Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
1 Like
This seems like its historical description rather then the maximum aerodynamic parameters in which he completed cobra in testing.
Not the full potential aerodynamic capability of the Flanker itself. Is there evidence that this has not been surpassed in over 35 years?
Scratch that. Yes, the parameters described were surpassed by Viktor Pugachev in which his cobra obtains higher degrees of alpha.
Still, it says what heights and what speeds. The cobra made by Viktor Pugachev is absolutely the same as in these photos
2 Likes
Viktor Pugachev in which his cobra obtains higher degrees of alpha than the one first accomplished by Igor Volkov in his No.09-06 (T10-30). Higher than 80 degrees.
My point is this does not quite tell us the true maximum aerodynamic capability of the Flanker in this regime. Right?
How high was Igor Volkov in this test run? I did not quite understand the altitude you listed.
Read carefully
1 Like
I see. Yup, never mind.
So is there any evidence that the flanker has surpased these parameters since in speed or in angles of attack?
Also it still does not solve the issue of performing it properly in full real at 450km. Doing it any lower causes the aircraft to lose lift control and the nose shoots downward dropping its airspeed to 190km.
450km is where it seems to be set, I am testing now and trying to complete it at varying altitudes. Will record.
Not surpassed
1 Like
Modern aircraft are capable of maneuvers exceeding those possible by purely aerodynamic design. This capability, called supermaneuverability, includes rapid changes in acceleration and high-G turns that are not feasible from traditional aircraft. Furthermore, newer aircraft often have a low radar cross-section (RCS) profile and/or RCS which varies rapidly with look angle. This paper summarizes the results of a performance evaluation of several conventional and emerging tracking approaches for supermaneuverable targets. The algorithms have been evaluated with respect to target maneuverability, along the continuum of mild maneuvers to supermaneuvers and as a function of target RCS. From this analysis, we draw the following broad conclusions: For high-SNR stable RCS targets exhibiting modest maneuvering, conventional Kalman filter (KF) trackers work well and are computationally appealing. For modern targets that exhibit a low RCS profile, high scintillation, and/or high maneuverability, KF approaches fail and more sophisticated approaches are required. While particle filter (PF) trackers are more computationally demanding than the KF, they provide a tracking capability not achievable by KF methods. This paper provides several case studies that backup these conclusions.
Supermanueverability is a requirement for 5th generation air superiority fighter and 6th generation. Tracking radar frequencies must rapidly vary depending on closure rate, distance and altitude of a target and then filter out those returns. They also have tracking algorithms for conventional flying targets. Supermanueverability greatly increases in disrupting this targeting chain. Techniques such as notching are a conventional radar defeating technique.
Supermaneuvrability is a REQUIREMENT FOR RADAR DEFEATING and they are literally developing ways to counter it in developing new radar tracking algorithms.
So much for a slogan huh? You don’t have a clue what you are talking about. Don’t take this the wrong way.
Got more links and technical studies in full will share when I get home.
Thank you, I’ll definitely take a look at the article, but we’re talking about the Su 27, late 80s. When this wasn’t used, it wasn’t used much later. BVR is about speed, altitude and modern AESA radars are different than the original PD radars APG-63 or N001. Plus, in an environment like Europe where there are XY air and ground radars pointed at the aircraft at once… it’s questionable if it’s a good idea to slow down.
Yeah, the Su27 is literally the forerunner of dynamic attainment AKA supermaneuvrability.
What are you suggesting? Radar defeating techniques such as notching did not exist in the 80s? Radar frequencies and ways to disrupt them did not exist until when in your mind? The early 2000’s? lol.
Yeah, totally dude, the Russians had no idea supermaneuvrability can help defeat radar tracking and the frequencies needed to guide missiles. Just because you did not read it in the books you purchased off Amazon or saw it on YouTube does not mean there is no military doctrine on it going back to the 70’s…
Look man, it’s become quite apparent that you are less about being productive in seeking out a truth of a matter and more about bending over backwards just to be right about everything. It’s a waste of time.
Ah, so you are now conceding that Supermaneuvrability does assist in defeating radar tracking. Just not in the 80s with lesser capable radars? Just today?
Hmmmm… You seemed so sure of yourself when you shared your pretty little hard cover book just an hour ago.
So, what year did the Russians, and the Americans realize supermaneuvrability can assist in disrupting tracking radar frequencies and processing algorithms?
