Indians outperformed USAF F15E

Strategy Page ^ | 3/1/2004 12:35:32 PM | JJFS

[Tennessee_Bob]

Reckon we ought to invite the IAF to come and play with the folks I used to work for?

[AnIndianFromIndia]

Another excerpt from the same site:

"F-15's vs. Su-30's 6/8/2002 10:54:30 PM
I noticed the recent post on SP about how the Su-30 proved superior to the F-15 in previously classified USAF simulations. I can't get onto the Fighters/Bombers/Recon board for some reason (never been able to), so I'll bring it over here.

Isn't this sort of to be expected, though? The F-15 is 1972 vintage. The Su-30 came out in 1989. I wouldn't expect a Soviet fighter of the same year to stand up to one of ours, but technology changes a lot if you look in 15+ year intervals. In addition, the total Russian inventory of Su-30's isn't that high, and I can't imagine they're shelling out a whole lot to increase their inventory at the moment.

All that notwithstanding, does anyone know a decent place to find statistics for the capabilities of the Alamo, Adler, and Archer missiles? How likely is it that an F-15 could dodge one of these things?

Also, SP said that the Su-30 is currently being flown by China and India ... does anyone know how many of these are currently in the Chinese and Indian inventories?

--Phoenix Rising "

http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/29-35.asp


And another one...
"RE:F-15's vs. Su-30's 8/2/2002 6:56:45 AM
According to my sources, in NATO stimulations F-15 acheived a 1.3 kill ratio against Su-35. Note that although it does prove the inferiority of F-15 against Russian Su fighters, Su-35 is superior to Su-30s. In a BvR duel, F-15 will have a fifty-fifty against Su-30. If USAF F-15s can be armed with AIM-9X in time, they can even have equal footing in a dogfight, since that it is very difficult to dodge a short-range missile nowadays, given the agility of those new AAMs.About the number of fighters the Chinese have: the Chinese have both Su-27s and Su-30s. I do not know how many, but I know that they are buying an additonal 30 Su-30s, armed with anti-ship missiles to attack US carriers, if there should be a war between US and PROC. "

One more...
"RE:F-15's vs. Su-30's 8/29/2002 8:40:09 AM
The US simulations showed that the Su with thrust vectoring would beat the F-15C EVERY TIME (source, Military Technology), mainly because of the capabilities of the Russian R-73 missile. Once the AIM-9X is in use, this should level out.

Incidentally, the same source indicates that in mock combats between US and Israeli planes, the Israelis have won 220 out of 240 combats. Again, the reason is the capability of the Israeli dogfight missiles.

The USA has been concentrating on long-range AAMs and neglected the short-range ones until recently, so before the AIM-9X they were WAY behind.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/"

[cpdiii]

Rokke

This post needs your analysis. Is the F15 and the SU 30 like comparing apples and oranges? Presently the F16 is our premier dog fighter.

I have no doubt the Indian pilots are very good. Although not "officially" our ally they really are. This is good.

[RightOnline]

Let me put it this way.......as a former AF airplane driver (but not a fighter jock, mind you.........I worked for a living).

Anyone who believes for two seconds that the IAF could whup USAF pilots in a stand-up fight in air combat is smoking something. Not disparaging the IAF; they are fine folks. NO comparison in training, etc. Not even close.

[AnIndianFromIndia]

Did not mean it that way, but meant so regarding the comment on sandbagged exercises.That's bullsh!t.Talk of separating the chaff!

[AnIndianFromIndia]

The IAF 'whupped' USAF pilots IN THAT PARTICULAR EXERCISE.Now to say that the result then would hold good if the whole USAF showed up against the puny IAF would be unforgiven stupidity.

[1rudeboy]

Can you imagine the Indians' kill-ratio against the A-10?

[F16Fighter]

ping

[ASA Vet]

it's the pilot that matters most

The next generation fighter pilots will be 15 year old pimply faced boys manning virtual terminals.
The aircraft itself will not be designed down for a human occupant.

[Reeses]

So, F-22 will be the world's greatest fighter, with the world's highest price tag. It will be able to do things that no other fighter can do, and they'll be tactically useful, air dominance winners. But in the end, it's the pilot that matters most.

It will also probably be America's last manned fighter. We're entering the robotic age. The fighters in the future will be able to pull 20G's, fly low and take higher risks. In the end, it will be the computer programmer that matters most. I would not want to go up against a suicidal robot.

Do dog fights happen anymore? The last one was like 10 years ago. With modern weapon systems I would think the game is over before the jets get within 30 miles of each other.

