US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2019, 04:04
by Corsair1963
US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Apr 9, 2019 in Aviation, News

US senior administration official has warned Egypt against buying a Russian Su-35 multi-role air-defense fighters and air-launched weapons.

“In terms of the expanding Russian influence in the region, that’s obviously something which we are quite concerned. We don’t see a lot of material benefits to engagements with the Russians”, the official said on Monday. “We just would encourage the Egyptians to turn more toward the West, toward the United States”.

According to him, Washington has already faced the same situation with China, India, and Turkey. The official explained that Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act or CAATSA (the law on countering America’s opponents through sanctions) is in effect in the United States. The document provides for retaliatory measures for those countries that enter into transactions with the Russian defense or intelligence sectors.

“The president views the relationship with Egypt, as he does all of our … relationships with foreign countries … through the lens of America First and what serves our interest,” the official said.

The official said the administration was encouraging Egypt to develop democratic institutions while being mindful of U.S. security interests.

According to media reports in recent weeks, Egypt would buy “over two dozen” Su-35 fighter jets from Russia. Egypt has reportedly signed a $2 billion deal with Russia to buy more than 20 Sukhoi SU-35 fighter jets, as well as weapons for the aircraft. Russian newspaper Kommersant reported on March 18, the acquisition will significantly boost the Egyptian Air Force’s potential alongside deliveries of the MiG-29M/M2, which are ongoing.

Moreover, the United States wants to expand its counterterrorism partnership with Egypt given that terrorism remains a significant threat to that country’s stability, a senior administration official said in press briefing.

“Terrorism is a very significant threat to Egypt’s stability, from Libya, Sinai and the South, so they are kind of uniquely positioned to be responding to a whole range of threats in that theater. For us, it’s a very, very important partnership that we want to expand,” the official said on Monday.

The official noted that Egypt plays an important diplomatic role in negotiating with Hamas, and is working to persuade the Palestinian movement to comply with the conditions that would move them out of being considered a terrorist organization.

https://defence-blog.com/news/us-warns- ... -deal.html

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2019, 10:06
by invictus
Makes you wonder whether being an ally of the US is worth it.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2019, 13:01
by madrat
Or it makes one think being an ally of the U.S. is a choice for success whereas alternatives are failure. Su-35S is high maintenance compared to their F-16's. They also are a huge step back from the technology they already enjoy.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2019, 13:15
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:Or it makes one think being an ally of the U.S. is a choice for success whereas alternatives are failure. Su-35S is high maintenance compared to their F-16's. They also are a huge step back from the technology they already enjoy.


I'm assuming you mean Rafale and F-16 Block 52.

I think the buy is completely logical. Egypt lacks a heavy fighter capable of long range escort/air superiority missions. The Rafale in the strike fighter role, and their Mig-29's are rather short legged. The F-16 force is big/modern but there again there's a slant toward air to ground missions.

Meanwhile, the UAE, Quatar and Israel fly the world's latest F-15's. Even Iran (arguably) has the F-14. They need something that goes deep, sanitizes the airspace and be damn feared. Speaking of which, why no Eagle for Egypt?

They have the $. They're the 4th largest F-16 operator in the world! Something about Israel's qualitative edge being preserved??

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2019, 22:27
by milosh
Last time I checked american congress don't want to sell AIM-120 nor AIM-9X so it is quite logical to buy from Russians. They will make congress to think twice about not selling modern missiles to Egypt.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2019, 22:32
by f-16adf
Qatari Air Force also has too many different types of jets.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2019, 00:04
by invictus
mixelflick wrote:
madrat wrote:Or it makes one think being an ally of the U.S. is a choice for success whereas alternatives are failure. Su-35S is high maintenance compared to their F-16's. They also are a huge step back from the technology they already enjoy.


I'm assuming you mean Rafale and F-16 Block 52.

I think the buy is completely logical. Egypt lacks a heavy fighter capable of long range escort/air superiority missions. The Rafale in the strike fighter role, and their Mig-29's are rather short legged. The F-16 force is big/modern but there again there's a slant toward air to ground missions.

Meanwhile, the UAE, Quatar and Israel fly the world's latest F-15's. Even Iran (arguably) has the F-14. They need something that goes deep, sanitizes the airspace and be damn feared. Speaking of which, why no Eagle for Egypt?

They have the $. They're the 4th largest F-16 operator in the world! Something about Israel's qualitative edge being preserved??



Dont you think so many different platforms would be a logistical nightmare?

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2019, 04:01
by Corsair1963
mixelflick wrote:
I'm assuming you mean Rafale and F-16 Block 52.

I think the buy is completely logical. Egypt lacks a heavy fighter capable of long range escort/air superiority missions. The Rafale in the strike fighter role, and their Mig-29's are rather short legged. The F-16 force is big/modern but there again there's a slant toward air to ground missions.

Meanwhile, the UAE, Quatar and Israel fly the world's latest F-15's. Even Iran (arguably) has the F-14. They need something that goes deep, sanitizes the airspace and be damn feared. Speaking of which, why no Eagle for Egypt?

They have the $. They're the 4th largest F-16 operator in the world! Something about Israel's qualitative edge being preserved??


Logical??? I don't see that at all. As the current Rafale and F-16 Fleets as just as capable in the fighter role and even more capable in the strike role. Plus, both are already in service and with all the needed infrastructure to support them.

Now add the Su-35 which from the start has lower RAS (Reliability, Availability and Serviceability) and none of the benefits of the aforementioned types.

