PAK-FA, T-50: News #2

NickM wrote:

GarryB wrote:The two most heavily populated countries on the planet... China and India... remember the US picking Taiwan and Pakistan?

GarryB , seriously     No Russian worth his salt would call these two wretched countries as Russia's friends . China is a communist state , India , nominally a democracy .

Oh sh*t, right now you have to surface again!
I'm tired of your crap...it's like shitting in water - and the shit rises to the surface only to embarrass you...
That's how you embarrass white people!
And YOU'RE the SHIT - if that analogy went past you!

------------------------------------
edit:

Good God, I WOULDN'T MIND meeting you in a pub when I'm feeling like I do now (coming from a pacifist, mind you)! I'd...well..I'll leave that to your imagination!

macedonian wrote:That's how you embarrass white people!

Last heard you ain't the voice of WHITE people . Come to the States or to UK and ask the local White people what they think about a India or China . Most Whites think they are scum . We don't say it in as many words coz we are a civilized society.

Indian Flanker wrote:F-22 is no doubt a great aircraft(sans its maintenance problems), but I think Su-T 50 is going to be better than it in :

1) Close WVR fight( read Dogfight)

2) Versatility( able to perform other roles than just air superiority)

3) Maintenance

4) Flight cost


And hopefully, it'll as stealthy as F-22 and as good BVR fighter( if not better).


Even as a flanker fan, I will concede that Americans have pretty much mastered the BVR fight domain.


Hopefully our version PMF/FGFA is also ready soon  

Russian BVR missiles have higher kinematic performance attributes, giving them significantly greater range than Western analogues, such as Vympel R-27, R-33, R-37, R-77 and possibly Novator K-100 in the future.

NickM wrote:

macedonian wrote:That's how you embarrass white people!

Last heard you ain't the voice of WHITE people . Come to the States or to UK and ask the local White people what they think about a India or China . Most Whites think they are scum . We don't say it in as many words coz we are a civilized society.

Maybe you should discuss with someone who hasn't lived BOTH in the US and the UK for a substantial period of time.
And: I ain't the voice of the whites?!
And you ARE presumably?!
Do piss off you wanker, because I AIN'T in the mood tonight!!!

And that's as civil as I'm gonna get tonight (which is WAAAY more than you are)!
Now bugger off!

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Russian BVR missiles have higher kinematic performance attributes, giving them significantly greater range than Western analogues, such as Vympel R-27, R-33, R-37, R-77 and possibly Novator K-100 in the future.

That's a big generalisation. There many different versions of any missile. All will have different range performances. Anyway, there are other factors of a missile's performance to take into account, such as ECM resistance, reliability, etc.

BVR is best for nonstealthy targets and those that cant see the attacker after dodging the attack- any advantage F-22 has in BVR is nullified against Su-35S and Pak-fa. Also F-22 BVR is dependant on outside support network- AWACS. Take them out and you can fight them plane-to plane. Tho ofc. your jets have to be able to kill F-22 in the first place.
Also, Mig-31 and upcoming Mig-41 are the best BVR platforms you can find, pure Kinematic performance wise that is.

The reason I said US has a advantage in BVR was because of what it has achieved in the terms of Radar technology(AESA &stealth et al).

Having said that now Russia is catching them fast, and who knows in the next few years they may even surpass US in every parameter of technology(stealth, Radar, EW suite, Laser technology, etc.)

Or atleast we are hoping so. I would love to see the Americans getting terrorized by the capabilities of T-50 in some Cope India/Red Flag sort of exercise, just like they were of our MKI's

All this agitation about the double F-117 SAM interceptions ,one of which resulted in a destroyed Aircraft, became famous and the other in one damaged beyond repair, and the creative explanations provided by US,to the public opinion, for the events   (..... after which, however, followed a much less public-opinion-oriented and much more military-efficiency-grounded ,prompt decision to retire from operational service the entire F-117's fleet with good peace of the "selective  luck" or "mission planning mistake" ridiculous excuses   .....) often hide a fact much more simple and important : the aircraft losses cited are always referred as those of "Kosovo War air campaign" against "Serbian Air Defense" but that is FALSE and totally MISLEADING.


The aircraft losses in question.






and several other highly damaged aircraft ,among which a second F-117 almost downed three day after ,previously cited, two A-10s of which one that barely managed to return home and several BGM-109s and "Predator" UAVs destroyed or damaged ) was NOT the achievements of the entire "Serbian Air Defense" in the course of the air campaign , but of a SINGLE, "strangely" deadly, SAM battery (the 3th battery of the Serbian 250rd PVO ,operating in the north western sector Belgrade ,under the command of Zoltan Dani ).

