Max weight for SU-33 carrier take-off - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2020, 11:54 AM   #1
tflash
Senior Member
 
tflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,776
Default Max weight for SU-33 carrier take-off

Is there a max weight I should take into account for Carrier Take-Off?

With a full A2A weapons load and sorbytsa jammers I cannot take more than 40% fuel, is that also your impression?

(Of course using extra thrust and extra brake power).
__________________
tflash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2020, 12:22 PM   #2
AeriaGloria
Senior Member
 
AeriaGloria's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: LA
Posts: 2,869
Default

In real life they prefer taking less missiles with half or more fuel it seems. You always see two R-73 plus jammers and two R-27.

However with a good headwind and starting from the rear most take off position, it is possible to take off at MTOW.

Are you only taking off from the front two spots? Becuase from there you need to limit your fuel, but in back unless it’s over 100 degrees F and there’s no wind you can take off fully loaded
AeriaGloria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2020, 01:15 PM   #3
draconus
DCS Ground Crew
 
draconus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,029
Default

I remember the campaign makes you take off quite heavy from the front a few times. With the right technique it's doable. Don't forget to open inlet grids, full flaps and wait for engines to spool up. Take off with high nose, on the edge of stall, quick gear up, boil the sea water with AB and go up retracting flaps like a pro
__________________
G4560@3,5GHz/DDR4-16GB/GTX970-4GB/SATA3-SSD, Win7-64, 27"LCD-FullHD, T16000M HOTAS, customTiR
Aircraft: FC3, F-14B
/ Supercarrier / Maps: NTTR, PG
draconus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2020, 01:28 PM   #4
Coxy_99
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 3,696
Default

Full payload and fuel take off ramp 3 full take off trim job done.
Coxy_99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2020, 02:01 PM   #5
tflash
Senior Member
 
tflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,776
Default

Thanks guys I'll give it a try!
__________________
tflash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2020, 03:55 PM   #6
Seaeagle
Member
 
Seaeagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 429
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tflash View Post
Is there a max weight I should take into account for Carrier Take-Off?

With a full A2A weapons load and sorbytsa jammers I cannot take more than 40% fuel, is that also your impression?

(Of course using extra thrust and extra brake power).
I realise that you are asking for DCS figures, but in case you are interested I found an old chart(RL) for max carrier take-off weights, where the following is stated for the Su-33:

With a head wind of 0 m/s:

100 m take-off run: not supported
180 m take-off run: max TOW = 27,3 T

With a head wind of 15 m/s:

100 m take-off run: max TOW = 30,0 T
180 m take-off run: max TOW = 32,7 T

I also seem to remember reading somewhere that the maximum return(landing) weight is somewhere around 25 T.

Moreover, there is a two-way switch for controlling FOD inlet grids - "Auto/open" - which always seems to be in the "open"(FOD grids disabled) when operating from the carrier....it may also be required for use of the "emergency thrust" feature(in order to provide sufficient airflow to the engines).

Last edited by Seaeagle; 03-19-2020 at 04:05 PM.
Seaeagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2020, 02:12 AM   #7
DarkFire
DCS Ground Crew
 
DarkFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaeagle View Post
I realise that you are asking for DCS figures, but in case you are interested I found an old chart(RL) for max carrier take-off weights, where the following is stated for the Su-33:

With a head wind of 0 m/s:

100 m take-off run: not supported
180 m take-off run: max TOW = 27,3 T

With a head wind of 15 m/s:

100 m take-off run: max TOW = 30,0 T
180 m take-off run: max TOW = 32,7 T

I also seem to remember reading somewhere that the maximum return(landing) weight is somewhere around 25 T.

Moreover, there is a two-way switch for controlling FOD inlet grids - "Auto/open" - which always seems to be in the "open"(FOD grids disabled) when operating from the carrier....it may also be required for use of the "emergency thrust" feature(in order to provide sufficient airflow to the engines).
That's really useful information, thanks for posting this
__________________
CM Storm case | i7 6700k @ 4GHz | MSI GTX1080 | 32GB Kingston Predator PC3000 RAM | SB ZXR sound | TM Warthog stick & throttle | TrackIR 5 | Samsung Evo 850 2TB | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit.

