Should a marginal thrust increase be expected on the Su35 when compared to the SM2? Given the intakes on the Su35 are reportedly enlarged.
4 Likes
no, unless gaijin gives the Su-35 the special thrust mode
since 14 tons of thrust is the normal output of the Al-41 without channel losses
3 Likes
I mean, as he pointed out, If Su-35S does have enlarged intakes that should lead to more thrust.
Or, at least changes to Channel loss.
Huh so the 14500 figure is achieved through a special mode, didn’t know that thanks.
Perhaps something like the MiG-29KR engine that gets really hot very fast?
1 Like
Or the Al-31FP where it only kicks on at certain speeds.
1 Like
“if” is the important word here
as i have not seen any concrete numbers for that yet
ppl have been talking about that but i havent seen any proof for it yet
similarly to the 360° radar coverage on the Su-57
2 Likes
Well, intakes on Flankers are pretty straightforward (as well as on Fulcrums but gaijin be gaijin), so i think intake loss should be minimal anyways. AL-41F1 seems to consume no more than 130 kg of air per second, so the question is how much air can be pushed trough intakes at zero speed
I think the limiting factor for the engines is engine controls, with FADEC allowing engines to operate at better effectiveness and efficiency than older electromechanical controls
1 Like
On a sidenote, what about the consumption rate of the engine family?
I’m like 99% sure there was an accepted report back in Xmas 2025 for that, and to be honest that would be nice on stuff like the J10’s, that carry water-cup worth of fuel🙏🏻
there is an entire book about AL-31F publicly available, so i dunno if gaijin did anything about it
It literally even shows 2% intake loss on this table if i understand it correctly
also this graph
1 Like
gaijin adressed that bug report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/s170Pydpl05W
2 Likes
Oh well, I take it back.
e-famous
2 Likes
I recently found out about this. Apparently it’s called Su-35UB, and it’s meant to be a trainer for the Su-35(S?).
Supposedly only one was built, it looks weird compared to other Su-30s and Twin Seat Flankers but I can’t put my finger on why.
1 Like
For Su-27M (Su-35) from my understanding. You can see canards and large tail with flat tips.
1 Like
CM-102? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was designed in R-77 dimensions, but can’t prove it
isnt this pretty much just a early Su-30MKI/SM?
Well, lineage wise it technically isn’t. It is a trainer version of a Su-27M, aka Su-35 for export.
Actually disregard that, after checking the development history - it was made in 2000s and supposed to be the best of both worlds - canards and avionics from MKI and bigger tail from Su-27M or Su-30MKK and better engines in the future
Tho this technically literally makes it a dual seater a bit more advanced version Su-27M
2 Likes