The US has learn a hard lesson of operating to many types that basically perform many of the same missions. Which, is why it develop the F-35 in the first place. In order to consolidate the number of types down to the bare minimum.

Which, is turn will lower cost and increase numbers!

For example I would clearly prefer a fleet of 100 Rafales and 100 F-16's. Over a fleet of 50 Rafales, 50 F-16's, and 50 Su-35's. (i.e. 200 vs 150)

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2019, 14:02
by mixelflick
Corsair1963 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
I'm assuming you mean Rafale and F-16 Block 52.

I think the buy is completely logical. Egypt lacks a heavy fighter capable of long range escort/air superiority missions. The Rafale in the strike fighter role, and their Mig-29's are rather short legged. The F-16 force is big/modern but there again there's a slant toward air to ground missions.

Meanwhile, the UAE, Quatar and Israel fly the world's latest F-15's. Even Iran (arguably) has the F-14. They need something that goes deep, sanitizes the airspace and be damn feared. Speaking of which, why no Eagle for Egypt?

They have the $. They're the 4th largest F-16 operator in the world! Something about Israel's qualitative edge being preserved??


Logical??? I don't see that at all. As the current Rafale and F-16 Fleets as just as capable in the fighter role and even more capable in the strike role. Plus, both are already in service and with all the needed infrastructure to support them.

Now add the Su-35 which from the start has lower RAS (Reliability, Availability and Serviceability) and none of the benefits of the aforementioned types.

The US has learn a hard lesson of operating to many types that basically perform many of the same missions. Which, is why it develop the F-35 in the first place. In order to consolidate the number of types down to the bare minimum.

Which, is turn will lower cost and increase numbers!

For example I would clearly prefer a fleet of 100 Rafales and 100 F-16's. Over a fleet of 50 Rafales, 50 F-16's, and 50 Su-35's. (i.e. 200 vs 150)


Logistical nightmare?

Maybe. But no less so than Quatar who operates the Rafale. Typhoon, F-15QA, Mirage 2000 and Alpha Jets. Or South Korea, who operates F-4's, F-5's, F-15's, F-16's and now F-35's. Or Saudi Arabia, who operates F-15C variants, Typhoons, Tornado's and now F-15SA's.

And while the Rafale and F-16 are capable jets, neither offers the range/reach of the SU-35, nor its vaunted super-maneuverability (nor price tag). You can argue super-maneuverability does/doesn't matter, but it will in a sales pitch where not everyone is a military expert.

Of all of those variables though, price point is the one that matters. I don't think anyone will argue that the SU-35 buys you a whole lotta capability, especially for the price...

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2019, 20:10
by milosh
Corsair1963 wrote:
Logical??? I don't see that at all. As the current Rafale and F-16 Fleets as just as capable in the fighter role and even more capable in the strike role. Plus, both are already in service and with all the needed infrastructure to support them.


Egypt's F-16 doesn't have modern radar nor is armed with modern missiles. Its fighter capabilities are same as in 1980s.

Rafale lack radar powerful enough to achieve anything useful against VLO. MiG-35 similar story as Rafale. So only option for Egypt is Su-35.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2019, 16:15
by mixelflick
milosh wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
Logical??? I don't see that at all. As the current Rafale and F-16 Fleets as just as capable in the fighter role and even more capable in the strike role. Plus, both are already in service and with all the needed infrastructure to support them.


Egypt's F-16 doesn't have modern radar nor is armed with modern missiles. Its fighter capabilities are same as in 1980s.

Rafale lack radar powerful enough to achieve anything useful against VLO. MiG-35 similar story as Rafale. So only option for Egypt is Su-35.


That's another good point: The SU-35's radar though not an AESA, is absurdly powerful. Much moreso than the competition. So you have a big fighter that can handily out-range its opponents. It can carry a fairly heavy weapons load to altitude, with a monster radar that at least has a shot at detecting VLO targets. And if it gets to the merge, you have to get up awful early to beat an SU-35 and its Archer missiles.

And it's cheap, at least compared to the competition.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2019, 18:27
by icemaverick
The problem for the Su-35 is that it’s radar is also very loud. As it’s not an AESA radar, aircraft with decent electronic warfare suites will easily detect the IRBIS-E radar emissions. In fact its radar emissions could probably be used against it. On top of that, it’s got a massive RCS. Plus, in the real world I’ll bet the R-77 is at a major disadvantage against the AMRAAM and Meteor.

You’re a funny guy Mixeflick. You’ve been lamenting the poor performance of the Su-30MKI and here you are singing the praises of an aircraft which is basically a modified version of the same jet. Sure it has a new radar but it’s still a PESA. The engines are a little better and the aerodynamics might be a bit better because it’s a single seater, but I doubt it’s a game changing improvement. It’s basically an incremental improvement on a 70s era design.

There’s a reason why the Flankers are cheap. It’s the same reason why the Russian aircraft industry is in a world of trouble right now. Let’s not pretend that this is anything other than a political decision. Egypt’s relationship with the US has deteriorated in recent years. Thus, they have turned to the Russians, who are less likely to slap on sanctions and other restrictions. While the French were happy to sell them Rafales, they are still very much a firm US ally and would likely side with the US if push came to shove.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2019, 20:00
by milosh
icemaverick wrote:The problem for the Su-35 is that it’s radar is also very loud. As it’s not an AESA radar, aircraft with decent electronic warfare suites will easily detect the IRBIS-E radar emissions. In fact its radar emissions could probably be used against it. On top of that, it’s got a massive RCS. Plus, in the real world I’ll bet the R-77 is at a major disadvantage against the AMRAAM and Meteor.


