Russian Airshow + new Sukoi
-
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 90’s at best.
Useless.
not to mention the maintenance cost of thrust vectoring…
-
Hmm, Russian…wonder who they copied that design from…
-
Ain’t all aircraft now from the 90’s or older?
So it’s for those cases.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
-
Hmm, Russian…wonder who they copied that design from…
I was going to say “How American of you old Chap” oops I said it.
-
Don’t know on which model Molni is referring, I would like to know though… regardless the SU-27 and up can pull those maneuvers and even though they slow it down when the going get’s tough the tough get going… so it can get a tactical advantage in situations it seems impossible.
Yeap maybe rare in modern tactics… but as said by many for other situations like low flying and terrain masking isn’t used anymore… well it’s not the case for all.
Bottom line the airframe isn’t capable only of this and on the features aspect doesn’t have anything to be jealous of others… 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 it’s self so even a 5th gen can’t actually handle it?
Sure the F-35 doesn’t 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 that’s all mambo jumbo from the press as the previous for the F-35 helmet not working at moonless nights.
And yes the answer is it’s the Raptors work not the F-35’s.
But our beloved F-35 is targeted … :lol:
Raptors had a low public profile and passed to service without all that horns and whistles by the F-35… -
I have a bad feeling about this thread…
But yeah, high AOA is nice to watch but meant for airshows I guess… 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 hadn’t been trained properly in AA tactics (developments) for a long time due to continuous service in AG roles.
-
Come on, lets be honest, it’s just so cool.
Just have to love something not made in the USA
-
Come on, lets be honest, it’s just so cool.
Just have to love something not made in the USA
BLASPHEMY!! Take that back…
-
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, Russian…wonder who they copied that design from…
They didn’t, even the T-10 series of prototypes featured original aerodynamic advancements that I can’t recall being operationally available anywhere else in the world at the time (at least until General Dynamics’ entry for the LWF contest was revealed…), including LERX and a so-called ‘blended wing/body’ (or ‘integral layout design’ 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 Simonov’s obsession with ‘super-manoeuvrability’.
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 it’s still pretty cool and fun to watch.
-
-
BLASPHEMY!! Take that back…
Does that happen often ?
You do have a very liberal return policy.
-
One example-when was created the F-4, its purpose was long range missile battle. However, in real life things have turned out differently. And “Phantoms” had to get involved in a lot of maneuverable fights. So I wouldn’t underestimate the practicality of maneuverability of fighters.
-
Modern tactics of air combat based on experience of military operations in Iraq, Yugoslavia and the like, when one side had total quantitative and qualitative superiority over the other. All this is good against small countries with weak air forces and air defense. But in case of war with Russia, the situation will be different. For example - what if AWACS, radars, combat aircraft and other electronic systems will not be able to work because of the powerful electronic warfare? What if the enemy impose his tactics, which both sides have to put aside the “dueling revolvers” and start fist fighting ? SU-35 was created for a total war for survival. And its maneuverability and optical location station is a spare knive in street fight.
-
An F-35 pilot should still have a large advantage in a visual fight over an Su-35 even if all its radars / missiles are all jammed/decoyed etc in Internet fantasy situations and everyone is down to good ol guns……it has been designed based on all lessons from history especially Vietnam…
Doesn’t look as good as the Su-35 in form or at airshows…however that is not relevant to its purpose for being.
-
Also keep in mind, despite all of these advancements in stealth and long range detection and engagement, there is one very important fact that is often overlooked. ROE. The most recent A2A engagements (which have been far and few between) over that last few conflicts have been WVR because of ROE. Take a look at the last A2A between an F-18 and a SU-22. Although this was not a “true” WVR fight the situation ended up with a WVR engagement with an 9X shot attempt from within 1.5 miles (which missed and eventually end up using the more expensive 120 to finish the job). Every time we discount the age of the WVR fight and whats advancements are need for that fight, we do this at our own peril.