Congratulations sincerely. More opportunity I think you in particular can take advantage of.
Now if you do not mind, I have some Su-27 gaming. & R-77 slinging to do.
:)
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
I’m not stopping you
Best Flanker so far at the moment.
The N001VEP is just unbearable at the moment. I don’t think the R-77 is that bad.
Oddly I do fine in J-11A.
1 Like
是先后引导，不是同时引导
1 Like
Su-27SM is getting fun now.
Telegram: Contact @rogozin_alexey
Илон Маск похвалил российские космические технологии. | Пикабу (pikabu.ru)
Маск признал сильное влияние российских разработок на двигатели Space X (ko.ru)
Илон Маск назвал российские двигатели лучшими на данный момент - Афиша Daily (afisha.ru)
1 Like
My boy!!!
Coming in clutch as always.
1 Like
Cool, so as it is said the RD-180 was never used on a SpaceX rocket and the SpaceX stuff is entirely designed and produced in the US. There are no Russian parts or pieces ever used by the falcon 9.
Touching back with the reason this was brought up - the R-77, the grid fins are ultra thin at the point and are designed for reduced drag whereas the falcon 9’s are optimized for higher drag to stabilize and slow down the booster for re-entry.
This doesn’t need further explanation, the two are not the same. The falcon 9’s are easily optimized as air brakes and a method of slowing down whereas the R-77’s are optimized for high controllability and reduced torque requirement while maintaining high precision. In both designs it reduces cost and in the case of the falcon 9 there are no compromises. For the R-77, the compromise is transonic wave drag. It is far more efficient to launch at above mach, and this is more easily done now thanks to super cruise capable fighters.
The grid fins may be disappearing due to the requirement for missiles of the future to be low observable as well as the fighters. One benefit that was never truly realized on the R-77 is that of foldable grid fins, being that they can fit more in a smaller space such as an internal weapons bay.
Anyhow, if I recall correctly the maximum R-77’s is 12-16 depending on future Sukhoi variants. I’m excited to see them implement the dual racks on the belly between the nacelles.
3 Likes
Did Space X make their own rockets from the begining? No.
So, what government did they contract with for their missions? The US.
What Rockets did the US employ? The Russian RD-180
At the end of the day. The fact remains that Russian ballistic rocket designs are amazing.
They are used by the US today & Elon Musk even concedes to that.
You changed the goal post to “Russian parts”.
Space X produces its own rockets now.
But the very grid fins they use now were invented in The Soviet Union.
It is very Russian regardless if the titanium was forged in Florida or Idaho.
It is purely a Russian design.
No other nation on Earth came up with the design.
I was always right.
Grid fins of both R-77 & Falcon 9 is optimal for Supersonic, Hyper Sonic, High Hypersonic & Reentry speeds, Space X still uses them, Grid fins are not airbrakes, Grid fins are control surfaces, USSR & RuF develop superior rockets, the US uses the Russian RD-180 & Space X used the US for their launches prior to developing their own.
1 Like
No, SpaceX never used the RD-180. The only engines they ever used were designed and produced in the US.
You are absolutely defacing yourself daily at this rate
Again, no. Literally look it up. The Falcon 9 has only ever used SpaceX designed engines.
https://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_1/Falcon-9/Merlin/index.htm
Grid fins on the Falcon 9 are optimized as air brakes to slow the rocket down and have considerably high drag in comparison to grid fins used on the R-77.
To say that anything using grid fins copied Russia is goofy because it’s like saying every single rocket propelled anything is Swedish in origin since that was where the convergent-divergent nozzle was invented. No one goes around claiming every modern rocket with such a nozzle is Swedish-originated.
4 Likes
Who can measure the fuel consumption of aircraft on the spot on mil mode and AB ?
1 Like
I can run the Su-27s for you if you like & record them. I have all of the Flankers in game spaded & aced crew.
Just let me know the parameters.
you need to measure the fuel consumption parameters via localhost or WRTI
At the airfield, head into the house and first measure with mil mode, then with AB. The same should be done at an altitude of 11 km. When the plane runs into resistance
1 Like
6 Likes
I mean. that’s a bit derived… but in of itself correct sure.
The amount of drag is proportional to frontal area, but shape also plays a significant role.
Depending only on the shape of the objects (i.e with the same frontal area) you can get a coefficient of drag difference of like 10x or more between two different objects.
1 Like
Are you not going to consider “optimized” is referring more to the design than just the size?
Are you not going to consider there is no source stating that Grid Fins are used as airbrakes ever & there is no source stating it by DESIGN?
Optimized: make the best or most effective use of (a situation, opportunity, or resource).
He said, “optimized as airbrakes”. Grid Fins are not air brakes BY DESIGN.
Find one source that states Grid Fins are used as air brakes in rockets, I will be here all week.
If I say the Su-27 is optimized as a stealth bomber, is that statement any less absurd because I put the word optimized in it?
The area of the grid depends on its size
S=ARmb
m-The number of plans in the grid
b-chord
1 Like
If you want to know about lattice wings, see the original source. I did not find the English version
1 Like
Working on this now. Both Su-27s. Correct no J-11s?