Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
2175

SU-37
Su-27M (T10M-11)
Flanker F

These are all names for the same aircraft.
Russia does this a lot. It takes an existing airframe, gives it a random upgrade for a one off prototype or limited production run and gives it an entirely new name.

All are the same prototype demonstrator aircraft that incorporated canads and thrust vectoring and and digital FCS into the SU27M airframe.

It was a demonstrator that was able to perform a 360 somersault.

It crashed due to structural failure in 2002

It proved that canards were pretty much useless on an aircraft that used thrust vectoring.

2177

@Grimtax
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0GPpvSFq9j45
wing area 62.04m2 not 65

2 Likes
2178

Ahahaha. The SM2 version never existed…The Su-27SM has nothing to do with the Su-35. The Su-35 of the first generation is the T10M tail number 710

2179

Calling Su-27SM first generation Su-35S is still wrong

2 Likes
2180

Why?.. Su-27M he should have received such a name in the Air Forces if adopted… The prototypes are T-10M…In 1992 formed the appearance and name of the export version of the Su-35…
In 1995, three production aircraft were built under the name Su-35…

2 Likes
2181

Su-27SM is not first generation Su-35S. I said it before that Su-27M(T-10M) is the one that can be called that. There are no Su-35 made from Su-27SM(Serial Modernized) as far as I know. NATO is claiming Su-27SM is first generation Su-35 which is not true.

2182

But excuse me! I didn’t see one letter…Of course not, the first generation of the Su-35 is the T-10M(Su-27M)/Su-35…

1 Like
2183
1 Like
2184

image
image1920×918 117 KB

9 Likes
2185

Russian aircraft markings are always quite complicated

2186

It seems there is some confusion regarding my statement about the generation statement of the
Su-27SM to the Su-35S. To clarify, I am not suggesting that the Su-35S was directly built upon the Su-27SM platforms. Instead, my point is about the historical and developmental lineage that led to the Su-35S.

Historically, the Su-27SM was the first significant upgrade to the Su-27, introducing new avionics, weapons systems, and capabilities. This can be seen as the first generation in the modernized Su-27 series. Following this, the Su-27SM2 and Su-27SM3 represented further advancements, each incorporating more sophisticated technology and improvements over their predecessors. These successive upgrades can be considered the second and third generations as mentioned, respectively.

Finally, the Su-35S represents the final iteration of this evolutionary process. While it is a highly advanced and distinct aircraft, its development was influenced by the technological and operational lessons learned from the Su-27SM, SM2, and SM3. Therefore, when I refer to the Su-27SM, SM2, SM3, and Su-35S as first, second, third, and fourth generations, respectively, I am speaking about the historical progression and technological evolution that led to the final development of the Su-35S. Now this is quite logical right so everyone should be able to follow where I am going with this.

In summary, the Su-27SM, SM2, and SM3 were critical steps in the evolution that eventually resulted in the Su-35S, which is why both the SM3 and Su-35S finished development approx. around 2008 and they both had their maiden flights in 2008, but the Su-35S is not built directly upon the Su-27SM platforms. This was rather the Su-27M which some have mentioned. BUT this was just a short period of a demonstration life and not an actual used platform as the first, second, and third gens are as I have now stated. They are rather the product of a continuous improvement and modernization process which then again inevitably resulted in the final state of the Su-35S.

Please notice I am saying Su-35S not Su-35 and the three Su-35 that were acquired by the RUAF is not mentioned by me once as they were hangar queens their entire life almost. And as I will be saying in the latter unless you are an employee at UAC that has first hand info about their developments being separate then there is no universal declaration about this.

This is EXTREMELY logical, I hope this clears up any misunderstandings and honestly no point in arguing about this anymore.

It seems a lot of us are very passionate about this aircraft series. I will have my opinion, You can have yours. Unless you are an employee at UAC that has first hand information about this there is no point in declaring a universal statement.

Thanks.

2187

The first upgrade was the 27m, if you want to use logic.

1 Like
2188

It was a demonstrator do you even read what I say. It was not a production unit.

2189

There’s no logic in your statement.

1 Like
2190

Well broaden your mind my friend it seems like you refuse to learn after reading but I wont judge.

2191

The sm3 is from 2008 the 35 is from 1992 you told tò yourself that the 35 comes from the 27m which Is correct, but 35 Is not an upgrade tò the sm3, neither the development was derived from the sm3, because they are 2 different projects with different ideas in mind, one is an upgrade package, the other one is a continuation of a soviet project.

2 Likes
2192

Can i take it like T-series for more simplify explaination ?
T-72B and it’s mordernization like 72B2/B3 like SM/SM3
T-90 is Su-35, which is share some aspect but not the whole thing.

2193

Same thing for the t80ue and t80bvm

2194

Again you just don’t read what I say but make up things like I have said it when I have not.

I quite clearly stated I am talking about the Su-35S and NOT the Su-35.

With this in mind, what I am saying should make more sense to you now.

2195

They are basically the same plane other that one Is the production model.
The 35 has a different airframe from the 27s that’s why you can upgrade the 27s to the sm3 but you can’t upgrade the 27sm3 into a 35s.