Su-35/Rafale/MiG-35 can't hide from F-35 so all will use its radar on max setting becuase it is pointless to use LPI mode, and that is where Su-35 have much bigger advantage over Rafale or MiG-35. So it is logical to buy Su-35 when Israel get F-35.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2019, 20:11
by swiss
icemaverick wrote:The problem for the Su-35 is that it’s radar is also very loud. As it’s not an AESA radar, aircraft with decent electronic warfare suites will easily detect the IRBIS-E radar emissions. In fact its radar emissions could probably be used against it. On top of that, it’s got a massive RCS. Plus, in the real world I’ll bet the R-77 is at a major disadvantage against the AMRAAM and Meteor.


I see this the same way. Ibris-e is a strong flashlight in the dark. It's western 80s tech, on the level of a APG-70. When you look at range (200km) and resolution (3m). And According the Manufacturer, the RBE-2 AA even outrange the irbis-e. Especially in a real world battelspace with jamming conditions. And even the Mica has more range than a the R-77.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2019, 21:47
by milosh
swiss wrote:I see this the same way. Ibris-e is a strong flashlight in the dark. It's western 80s tech, on the level of a APG-70. When you look at range (200km) and resolution (3m). And According the Manufacturer, the RBE-2 AA even outrange the irbis-e. Especially in a real world battelspace with jamming conditions. Even the Mica has more range than a the R-77.


What 200km range you are writing about? N035 range is much better then that, up to 400km for 3m2 in narrow beam mode. That is better then what Chinese Flanker with AESA can it impressed Chinese.

Do you have any info about RBE-2 AESA range? All I find isn't numbers but comparison with RBE-2 PESA, they say new radar have 1000 modules and is +50% better then PESA radar, even if it is 100% better (they will surely marketing it) it isn't nothing so special.

If it have 1000 modules and if they are smilar as APG-77(V) modules (I doubt that) that is 10kW peak power and 2.5kW average power, compare that to N035 20kW peak and 5kW avarage power and there isn't any chance RBE-2 AESA outrange N035, and that is if antenna size are similar, they AREN'T.

What Dasso probable mean, Rafale with AESA will detect Su-35 earlier hten Su-35 with PESA will detect Rafale. This is nice but that mean they didn't count on fuel tanks which Rafale would need to carry to match Su-35 looting capability. I mean Rafale in CAP missions carry three supersonic fuel tanks, those things have huge impact on RCS.

Mica have better range then R-77? No it doesn't, it have same range but as basic R-77 or to be precise export variant RVV-AE:

Mica:
https://www.forecastinternational.com/a ... _RECNO=942

RVV-AE:
http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-sys ... le/rvv-ae/

RVV-SD is ~1.5x better then AE:
http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-sys ... le/rvv-sd/

Smaller electronics, longer missile (more space for fuel).

Domestic R-77 is R-77-1 which some say is RVV-SD others say it is RVV-SD with dual pulse engine.

But for Egypt missile range isn't relevant, Adir you can't engage from long distance, if you have powerful radar then it still can be lower part of BVR envelope but if radar is weak then it is already WVR so I really don't see Meteor advantage over RVV-AE/SD or AIM-120. In fact Mica would be lot better option against F-35 then Meteor.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 12 Apr 2019, 22:37
by icemaverick
milosh wrote:
icemaverick wrote:The problem for the Su-35 is that it’s radar is also very loud. As it’s not an AESA radar, aircraft with decent electronic warfare suites will easily detect the IRBIS-E radar emissions. In fact its radar emissions could probably be used against it. On top of that, it’s got a massive RCS. Plus, in the real world I’ll bet the R-77 is at a major disadvantage against the AMRAAM and Meteor.


Su-35/Rafale/MiG-35 can't hide from F-35 so all will use its radar on max setting becuase it is pointless to use LPI mode, and that is where Su-35 have much bigger advantage over Rafale or MiG-35. So it is logical to buy Su-35 when Israel get F-35.


The problem for the Su-35 is that its relatively massive radar cross section and loud radar emissions will make it a sitting duck for F-35s. With their sensor fusion capabilities, the F-35s probably wouldn't even need to turn on their radars. A big PESA will work well against other 4th gens but It would be a big liability against 5th gens and 4++ gens. Instead of being used to engage enemy fighters, the enemy fighters would use the radar emissions to engage the Su-35.

Rafales at least have AESA radars, more advanced sensor fusion, a better electronic warfare suite and reduced RCS (albeit not VLO). They still wouldn't stand much of a chance against Israeli F-35s, but they would have better odds than the Su-35. Egypt doesn't really have other options. They could only afford the Rafale due to generous financing from France and they can't afford more. Relations with the USA are too strained to get advanced American fighter jets. So their only choice is to turn to Russia and maybe China.

It's most telling that India isn't ordering more Su-30MKIs or really interested in the Su-35. They want Rafales, even though they cost a whole lot more. At the end of the day, you get what you pay for. If anybody told you they could get you a Ferrari for the price of a Hyundai, you would be skeptical. It's no different when it comes to fighters. Russia doesn't have some magical formula to produce superior aircraft at a lower price....especially when considering their low production volumes.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2019, 08:17
by milosh
icemaverick wrote:Rafales at least have AESA radars, more advanced sensor fusion, a better electronic warfare suite and reduced RCS (albeit not VLO). They still wouldn't stand much of a chance against Israeli F-35s, but they would have better odds than the Su-35. Egypt doesn't really have other options.


