Pretty cool.
But is it a Flanker?
China has the money; they have the “nonexistent” J-20B :)
Right @MiG_23M?
The Flanker is just not replaceable at this time.
Who said this? I said Flanker is here to stay like the F-15 :)
Its actually Better then Flanker in two circle.
Flanker designed to be long range missile bus with supermaneuverability, Mig29 designed to be frontline fighter.
Usa has also shit ton of money but i dont see any replacement for F-15s nor F-22s.
Also J-20B doesnt exist aside from prototypes, its a twinseat version of J-20A thats still under development.
2 Likes
For energy, it depends on how much energy was exchanged for the turn in, it’s not an easy number to pin down since dogfights are fluid. I wouldn’t be able to provide numbers for either aircraft for the first turn in, so I generally focus on mass then T/W ratios, to which the F-15 is slightly lighter, allowing better sustained performance since the T/W ratios are roughly similar from a glance. It especially becomes more prevalent when aircraft go to higher AoA, as aircraft with heavier mass will have greater difficulty moving to the direction they are pointing to. This is, at least, how I understand the basics, there is significantly more nuance to it.
I wasn’t focusing on simulated kills, since if it is just based on missile launch, even a missile that would not be reasonably able to track and kill its target would be counted as a kill regardless.
China struggles quite a bit in the military export market and making new airframes is an extremely expensive endeavor. They are still struggling to make engines that meet their demands, only fairly recently completing trials of a new engine. I do not blame them that they want to save budget by keeping their current inventory especially for parts, it is wise regardless of which military does it. The Su-27 isn’t a bad aircraft by any means, there is a reason it sees export success. As long as there are weapons that keep the airframe relevant, there is no reason to discard it.
For games such as this, it is. Even DCS tries to make adjustments based on pilot feedback both positive and negative. And what the actual capabilities of an airframe can do are restricted to those that do the fighting. For gamers and enthusiasts, public data is the only thing that can be discussed.
Well, you better get started on that bug report.
I am with you the Fulcrum is lacking,
Well, It’s not the Cold War anymore where US can afford to build purebred fighters for every single task each anymore like they once did.
The US, Russia, & China are starting to take the Multi-role & Swing-Role approach like the Western Europeans. High Performance & cost-efficient Multirole platforms. the 5th generation iterations will be the F-35, Su-75 (not looking likely Su) & Shenyang FC-31.
These fighters in theory according to trend will make up the primary force with air superiority at the top in lesser numbers F-22, Su-57 & J-20. Below the primary force will be the F-15EX & advanced multirole Flankers of both CCP & RuF. (I left out B21 Raider & Xi’an H-20)
Of course this is the trend for the next decade+ 6th Gen will enter production but will not be produced in the numbers comparable. These fighters will carry the weight of war for these nations. The US still has quite the lead.
Are they? J-20B, Shenyang FC-31, Xi’an H-20?
They are already in full scale production of their 5th gen TVC engines… Since 2020 & 2023. There are J-20B units delivered. Especially existing J-20As upgraded to B.
J-20B
China now operates a fully capable 5th Generation Air Superiority Fighter. Was just missing that thrust & TVC (supermaneuvrability) lol of course that is one of other benefits.
:)
You are correct.
You guys’ love talking to me, I am flattered but gtg be back to respond to all your concerns later.
They certainly struggle in the export market. Making new fighters to address the current threat environment is a necessity, being expensive does not mean they won’t do it. But in terms of completely replacing old aircraft, it is too expensive just to do that.
The engine did indeed complete trials “fairly recently” and started full production in 2023. This does not mean their engine issues are over, just that they finally were able to produce an engine that meets the needs of their J-20.
The J-20, from current observation and estimates, poses a risk to Strategic targets such as tankers and AWACS, being seen as more of a stealthy interceptor as opposed to the air superiority fighter. In terms of abilities, it will be speculative. It will at least be more successful the the failed Su-57 I would imagine.
2 Likes
You are wrong or do not analyze the facts…
- the most massive fighters of the Russian Aerospace Forces are the MiG-31BM, Su-35S and multi-purpose Su-30SM/CM2… The Su-30SM2 was also recently presented with R-37M. missiles.
- In real combat conditions, Abrams becomes like a T-80…
2 Likes
That’s great, if you can do the first half without resorting to ridiculing and antagonising other users, regardless of their oppinions then we would all be able to get along and have meaningful discussions/debates.
Your idea of “fun” is just another form of trolling.
Supermanoeuvrability has advantages and disadvantages, it’s not a gamechanger, but it can come in handy. As I wrote at the beginning of Ziggi, in BVR the use of supermaneuverability is questionable, so far- In close maneuver 1 vs 1 combat its usefulness is higher, but it depends on the specific situation/timing etc- And it requires an experienced pilot.
In multi aircraft scenarios its use is problematic.
