Amazing tbh
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
Thanks :D
(Forgot to reply, my bad! Repost, deleted previous post!)
Then why do the videos show it to not be the case? As for being limited by the game engine, that is just straight up non-sense. Gaijin has the capability to make the Su-27 perform as it does in real life, yet they choose not to. They could make an aircraft perform like a genuine UFO if they wanted, they aren’t some how limited by the game engine when it comes to this. They have the tools available to implement it in a way would be faithful to how it is in real life. But again, they don’t want to. Because they employ selective sourcing when it comes to this aircraft.
Your statement regarding the Hud footage, while partially correct, still ignores the point. You disvalidate the footage because we don’t know the specifics. But do you know what we know the specifics of? The footage from the airshow. But you also disvalidate it by saying… That we know the conditions for it? So you raise it as a point against my argument (and by proxy the one in the video) that we don’t know the conditions in the Hud footage, but say that because we know the aircraft is in airshow conditions, that also disvalidates the airshow footage?
Do you have any idea how you sound saying that? “Oh, we can’t use this footage because we don’t know the conditions! But we also can’t use this one because it’s under ideal conditions!” But the funny part is, if you had actually watched the video in full, you would have read the text near the end, where Squishface literally states and I quote:
“There are no circumstances I have tested in War Thunder where the Su-27 will complete a 360 degree turn in 13 seconds with any fuel load.”
So we emulated the same conditions that were given by the video, yet it is still unable to pull the maneuver demonstrated in the video? Why is that? Can you tell me? Because I know why: the airframe is under-performing.
Textbook whataboutism. Just because it may be a issue with other vehicles, does it somehow reduce/make how it affects the Su-27 less important? No. In fact, I’d say the fact that the Su-27 is like this is a very important issue to struggle – because it is supposed to be the premier of Soviet/Russian air design, yet it isn’t modeled in-game properly. So naturally, people will be far more interested in seeing the aircraft perform as it should.
Please don’t argue in bad faith, it makes you look stupid. Your points especially regarding the HUD footage and airshow footage show that you have no intention of actually trying to improve the situation.
3 Likes
The game engine limits modern airframes always has done, this might be new to Russian players but not British or other nations. It’s the reason they cannot model canards or swing wing aircraft correctly.
Gaijin have tried to make the best compromise like they do with every single vehicle in game.
Yes they could make the Su-27 turn faster but they would likely have to adjust another parameter of the flight model to accomplish this. Remember while you and your friend Squish are discounting the fact that fms are built from a framework data base using existing flight models and adjusted not created singularly for each vehicle. Adjusting code or parameters for one airframe can indirectly affect another that uses the same model parts. With how frequently Gaijin release content it would be impossible to model every single airframe to the level of fidelity you expect.
This game is not a simulator.
Point still stands, we cannot use data if we do not know the point we start from and the point we are trying to get to. We do not know if this is a lightened airframe (yes thats possible Russia sent a pre production Su-57 to China) We do not know if it is a clean airframe are the wing pylons removed? is it carrying any stores? We do not know air temperature and density, we do not know what power plant (variant of the airframe) is fitted to that particular Su-27. For the data to be useable we need to know this information.
Point above Squishface and yourself are expecting the Su-27 to behave like it does in the real world, this game is not a sim and even DCS fm for the Flanker is not perfect. We could take cockpit footage of so many other aircraft and they would not align with war thunders interpretation.
Not whataboutism, you and your friends make it sound like the Su-27 is this forgotten maligned child, left to rot in the corner. Ignoring the pile of fixes it has had and the buffs to payload and power plants.
Su-27 isnt perfect but neither is any other top tier jet.
Temper your expectations.
Guys, how are you going to make a flight model for the Su-30SM? Video from the air show?
In fact, this question is very interesting for me, because Rafale was tuned based on video materials.
There are good video for it? i know there are videos for the Su-35s. Almost Su-57 LV of UFO. But a bit slower on yaw. Like F-22 (USA fanboys stay away).
Side note. Su-30sm2 has being confirme to use R-37m and Perform a 130km Kill.
1 Like
Searching for vid. found this Sukhoi Su-30SM Flanker Super Maneuverable Russian Fighter Aircraft. (3:26) Blue Afterburner. So Same engine as the Su-27sm/Su-34? but with TVC.