Rafale AESA radar is one of weakest AESA so chance it would detect F-35 for any useful range is very slim. You have much better chance with Su-35 lot more powerful PESA radar in that scenario. And in future they will upgrade Su-35 with AESA so it would have even more powerful radar.

Against non stealth Rafale is better option becuse it can use full potential of Meteor.

Su-35 RCS isn't same as Su-27 RCS, I really don't understand why people think that. You can even find what Russians did with Su-35 to reduce its RCS.

icemaverick wrote:It's most telling that India isn't ordering more Su-30MKIs or really interested in the Su-35. They want Rafales, even though they cost a whole lot more.


India don't need more Flankers because they will have around 300 Su-30MKI. They don't need more heavies, they need plane which can replace Jaguar and MiG-27 so they need good strike platform and Rafale is excellent in that role. Problem is cost and political scandal connected to Rafale deal.

On other hand Flanker isn't cheap anymore. It cost between 80-100 million. Those aren't 1990s when Russian GDP fall to less 200 billions and Flankers were sold just to Sukhoi survive (Vietnam paid for Su-30 in chicken!)

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2019, 09:39
by zero-one
Just some thoughts on why Egypt might be leaning towards Russia for hardware

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/artic ... ia-s-su-35

Egypt has repeatedly sought to acquire high end air superiority fighters - namely the American F-15 Eagle. While these aircraft were sold to Saudi Arabia and Israel in large numbers however, Egypt was restricted to purchasing the cheaper and lighter jets such as the F-16 - ensuring a balance of power which favoured the Western Bloc’s more reliable clients. Furthermore, Egypt was the only major operator of the F-16 denied modern AIM-120 air to air missiles - meaning its aircraft would face an overwhelming disadvantage in combat with those of any other U.S. client.


More at the jump

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 13 Apr 2019, 18:01
by swiss
milosh wrote:
swiss wrote:I see this the same way. Ibris-e is a strong flashlight in the dark. It's western 80s tech, on the level of a APG-70. When you look at range (200km) and resolution (3m). And According the Manufacturer, the RBE-2 AA even outrange the irbis-e. Especially in a real world battelspace with jamming conditions. Even the Mica has more range than a the R-77.


What 200km range you are writing about? N035 range is much better then that, up to 400km for 3m2 in narrow beam mode. That is better then what Chinese Flanker with AESA can it impressed Chinese.

Do you have any info about RBE-2 AESA range? All I find isn't numbers but comparison with RBE-2 PESA, they say new radar have 1000 modules and is +50% better then PESA radar, even if it is 100% better (they will surely marketing it) it isn't nothing so special.

If it have 1000 modules and if they are smilar as APG-77(V) modules (I doubt that) that is 10kW peak power and 2.5kW average power, compare that to N035 20kW peak and 5kW avarage power and there isn't any chance RBE-2 AESA outrange N035, and that is if antenna size are similar, they AREN'T.

What Dasso probable mean, Rafale with AESA will detect Su-35 earlier hten Su-35 with PESA will detect Rafale. This is nice but that mean they didn't count on fuel tanks which Rafale would need to carry to match Su-35 looting capability. I mean Rafale in CAP missions carry three supersonic fuel tanks, those things have huge impact on RCS.

Mica have better range then R-77? No it doesn't, it have same range but as basic R-77 or to be precise export variant RVV-AE:

Mica:
https://www.forecastinternational.com/a ... _RECNO=942

RVV-AE:
http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-sys ... le/rvv-ae/

RVV-SD is ~1.5x better then AE:
http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/aerospace-sys ... le/rvv-sd/

Smaller electronics, longer missile (more space for fuel).

Domestic R-77 is R-77-1 which some say is RVV-SD others say it is RVV-SD with dual pulse engine.

But for Egypt missile range isn't relevant, Adir you can't engage from long distance, if you have powerful radar then it still can be lower part of BVR envelope but if radar is weak then it is already WVR so I really don't see Meteor advantage over RVV-AE/SD or AIM-120. In fact Mica would be lot better option against F-35 then Meteor.



I talk about volume search. And there the range of the no35 is 200 km.

https://www.uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/li ... n-features

Every Radar can do cued search. This is nothing special. And i assume a AESA can do this even better than a PESA or MSA.

The Range of the RBE2 PESA is 140 km2 vs a 3m2 Traget.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2009/06/0 ... us-squall/

So add over 50 % and you have clearly more then 200 km2 range in volume search. And you know also, that a modern AESA is better under jamming conditions then a PESA. So the advantage of the RBE2 AA will be even bigger in a war scenario.

As you can see here the AE has range of 12km as a surface to air missiles.

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production/military_ ... vv-ae.html

Mica as 20 km. I think this says a lot.

https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/vl-mica/

Mica has also a IIR seeker. That non Russian IR missiles has. Also a big advantage vs a stealth plane.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 08:49
by milosh
swiss wrote:I talk about volume search. And there the range of the no35 is 200 km.
https://www.uacrussia.ru/en/aircraft/li ... n-features

Every Radar can do cued search. This is nothing special. And i assume a AESA can do this even better than a PESA or MSA.

The Range of the RBE2 PESA is 140 km2 vs a 3m2 Traget.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2009/06/0 ... us-squall/


200km for typical airborne target which is 3m2 if you look other russian radar specification. Also don't forget one important thing AESA radars need lot more cooling and Rafale is smallish fighter so it probable cool its AESA using fuel, less fuel less cooling capability and it is questionable would it really be able to achieve 140km vs 3m2 constantly. On other hand Su-35 because of PESA and its size (enough space to have decent heat exchanger) can achieve 200km vs 3m2 constantly. And of course Su-35 isn't frozen in time it will get AESA upgrade.