Therefore to truly understand the lesson of those events we must simply identify what elements of difference , both under a technical and an operative employment point of view, had distincted that single battery from all  others serbian air defense missile batteries ,that instead revealed themselves to be largely ineffective against NATO air raids (how anyone expected taking into account the crushing numerical, organizative and the technological modernity's gap netween the two sides involded).

I already provided a quick enumeration of the most important ones in the post 661 of the old PAKFA thread.

https://www.russiadefence.net/t183p660-pak-fa-t-50-news

and a brief description of the basis characteristics of all pasted NATO Air Campaigns in the latest 25 years  at post 675.


The Kosovo Air Campaign not only validated, but even rendered wide underestimations, the end of '70 years VKO's models of representation of impact of masking/decoy operations and SAM's "shoot and scout" capabilities (anyhow immensely improved in the meantime) in a conflict with NATO Air forces elements.
The 3th/250 Serbian battery ,under command of Zoltan Dani ,in facts, achieved this highly level of lethality and total resilience to NATO SEAD/DEAD attempts, merely implementing a very little fraction of the capabilities characteristics of up-to date SAM systems of those years and attempting to mimic a little part of theirs standard operative patterns.


The 3th/250 SAM battery of Z. Dani had in facts a very high reaction time and time to target defeat from missile delivery ,in comparison to any up-to-date Russian SAM system of those years, and was therefore very often incapable to engage its intended target (or even wasted the two single missiles that its modified TEL had) because those targets often had ,in the meantime, transited outside the effective area of engagement of the battery's firing units and the single target engagement's limit prevented it to engagement of the entire strike or SEAD/DEAD groups with theirs F-16CJ escort, in spite to have achieved theirs stable coordinates for a fire solution -as in the instance of the four F-16CGs squad in the F-16 Downing).


The real question therefore should instead be ,what would had happened in 1999 if the entire Serbian IAD was composed of SAM crew with the same or higher level of proficiency of the 3th battery of 250th Air Defense Missile Brigade and all was equipped even merely with Buk-M1 and Tor-M1........for not say with S-300, Buk-M1, TOR-M1, 2К22М1, Igla-S in a n area concetration immensely higher with support of Pelena-1 ,SPN-2/4 ,SPN-30 ECM systems and decoy and masking devices immensely more efficients , in conjuction with an Air Force with hundreds of interceptors aircraft and ground based ballistic and cruise missiles capable to cancel Aviano AB and all the aircraft it hosted ,while merely preparing for the Air Campaign, from the face of Earth in a matter of minutes.

collegeboy16 wrote:BVR is best for nonstealthy targets and those that cant see the attacker after dodging the attack- any advantage F-22 has in BVR is nullified against Su-35S and Pak-fa. Also F-22 BVR is dependant on outside support network- AWACS...

Are you saying that MiG-31 has a poor performance against stealthy targets? Are you saying the same for all of the Russian PVO system?

Mindstorm wrote:
The real question therefore should instead be ,what would had happened in 1999 if the entire Serbian IAD was composed of SAM crew with the same or higher level of proficiency of the 3th battery of 250th Air Defense Missile Brigade and all was equipped even merely with Buk-M1 and Tor-M1........for not say with S-300, Buk-M1, TOR-M1, 2К22М1, Igla-S in a n area concetration immensely higher with support of Pelena-1 ,SPN-2/4 ,SPN-30 ECM systems and decoy and masking devices immensely more efficients , in conjuction with an Air Force with hundreds of interceptors aircraft and ground based ballistic and cruise missiles capable to cancel Aviano AB and all the aircraft it hosted ,while merely preparing for the Air Campaign, from the face of Earth in a matter of minutes.

In other words, you are saying: if Serbian air defences had better weapons and better trained operators and crews, they would have shot down more NATO aircraft? There is only one expression for such a statement: 'stating the bleeding obvious' - Kapitan Ochevidno. 

BlackArrow wrote:

Mindstorm wrote:
The real question therefore should instead be ,what would had happened in 1999 if the entire Serbian IAD was composed of SAM crew with the same or higher level of proficiency of the 3th battery of 250th Air Defense Missile Brigade and all was equipped even merely with Buk-M1 and Tor-M1........for not say with S-300, Buk-M1, TOR-M1, 2К22М1, Igla-S in a n area concetration immensely higher with support of Pelena-1 ,SPN-2/4 ,SPN-30 ECM systems and decoy and masking devices immensely more efficients , in conjuction with an Air Force with hundreds of interceptors aircraft and ground based ballistic and cruise missiles capable to cancel Aviano AB and all the aircraft it hosted ,while merely preparing for the Air Campaign, from the face of Earth in a matter of minutes.

In other words, you are saying: if Serbian air defences had better weapons and better trained operators and crews, they would have shot down more NATO aircraft? There is only one expression for such a statement: 'stating the bleeding obvious' -  Kapitan Ochevidno. 

