Does anyone else seem to rip their wings off a lot in rb in su27? Instructor keeps rolling with the rudder and ripping my damned wings off. I flew in sim and never had that issue once. Also tends to over rudder into a stall.
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
1 Like
The only time that I rip my wings with the Su-27 is during steep dives if I stop paying attention to my air speed and get going too fast.
lol fr, nice camo btw
1 Like
Yup especially if you have the AB on at high Mach numbers. GJ intentionally did this as it was not an issue in the dev server. Neither was it there upon release.
I do actually think the devs did a great job on the Su27 model so far. It is very realistic in full real if you let off the burner and use gravity etc.
However, the intentional Rip and the nerf to the airspeed in which you can pull supermaneuverable performances is heart breaking. Went from 900km, down to 700km-800km. Now if you attempt to pull high alpha (even in full real) there is an artificial limitation holding the jet at 800km+ from pulling alpha until you get slower and if you are at Mach 0.7+ you immediately rip the jet and die.
You no longer can do a real Pugachev’s Cobra as result. The limitation at 800km makes the jet pull up and gain altitude performing a cobra (dynamic deceleration) and any slower the jets nose falls to the earth because it literally stalled. Completely defeating all tactics out of the maneuver in the first place. A true cobra can be done at high subsonic speeds and the Flanker remains relatively level.
It is the Mig29 that gains more altitude performing a cobra.
But the Mig29 cannot remotely do it in game and the flanker currently gains a massive amount of altitude because of the further limitation they put on alpha at 800km.
Western propaganda will claim that the cobra maneuver and supermaneuvrability is not feasible. However, that is not true and that is why the United Stated invested heavily on high thrust to weight and thrust vectoring in the F22. The ability to cobra/dynamic deceleration is not only for 1v1 dogfight purposes. Its Soviet doctrine to allow flankers to quickly decelerate and change direction to notch/defeat western radar missiles. I think GJ is making a mistake by leaving out these critical performances or “hindering” them. Hope a devs see that.
From Paralay (Russian server) The importance (" Cobra") is rather in the psychological preparing of pilots, in expanding the limits of the idea of the aircraft’s capabilities. Well, and for the airshow. It was only done by a few people in the regiment. The speed range for entering this maneuver is very narrow +_ 50 km/h. The tactical value of the maneuver itself is rather questionable, it’s rather tricky. Incidentally, it was with the 279th Regiment that the aircraft crashed while performing it, P.P. Kretov successfully ejecting in a reverse spin. It was May 11, 2000, after that no one else in the regiment performed “cobras”."
I asked an American F-15 pilot for his opinion on the Cobra maneuver. He said it was a last-ditch maneuver. Losing speed means the plane is a "sitting duck"after the maneuver. With BVR he said it’s similar, he would be off radar for a while, but the moment he starts to move, radar finds him, plus the plane is left with no speed after the maneuver- so at a big disadvantage. He thinks ideally these planes should do Cobra as often as possible to make it easier to shoot down… He said that for fun.
Source for that if you have. Keep in mind I am specifically speaking in regard to the Su27. The Mig29 surely has range as well. If you have both that will be nice as well.
Additionally, regardless of if your speed range is correct, (Which it is not as Su-27 footage shows vapor clouds which only form 200 knots+) we must keep in mind fighter such as the F-16 and rate at speeds and high Gs far better and even accelerate and climb completely contradictory to reality.
That is an American doctrine. Amercian doctrine is based on energy maneuverability. That dogfighting is a quantifiable science rather than an art. Therefore, whatever he has to say is largely irrelevant as it contradicts his training and doctrine. Of course, he will have negative to say in regard to it. He was trained in a completely different doctrine, and totally different aircraft that is contrary to Soviet doctrine.
Valery Menitsky wrote in his memoirs about the suitability of the Cobra manoeuvre quite similar to the conclusions drawn from the paralay and from the F-15 pilot. He was a MiG test pilot. and his book is fantastic.
1 Like
Thats totally cool. If you can source the speed ranges for both aircraft that would be a big help. Additionally, regardless of whether Soviet/federation tactics are feasible in your mind or the mind of your F-15 pilot friend/Valery Menitsky a Mig29 test pilot is irrelevant still.
The premise is missing performances in the Su27 in full real.
The only person I found who considered Cobra a valid tactical maneuver was Pugachev. Menitsky and a large number of other Russians and Soviets said the exact opposite. I’m not arguing, I’m just writing what I found in my research.
1 Like
I am not disagreeing with you, western doctrine or a word you friend had to say. However. Soviet doctrine dictates these aircraft can pull dynamic deceleration and reach dynamic attainment at high subsonic speeds. Vapor clouds in footage would indicate as well. Just have not found solid numbers as of yet. Also, It’s not solely Pugachev’s cobra. I only brought his maneuver up because in game it is no longer able to be performed properly.
Please do not fixate on the cobra maneuver itself when again, I merely said you are no longer able to perform it correctly in game anymore in full real. The cobra maneuver is simply a form of dynamic deceleration. Dynamic deceleration is a type of maneuver performed by aircraft that have the ability to reach Dynamic Attainment, also known as Supermaneuverability.