Also we can't overlook search area of N035 it is lot wider then RBA2:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ml_BXodzgZY/hqdefault.jpg

swiss wrote:As you can see here the AE has range of 12km as a surface to air missiles.

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production/military_ ... vv-ae.html

Mica as 20 km. I think this says a lot.

https://www.mbda-systems.com/product/vl-mica/

Mica has also a IIR seeker. That non Russian IR missiles has. Also a big advantage vs a stealth plane.


A-A range are similar plus there is RVV-SD but as it is pointless becuase Rafale have Meteor which is better missile then any other medium AAM, but Meteor would be waste against VLO targets becuase of weak fighter radar.

Mica-IR is nice but Rafale lacks powerful enough radar to use Mica-IR as BVR weapon against stealth. So Rafale will use Mica-IR in WVR and that is were Mica-IR isn't good as AIM-9X, IRIS-T, Python V or even R-74, because it lack TVC.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 18:41
by swiss
milosh wrote:
200km for typical airborne target which is 3m2 if you look other russian radar specification. Also don't forget one important thing AESA radars need lot more cooling and Rafale is smallish fighter so it probable cool its AESA using fuel, less fuel less cooling capability and it is questionable would it really be able to achieve 140km vs 3m2 constantly. On other hand Su-35 because of PESA and its size (enough space to have decent heat exchanger) can achieve 200km vs 3m2 constantly. And of course Su-35 isn't frozen in time it will get AESA upgrade.


Sorry Milosh, but this are the typical Russian Fanboys arguments. You have no prove for your statements. AESA are also more reliable the PESA Radars. And not the other way around.




milosh wrote:A-A range are similar plus there is RVV-SD but as it is pointless becuase Rafale have Meteor which is better missile then any other medium AAM, but Meteor would be waste against VLO targets becuase of weak fighter radar.

Mica-IR is nice but Rafale lacks powerful enough radar to use Mica-IR as BVR weapon against stealth. So Rafale will use Mica-IR in WVR and that is were Mica-IR isn't good as AIM-9X, IRIS-T, Python V or even R-74, because it lack TVC.


There is no official Range information from MBDA in A-A. Only surface to air. And there is a clearly range advantage for the Mica. France Air force say 100 km class missiles.

https://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/technol ... nt-air-air

So its very likely in the same ballpark then the SD.

The mica has for sure TVC.
https://www.mbda-systems.com/?action=fo ... t_id=15322
And also Datalink, HOBS and LOL capabilities. She can even hit a target behind the Rafale, when guided from an other Rafale. So the mica is superior to every existing russian IR AAM. And in the same league then AIM-9x and iris-T.

We had this discussion so many times here. I don't no why you can't accept, that Russian aircraft and weapons are behind latest western 4 gen Fighters. So get over it and accept the facts.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 19:22
by milosh
swiss wrote:
milosh wrote:Sorry Milosh, but this are the typical Russian Fanboys arguments. You have no prove for your statements. AESA are also more reliable the PESA Radars. And not the other way around.


It isn't fanboism just numbers. If you have one radar which have 145km range for 3m2 and another which have 200km for same target (you can check NIIP to see what is étalon target is).

I don't say PESA is better of course it is not but AESA doesn't automatically mean better range. After all Russians are developing AESA and plan to upgrade PESA Flankers with it at least Su-35 becuase I don't know how easy would be to replace N011M with AESA, it is lot older radar (based on N007 tech I think).

About missiles I really doubt mica which is only little heavier then AIM-9 can be 100km class missile but it really don't mean much if Rafale will detect F-35 only from close distance.

On other hand Rafale with meteor and mica is deadlier for 4gen fighters then Su-35.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 19:59
by icemaverick
milosh wrote:
icemaverick wrote:Rafales at least have AESA radars, more advanced sensor fusion, a better electronic warfare suite and reduced RCS (albeit not VLO). They still wouldn't stand much of a chance against Israeli F-35s, but they would have better odds than the Su-35. Egypt doesn't really have other options.


Rafale AESA radar is one of weakest AESA so chance it would detect F-35 for any useful range is very slim. You have much better chance with Su-35 lot more powerful PESA radar in that scenario. And in future they will upgrade Su-35 with AESA so it would have even more powerful radar.


A "weak" AESA is still superior to a PESA. The likelihood that an Su-35 will detect an F-35 at any useful range is even slimmer than a Rafale's chances. In fact, its PESA radar will allow the F-35s to send in AMRAAMs without even turning on their radar. The Su-35 also has a massive radar cross section, so it will be spotted by Israeli AWACS or ground-based radar. Also, it's a lot easier to jam a PESA radar.

Against non stealth Rafale is better option becuse it can use full potential of Meteor.


The Rafale has the Meteor, which is a superior missile against both stealthy and non-stealthy targets. It also has superior sensor fusion and network centric warfare capabilities compared to the Su-35. That would give it a better chance of engaging F-35s. But even the Rafale's chances aren't great.

Su-35 RCS isn't same as Su-27 RCS, I really don't understand why people think that. You can even find what Russians did with Su-35 to reduce its RCS.