Personal wish list: DCS: Su-27SM.
DarkFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2020, 02:35 PM   #8
Seaeagle
Member
 
Seaeagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 429
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkFire View Post
That's really useful information, thanks for posting this
You are welcome .

I don't know how well this relates to the DCS situation, but at least it should give some pointers. Keep in mind that these are the max weight figures, so it would probably be good practise to keep well below that. I also remember reading elsewhere that the front starting position is really only meant for aircraft in normal TOW configuration(which IIRC is less than the 30 T stated as max for the Su-33).

At any rate a head wind of 15 m/s corresponds to the carrier steaming ahead at full flank(29 knots), so for heavy loads/front starting position, you need either that or to set mission conditions so that wind speed and carrier travel direction/speed provide this in combination.
Seaeagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2020, 12:07 AM   #9
vanir
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 263
Default

Sorry to bring up an older thread but been doing Su33 ME a fair bit lately and looked up a huge pile of operational footage and just found some interesting notes on loadouts during operational exercises; just posting it for interest sake.
On live missions always seem to be carrying sorbytsa and during all other exercises always have the tip racks bare, presumably because on live missions they will always be carrying sorbytsa. Here's a short list of some loadouts I've seen actually carried off the deck:
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 2x R27R under wings
Live mission: sorbytsa, 2x R73, 2x R27R under wings
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 2x R27R, 2x R77 under wings (fourth stations attached) - these were live missiles, not dummies but I don't know if actual R77 capability is installed or if propaganda photo staged during naval exercises
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 4x B20 under wings (fourth stations attached)
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 2x R27ER under wings, 2x R27ER under intakes

I haven't seen a photo or footage yet of actual carrier operations using all the weapon stations, most commonly it's just 2x R73 and 2x R27R, with sorbytsa if a live mission, without if exercise. Never seen one loaded up on the carrier the way an Su27 is from a land base.
I would like to see any links to more footage or photos of loadouts during operations, but these are the loads I've seen so far in a big hunt.
The impression I get is the large number of stations is more about weapon placement of light loads for the Su33 rather than carrying big loads like the Su27.

Might also be worth noting the main flight operation from Kuznetsov is ASW and SSM fire director rotaries, the fleet air defence role is primarily interception of missiles by the Kashtan/Kinzhal system. Technically the purpose of Su33 operations was intended as preparation for purpose built, catapult equipped carriers in future planning which were subsequently cancelled. Kuznetsov is a modified Kiev, never originally designed as a fixed wing carrier and just a way to get one quickly using Kiev hulls whilst purpose built carriers were being mooted, then cancelled. Hence abandonment of the future blue water naval plans are why the other Kievs were sold to China and India and similarly modified with through-decks and a ramp, although they don't have the shipwrecks and some other fit. Kuznetsov itself became more seaworthy with its modifications since they changed its seakeeping qualities but the Kiev are classes as green water cruisers that aren't particularly safe in the open ocean except in calm seas, intended for policing western approaches in the Soviet era, in fact mainly for a strategic proposal to secure the eastern-Mediterranean from NATO subs. Kuznetsov is mainly a fixed wing training ship retaining all other Kiev capabilities with technological improvements, but its better seakeeping qualities made it usable in blue water operations so whilst it was slated for Baltic and Black Sea Fleet operations it wound up becoming assigned to the Northern Fleet.
It doesn't in any way even remotely function like a NATO aircraft carrier, mainly it's an escort cruiser in SSM and ASW roles (4 tactical warheads carried for shipwrecks/torps in wartime IIRC), it doesn't perform any CC/flagship functions like NATO carriers as this is all done from the heavy cruiser flagships like Kirov and Slava classes, reflected by electronics fit carriers have a purely support/escort role in the Russian Navy. Mainly a ramp was fitted because of the international treaties in place at the time banning any catapult equipped carrier from entering the Black Sea, and the fact the 4th gen soviet jets are STOL types and capable of operating from a ramp in headwind, so basically it made the RFN the big boy on the block in the Black Sea since everybody else can only operate comparatively low performance V/STOLs and VTOLs from non-catapult carriers. But I don't think those treaties are in place anymore and it's a moot point anyway since Kuznetsov turned out to be blue water capable and thus sent to the northern approach.
It doesn't do night fixed wing operations at all and Su33 complement doesn't have any formal antishipping role (although Sukhoi OKB, through Jane's Information Group claims it had Kh31 capability at serial production and only the Su27K prototyping lacked this). The listed Kuznetsov air defence role is fleet air defence primarily against incoming missiles, primarily using the Kashtan/Kynzhal system. It really doesn't use its air complement the way NATO carriers do by any intention, although coincidences like the way Flankers were used in Syria will inevitably happen. Even at full war load, which I don't think it's ever been at, the complement is more than twice the number of Ka27 than Su33, most of the time it carries something like 10 Flankers and 35 rotaries plus a couple of development tests like the navalised Su25UTG and MiG29UB/K/M hybrids that India ordered.
From the RF Admiralty point of view it certainly appears the fixed wing side of Kuznetsov is really like a side project with limited combat capabilities, whilst the fleet role of the ship and its complement is all about missile interception, ASW and SSM support as an escort cruiser with a large number of rotaries.
The idea of Flanker Ds loading up with full A-G stores off the Kuznetsov and heading out on strikes isn't really an operational one but far more a training proposal with light loads in preparation for catapult carriers to be built but now cancelled. The entire deterrence strategy of Kuznetsov and the entire blue water Russian navy is formally stated as completely revolving around the potential use of tactical warheads and not conventional force projection like NATO fleets.

