True but pilots did not like the Mig-23 either, neither did engineers.
But I suppose that is a good example, though the Mig-21 was not a bad aircraft at all. It outlived all of them pretty much.
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
The MiG-21 is a very simple aircraft.There’s practically nothing to break
1 Like
Why am I being quoted again, you don’t see the sarcasm? Of course Sukhoi developed a stealth fighter that is reminiscent of their distinct design features…
Su-57 MAKS 2017
9:00-9:40 You can see the Leading-edge vortex controllers moving independently & working. A very powerful FBW computer is needed to work the TVC & LEVCON.
The RuF is well beyond leading edge roots extensions. No 5th generation is equipped in such a way.
The RuF is just in a whole other league when it comes to alpha flight. 3-dimension TVC is just one technology of alpha flight, high maneuverability, & supermaneuvrability. Most nations cannot achieve TVC. China just joined the club.
All of these technologies can be traced back to the mesmerizing ability of the Su-27.
Su-35 MAKS 2017 with 2x R-73s & 1x R-27ER aft fuselage lol.
iirc the primary purpose is to increase or decrease static stability and to act as a canard would as a trim device. It’s purpose is to allow a higher instability margin and give the aircraft a method of deep stall recovery or better post stall control.
Russia is behind on computers and whatnot, their electronics are reliable… but it doesn’t exactly take a supercomputer to handle FBW stuff.
They are behind only on the ability to mass produce. There is a difference.
They have all of the intellectual properties & innovation at the ready. They are sitting on many weapon system designs. If they had the manufacturing capability of the US, they could easily produce weapon systems on the level of the US, & in some aspect surpass them outright. For example, the US still is somewhat behind the RuF & even China (to a degree) in Intercontinental Balistic Missile design. The US is working hard right now to develop a new delivery system as we speak to catch up. Hypersonic missiles? US is working very hard to catch up as well.
As for FBW, to regulate the 3-dimensional thrust vectoring, LEVCONS, leading edge droop flaps on top of the conventional flight controls would require an above average FBW system. This is not just any FBW you will find in the F-16, or F-18 I guarantee it.
That is a 5th generation aircraft.
1 Like
They are massively behind in transistor production capability. They are generations behind in transistor size and have no ability to refine the raw materials necessary to even make these high end electronics. They are behind on thermals, behind on transistors, behind on electronics. Due to this they rely on imports and production is extremely limited.
5 Likes
I’m not aware of this, as far as my information goes the U.S. has a much better ability to upkeep their ballistic missiles where Russia falls significantly behind. And I think it is fair to say the one major shortfall of modern Russia is upkeep. For example, the maintenance log of the Moskava was extremely dire, well below acceptable limits yet pushed back into service before being missiled. China I would not be surprised has better land based attack systems, but this is just a guess, I don’t have thorough data.
Well, considering how well the Kinsel has been doing, I don’t think the U.S. is in a major rush.
Like before, I question the actual validity of the Su-57 being “good”. Can we call it a 5th Gen? I wouldn’t be opposed, but with the focus shifting to a survivability onion similar to ground forces (don’t be seen, don’t be shot, etc.), the Su-57 theoretically falls short unless some of the fatal flaws have been rectified. To this day I do not know if they have been fixed.
3 Likes
Keep in mind the Strategic Rocket Forces of the RuF is not the Navy. The Strategic Rocket Force & its delivery systems were the number one weapon of choice in a First strike (nuclear strategy) during the Cold War outside of submarine launched ICBMs (which the US Navy does not have ICBM submarines, only Ballistic capable). Therefore, the USSR invested heavily into these weapon systems & technologies. This branch is the pride of the RuF, their projection of power & primary strategic weapon system delivery, not their surface Navy.
Though the US Strategic Air Command obviously utilized ICBMs as well, their primary delivery choice in a First Strike Strategy was & still is Strategic Bombers because they are far less detectable than ICBMs. The range of strategic bombers means that they can come & strike from any direction in unknown numbers with least amount of warning & chance of counter strike (why the USSR was very interested in interceptor & SAM designs at one time).
