Katare wrote:Raffy and euro fighter will both out do mki in most of the dog and BVR fights. Both these aircrafts are lot more modern and efficient than the brute power hulk we have got.
Hardly. Both of these aircraft are yet to field some of the technologies the MKI has, such as an integrated triplane layout with TVC, and also the plethora of sensors (including long range ISR) & munitions the MKI already fields. The kind of post stall manoeuvering the MKI can do, with its AL-31FPs able to handle disturbed airflow without an issue, has to be seen to be believed. Pilot safety apart by expanding the flight envelope, TVC has shown itself in IAF exercises to be ruthlessly effective. At Mountain Home, in 1vs1 (guns), against lighter aggressors, the MKIs dominated. This should not come as a surprise either, since the US itself discovered the merits of TVC when it employed it on the X-31 which constantly outflew one of the best dogfighters on the planet, the F/A-18 early variant, which can still take on the R/E at close range (or for that matter, any non TVC aircraft). Its nose pointing ability is a benchmark. Its a different matter that TVC costs a heck of a lot to integrate into an airframe and develop an effective FBW for, so the US chose the simpler method of constantly upgrading their avionics & missiles to counter (JHMS with Aim-9X), but even there TVC/wHMCS+HOBS missile > just the latter.
At BVR, little remains to be said. Even the French publicly noted that the Su-30 MKI radar/missile combination is exceptional & the aircraft does not lack for power. Anti-BVR tactics that did work were to get out of the radar cone & flank it.
The same as can be employed against any platform, but hard in a networked environment. And these don't take into account the declining effectiveness of ARH missiles when against actual jammers (exercises use simulated missiles).
Furthermore, unlike the former two OEMs, the IAF is not in the business of advertizing some of the systems it has added to the aircraft, which diligent observers of the program can determine by attending seminars & other public events where these capabilities are mentioned. If those were to be publicly added up, it would further reinforce the fact, that despite all the good PR, the European programs have suffered from either poor program management & restricted finances (EF with far too many fingers in the pie, and ever declining budgets) and funding/original user restrictions (Rafale, with sliding numbers which means numbers have to be traded for technology insertions).
Even today, all the Rafale has to show for SEAD is an AASM in the range of SHORAD/MRSAMs. The MKI in contrast has the option to employ both stand off ARMs (Kh-31s) and more cost effective Kh-59s for long range suppression, plus other items. Using Scalps - as the Rafale has as its option - is a good way to end up broke on day 2 of the conflict with limited stocks over. And even that option is being compensated for by the AL Brahmos.
A lot of the "more modern and efficient" stuff on the net about these Eurocanards is also pure and simple hype, referring to capabilities achieved by other platforms much before. As late as last year as it turned out for the UAE sale, one of the capabilities "to be added" to the RBE-2 AA was mode interleaving, i.e. simultaneous A2A and A2G operations. Only problem - that was being claimed in all the Rafale PR all these days as already active on the RBE-2 PESA, apparently, yet to be achieved. The Bars has had it for many years now.
In contrast to the advertorial-PR machine which keeps churning out details on every tiny upgrade to the systems of these aircraft, the Su-30 MKI evolution is barely covered, if at that. The initial block 1s came with limited SAR modes, widely panned - latest reports note significant improvement to WW standards as of current gen. Apparently, the latest Bars all feature an upgraded DSP. Even more so, the newest Bars in service are to a new hardware & software standard. This noted, a year after the upgrade was certified & approved.
Similarly, the EF & Rafale are yet to get several of the capabilities initially promised, but are being fielded iteratively, in some cases with the upgrades outright cancelled or delayed.
Fact of the matter is the Su-30 MKI leveraged the host of technology developed by an erstwhile superpower - the Soviet Union, and is now once again benefiting from a renewed surge in programs like the new Su-35 & the FGFA, plus technologies developed by India for its local programs, which are also fairly competitive. All the hype about Spectra apart, there are several EW suites in the market now which feature sophisticated multi channel digital receivers & high ERP AESA transmitters. India's own MiG-29 upg is a perfect example, it leverages the multi-channel matrix (high accuracy RWR/ESM plus techniques generator, developed for the LCA) plus the high ERP jammers provided by an Italian firm, and codeveloped with DARE, to be produced at BEL. This is much the same reason the IAF is now increasingly going for local EW fits wherever it can. Makes no sense to rip out an integrated suite in the Rafale and replace with one locally, but wherever IAF can localize EW it is doing so since these offer similar capabilities at reduced cost, but most importantly independence in terms of reliance (most important for EW).
Besides which some of the stuff developed in the erstwhile Soviet Union, still has no parallel. The "brute hulk" of the MiG-31 for instance, when modernized, can range further at supersonic speed than any other fighter on the planet, with the possible exception of the F-22. When suitably upgraded, i.e. add a modernized Zaslon radar and the new R-33/RVV-BD missiles, and a possible threat becomes a serious issue for most situations. In ODS, a single MiG-25 used its speed & "brute" performance to break through chains of F-15 escorts, shot down a F-18 and got clean away, this with AWACs around.
If we take a look at the FGFA/PAKFA & see what its being designed for speed AND reduced RCS (with higher RCS spots to be addressed by RAM/active jamming) and it becomes clear that the Europeans are going to be outclassed platform wise, in a few years time.
Similarly, the US F-15/F-16/F-18 now feature technologies in spiral improvement paths that is ahead of what the Eurocanards can offer in several cases. The RSAF chose the F-15 SG and not the Typhoon or Rafale, when they saw the RMAF buying the Su-30 MKM. Tomorrow, the Su-30 MKM may again feed off some of the tech India spearheads via its choices for the Super-30 and the race will continue.
Net, net - the declining budgets and slashed procurement in Europe plus three competing programs (Rafale, EF and Gripen) have definitely affected their upgrades and the capabilities added. The Rafale is comparatively better off than the Typhoon here, but there are still design choices made which will restrict it in a few areas versus a larger platform like the Su-30 MKI
I am thinking constructive here, and not sarcastic.