The most important points Mindstorm is trying to make was that the Serbians were far more capable than was expected by NATO forces, and the deciding factor would of been how up to date the air defenses systems were. Up to date export versions of Russian sams would of easily shortened the duration of the NATO air campaign by a significant margin, let alone if Boris Yeltsin actually had a spine and decided to back Serbia up with logistics and intelligence.

US generals were shoked,that the war against small Serbia which was supposed to last 5 days lasted for 78 days and nights let alone that they lost their pride and joy the famous f-117.I have to remind everybody that Serbia was under severe sanctions for 10 years before nato invasion.So they didn't have any reserve parts for many of their weapons.

Djoka wrote:US generals were shoked,that the war against small Serbia which was supposed to last 5 days lasted for 78 days and nights let alone that they lost their pride and joy the famous f-117.I have to remind everybody that Serbia was under severe sanctions for 10 years before nato invasion.So they didn't have any reserve parts for many of their weapons.

Serbia was under sanctions while the Pentagon was using proxy's to arm the opposition (cut-and-paste the same tactics everywhere they go), Pinochet armed the Croatians against Serbia, and Saudi Arabia armed the Bosnians and the Albanians while Serbians where being disarmed!!!

magnumcromagnon wrote:
The most important points Mindstorm is trying to make was that the Serbians were far more capable than was expected by NATO forces, and the deciding factor would of been how up to date the air defenses systems were.

Maybe, but their air defences were still crap - how many NATO aircraft did they shoot down, 1, 2?

Up to date export versions of Russian sams would of easily shortened the duration of the NATO air campaign by a significant margin, wrote:

But Serbia didn't have a more modern air defence system - why would they have a more modern system? It's just another pointless 'what-if', useless to speculate - if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle, etc...

Werewolf wrote:
35 fixed wing and 7 rotary, more than 2 dozen UAV's and a few unidentified aicrafts and wasted several hundred millions by using cruise missiles on decoys, a complete failure of air campaign against a sanctioned,small country with very limited ADS.

A complete failure, are you sure?

"NATO's objectives in the Kosovo conflict were stated at the North Atlantic Council meeting held at NATO headquarters in Brussels on April 12, 1999:[42]      

An end to all military action and the immediate termination of violence and repressive activities by the Milosevic government;    

Withdrawal of all military, police and paramilitary forces from Kosovo;     Stationing of UN peacekeeping presence in Kosovo;    

Unconditional and safe return of all refugees and displaced persons;    

Establishment of a political framework agreement for Kosovo based on Rambouillet Accords, in conformity with international law and the Charter of the United Nations."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia#Goals

Which one of these goals weren't achieved?

35 fixed wing and 7 rotary, more than 2 dozen UAV's and a few unidentified aicrafts and wasted several hundred millions by using cruise missiles on decoys

Well, it is Saturday night...  

Werewolf wrote:Wikishmedia is no source not for military use neither for wars.

Wikipedia is perfectly good enough for factual, uncontroversial information.

Is this a better link? http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/1999/p99-051e.htm

Werewolf wrote:

BlackArrow wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Wikishmedia is no source not for military use neither for wars.

Wikipedia is perfectly good enough for factual, uncontroversial information.

Wikipedia is great for lot of stuff but worthless in absolute majority of articles about military matters and history.

So, are you disputing NATO's official goals for launching the 1999 bombing campaign, or have you got some 'official goals' of your own?

BlackArrow wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:
The most important points Mindstorm is trying to make was that the Serbians were far more capable than was expected by NATO forces, and the deciding factor would of been how up to date the air defenses systems were.

But Serbia didn't have a more modern air defence system - why would they have a more modern system? It's just another pointless 'what-if', useless to speculate - if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle, etc...

Actually it's a relevant point that the Pentagon forced sanctions on Yugoslavia thus arms transactions were strictly illegal therefor it was nearly impossible to buy upgraded air defense, while at the same time the sanctimonious hypocrites in the Pentagon urged their puppet Pinochet to act as a proxy and to engage in illegal arms trafficking with the Croatians and ship tons of weapons to them:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/11/world/chilean-arms-shipment-to-croatia-stirs-tensions.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/19/world/americas/19chile.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1992-01-11/news/9201020663_1_shipment-weapons-gen-augusto-pinochet

The Pentagon used Islamists to arm the Bosnians:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/apr/22/warcrimes.richardnortontaylor

...The arms trafficking would lead to wide scale conflict, and the conflict would be the context for a No-Fly-Zone and air campaign, the sanctions would insure that the Serbs would not get modern sam's and insure that they will take the heaviest losses and minimize the losses of NATO as much as possible. Like a real Mafia operation.