Therefore, the US invested heavily in these delivery systems & why they excel in that domain with aircraft such as the B-52 Stratofortress, the B-58 Hustler, B-1 Lancer & B-2 Spirit.
Spoiler
Right, but Russia is adapting & they are getting the best form of training & research data that anyone can ask for. The US understands this. The US did not become the most efficient fighting force without experiencing their fair share of conflict.
They say the best military doctrine is that which is written in blood.
The US is working very hard right now are you kidding me? They are rushing into producing 6th Gen, B-21 Raider, the Aim-260, hypersonic missiles of all types, upgrading the F-22 Raptors with IRST and ECM pods, HMD, new RAM coating etc. the list goes on. The good news is all these weapon systems had already been researched but the US saw no need for them until China risen quickly as the new principal threat.
Why not?
It has all the hallmarks of a 5th Generation fighter. The US Airforce & NATO definitely classify it as such. It is low observable, has ability to Super Cruise, Supermaneuverable & the N036 AESA radar. It even has capability that the F-22 Raptor does not have (yet) such as IRST passive detection/tracking capability & the Elektroavomatika NSTsI-50 helmet mounted sight and display.
What about the Vympel R-37 Hypersonic Air to Air missile, The AA-13 “Axehead”?
That missile does not need to be maneuverable to hit any fighter if its flying Mach 5. It’s pretty much appearing as a stationary target to its radar. The RWR will not even alert you in time to do anything. All the F-22 & F-35 has is medium ranged Aim-120s… This is a huge disadvantage regardless of superior low observable technology.
The US better hope these fighters cannot be tracked outside of their maximum Aim-120 effective range. I am inclined to believe they can. That is why the US is rushing to produce long range ARHs & recoat the F-22.
1 Like
As a former employee of the Paramilitary Organization (Air Defense) - I disagree…The legend of air defense…29 regiments, decommissioned in 1994…The most trouble-free aircraft for the entire existence of the Air Defense / Air Forces of the USSR and Russia…The first in the USSR with full auto guidance and missile launch without the participation of a pilot…
My proposal for the Su-15TM is under a different nickname… Су-15ТМ - Одобрено игроками [Карантин] - Официальный форум (warthunder.ru)
2 Likes
The world’s first Electro-Remote control system with mechanical redundancy is installed on the A-5…
The world’s first Electro-Remote control system with full responsibility (with 4-fold redundancy), including Engines installed on the T-4 (“100”) Sukhoi…The backup mechanical was only on the first prototype…
Avionics of Russia…
https://dzen.ru/a/YCwiNKyienGmibH-
1 Like
Not a single refusal is very loudly said
From what I’ve read the Su 15 on the other hand was a very good design and popular with pilots and ground crew.
Thanks to him, Sukhoi was allowed to make the Su 27
1 Like
Soviet interceptor pilots faced the daunting task of defending the world’s largest nation against the combined forces of the world’s most technologically advanced nations. The awesome responsibility of preventing nuclear annihilation from USAF B-52 bombers, countering the impossible nuisance of snooping mach 3 SR-71s and air-to-air combat with F-4 and F-15s were formidable tasks that the skilled pilots of the Soviet Air Defence Forces (PVO) trained for in earnest. In the Cold War, the backbone of their manned air defence was 1300 Sukhoi Su-15s (NATO codename ‘Flagon’), we spoke to Su-15 pilot Valeri Shatrov to find out more.
“If I had to choose three words or terms to describe the Su-15, I would say: reliability, good manoeuvrability, and beauty of form. High reliability was one of its best traits, I do not remember any tech failures. Su-15 crashes were very rare and were mostly caused by the human factor.
The main purpose of the Su-15 was to intercept air targets in day or night. The radar sight ‘saw’ a little worse than the radars of our potential enemies. But the long-range and short-range air to air missiles worked well, at least from my experience from training launches. After more than 30 years after flying Su-15 when I was at one of the air shows in the United States I had a chance to meet and speak with a SR-71 pilot. We were joking, exchanging impressions about our winged machines. I confessed to him, that if I was in my Su-15 attacking him from the front hemisphere I probably could had taken him out… but there was no chance of intercepting such a fast aircraft in the chase!
