Jump to content

Russian Air Force Photos and Video (NO DISCUSSION)


Flаnker

Recommended Posts

Think about the situations, where youre on the bandits tail, but the aerodynamic limitations of your plane just dont allow you to get that angle on him. Use that TV and that missile is surely going to cause him troubles.

Yeah sure that will work, although you are taking a risk by reducing SEP.

 

Or take for example defensive maneuvers that can be enhanced with TV in a way that makes it impossible for the opponent to follow you through them. Its not about the big maneuvers that will leave you standing around in the air if you dont get the kill, its about the small things TV can do to mess up your opponents day quickly.

Planes can already pull 9g STR across a broad range of speeds, so here we're back to a situation where you temporarily escape, bleeding SEP but then the opponent climbs out and dives back in again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah,love the Su-35S performance, nothing short of outstanding.. to those that say such maneuvers have no use in dogfights i really disagree .. if we are talking guns-guns dogfight that yes, its hard to gun down an opponent if one uses TVC while the other guy speeds away into the clouds.. but if we are talking infra-missiles dogfight than yes, this is superbly easy for Su-35 to point his nose to the enemy plane or at least bring the plane in the fire-launch zone of the missile and then helmet-fire the missile.. about how much time is needed to get a lock, locking with OLS is faster than with radar and most modern radars also have no problem locking in 1 second in close combat..so i don't know why this talk about Su-35 needing to point his nose at a running away target for considerable time, 1 second is more than enough,and Su35 has shown it can hold it for 4 seconds easy..

 

to me the most surprising is that Su-35 has lost weight..wow, better engines plus loss of weight.. a truly strong dominant machine, i bet it can super-cruise now, albeit under 1.4Mach..

Right now its Thrust to weight ratio is above 1.1 i think..

 

also the air-frame seems strong, not to break under this maneuvers.. i've read somewhere plane is designed to sustain +14G-loads..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know that 2 Raptors failed to do it, so maybe 'superbly easy' isn't quite accurate. The spin has inertia to it and can't be fine adjusted at a whim. If we're talking helmet launches, then there's no need to manoeuvre at all in theory.

 

The Su-35 is a great performing aircraft anyway but TV hasn't really demonstrated any ability to deliver in dogfights with regards to fully authority spin and lock matters. You might squeeze off a shot in some cases which might otherwise have fell just short but it's no miracle system. You have some control with it but not full control, it's like a car after the back end has broken loose, you can control it to some extent and it spins faster but you lose the fine control. The idea that it can turn a losing position on its head seems flawed and the Rafale vs F-22 video proved that.


Edited by UCAS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to me the most surprising is that Su-35 has lost weight..

 

Who told you so?

 

a truly strong dominant machine, i bet it can super-cruise now, albeit under 1.4Mach..

Right now its Thrust to weight ratio is above 1.1 i think..

 

Bogdan has said several times it can supercruise. But it is not clear if it is something proper like 1.2-1.3 or just something silly like 1.01... And besides, it is not clear if it is with or without weapons. And what do you mean its T/W is above 1.1? It is different every second it flies you know, depending on the fuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes no difference. By vectoring with one nozzle only, he can roll and then pitch as normal to achieve the effect of 3D vectoring. The fly-by-wire will do that automatically.

But it can't yaw to anywhere near the same extent. Su-35 can, even with little or no airspeed, yaw, roll or pitch to point the nose in any direction in a controlled manner.

Yes, the F-22 can cut thrust from one engine, but then the torque is only create by one engine with a distance from the aircraft's COG only half the speparation of the engines.

The Su-35 can produce yaw forces where the torque is created by both engines at half the length f the plane from the aircraft's COG. - massively more yaw forces, creating much more manouverability at very low airspeed. - It just can do things the F-22 can't, which means under certain circumstances, it can point the nose at an opponent where the F-22 wouldn't be able to. (see 0:35 or 1:45 in that video)


Edited by Weta43

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were talking about a tv equipped eurofighter or f-16 we would not be having this argument.