The Su-35 has some RCS reduction measures but you're not going to reduce the RCS by the orders of magnitude necessary to make a major difference. Stealth cannot be "bolted on" after the fact. It has to be baked in to the basic design. The Rafale is not anything close VLO but it did incorporate RCS reduction measures into the design from the very beginning. The Flanker family, on the other hand, had zero RCS reduction measures when first designed. A few minor changes here and there aren't going to make a major difference....especially against advanced modern radars.

If the Su-57 is being rejected by India due to its weak stealth, I highly doubt that the Su-35 has anything resembling a decent RCS in the modern world. It certainly has a larger RCS than the Super Hornet, Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen and F-35. It probably has a larger RCS than the F-16 as well. Most likely its RCS is comparable to the F-15 at best. However, the latest F-16s and F-15s have superior sensors and missiles.

icemaverick wrote:It's most telling that India isn't ordering more Su-30MKIs or really interested in the Su-35. They want Rafales, even though they cost a whole lot more.


India don't need more Flankers because they will have around 300 Su-30MKI. They don't need more heavies, they need plane which can replace Jaguar and MiG-27 so they need good strike platform and Rafale is excellent in that role. Problem is cost and political scandal connected to Rafale deal.

On other hand Flanker isn't cheap anymore. It cost between 80-100 million. Those aren't 1990s when Russian GDP fall to less 200 billions and Flankers were sold just to Sukhoi survive (Vietnam paid for Su-30 in chicken!)


It's still far cheaper than the Rafale. Even if India doesn't need a "heavy" fighter, they could still afford way more Su-30MKIs than they could Rafales. Yet, they are willing to pay significantly more for Rafales. They must believe that there is a major advantage, otherwise they would never have bought the Rafale in the first place.

The Russian GDP is still smaller than of Italy. Their research and development budget is still very small compared to their Western competitors. While Russians can build decent airframes, their engines, avionics and missiles are inferior to Western offerings.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 20:48
by milosh
icemaverick wrote:Most likely its RCS is comparable to the F-15 at best.


Nope, Su-35 is lot better then Su-27 in therm of RCS, this is what they develop for it in early 2000s:
http://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/92 ... xcerpt.pdf
Russian researchers have developed coatings and techniques in the stealth design that can reduce the head-on RCS
of a Sukhoi Su-35 fighter aircraft by a factor of 10, thereby halving the radar range for the
target detection.


There is detailed report if you want I could look for it.

Su-27 is comparable to F-15, Su-35 have lot smaller RCS it is similar to average F-16. While it isn't good as Rafale it isn't massive as folks think. But problem with Rafale are fuel tanks. Su-35 don't need them at all, while Rafale have them during combat missions. So I am pretty sure early warning radars will detect Su-35 later then Rafale with tanks.

It's still far cheaper than the Rafale. Even if India doesn't need a "heavy" fighter, they could still afford way more Su-30MKIs than they could Rafales. Yet, they are willing to pay significantly more for Rafales. They must believe that there is a major advantage, otherwise they would never have bought the Rafale in the first place.


Well it wasn't lot cheaper last batches cost a lot, over 100 million dollars per plane. Of course part of higher cost is domestic manufacturing and option for AESA upgrade for whole Su-30MKI fleet but still it wasn't cheap as first batches India bought.

Su-30 is lot worse as multirole and if you look what was most important for Indian MRCA competition it was multirole capability. Typhoon for example scored better in A-A but lacked in A-G compared to Rafale.

I really don't want to continue arguing about radars you have numbers it is clear which radar have better range.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 21:11
by knowan
milosh wrote:I really don't want to continue arguing about radars you have numbers it is clear which radar have better range.


Which is RBE2 AESA; RBE2 PESA is 140 km vs 3 m^2 RCS, and the AESA version is claimed to have at least 50% better range, which gives it 210 km vs 3 m^2 RCS.

No35 is only 200 km vs 3 m^2 RCS.

Factor in jamming and the AESA is even more superior.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2019, 21:40
by marsavian
There is detailed report if you want I could look for it.


The more information the better. 2 to 3 sq m is generally the figure I have seen for the Su-35 with its exposed inlets which the Rafale should beat even with stores head-on. Both will not be stealthy side on. Their radars should be comparable (bigger PESA antenna Vs smaller AESA) as would be their IRSTs. Load Rafale up with 3 big tanks and the ranges would be similar. Meteor/Mica are better than Su-35 missiles. The Egyptians were vetoed SCALP cruise missiles for their Rafales by the US so I suspect it's the offensive armament of Su-35 they are really interested in coupled with its range.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2019, 18:07
by swiss
knowan wrote:
milosh wrote:I really don't want to continue arguing about radars you have numbers it is clear which radar have better range.


Which is RBE2 AESA; RBE2 PESA is 140 km vs 3 m^2 RCS, and the AESA version is claimed to have at least 50% better range, which gives it 210 km vs 3 m^2 RCS.

No35 is only 200 km vs 3 m^2 RCS.

Factor in jamming and the AESA is even more superior.


Exactly.

And Thales even says, its clearly over 50%.

https://hushkit.net/2015/06/07/the-indo ... dge-radar/

What percentage increases over PESA will the radar offer in terms of search and tracking ranges?

In terms of performance, detection range is increased by considerably more than 50% and the radar can look in many directions at the same time offering significantly enhanced tracking capabilities.


I do not know what is so difficult to understand.

And according to a Russian study the RCS of the Su-35 is 10m2

Image

https://translate.google.ch/translate?h ... STELLS.HTM

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 15 Apr 2019, 21:40
by marsavian
That is not the RCS plot of the Su-35 but a theoretical example of what RCS reduction on a Su-27 would look like.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 12:43
by mixelflick
marsavian wrote:That is not the RCS plot of the Su-35 but a theoretical example of what RCS reduction on a Su-27 would look like.