It’s not true that the Soviets introduced and used any supemaneuvering tactics in practice, or that it was the main thing they did - it wasn’t, it’s silly. Maybe after 2010, but certainly never before.
Please don’t write that Lemoine is propaganda, I know at least two Soviet pilots who say what he says. And many others.
The ability to carry weapons internally is very important today, as is the stealth and avionic fusion that gives situational awareness. These are more important qualities than manoeuvrability.
But to put it into perspective, the first in the 80’s with TVC was the F-15 or the Su 27 ?
Here is a photo of the TVC nozzle for the F-15, didn’t get it due to possible technical issues, but it was seriously considered that the FX( F-15) would have a vectoring nozzle from the beginning.
How long has the wing been designed for the Su 27 ?
Show me a picture of the J-20B doing anything super maneuverable with the fabled TVC engines you mentioned
Is that what it is now?
There is little evidence the J-20B or WS-15 are in high capacity serial production. The FC-31 program appears to be stalled and the H-20 hasn’t entered pre production stages.
They are battling a new enemy, cage armor is useful and has been used by the US on all sorts of vehicles dating back to the 80s or even earlier. US Abrams will be less reliant on such things due to superior short range air defense and jamming / EW as well as hard kill. Comparing a T-80 to an Abrams is like comparing Jake Paul to prime Mike Tyson
That is not a TVC nozzle , it’s a flat nozzle design with the purpose of cooling exhaust gases to reduce IR signature, same design has for instance been addopted on B2 Spirit. TVC nozzles don’t have asymetrical lips ( be it 2D or 3D ). The TVC nozzle for the F-15 you are looking for is this one :
For the Su-27 work on TVC nozzles started in the 80s on the T-10-26 irrc . Both cylindrical 3D and flat 2D nozzle designs were experimented but yeah as we know they went with the 3D design .
2 Likes
It has a very terrible implementation in the game
This man cannot distinguish the Su-30SM from the Su-35S. And he certainly doesn’t know about supermaneuverability
1 Like
What what?
The problem is not with the carousel.And in the shells that are there.Load such projectiles into an Abrams or Leopard and the flight of the turret with the crew is ensured
1 Like
You will not beat a Flanker in two laps unless you reach a speed of more than 650 km/h and yes FM in DCS and Wt is wrong and has nothing to do with reality
on the MiG-29, as on the F-16, you need to keep a high speed of 700 + km/ h, unlike the flanker
No adjustments were made for the Su-27 and SU-33 based on feedback from pilots and engineers
What did the Su-57 fail at?
1 Like
For Flanker performance, I do not reasonably see how it should be performing better. It is a heavy, unstable fighter which gives it good AoA authority. I would imagine that for Flankers, their biggest weakness is higher intertia compared to its competitors, which would lead me to conclude that high AoA advantage is to finish fights at the start, not win a protracted fight. Just so I can understand your position, what aircraft should it have similar sustained rate performance to?
I would imagine pilots would attempt to stay in their optimal speed band if possible, plus I gave the advantage to the Flanker regardless for the first two turns anyway, I did not say anything to the contrary. However, if the Flanker is modeled according to public data, which to my knowledge so far is generally close, then there’s no improvement that can be made in these games. Is the performance of the Flanker overstated? Maybe? I don’t have any reason to think so, as opposed to the Su-57. Which leads me to-
In my current view, the Su-57 is a failure of an aircraft as a whole. Especially if we compare it to the J-20. According to radar reflection modeling and estimates, it is less stealthy than the French Rafale in clean configuration. Extremely limited production numbers prevent it from being a present threat, even if actually used on the battlefield. To be fair, a loss of an Su-57 in combat would be a PR nightmare, not to include the ones destroyed on the ground by drones.
My criticism is also based on a lot of predjudice though. I realistically do not know how capable the plane actually is. I assume and hope that the aircraft is terrible, without much other evidence to go by. Maybe I will eat my words and acknowledge that I underestimated it, but until that time my opinion of it is extremely skewed.
1 Like
The Flanker, no matter how it sounds.Low inductive resistance and high aerodynamic quality. It is comparable to the F/A-18. However, the Hornet has weak engines and slightly higher inductive resistance than the Flanker
I will say that the developers did not look for data on the flanker well
The Su-57 has the best flight performance among all 5th generation aircraft combined. Better load capacity. More missiles. All simulations are coffee fortune-telling (if you don’t have the exact geometry, you won’t get accurate data). I was near the Su-57 in person, unlike all these bloggers and “experts” and others. And what you see in life is different from what these “experts” say and write.
1 Like
You went from this…
To this….
They are in serial production since 2020 & 2023. There’s nothing more to it. If they are in serial production that means there is a completed pre production aircraft.
It exist. Stop coping. Take your L.
You said the aircraft does not exist get own