Is the PL-15 this good?

[Vmans]

I come here again seeking assistance,
I am currently simulating a deep strike with a Rafale-B fighters(A2A escort) and Su-30Mki (strike package) of the Indian air force and against a forward air base in Tibet region and had simulated it such that I maintain a persistent CAP of 1 flight of 3X J-20 with internal only loadout of PL-15s, I cannot get within detection range of either the missiles of the J-20 before my strike package of Su-30s are picked off, i really want to be within confirm kill radius of my Brahmos-A's, on top of which I also cannot get AEWACS in range due to those darn PL-15s.
All I have to show for is this:

SIDE: 1
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x J-20B Fagin


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
11x CH-AA-10 Abaddon [PL-15]
6x CH-AA-7C Adze [PL-12C]
1x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]



SIDE: 2
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x EMB-145I AEWC
3x Rafale C
5x Su-30MKI Mk2 Flanker H


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
8x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
8x Meteor

[caelunshun]

You're putting a very capable and stealthy aircraft (J-20) against strike aircraft that are a full generation behind, so this is an outcome that I would expect.

[Kushan04]

As Caelunshun said, this is the results I would expect. 4th generation aircraft don’t survive against fifth gen fighters supported by AEW&C aircraft. Add the longer range of the PL-15 into the mix and you get a no win all around.

[BDukes]

Indian SU-30s have suffered from very long development and integration programs. They are just getting jamming pods which will help a lot in the OPs engagement. The Super-30 program is happening very slowly (Aesa radars, digital cockpits, etc. etc.). I get why they want self-sufficiency but lot of their stuff is license built (Israeli etc). Even the new jamming pods seem very similar to their russian counterparts with a few key specs.

I would explore other tactics then strickly going head to head.

M

[tylerblakebrandon]

I think the other posters have it. 4th Gen needs to be created against and integrated adversary with AWACS supported 5th Gen fighters. Terrain masking, EW, maximization of standoff capability, and kill chain disruption are going to be necessary.

[Vmans]

Thank you all for your inputs,
I do believe it is critical for me to stress upon the objectives for which this Sim was tried (something I failed to mention previously):
the primary objective was to cripple FOB's of the PLAF in the region as essentially a roundabout means of degrading persistent CAP coverage in the area,
and if possible the secondary objectives were to turn the airspace from RED to contested airspace, and I do believe that loss of airframes in such a mission is expected but I cannot shake off a loss like this.
the only semi successful tactic I found was using Radar decoys and heavy OECM to absorb missiles and to keep ground based SAM's occupied allowing strike packages to slip through and provide a buffer till CAP replenishment arrives. This window helps at degrading local armor presence easing the field for ground forces.
Is there any particular way in which You would approach this?
I am all ears

[BDukes]

Thank you all for your inputs,
I do believe it is critical for me to stress upon the objectives for which this Sim was tried (something I failed to mention previously):
the primary objective was to cripple FOB's of the PLAF in the region as essentially a roundabout means of degrading persistent CAP coverage in the area,
and if possible the secondary objectives were to turn the airspace from RED to contested airspace, and I do believe that loss of airframes in such a mission is expected but I cannot shake off a loss like this.
the only semi successful tactic I found was using Radar decoys and heavy OECM to absorb missiles and to keep ground based SAM's occupied allowing strike packages to slip through and provide a buffer till CAP replenishment arrives. This window helps at degrading local armor presence easing the field for ground forces.
Is there any particular way in which You would approach this?
I am all ears

Lower your ground attack group's altitude so as not to make yourself an ideal target. Perhaps separate groups on different axes to (hopefully) draw the defenders off or at least split them up. I say this knowing how difficult that might be if you have no idea what their positions are.

M

[tylerblakebrandon]

Thank you all for your inputs,
I do believe it is critical for me to stress upon the objectives for which this Sim was tried (something I failed to mention previously):
the primary objective was to cripple FOB's of the PLAF in the region as essentially a roundabout means of degrading persistent CAP coverage in the area,
and if possible the secondary objectives were to turn the airspace from RED to contested airspace, and I do believe that loss of airframes in such a mission is expected but I cannot shake off a loss like this.
the only semi successful tactic I found was using Radar decoys and heavy OECM to absorb missiles and to keep ground based SAM's occupied allowing strike packages to slip through and provide a buffer till CAP replenishment arrives. This window helps at degrading local armor presence easing the field for ground forces.
Is there any particular way in which You would approach this?
I am all ears

Are you using any kinetic methods to degrade ground based AD, i.e. ARMs?

