It’s not. You are hallucinating.
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
2 Likes
Youre in wrong thread a bit
Spoiler
But still, according to F-15E flight manual(1993, PW229) at 20K feet must be able to sustain 6.5G at mach 1.5.(clean aircraft) and 5G(a bit more actually) at 30k feet. So, instructor might be just pulling “low enough” to sustain on such speeds
40k pounds*
Yeah, but I was making a comparison to the current Su-27s.
Sorry, I don’t quite understand what you meant by “We need to clarify.”.
Do you mean “серия 42” and “серия 48”? Or do you mean “изделие 99М1”?
Translation error
99M there is no such designation
Hmm, maybe 99M1 is an outdated designation? I found a few references to it:
The journal in the third picture is from 2021.
What is interesting is that the journal in the first picture “взлёт 04/2006” says that the AL-31F-M2 (99M2) was intended to be used on the Su-27SM, and even was renamed to AL-31-SM (99SM). However, I have not seen any other source saying the M2 is going to be used on the 27SM, but I have seen multiple sources stating that the M1 was tested and flown on flying Su-27 laboratories, 8 27SMs were delivered with a plan for 24 in total.
What are you using? Is it some software built into the forum or your browser? I would recommend using deepl.com for translation, or at least for translating from Russian to English. Russian tends to omit a lot of words and rely on context, whereas English does not do that as often. Older translating software tend to struggle translating because of that.
Magazine articles are not to be taken seriously.Maybe it is also commonly referred to as
browser
Where would you look for that kind of information, apart from being in the industry or having connections (assuming that info is not classified)? I want to find out if the M1 was ever used in service and possibly report/suggest it to the developers.
Okay, I’ll find out.
3 Likes
I have seen some bug reports on it, but they were rejected for lacking sources (rightfully). Were there any discussions on the forums about it with the devs? Do you have a link? I am curious what they said.
Also, give him my thanks.
PS: thank you for being a messenger too, lol.
1 Like
I don’t know. Maybe they directly contacted tech mods or cbrs.
1 Like
They just copied Su-27 HUD, right? (dont have DEV, but can make a guess)
copied mig-29 hud
Meh, they removed grom-1 from the su34, did ppl actually get mad at this missile? Like just move and you won’t die lmao
1 Like
According to some players just 6 grom- were enough to destroy an entire base, i think now i understand their decision. However i’d love to larp with the pseudo cruise missile :/
2 Likes
The grom 2s are still plenty godly for the role of sniping bases. This was all pure manufactured outrage from a mix of people misunderstanding the weapon and youtubers shamelessly fanning the 2-minutes of hate “RUSSIA BAD! RUSSIA BIAS!” narrative for easy clicks and algorithm engagement. If you read most of the comments it was largely a mix of F-4S bombers terrified at the prospect of a grom stealing their base kill before they could finish racing to a base and SPAAGs furious that the grom outranged their SAMs. Both fears are outlandish since groms are slow and any super-sonic aircraft racing full burn to a base will beat it to the target, which could be seen in the 7-10 minute videos watching the grom slowly glide to the base while captions lamented how war thunder wasn’t ready for such russian bias, and any long range attack against SPAAGs would have a similarly long time to impact. Given the duration of the average ground RB match, I wouldn’t be surprised if the entire match would end before a long range grom strike reaches a SPAAG. Simply adopting the habit of moving once every 2 minutes would render you immune even if you don’t see the launch. SPAAGs would counter that if you flew closer then the grom would more quickly reach them, but then you’re sacrificing the range advantage and it’s not really any different that CCIP assisted dumb rockets which are capable of getting ground kills in ground RB but are outdated weapons by that tier.
Maybe grom1 would have more impact sniping bases in sim battles, but grom 2 can do that too and I haven’t heard a single youtuber bring up the issue that a single strike eagle will be able to vaporize an entire frontline worth of NPC ground targets in sim in a single pass with a swarm of GBU-39s. Apparently war thunder isn’t ready for russia to get new toys but new american toys get a seal of approval.
It’s just insulting how much gaijin bends the knee to these whiners. First removing a missile with limited applications just because they cried, and now apparently considering upgrading the F-15E’s engines. Yet somehow the “Russian bias” myth persists in the community.
I know I’m unlocking strike eagle first before I get around to the fullback.
7 Likes