My point, aside from redirecting any popular assumptions that Kuznetsov is just a poor attempt at a supercarrier by inferior Russians towards its actual intended fleet role as an AD/ASW/SSM escort cruiser and training carrier and not a flagship supercarrier by even a remote description; is that the Su33 isn't either, ie. intended for heavy munitions carrier operations from Kuznetsov, but is intended to do precisely that role from catapult equipped carriers which have been since cancelled.
Context really changes the way you might be loading and using Flanker Ds if you're doing the Tom Clancy plausible thing in missions. They just don't do Hornet missions off Kuznetsov, aren't meant to.

Last edited by vanir; 04-18-2020 at 01:38 AM.
vanir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2020, 06:48 AM   #10
DarkFire
DCS Ground Crew
 
DarkFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vanir View Post
Sorry to bring up an older thread but been doing Su33 ME a fair bit lately and looked up a huge pile of operational footage and just found some interesting notes on loadouts during operational exercises; just posting it for interest sake.
On live missions always seem to be carrying sorbytsa and during all other exercises always have the tip racks bare, presumably because on live missions they will always be carrying sorbytsa. Here's a short list of some loadouts I've seen actually carried off the deck:
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 2x R27R under wings
Live mission: sorbytsa, 2x R73, 2x R27R under wings
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 2x R27R, 2x R77 under wings (fourth stations attached) - these were live missiles, not dummies but I don't know if actual R77 capability is installed or if propaganda photo staged during naval exercises
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 4x B20 under wings (fourth stations attached)
Exercise: tips bare, 2x R73, 2x R27ER under wings, 2x R27ER under intakes

I haven't seen a photo or footage yet of actual carrier operations using all the weapon stations, most commonly it's just 2x R73 and 2x R27R, with sorbytsa if a live mission, without if exercise. Never seen one loaded up on the carrier the way an Su27 is from a land base.
I would like to see any links to more footage or photos of loadouts during operations, but these are the loads I've seen so far in a big hunt.
The impression I get is the large number of stations is more about weapon placement of light loads for the Su33 rather than carrying big loads like the Su27.