[guitfiddlist]

Also:

"Despite the bonhommie, the USAF did not bring its latest F-16 jets, which helped destroy Iraqi air defences during the Gulf War, and the IAF politely declined to display its newest acquisition, the Sukhoi-MKI multi-role combat jets."

Next exercise will feature Sopwith Camels vs Fokkers.

All kidding aside, no offense is intended to the Sukhoi nor F-15C, but we're not going to show our best stuff to a country that goes running off with the Russians at the drop off a turban, and I'm sure the Indians feel likewise.

[proud American in Canada]

"You have this backward. They lost to the French then beat the Americans."

Oops! You're right. That's what I meant to say--thanks for the correction. :)

[StolarStorm]

What is your whole point here? Is this another one of those "we're better than you" posts from another arrogant Indian? We get these insecure "chip on shoulder" rants all the time on outsourcing threads.

[The Other Harry]

Guess how many F 15's have been shot down in actual air to air combat (total not just those flown by US)?

I think the answer to that is close to zero. It may be zero.

Just last night I watched a show about the F15's on the History Channel. Good show. Watch it if you can.

The F15 is a remarkable aircraft. I would not want to go up against one of them. One of the nice things about them is that you can keep them in the air.

[guitfiddlist]

In any case, the future is this:

And this:

[The Other Harry]

Can you imagine the Indians' kill-ratio against the A-10?

I hope you're not insulting the Warthog. Nobody ever said they were fighters.

[Oatka]

Don't forget that the Mahabharatta spoke of Indians flying "vimanas" in aerial combat over 5,000 years ago, so they should be pretty good by now. *Ancient Astronauts

[AnIndianFromIndia]

I'm amazed by your hypocritical reply. Who's the arrogant idiot here?

If I have to repeat again, the IAF is a puny imp compared to the USAF.But in the training exercise which occurred on the date mentioned in the article, the IAF Su-30s beat the USAF F-15s big time.That's the point here.Want me to go any more clearer than that, so that you may have the special luxury of understanding a simple statement?

[StolarStorm]

"IAF Su-30s beat the USAF F-15s big time"

So what? Why do you care? Like I said, this is just a weak attempt to gain some sense of superiority. We get this sort of thing from you guys all the time.

[Pukin Dog]

The first thing you need to do when discussing the various capabilities of modern fighter aircraft, is throw out the statistics. This is because the U.S. has never publically discussed the true capability, speeds and ranges of our combat aircraft. The specs are for comparison sake against other countries competing to sell combat aircraft to other nations. They are meaningless. The U.S. has always lied on the low side, the Russians on the high side. Where the Russians do have nice capabilities, they have terrible sortie rates because they cant keep their aircraft and engines in working order.

The fact is that right now, today, the best operational Fighter Aircraft in the world is the EFA. Pilots being of equal skill, until the F-22 becomes operational, the EFA is the best fighter hands down. The second best is the F-15C. The third best is the F-18C, followed by the F-16Block52. Each of these aircraft is way more than a match for anything else in the sky. When you add pilot skill to the mix, it becomes and unfair fight.

The U.S. does not participate in these fly-off for the purpose of demonstrating our ability. We do so to gage the ability of the opponent, who in the end will ALWAYS be victorious. If the opponent loses, the U.S. learns nothing about them. So, we tank. We always tank. We tank against the Israelis on a constant basis. When U.S. aircraft perform at airshows, we are under strict orders to work within a planned, limited flight envelope. The idea that U.S. aircraft cannot perform a 9G 360 without losing altitude is ridiculous.

There is no AA missile that cannot be dodged or spoofed. The Archer is a tough missile, but it can be beamed and defeated like any other. The 9X is the toughest defeat of all. Someone else suggested that the F-22 is not a dogfighter. That is not true, but I can understand why someone would believe that when the F-22 can kill anything before it needs to dogfight under 99% of possible scenarios.

The U.S. is currently trying to fund the F-22. In no way, will the F-15 be allowed to perform up to its abilities during this time. The U.S. does not want fair or close fights with its multi-million dollar aircraft. The F-15 has NEVER lost a dogfight, or even been scratched in anger. It has almost as large an advantage over most aircraft as it did in 1990. The U.S. will return to the advantage we had in 1973 when the F-22 becomes operational. All these canard-laden Russian aircraft are great airshow warriors, which become nothing be large radar-signatures for the Eagle's super radar, and the F-22's stealth.

It is not even close, and the U.S. will never let it become close.