Russian Airshow + new Sukoi
-
-
Longer video here:
-
Easy target
-
3-4 weeks maybe?
-
Real not falconā¦
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
Easy target
Still pretty cool. I wonder if it will carry extra tanks for the vomit though, might be classified as a chemical weapon .
-
I believe Mav was making a joke. Thus the smile icon .
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
I believe Mav was making a joke. Thus the smile icon .
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
no joke at all
the quest for very high AOA Manoeuvrability is a quest from the 90ās at best.
Useless.
not to mention the maintenance cost of thrust vectoringā¦
-
Hmm, Russianā¦wonder who they copied that design fromā¦
-
Aināt all aircraft now from the 90ās or older?
So itās for those cases.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
-
Hmm, Russianā¦wonder who they copied that design fromā¦
I was going to say āHow American of you old Chapā oops I said it.
-
Donāt know on which model Molni is referring, I would like to know thoughā¦ regardless the SU-27 and up can pull those maneuvers and even though they slow it down when the going getās tough the tough get goingā¦ so it can get a tactical advantage in situations it seems impossible.
Yeap maybe rare in modern tacticsā¦ but as said by many for other situations like low flying and terrain masking isnāt used anymoreā¦ well itās not the case for all.
Bottom line the airframe isnāt capable only of this and on the features aspect doesnāt have anything to be jealous of othersā¦ the opposite I would say.And for some chit chat:
From the F-35 vs Su35 aspect our full truly journalists everything on the web is 100% and some members here said when they are about to engage each other the F-35 will have a tactical advantage to spot the SU earlier and flee to save itās self so even a 5th gen canāt actually handle it?
Sure the F-35 doesnāt have the ability to beat an SU but on the account of a 5th gen against a 4th or 3d gen fighter this sounds a bit disappointing.
But thatās all mambo jumbo from the press as the previous for the F-35 helmet not working at moonless nights.
And yes the answer is itās the Raptors work not the F-35ās.
But our beloved F-35 is targeted ā¦ :lol:
Raptors had a low public profile and passed to service without all that horns and whistles by the F-35ā¦ -
I have a bad feeling about this threadā¦
But yeah, high AOA is nice to watch but meant for airshows I guessā¦ The whole point of an expensive aircraft is not to get into a WVR fight, finding yourself up against a Su35 in an F35 (funny guys these Russians, same ##) you have obviously done something wrong. This is a step away from the F-16 that is more comfortable in WVR, a shift of some of concern in Europe as were trading in an F for an F/A.
Loss of high-G manoeuvrability gives people the creeps (including me), but the reality of the matter is that most countries have not been in WVR fights in the last years and use the F-16 purely as a ground attack aircraft. Last week I read a nice article about the RNlAF about their first red-flag participation in years, where an officer was basically admitting that he hadnāt been trained properly in AA tactics (developments) for a long time due to continuous service in AG roles.
-
Come on, lets be honest, itās just so cool.
Just have to love something not made in the USA
-
Come on, lets be honest, itās just so cool.
Just have to love something not made in the USA
BLASPHEMY!! Take that backā¦
-
Well USA changed the tactics
Drones
Intelligence
Tomahawks
Airplane just or mostly on patrol
Some CAS mostly with hellos.
Natives for the laundry
Done.
So no actual need for maneuverable aircraft.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
Hmm, Russianā¦wonder who they copied that design fromā¦
They didnāt, even the T-10 series of prototypes featured original aerodynamic advancements that I canāt recall being operationally available anywhere else in the world at the time (at least until General Dynamicsā entry for the LWF contest was revealedā¦), including LERX and a so-called āblended wing/bodyā (or āintegral layout designā in Russian parlance). The final layout (and basis for the entire Flanker family) was the brainchild of Mikhail Simonov, who basically reworked the aerodynamics from the ground up to accommodate for a static unstable design (much like the F-16, but unlike the F-15 or the MiG29), which was a pretty bold move in that day and age, especially in the Soviet Union if you consider their advancements (or lack thereof) in aspects such as fly-by-wire technology. What you see in the video is basically the end result of Simonovās obsession with āsuper-manoeuvrabilityā.
One can argue whether such a display of fancy aerobatics has practical applications (if any) in modern air combat or not, but it is still quite a remarkable achievement, especially for a fighter this size. And itās still pretty cool and fun to watch.
-
-
BLASPHEMY!! Take that backā¦
Does that happen often ?
You do have a very liberal return policy.