SU-35 Video
05-20-2004, 08:45 AM
#6
Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: dallas, GA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
How in the world does the airframe withstand the intense stress encountered during those manuvers????
Too bad the russian goverment is to broek to put it into full scale production, would make for an interesting dogfight with a F-22.
Too bad the russian goverment is to broek to put it into full scale production, would make for an interesting dogfight with a F-22.
05-21-2004, 01:11 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vancouver,
BC, CANADA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
It's a cool aircraft. There aren't that many that can do a cobra and keep the engines lit. I noticed the nozzles moving near the start of the second segment...wonder if the flight control system allows for thrust vectoring... it must...no reason for the nozzles to move like that otherwise. That plus the canards must make it as maneuverable as it is...
As for the Russians not putting it into production...speaking as one who has worn a flight suit...I'm glad I won't have to worry about them too much!
As for the Russians not putting it into production...speaking as one who has worn a flight suit...I'm glad I won't have to worry about them too much!
05-21-2004, 11:39 PM
#8
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: WinnipegManitoba, CANADA
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
Don't have to worry! The Chinese have 'em! India too. Check out this excellent, informative website... http://www.duffeyk.fsnet.co.uk/su-27_variants.html
IMO the Flanker in the canard/vectored thrust configuration is likely untouchable in a dogfight. Looks like it could fly circles around an F-15, and maybe a Harrier too! The F-22 is designed to be a stealthy long range hitter. Dogfighting is a last resort in combat - pilots try desperately not to have to get that close in. Of course they have to be capable if a situation degrades to that.... The technology now is very interesting - use an AWACS standing back at a safe range to paint the target, data link the target info forward to a stealthy fighter equipped with long range stand off missles, and hopefully you don't have to get in close to engage. Looks to me like the Russians have the edge right now in aerodynamics and maneuverability, and the U.S. the edge in stealth and avionics/radar/communication (electronics) technology.
IMO the Flanker in the canard/vectored thrust configuration is likely untouchable in a dogfight. Looks like it could fly circles around an F-15, and maybe a Harrier too! The F-22 is designed to be a stealthy long range hitter. Dogfighting is a last resort in combat - pilots try desperately not to have to get that close in. Of course they have to be capable if a situation degrades to that.... The technology now is very interesting - use an AWACS standing back at a safe range to paint the target, data link the target info forward to a stealthy fighter equipped with long range stand off missles, and hopefully you don't have to get in close to engage. Looks to me like the Russians have the edge right now in aerodynamics and maneuverability, and the U.S. the edge in stealth and avionics/radar/communication (electronics) technology.
05-22-2004, 03:52 PM
#9
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
It will always take second to the F-15 fighter jet. Of course I'm a United Stated Air Force Man (F-15 Rider)
Of course it's just an opinion...if you don't like it I have others...lol
Lefty
[sm=thumbup.gif]
Of course it's just an opinion...if you don't like it I have others...lol
Lefty
[sm=thumbup.gif]
06-01-2004, 06:30 PM
#11
Banned
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 7,744
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
very impressive fighter and like in the earlier post India and China have them with Indonesia wanting them and Malaysia with 27s. Nasty nasty bit of kit.
Our poor old RAAF still has F/A-18 A models which are no real match in a dogfight, out ranged in radar and missiles. At least we are getting helmet mounted sigting and an infared system plus new generation ASRAAM in place of the old AIM9L plus AMRAAM in place of sparrow.
Once our AWACS come on stream then we will stand a chance. My opioin is to stay well out of their range and do as per earlier post, data link to AWACS then shoot a AMRAAM down the bearing and bug out ASAP.
Lets just hope the rules of engagement permit such scenarios and we are not forced to visually ID before firing. I think in that case there will be a lot of vacant spots on the ramp.
cheers
PEter
Our poor old RAAF still has F/A-18 A models which are no real match in a dogfight, out ranged in radar and missiles. At least we are getting helmet mounted sigting and an infared system plus new generation ASRAAM in place of the old AIM9L plus AMRAAM in place of sparrow.