Might also be worth noting the main flight operation from Kuznetsov is ASW and SSM fire director rotaries, the fleet air defence role is primarily interception of missiles by the Kashtan/Kinzhal system. Technically the purpose of Su33 operations was intended as preparation for purpose built, catapult equipped carriers in future planning which were subsequently cancelled. Kuznetsov is a modified Kiev, never originally designed as a fixed wing carrier and just a way to get one quickly using Kiev hulls whilst purpose built carriers were being mooted, then cancelled. Hence abandonment of the future blue water naval plans are why the other Kievs were sold to China and India and similarly modified with through-decks and a ramp, although they don't have the shipwrecks and some other fit. Kuznetsov itself became more seaworthy with its modifications since they changed its seakeeping qualities but the Kiev are classes as green water cruisers that aren't particularly safe in the open ocean except in calm seas, intended for policing western approaches in the Soviet era, in fact mainly for a strategic proposal to secure the eastern-Mediterranean from NATO subs. Kuznetsov is mainly a fixed wing training ship retaining all other Kiev capabilities with technological improvements, but its better seakeeping qualities made it usable in blue water operations so whilst it was slated for Baltic and Black Sea Fleet operations it wound up becoming assigned to the Northern Fleet.
It doesn't in any way even remotely function like a NATO aircraft carrier, mainly it's an escort cruiser in SSM and ASW roles (4 tactical warheads carried for shipwrecks/torps in wartime IIRC), it doesn't perform any CC/flagship functions like NATO carriers as this is all done from the heavy cruiser flagships like Kirov and Slava classes, reflected by electronics fit carriers have a purely support/escort role in the Russian Navy. Mainly a ramp was fitted because of the international treaties in place at the time banning any catapult equipped carrier from entering the Black Sea, and the fact the 4th gen soviet jets are STOL types and capable of operating from a ramp in headwind, so basically it made the RFN the big boy on the block in the Black Sea since everybody else can only operate comparatively low performance V/STOLs and VTOLs from non-catapult carriers. But I don't think those treaties are in place anymore and it's a moot point anyway since Kuznetsov turned out to be blue water capable and thus sent to the northern approach.
It doesn't do night fixed wing operations at all and Su33 complement doesn't have any formal antishipping role (although Sukhoi OKB, through Jane's Information Group claims it had Kh31 capability at serial production and only the Su27K prototyping lacked this). The listed Kuznetsov air defence role is fleet air defence primarily against incoming missiles, primarily using the Kashtan/Kynzhal system. It really doesn't use its air complement the way NATO carriers do by any intention, although coincidences like the way Flankers were used in Syria will inevitably happen. Even at full war load, which I don't think it's ever been at, the complement is more than twice the number of Ka27 than Su33, most of the time it carries something like 10 Flankers and 35 rotaries plus a couple of development tests like the navalised Su25UTG and MiG29UB/K/M hybrids that India ordered.
From the RF Admiralty point of view it certainly appears the fixed wing side of Kuznetsov is really like a side project with limited combat capabilities, whilst the fleet role of the ship and its complement is all about missile interception, ASW and SSM support as an escort cruiser with a large number of rotaries.
The idea of Flanker Ds loading up with full A-G stores off the Kuznetsov and heading out on strikes isn't really an operational one but far more a training proposal with light loads in preparation for catapult carriers to be built but now cancelled. The entire deterrence strategy of Kuznetsov and the entire blue water Russian navy is formally stated as completely revolving around the potential use of tactical warheads and not conventional force projection like NATO fleets.

My point, aside from redirecting any popular assumptions that Kuznetsov is just a poor attempt at a supercarrier by inferior Russians towards its actual intended fleet role as an AD/ASW/SSM escort cruiser and training carrier and not a flagship supercarrier by even a remote description; is that the Su33 isn't either, ie. intended for heavy munitions carrier operations from Kuznetsov, but is intended to do precisely that role from catapult equipped carriers which have been since cancelled.
Context really changes the way you might be loading and using Flanker Ds if you're doing the Tom Clancy plausible thing in missions. They just don't do Hornet missions off Kuznetsov, aren't meant to.
Very interesting, thanks for posting this. I'd imagine that the relatively light loads for everything other than operational missions also reduces wear on the tyres, landing gear etc. decreasing the need for expensive maintenance.

On the subject of the R-77, the best information I've been able to find suggests that while the VKS (and possibly the Russian Navy) bought some R-77's the actual number in the inventory is tiny. I'm guessing the Russian ministry of defence is happy to wait and use existing R-27R / ER types until the K-77M becomes available for the 'Su-57'. I haven't read anywhere that the Su-33 is capable of using the R-77 so that might be a payload used for an airshow displaying what might be possible for a customer willing to buy upgraded avionics. Not sure the market for naval aircraft is large enough to support exported Su-33's but who knows. Maybe the Chinese will want them for their new carrier designs.
__________________
CM Storm case | i7 6700k @ 4GHz | MSI GTX1080 | 32GB Kingston Predator PC3000 RAM | SB ZXR sound | TM Warthog stick & throttle | TrackIR 5 | Samsung Evo 850 2TB | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit.

Personal wish list: DCS: Su-27SM.
DarkFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.