Unfortunately, I suspect Britain will get that aircraft. Hopefully the Soviet tree gets an Su-30SM at the same time, but one cannot be sure.
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
Su-37 Super Flanker is a super-maneuverable thrust vectoring fighter with the factory designation T-10M-11 derived from an Su-35 prototype. The last Su-35 prototype - number 711 - was fitted with Lyulka Saturn AL-31FU engines (31,970 lbf) that incorporate two-dimensional thrust-vectoring (TVC) nozzles. Externally similar to the Su-35 - apart from the nozzles - the Su-37 has a side-stick controller and has demonstrated some amazing manoeuvres, including a complete 360deg Cobra - known as a Kulbit.
The Su-37 for the first time, demonstrated the ability to reach ultra-large angles of attack and at near-zero speeds.
Thanks to the automation of all controls, the fighter could “independently” exit the tailspin.
The AL-37FU engines are configured for thrust vector control, with the axisymmetric steerable thrust vector control nozzle is fixed on a circular turning unit. The steel nozzle in the experimental engines is replaced in production engines by titanium units to reduce the weight of the nozzle. The nozzle only moves in the pitch axis, and the nozzles on the two engines can deflect together or differentially to achieve the desired thrust vector for a particular maneuver.
The Su-37 has the N011M Bars (Phased Array). The Radar is capable of tracking 20 targets & targeting 8 of them. The Su-37 Terminator is an R-77 carrying aircraft in case you need it spelled out for you.
The all-weather digital multi-mode phased array radar operates in either air and ground surveillance modes or in both modes simultaneously. Ground surveillance modes include mapping (with Doppler beam sharpening), search-and-track of moving targets, synthetic aperture radar and terrain avoidance.
The Su-37 also has the N012 self-defense rearward facing radar in the tail stinger area of the fuselage. tail stinger area of the fuselage.
The Su-37 also incorporates state of the art ECM in wing-tip pods, allowing improved survivability in electronic warfare environments.
The Su-37 can carry air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons on 12 stations. The number of missiles and bombs carried can be increased to 14 with the use of multi-payload racks. The military arsenal had become more diverse in comparison with the Su-27. The new aircraft could use not only unguided missiles and free-falling bombs, but also guided air-to-surface missiles, including anti-ship ones.
It also has to be said B. The aircraft was overloaded from these manoeuvres, the same thing happened to the F-15 Activ, the airframe needs to be strengthened more - this leads to an increase in weight, which leads to a reduction in performance and or the need to use more powerful engines etc… everything is a compromise…
Also the plane had more drag for the canards in the front ( combination of elevators, rudders and canards)…
2 Likes
You didn’t answer my question at all
It’s actually does not need to be said. In WT, design flaws are intentionally not modelled, neither are the modelled in engines such compressor stalls & flame outs etc. that plagued certain aircraft in game now (will not name the aircraft the aircraft as to drag off topic).
GJ has officially noted this in previous forum. These flaws will not be modelled in game.
I do like discussing it though, regardless of how irrelevant it is to the game.
Thats why you have 31,970 lbf :)
“Crashed due to structural failure caused by repeatedly exceeding the design limit of the airframe.”
1 Like
Wrong
Better situational awareness and very minor upgrades to existing radars or ordnance… Yippee…
Can’t wait for the slightly longer range R-73 and the slightly longer range R-77… Gameplay will certainly be flipped upside down when those are added. Flatspinning on command or dumping all airspeed to look cool when others are just looking over the shoulder and launching a missile at you anyway is so useful!
4 Likes
Gotta agree with that one.
As much as i love super maneuverability it only looks good for eyes, trying cobra against a pilot who knows what his doing is death sentence.
1 Like
Why only Russian-USA/China/Japan X-2
Me too! it’s going to be awesome. You were not being sarcastic right?
First of all, you need to calm down Captain Top Gun.
This a video game. Things are supposed to look cool.
Yeah, flat spinning is fun as hell & does look pretty neat. It’s also very rewarding when you gun them in a pass.
Can you explain how the following would not be useful in a rolling scissors with another opponent?
Tell me you have no idea what Phased Array is without telling me…
You are on full blown cope tantrum over the Su-27 right now, I hope you are aware.
At the moment, supermaneuverability plays little role, only in close combat.It will be needed when there is an ultimatum protection against all missiles
2 Likes
Yes, poor flight and preflight checks, maybe poorly set up general inspections.
1 Like
Ziggy1989
1 Like
???
Tell me something I do not know.
The aircraft probably had lower performance than the Su 27, an interesting advantage was post stall aerobatics, but as you wrote, it was one test aircraft. Its purpose was to fundraise for Sukhoi in the 1990s.
1 Like
I’m glad we’re no longer talking about the superiority of supermanoeuvrability in BVR and its absolute necessity for WVR. As it seemed to me from your posts.
1 Like
I don’t like one-sided strong statements, maybe that’s why. I like to say A and B, not just the benefits.
I don’t have Su 27 in WT, I honestly don’t think it will be better than DCS.
But I’m commenting on reality and this forum is not just about the game, then maybe half the posts here wouldn’t be about reality. right ?
It’s a narcisists deflection tactic, and not worth engaging.
- comment about IRL - IRL doesn’t matter only the game matters
- Comment about the game - the game is broken and not reflective of real life performance.
- talk about the disadvantages of Russian designs - get called a h8r Yankee lover and will get your post quoted out of context and ridiculed.
8 Likes
That assumes the opponent started behind you and almost overshot, or that the flow went one circle in a very very slow merge. This simply doesn’t happen unless you make a very big mistake on the merge or the enemy accidentally messed up when given the opportunity to start offensive.
In any scenario, the enemy pilot (if competent) should hold the control zone sufficiently far behind you for guns, but not so close that you can force a scissors and subsequently an overshoot. I taught you this.
You say I’m scaring people away and preventing good discussion but every time you make such claims it feels like projection… this is why.
It’s funny tho
Does anyone have any idea how long that we’ll have to wait to get a flanker variant with competitive radar for top tier? Flying the 27SM is an exercise in frustration. It has missiles that only outperform opponents at closer ranges, but its radar set’s slow scan rates and inability to adjust search patterns makes it a pain to quickly acquire a lock amidst the 16v16 chaos. Meanwhile the opposition has twice the range on their ACM mode and just locks and clicks at you.
2 Likes