It is a joke because the in-game aircraft maneuvers as though it does, doing full 360 loops and such.
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
5 Likes
To my knowledge there have been no leaks to suggest that Su-30SM is coming. Just people saying “Su-33? That’s it? Man that’s gonna be dead on arrival if that’s all Russia’s getting. Maybe the Su-33 will be the new $80 premium and they’re going to give russia something like the Su-30SM so that they can seriously start competing against first the F-15E and leaked Eurofighter/Rafale.”
1 Like
Not bricked but performin ridiculous maneuvers like mig pointed out, not that these maneuvers are useful combat-wise but still, it shows how flawed is the logic behind the FMs made by gaijin
3 Likes
The upcoming canard/thrust vectoring Flankers would be cool and I want them in game, but wouldn’t change the state of USSR/Russian flight models. Canards increase angle-of-attack and turn performance at the cost of added drag and worsened energy retention. Thrust vectoring means great low to mid speed performance but at the cost of again, worsened retention.
-
Su-30SM - Twin seat, has both canards and TVC. Would be better than current Su-27SM in terms of low and mid speed turn performance, but more drag and weight means you lose even more speed.
-
Su-33 - Single-seat, has canards. Has a lot more weight, more drag, but more angle-of-attack. Would honestly be the worst “Flanker” in terms of flight performance. (Since Su-34 isn’t technically a “Flanker.”)
-
Su-35 - Single-seat, has TVC. Would be an all around upgrade over current Flanker at low/mid speed, but would also have worse retention, since added weight and thrust vectoring.
-
Su-37 - Single seat, has both canards and TVC. If added, think of it as a single-seated Su-30 but very slightly heavier in terms of flight performance. Likely best Flanker in terms of maneuverability.
I really do hope Russia’s flight models get better (Su-27S/SM and MiG-29S/SMT are sad rn) but I doubt it.
3 Likes
aren’t the su35 engines stronger though? so they make up for the weight?
The way that I look at things is that the Flanker just needs to successfully get into position to launch an R-73 after the merge. The problem is that while the Flanker can pull more AoA than other planes, its opponents aren’t slouches either and you can run into the problem that your energy bleeds so fast that your control surfaces start losing authority and the opponent just pulls away before you can get that HOBs shot off. If they fix the flight models then we’ll have more time to get that R-73 shot off. Thrust vectoring will make the energy bleed faster, but it could be worth it if it allows the flanker to to more quickly achieve that R-73 shot.
3 Likes
yeah, but it’ll probs be noticeably worse w/o the thrust vectoring, and only better in low speed flight regimes. more weight almost always means worse flight performance ingame. for example, the F-15E has noticeably more thrust than the F-15A to make up for the weight, but still loses to F-15A. (sorry this is a bad example, we don’t have any thrust vectoring aircraft that i can use instead.)
yeah, i see most Russian flight models being based around HOBS combat rather than basic BFM in the future. they really don’t have the lead in flight performance and i don’t see them regaining it.
The thing is the Flanker’s low-speed AOA performance with the instructor is absolutely crap.
You need to use sim controls but if you don’t use it, F-15 can actually beat you in a one-circle.
1 Like
Fighting the C with a mig29 and su-27 isn’t so bad tbh, it’s the f15a that is just weird to say the least.
That’s because the F-15C and F-16C are actually somewhat close to their diagrams.
Also regarding the su-37, it has a higher TW ratio than the su-35 from what I’ve read, and I agree it would probably be the best flanker and I wouldn’t mind seeing it in game at some point but the flanker series in game currently has its drag modeled wrong as the engines are over performing in certain scenarios. And given that gaijin would rather boost all around drag then fix the engines in their certain scenarios it has become what we have today. Even still the flankers in sim controls, which is what I use all the time no matter the plane, is still one of my favorite dog fighters as it forces you to use some brain cells and manage your energy while still giving you the ability to get good angles with its aoa
2 Likes
I don’t understand what the deal is with the instructor. If you use keybinds to input full pitch up, then shouldn’t that override the instructor? I still haven’t gotten around to setting up my controls to try to swap between modes.
My takeaway when flying the Flanker is that it, more than any other plane that I have flown, has forced me to take the greatest possible care with managing fuel load. You really need to sweat and min-max the hell out of your initial fuel load and manage afterburner usage so that you arrive to the combat in a state where you’re practically running on fumes just so that you can turn a bit better. But then you need to take care that you don’t run completely dry in a way that you can’t return to an airfield. I’m going to mangle the spelling, but I’m used to that Rita voice yelling “RABISH VOJRATTA” at me.
I really hope the MiG-29 (9.12/9.13) and SMT get better (why didn’t they just add the MiG-29M?) along with the Flanker but still. I doubt that’s on Gaijin’s list of stuff to do.
3 Likes
Let’s say it together
PAE!
It’s either the sea lightning or the EAP 😂
What about the Su-27M? Would that bring anything new to the table for USSR top tier air?
A good radar.
Is it’s radar better then the SM? I thought the 27SM was more modern then the 27M, but that the 27M had better flight peformance. But yall know more then I do most likely lol