1 Like
Ingame it might be a middle ground between su-27sm and su-33 in terms of maneuverability
shouldn’t it be better than both?
Also better vid MAKS Airshow ✈️ Su-30SM, The Flying UNO Reverse Card!! - YouTube
1 Like
No it wont.
It will be more maneuverable than both of them simply because of the TVC.
It is “only” around 1 ton heavier than the Su27, which isnt that much if you think about the Su-27 being able of carrying 9.5 tons of fuel.
So in the end it will be alot more maneuverabale especially at slow speeds due to the Thrust Vectoring.
I cant talk about higher speeds tho, depends if TVC works at higher speeds (trans/supersonic) and on how gaijin implements it.
But at slow speeds it should be uncontested.
1 Like
Irrelevant for War Thunder as the drag of the Wing Pylons isnt modeled afaik.
So best case scenario is that it is clean wing and would then perform correctly.
Worst case scenario is that it isnt clean wing and gaijin models it as if it is clean wing.
So in the end we would either get a Su27 that performs correctly or underperforms.
Did we know that for the Rafale FM adjustment?
well we kinda do it is a trainer for the Su-27S you can clearly see it as it has the IRST mounted in the center.
Ontop of that the Airshow was in 1989 and from my knowledge there shouldnt be any other Flanker variant at that time.
So again,
best case scenario is that the one at the airshow is exactly like the su27s we have in game, so if gaijin models the flanker in game after that, it performs like its real life counter part.
Worst case scenario is that the one in the airshow is a trainer (it is) and
has worse engines than the one in game.
So in the end we could only get a Su27 that would underperform if gaijin models the Su27s after the Trainer used in the airshow,
which btw performs better than the Flanker we have in game.
Wasnt that shown by Gaijin modeling the Su-27 after the T-10 which isnt even close to the production Su-27?
7 Likes
Easy enough to find, btw. It’s 389 blue. Serial number 96310413042. Т10U-7(seventh prototype for 27UB, 389 blue), first flight 17.04.1989. Currently, this aircraft is installed as a monument in Ufa, Russia.
Afaik, no modifications were made to the airframe/powerplant, it was a late prototype.
3 Likes
R-37M is a very scary missile IRL. While in the game we launch the amraam at a maximum range of 20-35 km from a high altitude for the most effective chances of shooting down the enemy, then we can launch the R-37M at a range of 150-200 km
1 Like
there is also this video, at various times you see the engines and the blue afterburner, you can even see the TVC working too
ngl, this is a really cool video talking about the su30sm
2 Likes
Theoretically yes but i don’t think TVC Will be working fine ingame, at least in the first months…
1 Like
They’ve been goofing around with them for a while on missiles now, and they seem to largely work ok at this point, so hopefully they’ll work relatively ok in-game. It’ll be interesting seeing them at work in manual mode in sim.
I Hope ur right and it works fine on the planes as they work with missiles, i’m generally kinda skeptical when gaijin tries to add new cool stuff for new vehicles.
i have been thinking about the r77 and aim120 and came to conclusion even if the su27sm had the ability to take 8 aim120 i still wouldn’t bring them
at close range r77 is better and long range the su27sm radar goes from good but sometimes unreliable to very bad and sometimes reliable
in particular the tws is awful it just assumes planes stand still in midair while it searches for other airplanes
2 Likes
I think the thing ppl might need to be careful about is their expectations of how much itll impact RB FM’s tbh.
The instructor screws all planes to some degree, and tends to need to be tailored either towards rate fighting (2c, energy retention is what the general community calls it) or towards radius fighting (1c, or AOA fighting). The instructor might allow the Su-30SM to pull a lot but give it “terrible” energy retention, or it might limit its AOA capabilities but remain decent at retaining energy.
In sim, there’s a good chance itll be a big deal, but mostly in the hands of good flanker players in dogfights. The full real controls and the ability to use SAS modes will allow the plane to get the most out of the TVN’s without sacrificing energy retention if the pilot is good.
Sorta the issue with the Typhoon atm. The radar is better, but not by much atm, which has the effect of taking what could be either the single best, or potentially second best (depending on how much you value the 2 extra AIM-120’s the F-15C/E/I can take) BVR jet in-game, to be tremendously unreliable in BVR, simply due to the fact you cant seem to depend on the radar to do anything a radar needs to do when it needs to do it.
4 Likes