With full internal fuel it is statically stable, correct ?
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
Yes. However, we now live in a world where low observation is not so “low” anymore. Radars are now becoming far more powerful than advancements in RAM can keep up. You can only put so many materials on an aircraft. There is only so many elements on the periodic table my friend.
Radar technology & effectiveness has no bounds in sight.
This technology is heavily invested by the principal enemies of the US. You cannot kill what you cannot reach regardless if you see it first. The US has zero long range air to air capabilities. Neither does it have hypersonic air to air missiles
The US slept on its perch at the top & did not expect the rapid technological growth of the CCP.
They are desperately trying to catch up. That is a fact whether anyone likes it or not.
1 Like
Stable
I think the current attempt to close the capability gap to the PL-15 is the AMRAAM-AXE (Air-launched eXtended Envelope), which is an attempt to produce an Air launched variant of the the AMRAAM-ER (AIM-120C-8 control section w/ the 8", Plus 5 motor replaced with the 10" diameter Norwegian Propulsion Stack ).
It seems to be drawing pretty heavily on inspiration from how the RIM-162 ESSM was developed, considering they will be sharing a motor. (I wouldn’t be surprised that if at some point the AMRAAM-ER is adapted for naval use and replaced the ESSM considering advancements, or the Dual mode seeker is backported to the AMRAAM ).
The main issue will be the likely reduction in internal / submerged carriage capacity due to moving to 10" diameter from 8", and potential ineligibility in the case of the F-35B.
And that should theoretically be sufficiently workable until the AIM-260 or FMRAAM enter production
1 Like
Did they test this on the moon or what??! lol jk it looks like it in the photo.
I agree, but this only solves one part of the equation. Long range is relatively easy capability to overcome especially for the US.
However, Hypersonic air to air missiles that can be stored internally is all the rage in combat aviation as of now. In which the RuF is leading the pack.
This is what the US is desperately trying to achieve & is proving quite the problem. Because both the F-35 & F-22 are completely built around the Aim-120. the F-22 needed to have Aim-120s modified with chopped wings to fit after all.
I have no doubt the US will achieve hypersonic missile capability whatsoever.
It’s being able to fit them within the weapons bay of the F-22 & F-35 I doubt. If they are unable, this means they will be loaded on the wings further degrading their low observability, flight performance & combat radius.
The US is currently developing stealth missile pods to house on the wings. I do not know how effective they will be, but it’s not going to completely stop the F-22’s RCS from increasing that is for certain.
Also, I forgot to mention the F-22 is being upgraded with stealth drop tanks (part of current upgrade plan). Currently still uses the F-15’s.
As you can see the AMRAAM-AXE alone is already proving to have some issues across the board & especially with the B model F-35. Can you imagine how hypersonic missiles are going to have issue with these platforms? Hypersonic Air to Air Missiles is the next generation. The US needed to develop & produce these yesterday.
There is untested concept for hypersonic missile design. Here is a video on it if interested.
The MAKO has not been developed. It’s purely untested concept.
Haven’t had a chance to fully read & reply to you lately my apologies.
No, the US lacks capability in the air straight up. There is no long-range air to air missiles in service. There is no long-range hypersonic air to air missiles in service either.
From what I have been able to find, the missile has been under development for seven years until being publicly shown, with the following quote as such:
When asked about where Mako will go, Loy highlighted that their showing at SAS 2024 aims to garner interest and continue its development. However, Mako is “ready to fly, ready now, and is ready to go in scale and into production quickly.”
I would assume that they aren’t yet in full production of the unit, but have the means to do so if given the green light. The unit apparently has also been fit tested physically and electronically. As far as fire testing, I do not have data about it. Lockheed does give out bold claims, it is a repurposed ATGM after they lost the contract to Grumman (lol). Maybe I should be looking into what Grumman has publicly been up to.
It depends on what’s being defined as long-range, as the AIM-120D has the range that covered the gap left behind through retirement of the Pheonix. If you mean the range similar to a PL-15, then no the U.S. doesn’t have that range yet, projected to be closed this year with the AIM-260. If I’m being honest, the range is not what is the deadlier aspect of the PL-15, it’s the ability to handoff guidance updates to an AWACS.
The missiles concept is fully developed & ready for testing. The US decided at the time it’s not needed & placed this concept in a project bin where the US has stacks of other countless technologies & weapon systems that are pending use in the event they may need them one day.
I assume MAKO is now active in the development phase & testing should go underway shortly. But there is no proof.
What does long-range mean to you? Since you are clearly obscuring reality to lie to yourself that the US can never be behind on anything in terms military capability.
You are only lying to yourself I hope you do realize.