OK, but we're talking about a "clean" SU-27 and "clean" SU-35 here, correct?

What happens when you hang the much vaunted capability of 10-12 AAM's off an SU-35? Or even 6?? Some of those missiles have some BIG honking control fins (like the R-27).What's the RCS look like then???

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 14:33
by swiss
marsavian wrote:That is not the RCS plot of the Su-35 but a theoretical example of what RCS reduction on a Su-27 would look like.


Yes you are right. But this is what the Su-35 is. A Su-27 with ram coating at the airframe and canopy. Or do you now any other version of the Su-27 in service with ram? :wink:

The study is from 2003. A view years bevor the first flight of the Su-35.

mixelflick wrote:
OK, but we're talking about a "clean" SU-27 and "clean" SU-35 here, correct?

What happens when you hang the much vaunted capability of 10-12 AAM's off an SU-35? Or even 6?? Some of those missiles have some BIG honking control fins (like the R-27).What's the RCS look like then???


Correct.

Definitely more Drag and RCS increase than modern western Missiles. This is probably also the reason, why you see Su-35/30 only with 4 missiles in combat mission over Syria.

Western missiles have a frontal RCS of well under 0.1m2. So difficult to say what the R-77, R-27 or R-73 have.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 15:10
by marsavian
swiss wrote:
marsavian wrote:That is not the RCS plot of the Su-35 but a theoretical example of what RCS reduction on a Su-27 would look like.


Yes you are right. But this is what the Su-35 is. A Su-27 with ram coating at the airframe and canopy. Or do you now any other version of the Su-27 in service with ram?
The study is from 2003. A view years bevor the first flight of the Su-35.


Also Ram on the engine fan/ducts and reduced antenna size ultimately led to an order of magnitude difference between Su-27 and Su-35 i.e. ~2 vs ~20 sq m.

https://www.fighter-planes.com/stealth2.htm

Russian stealth researchers have developed materials and techniques that can reduce the head-on radar cross-section (RCS) of a Sukhoi Su-35 fighter by an order of magnitude, halving the range at which hostile radars can detect it. The research group - working with Sukhoi, but based at the Institute for Theoretical and Applied Electromagnetics (ITAE) at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow - has performed more than 100 hours of testing on a reduced-RCS Su-35 and has also experimented with the use of plasmas - ionized gases - to reduce RCS.

US and European aircraft manufacturers have used specially developed materials to reduce the RCS of basically non-stealthy aircraft for many years. Notable examples include the Have Glass and Have Glass II modifications to the F-16. However, Russian work in this area was undisclosed until ITAE researchers presented a paper to a conference on stealth in London in late October 2003, which was organized by the International Quality and Productivity Centre.

According to the ITAE presentation, Russian researchers have developed mathematical tools that can calculate scattering from complex configurations, such as an Su-35 carrying a full external missile load, by breaking them down into small facets and adding the effects of edge waves and surface currents. The antennas are modelled separately and then are added to the entire RCS picture.

"A problem of huge size" is how the researchers describe the Su-35 inlet, with a straight duct that provides direct visibility to the entire face of the engine compressor. The basic solution has been to apply ferro-magnetic radar absorbent material (RAM) to the compressor face and to the inlet duct walls, but this involves challenges. The researchers note: the material cannot be allowed to constrict airflow or impede the operation of anti-icing systems and must withstand high-speed airflows and temperatures up to 200°C. The ITAE team has developed and tested coating materials that meet these standards. A layer of RAM between 0.7mm and 1.4mm thick is applied to the ducts and a 0.5mm coating is applied to the front stages of the low-pressure compressor, using a robotic spray system. The result is a 10-15dB reduction in the RCS contribution from the inlets.

The modified Su-35 also has a treated cockpit canopy which reflects radar waves, concealing the high RCS contribution from metal components in the cockpit. ITAE has developed a plasma-deposition process to deposit alternating layers of metallic and polymer materials, creating a coating that blocks radio-frequency waves, is resistant to cracking and crazing and does not trap solar heat in the cockpit. The plasma-coating process is then carried out robotically in a 22 m3 vacuum chamber.

ITAE and its partners have also developed plasma-type technology for applying ceramic coatings to the exhaust and afterburner. The conference video also showed the use of hand-held sprays to apply RAM to R-27 air-to-air missiles.


Image

Image

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 17:14
by swiss
marsavian wrote:Also Ram on the engine fan/ducts and reduced antenna size ultimately led to an order of magnitude difference between Su-27 and Su-35 i.e. ~2 vs ~20 sq m.



Well the Russian researchers can tell a lot on a conference. :wink: The study is from the same year and say 50 % lower RCS. And has the same RCS Reduces as they claim at the conference.

Which is much more realistic. Boeing and Dassault claims also 1 order of magnitude lower RCS for the Super hornet ( compare to the F/A-18) and Rafale( compare to the Mirage 2000). And they did a lot more than to spray some ram coating on the airframe. New air intakes, Radarblockers, S-ducts, serrated patterns on the trailing edges of the wings and canards. Use of composite materials. The Su-35 has nothing of this RCS reducing features compare to the Su-27/30.The Engines blades of the Su-35 are still fully visible. Which increase the frontal RCS a lot.