I had a comfortable cockpit, everything in it was simple and easy to find. In those times there were no autopilots and navigation systems as we know them today, so we flew without any. Navigation was done with the aid of often barely legible pilot’s written notes! Very primitive by modern standards. Again, the lack of modern navigation instruments and landing systems required the pilot to maximise his skill in order to land the plane in minimum weather conditions. And it was nothing, it was ok for us. There were times you had to land below minimum weather conditions.”
Starting on the Su-15
I got on to the Su–15 immediately after graduating from the Armavir Flight School (or the Armavir Higher Military Aviation Red Banner School for Air Defence Pilots to give it its full title*).* At Armavir I trained on the L-29, MiG-15UTI and MiG-17. After completing a training course that included live ammo gun firing on ground targets, night flights and flights in challenging meteorological conditions we (the graduates) were awarded the qualification of ‘Military pilot of the 3rd class ‘. Following graduation in 1976 I was appointed to 302nd Fighter Regiment (302 ИП in Russian) at Pereyaslavka 2. That was located in the Far East region of the country near the city of Khabarovsk (this regiment doesn’t exist anymore). My first impression of the type was the elegance of its extremely swept wing and tail. The plane was very beautiful and extremely graceful. The Su-15 was a typical fighter of its time, we climbed into the cockpit using the ladder. The cabin was comfortable and relatively spacious. Even in winter time with fur jacket and boots (‘mukliks’) on I didn’t feel any discomfort inside the cockpit. Take-off was not difficult, but landing was. Its high approach speed required precision landing and the timely release of the braking parachute.
It was a good plane and exceptionally reliable. I always said that I loved it like a woman.
And when you turned on the afterburner on take-off, you got a hefty push in the back from the ferocious power of two engines. The relatively long fuselage and delta wings allowed you to make a large number of barrel rolls with any rotation speed. What I like most about Su–15 was its ability to perform complex aerobatics at full power.
All Sukhoi aircraft cockpits differ from each other, but share some traits. They are all quite spacious, the instrument panel is mounted a considerable distance from the pilot, which allows you to switch attention from one device to another with only a slight angular movement of the eyes. Thinking about the worst thing about the aircraft: the first serial Su–15 modifications (the Su-15TM Flagon-F) were called ‘Hound dog’ (Гончая in Russian) for their extremely high landing speed and ‘Dove of Peace’ (Голубь Мира in Russian) for having only two air-to-air missiles. I was lucky – I flew and was on duty with four missiles and two cannon pods. And that version had leading edge extension on the wing, somewhat reducing the landing speed.
Flight days started with preliminary preparation. Before lunch, the pilots were busy in the classrooms at headquarters. Theory preparations for flights, repeated special cases in flights worked out in detail and placed it schematically in a workbook. After lunch in our canteen and a short rest, we played ice hockey in winter time squadron vs squadron. As the doctor forbade playing with the puck to avoid injuries, we used a ball for bandy (but most of the hockey sticks were classic – for ice hockey). Then there was flight readiness control . The deputy or commander of the squadron himself went through the safety checklist questions, and ‘ready for flight’ status required a signature from the wing commanders of the units. There were flights at day and at night, in simple/complex weather conditions and with minimal acceptable weather conditions.
Su-15 allowance was (lower cloud edge in metres / visibility in metres):
SMU (difficult weather conditions) – 600/6.
Minimum – 250/3 at day and 300/4 at night.
Was even lower low 200/3 (for commander flying).
The aircraft was equipped only with a radio compass, there were no other landing systems. The day flight shift began at dawn and lasted six hours. Night shift lasted two hours in the afternoon – at dusk, and four hours at night.
We served in air defence, so we rarely wore everyday clothes – boots and a belt (much like a ‘Sam Browne’). There was even a joke about that uniform: “When I wear a belt, I get more and more stupid.” (This is a pun that doesn’t really translate directly into English- the word ‘portupeya ‘ (army belt) contains “tupeyu” which means ‘stupid’.) For service we wore flight suits, and added jackets (in Autumn and Winter).
