Non-Russian Μilitary multimedia thread:

Nice post...

The US has trained against very well trained German Mig-29 pilots, so they know the strengths and weaknesses of the older model aircraft and when they meet them in combat they exploit those weaknesses... which are often made rather worse by the fact that the US aircraft have full air support and jammers and AWACS aircraft to help them while the Mig-29s are often operating from bases under attack, and lacking even fairly basic radar support let alone wingmen.

Serbian Mig-29s took off with nonfunctioning radar against the latest models of western aircraft in service at that time.

BTW during tests after the cold war during dog fight tests the F-16 managed to outmanouver the German Mig-29s about 62% of the time and get on their tails for a kill shot.

The problem was that the F-16s didn't win a single dogfight because it was ruled that the Mig-29 pilot could have already acquired the F-16 with their helmet mounted sights and engaged the F-16 with an R-73 high off boresight AAM and killed the F-16 before the F-16 had a chance to manouver for its shot.

The F-16 also had no BVR capability at that time so the limited BVR capability of the export model Mig-29s made them more F-15 like than F-16 like.

Manouver capability is what is important when the technology fails... manouverability means you can point your gun at his plane and no amount of jamming or chaff or electronic jiggery pokery will stop your 30mm cannon shells ripping him a new one.

I very much agree... the US will not waste its enormously expensive and few in number stealth fighters against a competent enemy that has trained pilots and decent EW capability.

Most AMRAAM kills have been against unaware aircraft with no EW capability beyond Flares and Chaff and probably never saw it coming.

Old legacy fighters could carry plenty of AMRAAMs and Sidewinders but the new stealth planes only carry a few missiles each, so a modern capable enemy that has a better chance of surviving incoming threats suddenly becomes a real problem.

Morfei should be able to lock on and hit incoming missiles... so an Su-35 with standard EW equipment should detect the IR plume of a missile launch and the IR signature of an incoming missile in plenty of time to launch a 9M100 to shoot it down. The Su-35 could carry 12 missiles plus two ESM pods on the wingtips... more if the double missile loadout on the centreline is to be believed.

This suggests the Su-35 will have plenty of chances against an F-22... the F-22 can hide, but can't outrun... but then an Su-35 operating within an IADS... it probably actually can't hide either.

Trading missile for missile will suit the Flanker pilot but when there are no missiles left it becomes a gun fight...

Before the Vietnam war everyone thought guns were obsolete and that everything could be done with missiles.

When both sides actually have EW capability I still don't think we can call Missiles Hittiles yet. Which means keep practising that quick draw.

In fact the aircraft with the best gun sensor set up has always been the Mig-29 et al.

The laser range finder and IRST mean a very accurate track of the target is possible with a very precise calculation of the point of impact. Very simply in combat the pilot can turn off his radar and use his IRST to track the target with occasional laser rangings to update the targets position. The pilot pulls the trigger and manouvers the aircraft so that the gun aiming line in the HUD is on top of the target... when the computer detects the target will be hit it releases a burst of cannon shells... usually 5-7 rounds are fired in a short burst with the gun firing and stopping firing based on computer models of impact and target type.

The designer is reported to say that while the computer was shutting down the cannon after only 5-7 rounds had been fired the targets were being destroyed... if he had known it was going to be so accurate he would have halved the ammo capacity. (150 at the time to 75).

Guns definitely haven't became obsolete. But we also must note that the BVR missile technology has also improved by leaps and bounds. "Meteor" is a classic example of a highly evolved yet literally unavoidable(as claimed) BVR missile.

The size of the radar and electronics that can fit in the nose of a missile suggests to me no missile is unbeatable... meteor probably wont be locking PAk FAs at long range, while Su-35s should be able to carry enough AAMs to shoot down as many Meteors as a Rafale or Typhoon could carry and still have some missiles to fire back.

And HMS with high off-boresight WVR missiles have changed the game in dogfights as well. So, I don't think avoiding them would be a piece of cake like it was in the Vietnam war(as these new missiles also possess stealth, high speed, plus ultra-manoeuvrability).

DIRCMS burning out their optical sensors might make hits low probability...