If we are talking about BVR, then the Cobra maneuver is absolutely useless. If we are talking about BFM, then it is very controversial
1 Like
Any form of dynamic deceleration drastically reduces airspeed and pulse doppler closure rate allowing for sudden change of direction. All radar missiles rely on high PRF frequencies for targeting (closure rate). The ability to drastically decelerate and reach a near zero energy state instantly greatly assist in defeating radar missiles and is soviet doctrine. It is also why air superiority/dominance fighters of the 5th generation are equipped with the ability.
(title is wrong, it’s PPI-50AK flare)
1 Like
Soviet doctrine was never based on dynamic slowdown tactics - Cobra is more or less a demonstration manoeuvre without much tactical use.
It has several drawbacks - it can only be used at lower speeds, its execution requires a very experienced pilot, the energy loss is very high.
You might want to look at what the Soviet doctrine actually was - high speed, high altitude, passive detection and missile launches combined Radar and heat-seeking. Cobra, perhaps only in an absolute emergency as a last-ditch maneuver before certain death.
1 Like
The flight model change was by and large an improvement to the way that the plane handles. Immediately cobra-ing at 900kph and losing all speed is not very useful in gameplay.
Right now as it stands the flight model is still inferior to pretty much all of the USA stuff but that is mainly a factor due to it’s lack of energy retention / ability to regain energy while turning.
Why are you fixated on the cobra maneuver? I have been liking what you have posted since coming to the thread, but it seems you are now intentionally missing the point out of pride.
Again, it is absolutely irrelevant whether you think the cobra is useful or not. The issue is the aircraft cannot perform it any longer in full real at any speed.
This not totally correct. Frontal aviation fighters such as the Mig-29 was not a designed for high altitude combat. They were designed for low altitude rapid response point defense. That is why (as well as the Flanker) both have an IR ACM that points upward for detection of target passively. The Mig-29 was designed with low weight and highest thrust to weight outside the F-15 to immediately make contact and dispatch targets at close range using high alpha capability. They were specifically given high off-boresight missiles and HMD to greatly assist in this doctrine. Close quarters and dynamic attainment “Super Maneuverability” is soviet doctrine.
Yes, the Flanker is a Strategic Air Armies Asset and designed more for long-range high-altitude combat, but it does not change the fact that its supermaneuvrability is still there and actually much better than the Fulcrums.
Yes, The Soviet doctrine at one point was purely focused in the 60’s-70’s on high speed and high-altitude combat. The Soviet Union was heavily invested in high-speed interceptors during that period to deter the SR-71 and US’s strategic bombers with aircraft like the Mig-23, interceptors like the Flagon and Foxbat. We are not talking about those aircraft we are talking about 4th generation fighters where the Soviets favored supermaneuverability and the US favored energy maneuverability. Both favored 1:1+ thrust to weight and aerodynamically integral designs (high lift in fuselage)
The Su27’s supermaneuverability was perfect in dev server. It was its instructor’s regular flight that made the aircraft a little too good.
The devs knew exactly how to model its special performance in. It was only when they started balancing it out against other fighters after release is where performance degraded in full real. Again, I think they did a good job with it. But full real and the speeds in which you can utilize supermaneuverable maneuvers such as Kvochur’s Bell, J-turn and the cobra have been limited to a pathetic 400mph. When the speeds are truly around 550-600.
I know it sounds negligible, but that slight variation of speed means the difference of completely stalling out or staying in the dogfight.
Being able to cobra at 900km allowed airspeed left for the Flanker to maintain altitude and stay in the fight and not stall. The cobra maneuver does not mean total loss of air speed. That is not how it’s done.
Any slower than (as it is now) stalls the jet out taking all tactical use out of it. Supermaneuverability does not mean stalling your plane out and losing all your airspeed and control.
Supermaneuverability is the capability of fighter aircraft to execute tactical maneuvers that are not possible with purely aerodynamic techniques. Such maneuvers can involve controlled side-slipping or angles of attack beyond maximum lift.
It is irrelevant whether you or I think the Cobra is useful or not. It is the ability to properly do it in full real at correct speeds and maintain proper flight that is the issue at hand.
The Su-27 in the development server was not good. You are vastly overestimating how good it is in full real controls.
The first iteration that came to live server was also not particularly good in full real controls and the way that it behaves now is better than before due to a change in Oswald Efficiency.
Is there any source that specifics the speed at which the plane should be able to execute a cobra maneuver? From what I have seen it is basically a trick that is executed at lows speeds to entertain crowds at airshows and not something that anyone is doing while near mach 1.
Which is something that the Su-27 is able to do in game. I play in in sim and the high AoA limit and ability to rudder around in a circle is situationally useful.
The “super maneuverability” is not the factor that is holding the plane back. It’s the fact that it’s conventional maneuverability ends up being very lack luster due to how quickly the plane loses energy in normal turns.
1 Like