It is the same story that when the russians showed the su-27 and mig-29 for the first time... a few years after that we saw the west introducing a tv equipped raptor and the development of the aim-9x.

 

About that rafale video, the only thing it proves is that the rafale pilot was very good, he extended because he couldn't out turn the f-22, the f-22 kept turning and turning until it got too slow, then it became lunch. I think that the rafale is very underrated anyway, maybe the americans got a lesson that day.

People don't realize that the russians corrected the weaknesses of the su-30 mk; the su-35 has better power to weight ratio, it is less draggy, uses an improved control systems, it can super cruse (how fast? I don't know) as commented by the su-35 pilot himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^^^

 

Excellent! :thumbup:

 

I remember the people all screaming 'PHOTOSHOP' when the first pics of the SU-low pass surfaced. That'll teach them :megalol:

Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career?

Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

'....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell....

One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@nola.. the weight, empty weight of Su-35S is about 18.4 tons, the usual Su-27 variants weigh at 21-22 tons.. that is without fuel,weapons.. so loosing 4 metric tons while getting a more powerful engines makes Su-35S totally more powerful in t/w ratio than before, even with added fuel and weapons i can't see why it couldn't super-cruise as eurofighter can at 1.3 machs..

 

of course Su has much more internal fuel, so if you load it up to the max it won't be possible to supercruise,but under 5 tons of fuel, air-to-air weapons load why not..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it can't yaw to anywhere near the same extent. Su-35 can, even with little or no airspeed, yaw, roll or pitch to point the nose in any direction in a controlled manner.

Yes, the F-22 can cut thrust from one engine, but then the torque is only create by one engine with a distance from the aircraft's COG only half the speparation of the engines.

The Su-35 can produce yaw forces where the torque is created by both engines at half the length f the plane from the aircraft's COG. - massively more yaw forces, creating much more manouverability at very low airspeed. - It just can do things the F-22 can't, which means under certain circumstances, it can point the nose at an opponent where the F-22 wouldn't be able to. (see 0:35 or 1:45 in that video)

Yaw can be still be achieved with a roll and a pitch. The problem is that aircraft still has inertia and has no 'footing'. It isn't a mid-air turret. People made all the same arguments for the F-22 until it had its ass handed to it. The advantage of TV in dogfights is subtle rather than massive and partially offset by the extra weight of the system itself and wing loadings of 85lb/ft2 in some cases for the aircraft that use it. Something like a Rafale that can attain a 110deg A0A and has a wing loading of about 62lb/ft2 can simply do some of the stuff that other aircraft require TV to do anyway and furthermore they can perform climbing turns whilst maintaining SEP far better. They also naturally generate less drag when cruising, particularly at supersonic speeds due to the delta wing sweep.


Edited by UCAS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@nola.. the weight, empty weight of Su-35S is about 18.4 tons..

 

I see we have severe case of wikipedia here. It doesn't weigh 18.4 tons empty.

 

the usual Su-27 variants weigh at 21-22 tons..

 

Lol no. Su-27 is in 16.3 tons or so empty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^^^

 

Excellent! :thumbup:

 

I remember the people all screaming 'PHOTOSHOP' when the first pics of the SU-low pass surfaced. That'll teach them :megalol:

 

Yes indeed :smilewink:

Configuration:  

Windows 11 Home/ Intel Core i9-12900FRTX 3080 10 GB/ 64GB DDR4-3200/ 2 TB m.2 NVMe/ HP Reverb G2/V2/ Thrustmaster Cougar Hotas/ 

INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT@ross_impress • Instagram-foto's en -video's  (everything about the real flying world, drone and DCS)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^^^

 

Excellent! :thumbup:

 

I remember the people all screaming 'PHOTOSHOP' when the first pics of the SU-low pass surfaced. That'll teach them :megalol:

I love those types. The same types that screamed photoshop about the J-20.

 

The very next few days right in this forum, an industrious chap presented us with the fence side video from the airfield. :D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...