Ready to defend
On weekends, family pilots spent time with their children and wives, walked along the only street of the military town, swam in the river, or gathered mushrooms in the forest nearby, or in winter, skied. Single pilots spent weekends at the dances in the Officers House where girls from Khabarovsk and nearby villages came. We drank in companies (but on Sunday we’d abstain from drinking —known as ‘taking a breath’ — if there were flights on Monday, because the doctor would have strict and pre-flight control before each flight).
Any flight was a feast for a military pilot in my time. I can’t single out one as being the most interesting mission. I remember being very fond of any training missions that included live missiles launches on target-aircraft, combat duty missions, flights in minimum weather conditions and night flights. I have strong mental images of penetrating clouds as a pair. Any flights for a military pilot are a holiday!
The aircraft was manoeuvrable, as I have already mentioned. With the engines set at maximum thrust the Su–15 allowed you to perform a turn with a roll of almost 90 degrees. As for the service ceiling of the aircraft I personally gained a height of 23,000 metres (75,459 feet) , where ‘a little higher – space begins’ as we joked in those days.The instantaneous turn rate was very good, with a G-force of up to 6. The high alpha of the aircraft was limited to this maximum overload, but the thrust of the engines allowed any horizontal aerobatics figures without loss of speed. ‘Split ‘S manoeuvres were allowed from a minimum altitude of 2.5 km up to the practical service ceiling.
There were no simulators in our time, we had our main training in the cockpit.
Yes, there were simulated interceptions according to the course of combat training requirements: air combats one-on-one, pair-vs-pair and flight-vs-flight. The ‘enemy aircraft’ for training were usually Su-15s from our regiment. There were also training flights training interceptions against bombers. Usually the target bomber was the Tu-16. For actual missions, the SR-71 was the hardest to intercept.
In addition to training launches of air-to-air missiles, one had to shoot cannons at ground targets. We had no misses. I guess that says a lot. For its time, the aircraft was well armed and equipped with decent avionics.
Actually I had no chance meeting with the SR-71. They ‘teased’ our pilots on combat duty, especially in Primorsky Krai. Sometimes DS (Duty vehicles) had real interception flights – aircraft were frequently scrambled. The SR-71s were performing flights in neutral zone but with each launch of our interception aircraft, they turned toward their base. In my case, bases in Japan. In wartime the Su-15 would have intercepted B-52s, which raises the question of whether the B-52s would be accompanied by a number of escort fighters, which would drawn us into a missile air battle. While F-4s and Su-15s had the same manoeuvring characteristics and armament, the F-15 would have proved a far more challenging battle opponent. The F-15 was more manoeuvrable than our aircraft, and its electronic equipment was much more modern.
I served in a great regiment with great people. When we arrived to the regiment it was equipped with MiG-17s. Training on Su-15s took place directly in the regiment. I remember all my pilots-instructors, I still meet some of them. If I had to evaluate the training on a five-point system, I would give it ‘5’- it was excellent. We are still friends and meet once a year in Moscow – pilots and engineers alike. Our unit, the 302nd Fighter Aviation Regiment was based in Pereyaslavka-2, Khabarovsk Krai. Now there are no aircraft, and there are only two or three colleagues left. The former military town is now a civilian settlement.”
Special thanks to Vasily Kuznetsov
2 Likes
My note is about the LEVCON, for me the F-15 somewhat had it in 1974.
Yes, it’s not today’s modern thing, but it does a little bit of similar things.Like LEVCON version 0,5
1 Like
seeing the su-15, mig25 and then the 31 in the ussr/russian tree would be nice, although in the current air rb maps and gamemode they would probably suck ass
3 Likes
If the F-15 was unstable they (the moving intakes) could actually be used in almost the exact same manner.
They affect flow along the fuselage by their movement, in certain phases they also form a vortex, lightening the horizontal tail surfaces. It’s nice for a late 1960s design.
1 Like