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

In fact, the Soviets didn’t practice any supermaneuverability tactics, not in the eighties, not in the nineties. They didn’t have a doctrine based on it.

2 Likes

You do not know what you are talking about. Like at all.

explain in your own word what is a supermaneuverable tactic. What do you think it is?

Just a Cobra?

I’ve read about dynamic deceleration methods to confuse radar, on paper useful in BVR combat. That wasn’t practiced either. Supermaneuverability was like the new adidas shoes in the 90s, very in. Flankermania was then too. But the truth was that the Soviet Union was in a very bad way, not only financially, but also in pilot training. None of what you read related to supermaneuverability was in use then, maybe not until after 2010.

1 Like

Because you did not find it on the internet they didn’t? Why would their doctrine be readily available??

Confuse the radar?

Do you mean radar defeating techniques? Such as notching?

Ummm…yeah dude notching is a real thing. Immediate reduction to your closure rate & change of direction definitely affect the measurement radar guided missiles predominately rely on.

Notching is exploiting Doppler radars’ reliance on velocity measurement. The maneuver is done by turning at a 90 degree angle to a tracking radar, and the left/right perpendicular directions to the aircraft are sometimes called the beam of the aircraft.

All radar missiles utilize velocity measurement (high pulse repetition frequencies).
Objects with zero velocity are considered ground clutter and are ignored by the radar. Nothing is ever measured with a perfect zero velocity due to signal noise, Therefore the radar set is designed to reject any return with a slow enough relative velocity that it can’t be distinguished from background noise. That’s the “notch”- the relative velocities close enough to zero that can’t be distinguished. This is accomplished in the hardware with a notch filter.

The faster an aircraft can reduce its velocity and suddenly change direction makes a fighter much more survivable. It affords a pilot additional time to react & go defensive.

Why would having a quicker ability to go defensive be a theory?

Why do you think the F-22 , Su-57 & J-20B are supermaneuverable if no benefit or doctrine exist for it? They just like paying for the very costly maintenance of thrust vectoring?

Not notching…
It’s tough, you probably didn’t read the interview with Pugachev where he talks about using supermanoeuvrability, otherwise you wouldn’t have thought of notching…oh well. I’ll make it simple. Just put supermanoeuvrability to the back of your mind until about 2010.

1 Like

I just want to know where you factor in the ground here. How is that so hard for you to explain?

None of these dudes are referring to the ground.

This is irrelevant.

One person who is a developer simply said he will reduce the post stall stability & it seems a bit off from real characteristics. So, what. He does not believe in the Mig-29 or care much about it. That is obvious by looking at the aircraft’s state in game.

Is this supposed to make you special? You never spoken to a dev before? This is not even conversation. You made it sound he asked you out…

What does this have to do with your ground & angle of attack science?

I already explained. The aircraft starts the maneuver and the direction the aircraft is traveling in relation to the air and ground changes. The direction of travel at the peak is about 30° up in relation to the ground, the nose is 90°, the AoA is 60° between nose and direction of travel through the air.

Obviously this is a very nutshell or layman method of stating this, but that is essentially what is happening. The aircraft then decelerates rapidly during this maneuver so there is little gain in altitude, the thrust allows it to accelerate and prevent loss of altitude… For a brief moment it attains a nose position 90° relative to where it was pointing but the true AoA never exceeds 60°.

Though I didn’t need to explain this, the devs already understand this and that is how it should already be modeled in game now. You’re welcome.

I can’t read you mind kid. “confuses radar” this is your bunk vocabulary we are working with.

Wasa is no kid, I don’t think any of the people who have involved themselves in this conversation recently are. Regardless, it isn’t polite discussion etiquette and I suggest you cut it out before you get smacked by the mods again.

This nonsense. Can you post any source regarding angle of the attack measured with the ground as reference.

Thanks

I didn’t say the ground was used as a reference for the angle of attack

Why is the ground mentioned at all then?

People confuse the pitch in relation to the ground for true AoA, which is the reason for people conflating “90° pitch” with true AoA

You mean this guy? So, it’s your word vs G .I.Zagainov director TsaGI. That’s cool, thanks :)

What was you highest level of education in this subject again? Or just in general?

The Su-27 is also not 90 either huh?

The terminology is used loosely at that section, it is described further for both in later portions of the document. The Su-27 is only capable of > 90° because of the instability in those regimes.

You have a source for that? or is that a 12th grade education speaking?

Find a page any page right now then prove it.

Thank you I have all the information I need.

I’m sorry, my English is not good, I’m already 40 years old and from a different generation. Some of the things you so aggressively advocate are a bit… strange. Like the MiG 29 and the F-22, or the fanatical fascination with supermaneuverability. But no offense, internet discussions are tough, . Face to face those issues don’t arise.

3 Likes

You have for years now, when I first showed you the document above. Somehow it is still being misread.

1 Like

The first Su-27 Flanker B aircraft (since upgraded) had a significant delay in the control response… do you know anything about this ? I know it’s a tough question.

4 Likes