SU-35 vs Typhoon

[ORAC]

Su-35 versus Typhoon: Analysis from RUSI?s Justin Bronk | Hush-Kit (http://hushkit.net/2016/03/17/su-35-versus-typhoon-analysis-from-rusis-justin-bronk/)

Outside the Western world, Russia’s ultra-agile Su-35 is the most potent fighter in operational service. We asked Justin Bronk from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank his thoughts on the Su-35’s combat effectiveness against the Typhoon the backbone of NATO’s fighter force. We also look at how the Su-35 would fare against the US’ F-15, F-16 and F-22.

[AreOut]

I don't understand how these comparisons are relevant, you could find two planes where plane A would easily beat plane B 1 vs 1 but lose badly if its 5 vs 5 which is more likely to occur, and then if we add SAM support it becomes even more complicated.

[Courtney Mil]

That was a good read over mid-morning coffee. Thanks, ORAC. :ok:

Are out, it was just a simple comparison, it wasn't meant to be a tactical analysis of two nations' entire combat capability including AWAC, GCI, dedicated EW, tanker support, GBAD, etc. It doesn't even define what mission each aircraft is supposed to be on.

[glad rag]

Enjoyed that as cm said a good read.

Gripen eh who'd have thought it......gripen with Meteor got to be the AD bargain of the century

[theonewhoknows]

An interesting article. In parts, well informed. In others, there are many assumptions. An allusion to EW/EA capabilities is pertinent. However, there seems to be little appreciation as to the complete destruction of gaining any SA this capability offers. SA is KING. Without it, little else matters.

[A_Van]

IMHO, the article (referred to in the 1st port) is rather shallow and based on an "old fashioned" approach. Just static data from publicly available specs are taken and compared. This approach worked some 30-40 years ago, but not now (except for familiarization courses for cadets, maybe). Currently in the professional area such analyses are accomplished through detailed joint simulations (including ground systems, datalinks, EW, C4ISR, etc etc) with a great number of realistic scenarios, high-fidelity models and dynamically changing parameters. E.g. RCS greatly depends and varies on the a/c orientation vs the LoS to an enemy radar, configuration, etc.. Such simulations could be either just constructive, or with man-in-the-loop components (i.e. pilots in simulators), or full LVC.


Also, some parts of the article sound too self-assured. E.g. it is written: "Man-machine interface/ ease offlying and fighting: This is an area where Russian jets have always struggled. Even with multifunction cockpit displays and digital flight instruments, the Su-35 lags behind Typhoon in terms of ease of flying and fighting with it as a weapons system".
To say so, one should pass through appropriate training courses and then log at least 10-20 hours flying each of both aircraft under comparison (preferably within the same reasonably short period of time) in various operational modes and flight regimes. I greatly doubt the author (or anybody he might have interviewed) did that.

[Courtney Mil]

I don't think anyone's arguing with that, A Van, but the article was never claiming to be a full-on operational analysis.

As for modern simulation using man-in-the-loop, don't get over-excited, especially where cockpit ergonomics are concerned. Unless you build linked full mission simulators for every participant and every aircraft type under evaluation you won't properly evaluate the "man-machine interface" and its effect on operational capability.

[A_Van]

Courtney Mil: Sure, you are right about sims. I am not over-excited (rather opposite) having dealt with various sims for about 35 years...


P.S. My apologies that some words have stuck together in my previous post. It sometimes happens here while cut'n'pasting from a word processor. I did not notice, sorry.

[Courtney Mil]

Sticky words are often a problem, A Van, but I got your drift.

[jindabyne]

Ned Frith's 'S' curves revealed no contest - Typhoon far greater effectiveness!

[LL of LL]

Ahh, Uncle Ned's S curves. That brings back memories!!!

[KenV]

Su-35 versus Typhoon: Analysis from RUSI?s Justin Bronk | Hush-Kit (http://hushkit.net/2016/03/17/su-35-versus-typhoon-analysis-from-rusis-justin-bronk/)
Outside the Western world, Russia’s ultra-agile Su-35 is the most potent fighter in operational service. We asked Justin Bronk from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank his thoughts on the Su-35’s combat effectiveness against the Typhoon the backbone of NATO’s fighter force. We also look at how the Su-35 would fare against the US’ F-15, F-16 and F-22. The following is an interesting sentence from that comparison article:
The F-22 also will not get into an angles fight with an Sukhoi – there is simply no need for it to do so.

I believe if "F-22" were replaced with "F-35", the above sentence would remain equally true.

[Heathrow Harry]

nice if you get the choice - that was suppsoed to be the line with the F4 over N Vietnam..... but sometimes those pesky MiGs hadnt read the script

[KenV]

nice if you get the choice - that was suppsoed to be the line with the F4 over N Vietnam..... but sometimes those pesky MiGs hadnt read the scriptI wonder if it was the pesky MiGs nearly as much as the pesky politicians. It was after all the politicians who set the RoE that negated the BVR advantage. Somehow I doubt we'll return to those RoE anytime soon.

[Just This Once...]

I believe if "F-22" were replaced with "F-35", the above sentence would remain equally true.

The F-22 can throw its AMRAAMs one heck of a long way; F-35 not so much.

[MSOCS]

JTO, true, but F-35 will throw its Meteor further than F-22's AMRAAM.

But we both know it isn't entirely about the throw.

(I'm a poet and I didn't know it!!)

[AreOut]

what makes you sure Russians don't have the means to discover stealth aircrafts at a significant distance?! Maybe not from the S35 itself but in the event of serious confrontation they would certainly cover lot of the airspace with AWAC planes, powerful ground radars etc.

[MSOCS]

I think you're onto something AreOut. We're wasting our time and money. Come to think of it, so are 13 other countries.

Damn!!

[Courtney Mil]

AreOut, it's not so much power (although, if you could get enough of it, it would eventually do it), it's about frequency. And that brings its own issues of resolution and guidance. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's not as straightforward as some might suggest - today, at least.

[AreOut]

well I don't know if they can do it because if they can it's probably a military secret, just saying noone could be sure if they can or not

[theonewhoknows]

Exactly. All else isn't really worth discussing.