Su-30SM is considerably worse than the other 14.0’s
- it has worse RWR angles, only 30 vertical degrees compared to 45 on F-16 and F-15’s, full 360 degrees on EF and Rafales alongside MAW systems. You have a very big blind spots that you can get shot at but not notice on RWR.
-
R-77-1 only slightly increases the range, it’s still way worse than the AMRAAMs. Especially hitting at turning and notching targets because of it’s high drag. Even though R-77-1 has more speed than AMRAAMS on paper, because of the platform’s speed it’s launched from, AMRAAMS will still win in a BVR.
-
It has only 96x countermeasures, considering you’re only good at low ranges, you have to carry a lot of flares too, which further reduces your chaff carry amount.
-
Engines are the ones from the regular Su-27 but heavier with thrust vectoring addition and thrust is lower than the Su-27SM. So you can see how terrible it’s Thrust to Weight ratio is compared to even the previous flanker, yet alone the other 14.0’s. F-15E can go mach 2 and maintain it while turning, Eurofighters and Rafale can supercruise without the afterburner. Flankers on the other hand are not only worse at turning at high speeds but also lose a ton of speed while turning too.
-
Thrust Vectoring is a gimmick at best, sure it works in a 1v1 but how often does this actually happen? One in 5-6 matches at best where you’re actually left alone and isn’t bombarded by gazilion Fox 3’s at your way. Not to mention you’re completely vulnerable after doing this, just falling out of the sky not being able to do anything. In Fox 3 era where high speed is the meta, low speed manevourability isn’t gonna save you, it’s gonna be the death of you.
These and many more disadvantages are the reason why I think it should get the engine upgrade and possibly more countermeasures (if it actually carried more IRL).
12 Likes
Well he aint wrong about the engines, the upgraded ones would probably help a bit for acceleration so you arent last in battle cuz its all Eurofighters and F15E lol
2 Likes
I rather have them fix the Energy retention and drag than have a mashup Su-30SM
3 Likes
What better engines could it possibly get??
Issue is that there are no upgraded engines
Gaijin could upgrade Su-30SM to the SM2, just like how Su-27SM got the double pylons from Su-27SM2
3 Likes
Not from Su-27SM2, but from Su-35S.
1 Like
As did the Su-30SM and the Kh-38 with it witch is a buff already that we have no proof of them using
Not sure that KH-38MT was spotted on Su-35s
Yea that’s kinda nuts, Su-30SM shouldn’t have gotten the Kh-38MT’s, Kh-29TD’s were more than enough already to make it a competent CAS
1 Like
There a Photo of an Su-35S (Red 24) carrying 2 Kh-38 on stations 9 and 10 missiles for testing
The pylons are something that can be used on any platform carrying underfuselage R-77s, though the Su-30SM2 is an entirely different aircraft.
If you’d like to implement the 4th most advanced radar in the world just because 125kN per engine isn’t enough power to you, have fun embarrassing yourself.
Su-30SM has no upgraded engine options. SM2 has an intent to use the new variant of the thrust vectoring Saturn engine, but that’s it.
F-15C also goes mach 2 and maintains it while turning.
Its Strongest Rocket on real distance battle… Statshark in help.
Its Big Countermeasure its x2 from normal 96x2=192
And so?
SU-30SM on dev now its strongest plane with Rafale.
He dont need Buffs.
1 Like
no, just have tvc on a toggle
Nah bro… the 30sm very good plane. Just the CM count and the engine thrust incorrect.
Correct CM count is 192 and the correct engine thrust 25.000kgf so 2x 12.500 with max burner.
All page says same thing… 12.500 the correct at this engine
2 Likes
CM amount is correct. You always can count amount of CM on plane.
Thrust is also correct, 12500kgf is without channel losses, so, right.