BTW if the Su-35 has a RCS of 2 m2 that would be nearly same level than the Su-57. Which has a RCS of 0.1-1 m2. :wink:

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 17:27
by marsavian
One is a theoretical study on which you are eyeballing and averaging the end result of very thick dashed lines, the other is actual detailed work on the airframe giving precise numbers. That Su-57 number is also for the frontal shape alone before RAM. RAM can reduce your RCS by order(s) of magnitude if you are prepared to take the weight hit.

A layer of RAM between 0.7mm and 1.4mm thick is applied to the ducts and a 0.5mm coating is applied to the front stages of the low-pressure compressor, using a robotic spray system. The result is a 10-15dB reduction in the RCS contribution from the inlets.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 17:54
by swiss
marsavian wrote:One is a theoretical study on which you are eyeballing and averaging the end result of very thick dashed lines, the other is actual detailed work on the airframe giving precise numbers.


Well that's your opinion. You can see at the diagram 1 is bit more then 20m2. 2 its nearly 10m2. And this was posted years ago in this forum. So its not only my opinion. :wink:

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=16457&start=450

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=16457&start=435

marsavian wrote:That Su-57 number is also for the frontal shape alone before RAM. RAM can reduce your RCS by order(s) of magnitude if you are prepared to take the weight hit.


Who said that?

And as far as i know, shape is the most imported factor for stealth.

And you really believe sukhoi can do the same RCS reduction ( 1 order of magnitude) like Boeing and Dassault only with ram coating. And full visible engines blades. Boeing who developed F-22 btw.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 20:20
by marsavian
swiss wrote:Who said that?


http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf

And you really believe sukhoi can do the same RCS reduction ( 1 order of magnitude) like Boeing and Dassault only with ram coating.


You can get an order of magnitude RCS reduction with any RAM as long as you are prepared to take the weight hit i.e. F-117's RAM overcoat cost it 2000lb of weight. The Russians have already said they got 10-15 dBsm less from the standard inlets which is your order of magnitude reduction. Shape gets you lower RCS without a weight penalty which is why it's the first order design point for stealth aircraft but RAM can get you there too, why do you think F-22/F-35 RAM maintenance is so crucial for their day to day running, it's the RAM that smooths out the big spikes at some angles leading to a more uniform RCS reduction beyond the basic LO shape.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 16 Apr 2019, 23:07
by swiss
marsavian wrote:
swiss wrote:Who said that?


http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jatm/v8n1/1984 ... 1-0040.pdf


And where in this study its mentioned that the prototypes of the Su-57 have an RCS of 0.5 m2 without ram coating. And if, from where should they know that?

BTW the patens about the stealth features from the Su-57 from sukhoi says the opposite.

https://web.archive.org/web/20141023114 ... -published

with the intention being to reduce the size of the RCS in the T-50 to an "average figure of 0.1-1 m 2 ".

In common with other low observable aircraft designs, this reduction is achieved throught the use of radar-absorbing and radar-shielding materials and coatings, panel shaping (especially around the air intakes) and in the design of the junctions between moving elements, such as flaps and hatches.


You see here also what an effort they did, to reduce the RCS of under 1m2.

marsavian wrote:You can get an order of magnitude RCS reduction with any RAM as long as you are prepared to take the weight hit i.e. F-117's RAM overcoat cost it 2000lb of weight. The Russians have already said they got 10-15 dBsm less from the standard inlets which is your order of magnitude reduction. Shape gets you lower RCS without a weight penalty which is why it's the first order design point for stealth aircraft but RAM can get you there too, why do you think F-22/F-35 RAM maintenance is so crucial for their day to day running, it's the RAM that smooths out the big spikes at some angles leading to a more uniform RCS reduction beyond the basic LO shape.


Well you give the answer for you self. 2000lb of weight increase. So that would mean the Su-35 must be clearly heavier then the Su-30. which is not the case. According this study ( 4 last page) To reduce RCS about -10dbsm vs 8-12 Ghz (frequency where a fighter Radar operates) you need a layer of 9,5mm .

https://web.archive.org/web/20140221205 ... h_Part.pdf

And you think the Russian can do this with a coating thickness of roughly 1mm or even lower. Thy are over 2 decades behind the U.S. in stealth technology. In even this would be true. The visible engine blades would ruin your RCS reduction in the frontal hemisphere. Why do you think latest 4 gen like EF, SH or Rafale have hidden engine faces? If the russian ubercoating is so good, the could spray it on there airframes and the -10-15dbsm reduction is done. No S-duct, no inlet changes, no composite materials and no serrated patterns. Or the the USAF could used it on there F-15 to reduce the RCS from 20 to 1 m2.

Its an open secret, that the russian are very optimistic, with the capability of there military products.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2019, 03:29
by firebase99
As we all know spinning turbofan blades are like a bright beacon of light in regards to radar returns. I dont care what kind of RAM you got, you see those big fellas spinning- youre a glowing target.

Re: US warns Egypt over Russian Su-35 fighter jets deal

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2019, 13:40
by mixelflick
I believe there was some RCS reduction done on the SU-35, just not as much as the Russians would have us believe. I also think they're continuing to do that on the SU-57. The problem is that they started with a super-maneuverable airplane, then attempted to bolt stealth onto it.

Whereas the F-22 and F-35 started with stealth as a given, its most important attribute. The fact that both are super-maneuverable is a testament to the engineers working on them.

Had the Russians done the same, the PAK FA would have taken a lot longer IMO. They knew going that route would result in delays, if not outright never getting there. So they engineered what they understood, what their fighters are best known for. I think on balance, they've done OK.

Problem being that 2nd best in air combat = Dead. There's no silver medal...