If you’re going into that assumption, you are not taking our discussion in good faith. Having a missile range expanded estimated over 100mi for the latest version of it is quite “long-range”, essentially matching the Pheonix which was a “long-range” missile. The PL-15 is estimated 120-190mi. While the current AMRAAM isn’t comparable in maximum range, it’s current range is respectable and still a relevant threat until the AIM-260 can be fielded in sufficient numbers.
You are the one that said the Aim-120 covered the gap left behind by the Aim-54.
That is the very definition of grasping for straws.
We have strayed far from the beaten path of the Su-27 I hope you realize as well.
As much as I love talking with you about useless information that does not do me any good in the real world, this is not the topic for it.
So, we need to work on the SM’s radar it is said to have all the capabilities of the Zhuk-27 just not its power & range.
the N001 is really showing its inferiority out there compared to 19km acm & better FoV modes. GJ removed the inability for HMD tracking of Western Fighters.
They can lock you up just as quick as we can with the IRST. The difference is that we need to switch over from IRST to PD to achieve quicker tracks.
We also are limited to the 60-degree FoV TWS which means if we miss a target on a first scan, we must wait for it to repeat which greatly reduces our reaction time to Western Fighters.
The SMT is currently shining with its much-needed historical buff to FM & it’s very modern & powerful Zhuk. The SM is not bad whatsoever. The RWR helps big time. It’s just the N001VP is missing its modes which is only right for this late model Mech.
Can’t even manually scan the radar lobe to try and pick up specific targets faster like we used to, it’s annoying.
There was a buff? I’m not tracking any FM file changes in the last ~3-4 months
1 Like
Well, the SMT must of had been updated now, it was not like this in dev. It can actually roll and dogfight at supersonic. It’s nothing spectacular, but it’s more like the 9-13 now. The G is the talk of the town as well in the RR thread.
The main thing that convinces me personally is the roll rate & increased response to input. I have videos of it prior & it’s pretty apparent the roll was updated. Alpha seems to be the same. It’s just the agility has been increased.
Spoiler
Lastly GJ has decided to expound a little more regarding their updates to the game the last update before Major drop.
I knew they update the game that is not apparent in Datamine. But I was unaware they update the game without any visual download on our end. Of course they mention they have their other methods to retrieve feedback. Like I said we all have our ways of getting out points across that do not always involve reporting.
As for the Flanker radar. From what I gathered, The Su-27M is currently the Russian domestic version of the Su-30MK2-based SMK mid-life upgrade, equipped with a N001VP Radar.
The radar in in the Su-27SM the N001VP because Russia does not use export-controlled radars with less capability.
Anyway, besides the name (not really important), our Su-27SM should have the capability of tracking 10 targets simultaneously (not really important either) & able to target two of them with ARHs (R-77s) simultaneously or two of them with SARHs (R-27RE) simultaneously.
Additionally, since our radar is the domestic version of the Chinese N001VEP. It has all the same upgrades of it, the 70km targeting range, additional search modes etc. plus further capability as the domestic version not export. But those extra differences are not defined & disclosed.
The issue is, I cannot find out what exactly are those additional modes & detection ranges exactly.
There were no changes to the FM file, maybe you are experiencing the reduced weight or drag / center of gravity shift of carrying R-77 vs R-27ER?
One is half the weight anyway.
I’m discussing the fact that there were no datamine changes to the FM… I also don’t notice a difference in-game either.
@_Fantom2451 any info?
1 Like
I considered that yes, But I am now increasing the fuel because its not as detrimental anymore. People are not taking 30min fuel with tanks. I am personally carrying all R-77s & R-27ERs. So the SMT is just getting heavier for me.
I was completely unable to take more than 20min and a drop tank prior to update. I am personally increasing the fuel to 25 & a drop tank.
If the plane is heavy, it’s still feels heavy it just has more range of motion. than previously. You would probably get a better feel for it in the G. People grinding the ICE in the G are mostly reporting greater effects.
I figure the changes are instructor related, therefore they will not be so apparent in the model. There was no increase in capability. It feels more like they raised the threshold & speed at which the Mig-29 holds its optimal performance. Before, once you reached Mach the aircraft locks up & can barely roll or pull out of a dive. Now you can maneuver to the same efficiency found at .80 at Mach 1+.
Additionally, the Su-27 burns slightly more fuel it appears. I understand we are doing more evasive flying in the beginning of the match. But I tested in a custom going my regular match route & flying still requires I bring a minute more or two fuel. Nothing major.
People are reporting the Su-27 flies a little different. I noticed it as well just seems a little “floatier” (best I can describe it.) Mostly when it rolls then pitches I feel it.
Full real does seem slightly different. The Su-27 will seem to hang up in the sky suspended a little longer when you completely stall the aircraft out.
Only proven issues are lack of extended range mode and A-G mode. And there is also info of availability of LPRF for N001VEP.