Once our AWACS come on stream then we will stand a chance. My opioin is to stay well out of their range and do as per earlier post, data link to AWACS then shoot a AMRAAM down the bearing and bug out ASAP.
Lets just hope the rules of engagement permit such scenarios and we are not forced to visually ID before firing. I think in that case there will be a lot of vacant spots on the ramp.
cheers
PEter
06-23-2004, 11:46 AM
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Posts: 6,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
ORIGINAL: Daryl Martel
The technology now is very interesting - use an AWACS standing back at a safe range to paint the target, data link the target info forward to a stealthy fighter equipped with long range stand off missles, and hopefully you don't have to get in close to engage. Looks to me like the Russians have the edge right now in aerodynamics and maneuverability, and the U.S. the edge in stealth and avionics/radar/communication (electronics) technology.
The technology now is very interesting - use an AWACS standing back at a safe range to paint the target, data link the target info forward to a stealthy fighter equipped with long range stand off missles, and hopefully you don't have to get in close to engage. Looks to me like the Russians have the edge right now in aerodynamics and maneuverability, and the U.S. the edge in stealth and avionics/radar/communication (electronics) technology.
The thing is, electronics/radar can be jammed, but you can't jam a more manueverable aircraft!
06-23-2004, 01:21 PM
#16
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: WinnipegManitoba, CANADA
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
Experience has shown the best defence is a good offence. Why put yourself in greater harm than necessary? Current combat logic is "risk analysis" to the max - look at a typical fighter battle scenario: dissimilar fighter types approach each other in for example four ship formations. Radar gives a reasonably accurate identification even from beyond visual range. Intelligence has already briefed the pilots on the likely threats and warloads - each oponents capabilities are reasonably known to each side. The fighters are heavy with ordnance and external tanks, so much so they wouldn't do well in a close in turning engagement at this point. Heavier long range "fire and forget" missles are fired first from "stand off" distance, aircraft radar emission stopped and both sides continue to close, perhaps taking advantage of jamming. As both sides continue to close, despite jamming, deploying chaff, flares and evasive maneuvering, some missles find their target. External tanks are jettisoned for close in engagement. There hasn't been a lot of turning and burning up to this point, the aircraft just being "weapons platforms". Short range missle engagement ensues, both sides trying to evade missles and gain a position to take advantage of their aircrafts strengths and exploit the others weaknesses. It's all over quickly and fuel is now becoming critical. Perhaps a few aircraft have loosed all their missles and are locked in a tight dog fight relying on the cannon to get shots off. If both weapons systems were well matched, just a handful of the original group remain, the majority shot down or running for home out of missles and low on fuel. Imagine having a technical advantage that gives you the "edge" where close in combat is rarely necessary - all of a sudden the U.S. strategy to develop stealth, internal weapons bays, enough internal fuel capacity to negate the requirement for external tanks (less drag), and "super cruise" capability makes sense. The push is to make both the aircraft and weapons have more long range "punch". The boxer with the longer reach has an advantage. Time will tell if the F-22 can turn and burn with the big dogs - maybe it won't have to. With the advent of UAVs, the game takes an even bigger twist... without the need to care for a pilot the airframe can pull more "G", weighs less and frees up more room for fuel and munitions.
06-24-2004, 07:02 AM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: An Iceburg in, ANTARCTICA
Posts: 6,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So much for the f-15c superiority theory
For the latest on the F-15 superiority, see this thread.
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/06/23...eut/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/06/23...eut/index.html
06-24-2004, 09:14 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
is it 2 stroke or 4? Do you think they use after run oil in it? So will this be a good first kit plane for me to build? Should I glass it with poly or with epoxy? Will the Springair retracts work - if so should i get 85 degree or 90 degree ones?
So many questions.. so little time...
So many questions.. so little time...
06-25-2004, 01:28 PM
#24
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Diego, CA,
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: SU-35 Video
i don't know, that manuver looks cool, but notice that every time he does he has to trade ALOT of altituide for airspeed. So between that and having to pour on the throttle (wasting fuel) to get back to a respectable speed and stay in the fight I think he has just given back whatever advantage that manuver was supposed to gain him.