanced than we expected," Snowden says. "India had developed its own air tactics somewhat in a vacuum. They had done some training with the French that we knew about, but we did not expect them to be a very well-trained air force. That was silly.

At least he admitted the "core issue" to Aviation Week.

That loss really hurt the H&D of some of the online fanbois in the "unmentionables".

Next up, the IAF showing the middle finger to the famed F-16 and F-18

which left one chap in a frothing rage so much so he was busy calling the IAF dishonest. Like clockwork, to spread FUD on the IAF he appeared when the IAF did well again.

Its one thing to come off second best, which happens. The sore losers gang just can't admit it though.

Most hilarious the fact that the Su-30 is good can't even be digested by another chap who is now worried what would happen to ze MMRCA "winner.

"Sniff, le Su-30 is brutale fighter, sniff sniff not like ze Rafale which is ze so sophisticated".

Seeing their pack mentality, in which they sit and b!tch against each other 24/7 but all can't accept a humbling defeat by the blasted Indians I am reminded of this.

It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world. And all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 08 Aug 2015 17:03

The uHooro Typhoon got beat 12-0. WHAT, WHAT, WHAT!

German Engineering, British Englisheering over the skies of Bartannia. Battle of Britain saw the slaughter of the best breed of cattle of Britain.

The cattle cannot be beaten is dirge that they sing - bruised ego and all that. Even if I agree the cattle was great, them cowboy need to learn how to shepherd the cattle some more- say what - why don't the RAF boys get some more hours flying or the budgets are not good enough to support that. Poor Bartannia.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Aug 2015 17:04

Below piece is an excellent one for detailing, good nuggets and pics:

http://www.globalaviationresource.com/v ... nush-2015/

...

Unlike the previous deployment, the IAF Su-30MKIs were permitted to use their full potential including their N011M radar, as well as the thrust vectoring control on their Lyulka AL-31FP engines. ‘We both have our strengths, the Typhoon is a ‘high-rate’ fighter and the ‘Flanker’s is a high-Alpha, slower-speed fighter’ continued Wg Cdr Moon. ‘We debrief over in the squadron and merge the tracks we fly and [are] able to read the Blue and Red Forces via RAIDS on the RAF jets and a similar system on the IAF jets, and you’ll be pleased to hear that the combined Typhoon and ‘Flanker’ package has been doing extremely well.

...

‘We also simulated air-to-ground mission, and we have simulated EPW2 drops as well as Paveway IVs and the Indian AF has simulated a vast variety of weapons. We have learnt that we operate in a very similar manner. You’d expect the types to have different strengths – such as two-seat versus single, and we do have subtly different weapons – but we have learnt that we can integrate together, certainly when it comes to the planning, briefing and debriefing. There were very few surprises and we achieved all of our objectives.’ This was echoed by Sqn Ldr Avi Arya, a Qualified Weapons Instructor responsible for training pilots on the radar and weapons systems of the Su-30. He said: ‘Both are Fourth Generation aircraft and so are matched evenly, so the learning value comes from the person to person contact, it’s the man behind the machine which matters. All fighter pilots speak the same language, that’s the common thing we have and it’s very comfortable to learn from each other.’

....

‘Of the 190 personnel we brought over, 20 were aircrew as a mix of 15 pilots and five WSOs with a cross-section of flight experience (pilots can fly as WSO but not vice-versa), which is representative of the way we work back home. Reliability has been very good, which is why we only needed to bring four aircraft this time round and, as of late last year and after a decade of development, HAL now has a full thrust-vectoring maintenance facility so we no longer need to send them to Russia for overhaul. In terms of the future, we have an upgrade planned for a better radar (possibly Zhuk AESA) and weapons systems (potentially including full integration of the Novator KS-172 AAM and BrahMos cruise missile), and are looking forward to welcoming the RAF back to India next year.’

...

So it seems we have accepted the WSO model after a lot of debate.

On a side note, how will Su-30MKI fare on interception missions? The kind Tornados and MiG-31s are tasked with