[Vmans]

Are you using any kinetic methods to degrade ground based AD, i.e. ARMs?

I usually avoid SEAD missions when in contested airspace, it is a capability I am yet to develop.
even so the Sim is set up such that there are 2 SAM Bty's of HQ-16 with a 50% probability of appearing each,
an ARM strike would be easily intercepted given I have access only to the KH-31P(https://cmano-db.com/weapon/276/) from my Flankers.
Would ELINT have any use here?

[tylerblakebrandon]

Are you using any kinetic methods to degrade ground based AD, i.e. ARMs?

I usually avoid SEAD missions when in contested airspace, it is a capability I am yet to develop.
even so the Sim is set up such that there are 2 SAM Bty's of HQ-16 with a 50% probability of appearing each,
an ARM strike would be easily intercepted given I have access only to the KH-31P(https://cmano-db.com/weapon/276/) from my Flankers.
Would ELINT have any use here?

ELINT could standoff further back than an AWACS and still potentially be able to locate SAMs and Radars that yo strikes can avoid and also be a bit buffered somewhat against PRC VLRAAMs. That info could let you plan some SEAD strikes that take advantage of terrain masking and let your ARM shooters fly very low in the ground clutter to get close enough to shoot.

I this scenario is going to require a well coordinated use of AWACS, OECM, ELINT, and terrain masking to get 4th Gen into scoring position.

[Tcao]

Can you please share your scenario? It sounds like a very challenging scenario and I like challenge.

Undoubtedly, you are the technologically inferior side. In this kind of engagement, the only hope lies in making up for it through tactics and sheer numbers.

It seems that the side you're controlling doesn't even have a numerical advantage. Perhaps on paper there's a slight numerical edge, but you have to split your forces between attack and escort roles.

The only solution I can think of is to abandon using the Rafale for close escort of the Su-30s. Instead, have the Rafales approach from another direction in small batches, repeatedly advancing and withdrawing to draw the J-20s toward a secondary direction. Meanwhile, the Su-30MKKs go full speed to enter firing position, launch their AGM, and then retreat at maximum speed.

at least this tactic should trick the AI, but when facing a human opponent in the future (if we can have PBEM implemented in CMO very soon) , this tactic has a low chance to success

[Tcao]

Are you using any kinetic methods to degrade ground based AD, i.e. ARMs?

I usually avoid SEAD missions when in contested airspace, it is a capability I am yet to develop.
even so the Sim is set up such that there are 2 SAM Bty's of HQ-16 with a 50% probability of appearing each,
an ARM strike would be easily intercepted given I have access only to the KH-31P(https://cmano-db.com/weapon/276/) from my Flankers.
Would ELINT have any use here?

J-20's AESA radar has LPI mode, it is going to be very hard to intercept its signal . And India don't have good ELINT aircraft.

[Vmans]

Can you please share your scenario? It sounds like a very challenging scenario and I like challenge.

Undoubtedly, you are the technologically inferior side. In this kind of engagement, the only hope lies in making up for it through tactics and sheer numbers.

It seems that the side you're controlling doesn't even have a numerical advantage. Perhaps on paper there's a slight numerical edge, but you have to split your forces between attack and escort roles.

The only solution I can think of is to abandon using the Rafale for close escort of the Su-30s. Instead, have the Rafales approach from another direction in small batches, repeatedly advancing and withdrawing to draw the J-20s toward a secondary direction. Meanwhile, the Su-30MKKs go full speed to enter firing position, launch their AGM, and then retreat at maximum speed.

at least this tactic should trick the AI, but when facing a human opponent in the future (if we can have PBEM implemented in CMO very soon) , this tactic has a low chance to success

The ELINT tip was accurate and could not get an accurate lock,
but sadly that sim was part of a random sandbox where I try weird stuff and I have since moved on,
I did try it with the PL-12 loadout and had a much better time as an attacker.