Well, irl, NATO jets just opted to beat the aircraft with longer range missiles, you don’t even need super good maneuverability for a dogfight when you prevent it in the first place.
Not to the same extent, and atleast with the F-15, when you get to a speed when you pull more, you actually have energy retention, it’s just always beating the Su-27 in a dogfight.
I hate to break it to you, but the fighter mafia and the rest of the dribbling idiots following that ideology successfully made sure that they did exactly the opposite, while retaining the BVR capability, they also had amazing flight performance in every fighter since the F-16 first released
Managing the stall… If you’re already stalling then the fight is lost. This won’t ever win in practice, there is so many jets that outrate you and outpull you. All someone has to do is just survive that little window the Su-27 can pull a lot and then kill it, and even then that time where the Flanker can pull a lot isn’t even special, because many jets can pull more while not sacrificing the drastic amount of energy to do so.
Yeah you’re right, idk why I am defending the flanker, can’t stand them anyway, would rather fly my J-10 in peace than go near the mess that is the J-11A
there isnt a single nato fighter aircraft with poor maneuverabilty, even the f35 which gets alot of misingformation spread regarding it is said to be very maneuverable by its pilots
2 Likes
I mean, for a while I was kind of a Flanker defender. It was because I loved the jets irl and wanted them to be good dogfighters ingame like they are irl, but they aren’t, like the Mig-29’s (moreso the SMT), and that’s a big part of the post.
You’re correct, NATO doesn’t really have any fighters with bad maneuverability. I didn’t say it directly but that wasn’t the impression I was trying to give off.
really true since F-14A honestly, F-4 was kinda the first and last
1 Like
At least as I know it, because my knowledge of the Fighter Mafia is kinda lacking, they wanted a focus on lighter fighters that are good at dogfighting because they saw the poor performance of radar missiles in Vietnam and never thought they’d advance. Their philosophy sort of is responsible for, atleast as an example, the F-16’s maneuverability, but what made the F-16’s legacy as a great jet is it’s long range air to air weaponry and great air to ground weapons. And that’s sort of the story with a lot of US jets, they have good flight performance, but their radars and advanced weapons have made them kings, both things that the Fighter Mafia was against. I’d say, the only things they were right about was the need for dogfighting capabilities in Vietnam, and the energy maneuverability theory.
Now, atleast as I know, their influence is gone, because well, we realized that their philosophy of dogfighting to gain air superiority is outdated. It’s not to say they didn’t play a part in US jets, but I think they are largely overstated.
There were efforts to emulate Russian maneuverability. When the Flanker was revealed, the US tried to match its AoA performance and instantaneous turn rate. No US fighter could really match the Flanker in those regards so they modified an F-16; increased the size of its horizontal stab, and made FCS adjustments. Here are the results:
I believe they implemented these upgrades into the F-16 block 15
Pretty sure there’s a video where one of the pilots talks about it and says the f35 can still dogfight an f16. It just would never do that, it would play against its strengths
1 Like
Can, but it wouldn’t, because it’s noticeably worse in terms of flight performance
I like how MiG-29 has 20 dps at 1 kilometer with racks no arm. But F-16 is 21.6 dps clean and suddenly, wow it can 2 circle a MiG-29.
Su-27 at 20-22 dps at 200 armed.
The MiG-29 chart with full racks has 90.7% of the clean F-16C’s (at 25% internal) SEP, but it’s ooh they can only 1 circle. It’s, almost as if the MiG-29 has the F-16C b50/52’s STR what a mystery.
3 Likes
Throwing my hat in the ring as a newer top tier player. From my experience the base Su-27 feels fine, great even, primarily due to that fact that its bracket is filled with F-4 ground pounders and its ability to carry 6 of the best fox 1s in game. I haven’t gotten my hands on the mig-29 so I can’t speak to their performance but the Su-27sm definitely needs a little love. My main gripe with the Su-27sm is when you’re forced defensive by fox 3s you lose all speed, and unless you get bailed out by a teammate or they lose interest, you’re gonna eat an AIM120. With better energy retention you could stay defensive longer and actually have energy to get nose on for some offence. Maybe a better fox 3 is needed for Russia but I think a flight model change would be a good start, and if it makes the base Su-27 too strong maybe take away 2 27ERs or bump it up .3 BR. Balanced top tier would be good for gaijin too, people would have a reason to grind other tech trees(buy premiums) and players won’t burn out as fast.
I ridiculed you because your statement makes no sense. The chinese flankers are better than the Russian ones in some aspects, however your wording was as if we were to throw up our arms and go play China when we want Russian aircraft. I perfectly enjoy PLAAF aircraft and I look forward to seeing much more variants of flanker ingame, but when you phrase it as such that we are simply to not bother with Russia when they provide unique oppurtunity is blatantly misguiding.
2 Likes
Don’t come crying when our J-15/J-16s blow anything you receive out the water
I will be enjoying them with you )))) Does China have any analogue to R-37M?
The PL-17 is china’s ‘AWACS’ hunter although trades a bit more range for a loss in speed compared to the R-37M, in a sleeker chassis so will be relatively comparable