Sukhoi Su-30MKI

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,249
3,831
The only area where the MKI does the best in strike is carpet bombing. That's always a sight to see.

For that you need to go up close to the target

And before that you have to take care of the EW threats , both in the ground and In the Air

In a Dense EW environment , A mixed fighter package of Rafales and Su 30 will deliver optimum results

Before Su 30 came , Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 worked together in a Collaborative manner

The Same thing will happen with Su 30 and Rafale
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
For that you need to go up close to the target

And before that you have to take care of the EW threats , both in the ground and In the Air

In a Dense EW environment , A mixed fighter package of Rafales and Su 30 will deliver optimum results

Before Su 30 came , Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 worked together in a Collaborative manner

The Same thing will happen with Su 30 and Rafale

No aircraft can operate efficiently in enemy territory until SEAD/DEAD missions are complete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,176
2,660
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
No aircraft can operate efficiently in enemy territory until SEAD/DEAD missions are complete.
No aircraft but Rafale
Rafale pilots are also very complementary about their SPECTRA self-protection suite, which is of critical importance as France does not have any aircraft dedicated to the Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) missions. “SPECTRA allowed us to begin operations over Libya the very same day the political decision was taken, and to fly deep into Libyan territory without an escort,” says one pilot, adding that “the Americans also flew in, but only after they had fired 119 Tomahawks to take out Libyan air defenses.”

Rafale’s capabilities are changing the way the French air force operates. Previously, distinct pilot “communities” developed around each of the main missions flown – air defense, ground attack, strike, etc. – and lived more or less independently of each other. With the Rafale, however, this phenomenon is fading away since any unit, any aircraft and any pilot fly air-defense, strike or ground attack missions, as required. Specialization will disappear, several officers said, to be replaced by fewer but far more flexible aircraft and pilots.

“The idea that a single aircraft can be re-tasked in flight from reconnaissance to strike to interception during the same sortie is truly revolutionary, and we’re just now beginning to understand all that this implies,” says one officer.

This flexibility also translates into a major advantage for operational management, because any available Rafale can be tasked for any mission, without needing, as in the past, for a given aircraft-weapon combination to be available.

 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India

I know, which is why I added the word "efficiently" in my statement. Yeah, there may be handful of missions which the Rafale can quickly execuse without SEAD/DEAD and take the enemy by surprise, but even with SPECTRA, Rafale's still going to be constrained, by ways of not being able to emit anything else, fly higher or faster etc while inside enemy territory without SEAD/DEAD being conducted first.

Originally I had actually typed in: "No aircraft can operate in enemy territory until SEAD/DEAD missions are complete." Then I added "efficiently" in because I knew someone's going to pick up on it.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,176
2,660
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
I know, which is why I added the word "efficiently" in my statement. Yeah, there may be handful of missions which the Rafale can quickly execuse without SEAD/DEAD and take the enemy by surprise, but even with SPECTRA, Rafale's still going to be constrained, by ways of not being able to emit anything else, fly higher or faster etc while inside enemy territory without SEAD/DEAD being conducted first.

Originally I had actually typed in: "No aircraft can operate in enemy territory until SEAD/DEAD missions are complete." Then I added "efficiently" in because I knew someone's going to pick up on it.
We have another image of the Rafale that we express in a comparison with the Americans:
It is said that the Americans are used to tar all the roads before committing to war in enemy territory because they have only ordinary vehicles that cannot run on trails while we have a 4X4 that runs on trails and allows us to go to war right away.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
We have another image of the Rafale that we express in a comparison with the Americans:
It is said that the Americans are used to tar all the roads before committing to war in enemy territory because they have only ordinary vehicles that cannot run on trails while we have a 4X4 that runs on trails and allows us to go to war right away.

Pretty much. But I think that's what they are hoping to do with the F-35, if they ever finish it.
 

Hydra

Well-Known member
May 19, 2020
1,624
725
Mumbai
Pretty much. But I think that's what they are hoping to do with the F-35, if they ever finish it.
They are planning to induct 145 B21s as a successor to B2 spirit. It they are not confident about their SEAD/DEAD capability, the would not go for a strategic bomber program altogether.
@Picdelamirand-oil USA is the most efficient war machine exist today, you may be having a better gen 4 fighter but USAF is simply better than french or rest of the airforce, your lecrec tank may be better than M1Abram, but US army is simply out gun you.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,176
2,660
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
@Picdelamirand-oil USA is the most efficient war machine exist today, you may be having a better gen 4 fighter but USAF is simply better than french or rest of the airforce, your lecrec tank may be better than M1Abram, but US army is simply out gun you.
When we launched our campaign in Mali, which stopped the jihadists' advance, the Americans told us we were crazy. Because for the Americans such an operation would have required months of preparation, monstrous logistics, perhaps the creation of an artificial port, because Bamako would have been invaded during all this preparation as well as the entire country and the operations would have been much more difficult to carry out.
The light and reactive way of waging war that the French know how to conduct allowed us to achieve the result with far less means and power than the Americans. For your information, the description of the operations we conducted in Mali is now being studied at West Point.
 

