The low production run + the extreme trchnological complexity for the time was the reason. If it was produced and redesigned today it would be cheaper and better it just doesnt make sense to do so as it the replacement is well on its way.
And no its not a status simble its meant to insure American air superiority in the even of a war, which it undoubtedly would have, the assumption that it was kever the best jet hinges on your definition of “best jet”. Most definetly was the best air superiority aircraft but its a very specialized aircraft.
And no not really, thrust vectoring can be good for dogfights, you just need the engine power to counter some of the speed bleed. Dogfights are fairly irrelevant which is why at the end of the day TVC is only a tool to get planes up in the air faster.
R73s in war thunder have irccm which im not sure irl r73s had before the m) Every missile in war thunder is gimped, ive never had a single r73 spin out in the air personally and i find it to be a great missile(like it over aim9m personally).
Also modern fox 2s dont need to get their nose on target, iris t, python 5 and aam 5 are all capable off close to 360° offbore launches.
I remember reading a report from the PLAAF on the benefits of TVC and they found (using J10C’s against Su35S’s) that having HMD and a high off-bore missile was just… more effective than TVC was, and isn’t worth the additional weight and downsides that causes. No modern projects from anyone are using TVC for late 5th gen or 6th gen designs i’ve seen, outside the russkies.
That Fake. In the exercises in 2008 MKIs destroy USA toys. One USA general try to put face and comment a lot of BS. That late were denied by Indian and USA has to stop with that crap. Like that time when F-22 lose against RAFALE.
Must fun shit was that Indian pilot were almost newbies.
Su-30sm preforms much better in real life than in war thunder, there isn’t much argument to be made about this, it’s just common sense that the super-maneuverable aircraft irl should be super-maneuverable in game, imo it should feel like a heavier version of the F-2000 but with the benefits of tvc and canards. And since people were asking for sources and telling me to watch actual demonstration videos of the Su-30sm, here you go, lol.
The Indian pilots of the Su-30mki (export Su-30sm) have done combat exercises with NATO aircraft such as the F-15, F-2000, and F-22 and the Su-30sm outright beats them in dogfights most times.
Also, I’d like to mention the AOA button for a second, it feels super unoptimized for the game, and especially for the Su-30sm, honestly it’s the most uncontrollable aircraft in game that I’ve flown, I hope they fix it soon.
Like I said, “the Su-30 and F/A-18 should be equal in flight performance, with the Su-30 being better in 1 circle with its thrust vectoring, and the F/A-18 better in 2 circle with its sustained rate and energy retention” not to mention its low speed stability which is seemingly missing from the Su-30sm flight model
“The exercises included both Beyond Visual Range (BVR) and Within Visual Range (WVR) exercises between the Su-30MKI and Eurofighter Typhoon. Indian media reported the results were in favour of the IAF with a score of 12–0 at WVR engagements.”
“The first week of the exercises pitted the Su-30, which NATO calls the Flanker, in a series of aerial dogfight scenarios. First, there were 1 v 1 encounters, where a single jet of each type engaged each other in Within Visual Range (WVR) combat, firing simulated missiles to a range of two miles. The exercises progressed to 2 v 2 engagements with two Eurofighters taking on two Su-30s and 2 v 1 exercises where two Sukhois took on a single Typhoon and vice versa. Notably, in the exercise where a lone Su-30 was engaged by two Typhoons, the IAF jet emerged the victor ‘shooting’ down both ‘enemy’ jets. So, not only held the Su-30s an edge on the Typhoons on 1 vs 1 and 2 vs 2, but even when a Sukhoi flew against two Typhoons, it managed to shoot down both enemies.“
Developers don’t accept these types of narrations. They prefer sources where hard numbers are given such as sustained turn rate or instantaneous turn rate. These accounts are rightly not considered as sources. The A-10C has beaten the F-22 in a dogfight, so surely the A-10C is the supreme dogfighter right? Or the fact that Eurofighter and Rafales had beaten the F-22 in dogfights?
A spokesperson for the RAF just said:
“Our analysis does not match what has been reported, RAF pilots and the Typhoon performed well throughout the exercise with and against the Indian Air Force. Both forces learnt a great deal from the exercise and the RAF look forward to the next opportunity to train alongside the IAF.”
If you read the article I posted as my evidence, you’d understand that the combat exercises preformed between the IAF Su-30sm’s and F-2000 were conducted to simulate BVR engagements and WVR engagements (dogfights), so to play to your reasoning, sure it is he said she said about the performance of these aircraft, but when you put them against each other in 1v1-2v1-2v2 dogfights against NATOs top one circle fighters and they get outright sweeped, it’s pretty obvious that the Su-30sm is underperforming in game.
I’ve seen this, like I said, he said she said, but pilots from both sides have admitted that both aircraft are very equal, and it comes down to pilot skill when in dogfights.
You don’t seem to be reading much of what I’m saying, and providing silly statements to disagree with my points with no true fruit to your words, I see no point in arguing about this with you if you’re clearly not going to pay attention to anything I’m saying lol, just disagree and move on, because I really don’t care about you trying to argue your way through my evidence. Again if you read what I’m saying, you’d see I’m not disagreeing with you, I saw the article you sent me before I made my comments, pilots from both sides have stated that the aircraft (F-2000 and Su-30sm) are almost identical in a dogfight, and that it comes down to the pilots skill, I am not verifying what the IAF has said as 100% fact, but I’m using it as a base reference to prove my point that it is underperforming in game, but instead you’re too busy trying to argue with me instead of having genuine conversation, and saying that because the A-10 can out dogfight an F-22 that the A-10 is a “supreme dogfighter” to try and make some nothing statement to me. I see no point in continuing the conversation.
I’m saying that it’s obvious that the Su-30sm is underperforming if pilots from both sides regard them as equals in a dogfight or WVR engagement, you’re quite literally trying to disprove something I’m not even saying, are you just here to argue? Nowhere have I said that what the IAF said was a fact, I was just using the reports from the pilots as a basis for my reasoning as to why I believe the Su-30sm is underperforming in game.