If you find anything valid I will be only too happy, in 20 years of research in aviation I have not been able to find anything about it except the Sukhoi ad. The Swedes didn’t come up with anything either, and they had some head start with Drakken. Good luck and if you can find anything around, send it to me, I’d be very happy.
1 Like
We are not talking about detection. Active guided missiles use High PRF frequencies and the Dopler effect for terminal guidance. Why? High PRF frequency is most accurate at close range. They use the doppler effect because it relies on velocity, closure rate (head on). A missile is fast, and everything appears to its radar as coming head on at a high closure rate. Drastically reducing your own closure rate effects signal processing exploiting the Doppler radars’ reliance on velocity measurement. This is what notching does. Disrupting signal processing.
Chaff while performing these techniques further disrupts signal processing because now any radar return that did come in is now split and all appears to be in a zero-energy state or all moving in relation one to another.
Advanced radar missiles like the AMMRAM have the ability to transmit different frequencies and filter and process those returns. They are still limited because they are small radars and frequency agility. However, that is why even more maneuverable fighters alongside low observability is called for.
Supermaneuvrability is a requirement for 5th gen and 6th generation Air superiority & Air dominance platforms.
This is where you err if you keep looking at it from this perspective. I look at it every day like I do not know crap. Once you start acting like you studied it all and seen it all etc. You stop learning.
I will as soon as I can. Because I am here to make a player not break him!
In Europe, when an aircraft is targeted not by a single missile but by multiple R-37s or Meteors, including long-range heat-seeking and surface-to-air missiles, and the aircraft is targeted by XY radars and passive detection systems… I really don’t know. Your article talks about the combination of low rcs and supermaneuverability being good. But don’t work with such a complex environment. But we’re really far from Su 27 Flanker B.
NGAD from what I’ve read will be more focused on stealth, speed and range. Agility should take a bit of a back seat, but this project is beyond my interest.
1 Like
The Su-27 gets destroyed in a dogfight against pretty much any semi-competent F-15 or F-16 player. The R-73 has to carry it in a dogfight because if it comes down to guns only then it just loses. There is no special energy saving tactic…no Mach 1 trim turn…nothing that will save you.
Also the Su-27 is not good at recovering energy at all unless it is going straight.
Also there is no instructor in Air SB so I don’t see what you are crying about with instructor limitations.
ROFL.
Do you perhaps think that the Su27s primary Ace up its the sleeve was not dogfighting? Dogfighting regardless of how good its is in nose authority and high off boresight capability was actually its secondary role if it had to after expending its primary missiles and 50% internal fuel?
It is exclusively a Strategic Air Armies Asset of the VKS for a reason… It was given the range, the powerful (not modelled) very advanced (by western Air Force analyst) radar alongside the ability to carry an array of Long burning, extended range Alamo missiles of IR, Semi Active and Active sorts?
I am not saying should be easily beaten by the F-15 or F-16. Just a thought perhaps you are not playing to its strong suit. Granted the Su27s radar is still not modelled, and the F-16 is overperforming in full real.
What fuel states are you in when getting easily beaten by the F-15 and F-16? Are you caught slipping with 700lb R27ERs hanging off you?
Are you going to sit there and tell me nothing is wrong with the following sentence structure and choice of words?
Finally someone names a speed range for the Cobra maneuver.
Su-27 does cobra fine in these speeds and is pretty easy to manage in full real controls. I don’t know what Ziggy is coping about.
2 Likes
Yeah I said it seems to be capped at 450km the only one the first one was a real cobra.
Do it at 300km please.
I never stated the cobra should be done at high speeds and clarified the position many times even stating that there is no footage of vapor clouds while performing it indicating that its slow.
Why is seeking out a truth coping?
So, let me ask you. If allowing the aircraft to pull higher alpha, say the speeds other supermaneuverable techniques which are performed will that ruin your experience in sim?
You already get smoked by the F-15 and F-16. Of course, it has nothing to do with you or their flight models. I do not see why unlimiting some alpha at 800km like before and removing immediate death at 900km if you try, would hurt your performance in a dogfight at sim.
can you leave the nonsense reformer spreyite propaganda at home? Thanks
the F-35 is currently the most capable and successful 5th gen program in the world, 2015 wants its nonsense headlines back
2 Likes
Why don’t you actually demonstrate what your problem is?
Your initial position was that the Su-27 flight model was nerfed when in fact it was not.
I also have not been able to experience what you call immediate death at 900km/h so maybe you are just having a skill issue in full real controls.
1 Like
1 Like