Multiplication is inversely proportional to division.And if I multiply by a linear coefficient A(k), then I must divide by a linear coefficient
Before Mach 0.9
the coefficient is static as.Then it is linear
Oswald static=0.751 for Su-27
1 Like
Not too sure.
The first iteration of the Flanker was already at 120° before the point of stall. At stall would be much higher. This analysis of Pugahchev’s demonstration at the 1989 Paris airshows states that there was no tendency for the aircraft to roll or departure at 100-120°indicating the aircraft was not near its stall point.
Proof the Mig-29 is supermaneuverable but GJ is playing games. Making up excuses about flight controls etc. This is why I want the R-27ER removed from it. To force them to do something about the FM.
The literal director of Центра́льный аэрогидродинами́ческий институ́т, ЦАГИ states the Mig-29 is capable. Western sources do too.
But the graph in the picture is not linear
And what is he like?
y=kx+b
The individual components are smaller and lighter, but the designers and engineers don’t like wasted space. So they add more trinkets and doodats which needs more wiring and more complex installations which usually always means the end result is the plane gains a lot of weight.
1 Like
The Mig-29 is vastly lighter, with a substantial higher thrust to weight.
The Mig-29 is vastly more simplified than the Flanker. Even its brakes are actually pneumatic… there is nothing complex about the Mig-29 & this was a major selling point of Mikoyan to export clients.
“Trinkets & doodats” is a theory not in line with any truth. Appreciate it, though.
1 Like
1 Like
Because the MiG-29 had different requirements.By the time of deployment, preparation, maintenance and costs
The R-27R & ER is an outdated weapon system but the T & especially the ET are very advanced. Su-35s use the ET’s still.
Thank you so much, bit It is not 1G stal condition, it is rapid nose up maneuver - overshoot AoA in very small time - for very experinced pilots.
1 Like
Regardless of it still is very capable of hitting 90 degrees angles of attack. It cannot come near it in game with any Mig-29 variant flown min fuel with zero weapons in full real controls. That is definitely not correct.
Yeah, that why I said its definitely capable of over 120 since that is the degree before any sign of stall. That is why I highlighted that particular airshow because there is no actual true example of set degree at stall.
I provided what evidence is available for you to determine what you think it may be at stall. Definitely over 120.
Perhaps if the onset of AoA is at 1G, the stall will occur much sooner.
Ok, let’s suppose A(x) can be written as kx+b. Let’s first try to fit it. First, at Mach = 0, i.e. at x = 0
we have 0.21 = A(0) = k\cdot 0 + b = b, so we have b = 0.21.
Next. at x = 0.5 we have 0.21 = A(0.5) = k\cdot 0.5 + 0.21, meaning k = 0.
Seems like we have found our k and b, let’s check if it works somewhere else. Say, x = 1.5
A(1.5) = 0\cdot 1.5 + 0.21 = 0.21 \neq 0.37.5.
What??
Oh no, what a disaster, it does not match.
I wonder whyyyyyyy.
OH OH OH, I know, I KNOW. Could it maybe be because it is NOT A GOD DAMN STRAIGHT LINE???
For me, lose R-27R & R-27T from Su-27SM
Su-27SM3, Su-30SM, Su-30SM2 and Su-35S not armed R-27R & R-27T
You don’t need to start from 0.And from 0.9 . To 0.9, the line is straight there are no functions
Maybe my eyes are really bad, but even there the line is not entirely straight. It curves upward from 0.75
and also is slightly curved before that. I imagine even such a small change in a coefficient would result in a decent different in performance.
No, it wouldn’t.The values are very small.You have more Cl input because it is squared
Linear
4.11.2 Stall and spin.
Stall.
The aircraft enters stall modes only as a result of the following piloting errors:
- overboosting the ODA and exceeding α limit ( 24 AoA for Su 27 SK)
- loss of speed less than 200 km/h if the recommendations of paragraph 4.11.1 are not followed.
Exceeding the α allowance by 3° ( 24+3 AoA?) results in involuntary small amplitude roll and heading oscillations. When performing intensive manoeuvring with the achievement of these angles of attack at flight speeds less than 450-500 km/h, the nose of the aircraft drifts. Further increase in the angle of attack leads to an increase in the intensity of these phenomena. At angles of attack exceeding the allowable angles of attack by 8°-14° (24 maximum +14 AoA - 38 Aoa MAX), stall occurs (significantly increased amplitude of oscillations or aircraft roll and heading).
Stall recovery should be performed by immediately setting the pitch control stick to the neutral position (1/4-1/3 of a turn beyond the neutral position away from yourself), and roll contro lstick to the neutral position with the pedals in the neutral position. During stall recovery, the aircraft may go into a corkscrew.
Сваливание.
Самолет выходит на режимы сваливания только в результате следующих ошибок в пилотировании:
− пересиливания ОПР и превышения α доп.;
− потери скорости менее 200 км/ч при невыполнении рекомендаций пункта 4.11.1.
При превышении α доп. на 3° ( 24+3 AoA?)возникают непроизвольные колебания небольшой амплитуды по крену и курсу. При выполнении энергичного маневрирования с достижением этих углов атаки на скоростях полета менее 450-500 км/ч возникает увод носа самолета. Дальнейшее увеличение угла атаки приводит к увеличению интенсивности указанных явлений. На углах атаки, превышающих допустимые углы на 8°-14° ( 24+maximum 14 AoA - 38 Aoa MAX), происходит сваливание (значительно увеличивается амплитуда колебаний или увод самолета по крену и курсу).
Вывод из сваливания выполнять немедленной установкой ручки управления по тангажу в стриммированное положение (1/4-1/3 хода за нейтральное положение от себя), по крену – в нейтральное положение при нейтральном положении педалей. При выводе из сваливания возможен переход самолета в штопор.