Hydra

Well-Known member
May 19, 2020
1,624
725
Mumbai
When we launched our campaign in Mali, which stopped the jihadists' advance, the Americans told us we were crazy. Because for the Americans such an operation would have required months of preparation, monstrous logistics, perhaps the creation of an artificial port, because Bamako would have been invaded during all this preparation as well as the entire country and the operations would have been much more difficult to carry out.
The light and reactive way of waging war that the French know how to conduct allowed us to achieve the result with far less means and power than the Americans. For your information, the description of the operations we conducted in Mali is now being studied at West Point.
Will you be able to invade a country with such a short period? No you cannot. You need months long preparation for an invasion, US had invaded Iraq & Afghanistan where you guys just bombed few places with rafale, the impressive thing about your action was you operated your aircraft from your own military bases, but that just a few bombing mission.
US definitely could do such long range mission, unlike france they are using Bombers for such job.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,176
2,660
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
Will you be able to invade a country with such a short period? No you cannot. You need months long preparation for an invasion, US had invaded Iraq & Afghanistan where you guys just bombed few places with rafale, the impressive thing about your action was you operated your aircraft from your own military bases, but that just a few bombing mission.
US definitely could do such long range mission, unlike france they are using Bombers for such job.
What characterizes us is that we are able to carry out impressive operations with much smaller means than the USA. For example, the Barkhane operation that is underway in Africa covers a territory larger than India or Western Europe.
It is no longer our habit to invade countries, but we could do it.
 

A Person

Well-Known member
Dec 1, 2017
807
786
A Place
The Americans definitely have a lot more means. More money, more materiel, more personnel, gee-whiz gizmos for everyone, etc. It's definitely a strength, but it's also a weakness because it means they have grown to rely on having all that stuff, so if they ever have to make do without it, they won't know how to fight anymore. And they're aware of this, at least at top brass level, but they don't know how to solve the issue because their instinct to solve a problem is to throw money at it until it disappears.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
The Americans definitely have a lot more means. More money, more materiel, more personnel, gee-whiz gizmos for everyone, etc. It's definitely a strength, but it's also a weakness because it means they have grown to rely on having all that stuff, so if they ever have to make do without it, they won't know how to fight anymore. And they're aware of this, at least at top brass level, but they don't know how to solve the issue because their instinct to solve a problem is to throw money at it until it disappears.

Pretty soon they will have an enemy they can't outspend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbRaj and jetray

jetray

Well-Known member
Mar 15, 2018
1,252
857
India
What characterizes us is that we are able to carry out impressive operations with much smaller means than the USA. For example, the Barkhane operation that is underway in Africa covers a territory larger than India or Western Europe.
It is no longer our habit to invade countries, but we could do it.
Yeah, works well against minnows, why not pick a comparable enemy and see it works or not, lets say russia or even iran for that matter of fact.
 

jetray

Well-Known member
Mar 15, 2018
1,252
857
India
The Americans definitely have a lot more means. More money, more materiel, more personnel, gee-whiz gizmos for everyone, etc. It's definitely a strength, but it's also a weakness because it means they have grown to rely on having all that stuff, so if they ever have to make do without it, they won't know how to fight anymore. And they're aware of this, at least at top brass level, but they don't know how to solve the issue because their instinct to solve a problem is to throw money at it until it disappears.
thats the problem with technology, when you fight against a bunch of rag tag primitives like taliban it simply does not work. At the end of the day domination on the ground is only achievable by having boots on the ground. This was quite visible in vietnam war itself where they found going tough against viet cong.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Did you miss the word "re-engining an old airframe is almost always unsuccessful ".?

He's referring to something else. Fighter jets are almost always reengined during MLUs. The Mig-29UPG was. The Mig-21 Bison was. The IAF tried it with the Jaguar but failed because of costs, not due to a technical challenge. MKI's engine change can also become successful since the Russians are already doing it on their Su-30s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya