Of course you don’t see the contribution. You think only 4th generation fighters are capable of supermaneuvrability & think its only done on paper…
You also seriously think the F-18 has better control over the Su-27. Control as in what? in landing & taking off from a boat?
Ok sure. But then you have the Su-27K which still does that better and does not need a catapult to launch. That is how powerful these aircraft are over the F-18. Nothing about the F-18 can top the aerodynamic design of the Su-27. Nothing.
@BBCRF does the latest MiG-29 not delete these engine vents? Do the latest Sukhoi models use them?
I believe the answer is no… @Ziggy1989
Funnily enough, your description of how or what these vents are used for is erroneous as well.
This is indeed the Su-27 topic, perhaps we can discuss the meaning of the various vents around the intake nacelles and what they do in order to rectify this misunderstanding.
Additionally, while the F/A-18 does not use the center of the body for additional lifting the same fashion as the F-14 or Su-27, instead it places the engines directly next to one another and has additional wing-body space on the side of the nacelles before the wings extend out. The aircraft has quite a lot of wing, a lower sweep angle… it was intended to (and does) have better handling at higher AoA than the Su-27 with the exception of momentary maneuvers such as the Cobra. It must be said though that such maneuvers are not reversible or ‘controlled’ in the same fashion as the F-18’s high alpha capabilities because once started they must be followed through.
This entails the F-22, 35, J-20, Su-57 and KF-21 correct?
Though we obviously don’t truly know but the F-35A is not super maneuverable right?
Also for the second Q.
Isn’t Russias doctrine by heart in the 4th gen scene clearly to prioritize super maneuverability over anything compared to NATO doctrine which seems to be more bvr focused?
Just very curious to your take on these questions! Answer when you can bro! :D
You are so uneducated & keep getting smacked around by me I am starting to feel bad.
These vents were so important that the Americans copied the design & implemented them in this fighter them in this fighter. The automatic opening & closing at angles of attack.
Not the F-35 all evidence in its aerodynamic layout (though it’s got a vicious thrust) is capable. I believe I can find US pilots mentioning it too.
The KF-21 might as it is a dual engine setup with everything else, but no TVC that I am aware. I do not know what kind of thrust its working with or how quickly its max thrust & AB is engaged. Some aircraft have high thrust to weights but must slowly & judicially engage the throttle to max.
The General Electric F110-GE-400 have this issue in the Tomcat.
The first one certainly does. The F-15 isn’t in the game because we’re talking about maneuverability and achieving AoA, that’s why there’s the Light Hornet and the Heavy Su 27, nothing but academic debate and a bit of childishness in there. If we continue with the F-15, it is also maneuverable in high AoA of course it is in a different league than the Sukhoi but still pretty good and in practice sufficient.
You mentioned the F-18 having better control above 24° AoA than the Su-27, have you read into the F-35? I’ve heard it has a soft limit of 55° that it can float around at and maintain. It’s done so at airshows fairly regularly.
The F-18Cis light??? How so? It gained almost 10,000 pounds to become carrier worthy from the YF-17 without a single upgrade to its engines…
You do know they need to structurally strengthen the landing gears & airframe, right? That they also need to equip a beefy strong landing hook.
The Su-27 is heavy, strong & already had the strength to land in dirt fields my guy. Do you also have any idea how powerful the Saturn AL-31F engines are?
What about the Klimov RD-33 of the Mig-29?
Another thing about the Soviets… Say what you want about their radars etc.
But engines are another thing besides aerodynamics they know very well how to make. Also, Ballistic Rockets. They can design those in their sleep. They do not have to make 700 variants either of one engine type like the West.
You cannot win this argument my friend. Not while using the F-18 of any variant as your reference. I would just stop mentioning that aircraft altogether here. But it’s up to you.
They are modelled correctly in the Mig-29 of WT. They operate on angle of attack. Same as the F-22.
Did that look like “very low speed” flight to you?
Just try to play the game & stop trying to trip up a man who you are not equipped to debate on these subjects. You are obsessed with trying to look for holes in my post.
They are called dual mode intakes. The Mig-29 is the first in the world. The top vents are called intake louvers. The louvers operation is dictated on angle of attack & airspeed. Does not matter if Mig-29M had them or not.
It’s a design that was copied by the Americans & implemented in the F-22 Raptor :)
This technology & others like it are critical in supermaneuverable capable fighters.
