Su-30MK Beats F-15C 'Every Time'

Aviation Week & Space Technology | May 24, 2002 | David A. Fulghum and Douglas Barrie

[Soliton]

I am all for our forces having the latest technology, but this article is obvious BS put out to prevent Chenny from canceling the F-22 project.

[ctonious]

Agreed. As a USAF veteran of highly classified programs - I can guarantee that critical data identifying combat vulnerabilities is never revealed at face value.

[Captainpaintball]

How is this B.S.? Please give 3-5 examples.

[The Big Dog]

Other countries (potential enemies) are acquiring aircraft which are better than anything in the USAF. We can't fly the F-15's forever. They are 25 years old.

Besides, we have already spent billions of dollars on the F-22. It would be a waste if it was just cancelled now.

[Captainpaintball]

Is this similar to the claims that front-line Nato tank crews in Germany had a life-span of about 15 seconds in a war with the Soviets? that number was hard for me to believe...is this the same thing?

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

The F-22 Fighter is necessary to the continued dominance of the United States Air Force. The F-15 is from the early 1970s I believe, which means we are using a aircraft nearly 30 years old as our front line fighter, it is necessary to update and field a new fighter that will continue United States Air Superiority. Yes the F-22 is expensive, but the F-22 is necessary, because of its high survivability, stealth systems, top of the line radar and speed/manueverabilty. Trust me, the F-22 is the most important fighter acquisition since the Air Force bought the F-15.

[Free the USA]

Check the Bump List folders for articles related to and descriptions of the above topic(s) or for other topics of interest.

[Lou L]

Even if this simulation were true, it would demand highly-trained pilots, weapons systems, and communications. Which countries have all these?

[Whilom]

Those skeptical of the experiments say they're being used to justify the new Aim-9X high-off-boresight, short-range missile and its helmet-mounted cuing system, the F-22 as an air-superiority fighter and, possibly, the development of a new long-range air-to-air missile that could match the F-22 radar's ability to find targets at around 120 mi.

First, we discover a maneuver gap; second, we get the money; third, we undiscover the maneuver gap. Works every time.

[Charles Martel]

Sounds like the AIM-9x missile is the more crucial development program. Would the outcome in the simulator change if the F-15 pilot had missiles equivalent to the new Russian design? I think that change alone would deprive the Su-30 of its "edge" in executing that evasive maneuver.

[Poohbah]

Other countries (potential enemies) are acquiring aircraft which are better than anything in the USAF. We can't fly the F-15's forever. They are 25 years old.

They can't afford the planes AND the aircrews needed to fly them effectively.

Besides, we have already spent billions of dollars on the F-22. It would be a waste if it was just cancelled now.

This report is part of the USAF's usual sleaziness in saving their sacred cow du jour.

If you believe this report, then you also believe that the next major opponent for the USAF is...the Air National Guard component of the several States.

Should we be saving our Confederate money?

[Poohbah]

The scenario in which the Su-30 "always" beats the F-15 involves the Sukhoi taking a shot with a BVR missile (like the AA-12 Adder) and then "turning into the clutter notch of the F-15's radar," the Air Force official said. Getting into the clutter notch where the Doppler radar is ineffective involves making a descending, right-angle turn to drop below the approaching F-15 while reducing the Su-30's relative forward speed close to zero. This is a 20-year-old air combat tactic, but the Russian fighter's maneuverability, ability to dump speed quickly and then rapidly regain acceleration allow it to execute the tactic with great effectiveness, observers said.

Here's the dog in the manger: the F-15C was obviously constrained to straight and level flight in order for this tactic to work. ANY change in velocity or direction that the Su-30MK driver did not prepare for would neutralize the tactic.

[ReveBM]

I think it's highly unlikely that the potential Chinese/North Korean/Iraqi/Iranian foes we meet in any Su-30MK will be well trained enough to use this maneuver. Provided we are not fighting Su-30MKs driven by Russian top guns, I think the F-15 still has a lot of shelf life left.

This is just an armchair outlook. Does my argument make any sense to people who actually know stuff about the F-15? Also, aren't our frontline forces flying models later than the F-15C (F-15E?), or does the "C" in F-15C just mean it launched from a carrier or something?

[The Big Dog]

They can't afford the planes AND the aircrews needed to fly them effectively.

Are you sure? China, for example, has a very rapidly-growing economy which will surpass the US in about 30 years. The SU-30 (or maybe something even more advanced like the SU-35 or SU-37) will eventually be within the reach of potential adversaries.

If you believe this report, then you also believe that the next major opponent for the USAF is...the Air National Guard component of the several States.

No, all I believe is that the F-15 is a 25 yr old airframe and it can only be upgraded so far. Eventually, our adversaries will obtain fighter jets which our F-15's will be no match for. Our pilots deserve to go into combat with the best possible equipment we are able to provide them with.

The F-22 is already wired into future USAF budgets, so there is really no reason not to get it.

[The Big Dog]

ere's the dog in the manger: the F-15C was obviously constrained to straight and level flight in order for this tactic to work. ANY change in velocity or direction that the Su-30MK driver did not prepare for would neutralize the tactic.

An F-15 would usually be flying straight and level. He would not change his direction unless he had a reason to, and since the Su-30 is capable of sneaking up close without being detected by the Eagle's radar, the F-15 pilot not know to change his velocity/direction until it was too late. At least that's what I understand from reading that article.

[The Big Dog]

Also, aren't our frontline forces flying models later than the F-15C (F-15E?), or does the "C" in F-15C just mean it launched from a carrier or something?

The F-15E is just a strike version of the F-15C. The F-15C is the latest F-15, and it forms the backbone of the USAF. All F-15A's were converted to F-15C's some time in the late 80's, I think, which gave it more powerful engines, a more powerful radar and computer, and some other minor things. There's also the F-15D which is just a 2 seater version of the C.

[Dead Dog]

One, networked weapon systems (aircraft sharing radar data) would eliminate the use of the "clutter notch?". And, in fact can possibly minimize airframe performance as a factor in combat.

[Lee'sGhost]

"Is this similar to the claims that front-line Nato tank crews in Germany had a life-span of about 15 seconds in a war with the Soviets? that number was hard for me to believe...is this the same thing?"

Can't speak to the plane end of your equation, but as a former tread head I can tell you the 15 seconds for tanks (depending of course, exactly when you started the timer) was absolutely true. It was based on the amount of ordinance the Soviets could drop on any given area at a time. Their artillary numbers were(?) ungodly.