It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SU-35S Unreal Maneuverability

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   
My reaction to seeing this is a guttural exultation unpronounceable in the words of man. I'd never though I'd see the day a modern jet fighter could outmaneuver a DR.1

You'll have to see it to believe it.

Combination of thrust vectoring and absurd pilot skill. I have to wonder if there are more vectoring jet nozzles than just the rear as well, since there seems to be rotational dynamics independent of just the rear exhaust.




posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

I don't know, slowly flipping around in the air seems rather pointless. Those slow butterfly moves aren't gonna help you avoid a missile.

6:40


edit on 11-4-2018 by FauxMulder because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

I would assume its advantageous in a low energy dogfight situation (while the other guy is busy nosing down/leveling out to regain energy, SU-35S is pirouetting on a dime and firing from the hip).

Zaphod could of course answer that with more confidence than I.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Hmmmm, It would seem russian and western philosophies differ in this regard.

Supermaneuverability


The USAF abandoned the concept as counter-productive to BVR engagements as the Cobra maneuver leaves the aircraft in a state of near zero energy, having bled off nearly all of its speed in performing the Pugachev's Cobra maneuver without gaining any compensating altitude in the process. Excepting 1-on-1 engagements, this leaves the aircraft very vulnerable to both missile and gun attack by a wingman or other hostile, even if the initial threat overshoots the supermaneuvered aircraft.

In 1983, the MiG-29 and in 1996, the Sukhoi Su-27 were deployed with this capability, which has since become standard in all of Russia's fourth and fifth generation aircraft. There has been some speculation, but the mechanism behind the supermaneuverability of the Russian-built aircraft has not been disclosed to the public. However, post-stall analyses are increasingly used in recent years to advance maneuverability via the use of thrust vectoring engine nozzles.[2]

Russian emphasis on close-range slow-speed supermaneuverability runs counter to Western energy–maneuverability theory, which favors retaining kinetic energy to gain an increasingly better array of maneuvering options the longer an engagement endures.[3]


I hope we don't find out who's right



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 12:12 PM
link   
It all hinges on the ecm ability of the SU to dodge the BVR incoming barrage to get into an actual dogfight. The US strategy has been to engage well before anything is close enough to get low energy. Also take into account US ecm as well...firing from the hip is cool...but if the missile is dodged and the plane regains energy its already in a better position to re-engage the fluttery butterfly. Lots of variables in air to air combat...especially when there is no precedent to draw from of previous combat.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

Well played...I was literally writing that response as you posted.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Having looked at copious Dogfight videos and listened to many hours of audio from pilots it seems that there was a good deal of action taking place at or near stall speed in all conflicts from WW1 onwards, in Vietnam Robin Olds was furious that new pilots where not taught dog fighting techniques as the top brace said it was not needed due to the current technology in missiles, well they quickly found out that was total BS and they did indeed need to know dog fight techniques as they quickly came into contact with Communist Migs and having to go face to face..

It got to the point where so many victories where missed due to how close the US pilots where getting to their opponent some times way to close for missiles to even be deployed that they started to fit a Gun to the F4s..

There is a lot of info about missile malfunction in that conflict also that should be noted..


Moving on, I know people will say what is the point in this day and age of having aircraft capable of walking speed dog fights but honestly when the next conflict kicks off between two opponents with decent kit and pilots all bets are off as to how close the action could be..


RA



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: slider1982

I think that in the past x years there have been no dogfights.

I'm sure you can google the info that shows that.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: slider1982




all bets are off as to how close the action could be..


Well... supposedly the new F35 is supposed to be equipped with kit/software that allows it to track the enemy from far away, long before the enemy knows it's there... test pilots report big problems with it... but it IS in the works.




One system, the Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), is designed to help the F-35 detect and destroy enemy fighters from far enough away to make dogfighting a thing of the past. Mounted close to the nose of the aircraft, it incorporates a television camera, an infrared search and track system, and a laser rangefinder and designator.


Link



edit on 11-4-2018 by MarkOfTheV because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Crazy Ivan!



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Post -stall or near stall maneuvering is handy. Look up into on the F-16 MATV/VISTA program and what 3D thrust-vectoring was doing in the early 90's. Same stuff.
The F-22 is capable of post-stall maneuvering.. The F-35's actually have pretty good near-stall ability. The USAF decided it was better to avoid post-stall if possible. Using first stealth to avoid close encounters and energy loss, and then preferring more thrust enabling higher sustained-turn capability and faster acceleration to avoid post- and near-stall situations.
Still nice to have in the bag of tricks, though.


edit on 11-4-2018 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

And after that "unreal" maneuver you are a sitting duck, having bled all your speed.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: FauxMulder
I don't know, slowly flipping around in the air seems rather pointless. Those slow butterfly moves aren't gonna help you avoid a missile.

A last bit of hurrah before this kind of aircraft is gone, obsolete. These days jets don't even get within miles of their enemies, so this kind of maneuverability is truly pointless. And as maneuverable as it may be, it will always be limited by the physical endurance of the pilot, which is the component next in line to be removed from the system.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: Wayfarer

I don't know, slowly flipping around in the air seems rather pointless. Those slow butterfly moves aren't gonna help you avoid a missile.

6:40



No, but in a close in gunfight, it could sure cause a pusuer to overshoot, giving you a nice target solution. And it would confuse the hell out of most gunsights. The Sukhoi has all the good characteristics the F-4 lacked. The F-4 wouldn't turn and had miserable low speed performance. In a fight with a Mig, you never engaged in a turning fight. You go vertical or stick the nose down, go full afterburner and go somewhere else. The Russians can't make a good steam iron, but they make great airplanes. And tanks. And tractors. And women.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

The Su-22 that was shot down in Syria by an F-18 was only a couple miles ahead of the Hornet at the time. The Hornet pilot flew over the top of the Su-22 dropping flares to warn him off before shooting.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
The Su-22 that was shot down in Syria by an F-18 was only a couple miles ahead of the Hornet at the time. The Hornet pilot flew over the top of the Su-22 dropping flares to warn him off before shooting.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. That these types of maneuvers are common and that we still need planes like these? That someday these won't all be drones?



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 03:46 PM
link   
You said:


These days jets don't even get within miles of their enemies, so this kind of maneuverability is truly pointless.


My point was that you're wrong. Almost every aircraft shot down, but pretty much anyone that has shot down another aircraft using an air to air missile has been within visual range, and visually identified the aircraft before taking the shot.

The F-18 in Syria made several passes directly over the Su-22, and had to maneuver to avoid the explosion when his second shot detonated. He was close enough that the missile detonated within seconds of coming off the rail according to the pilot.

As for UAVs taking over, they're still years away from even trying that. The NGA/PCA/whatever it's called today is being designed as a manned aircraft.
edit on 4/11/2018 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I can see the point in having maneuverability like that, it's for the same reason that fighters still have guns.

The "experts" keep claiming the dogfight is dead...and they keep being wrong.

No, it's not likely we'll ever see swirling dogfights such as over the trenches of WWI, or over Britain during the Battle of, but it'll happen, and the pilot with the ability to get on the other guys 6, or a good deflection shot wins.

Super-maneuverability has a place. MHO, of course.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


The NGA/PCA/whatever it's called today is being designed as a manned aircraft.


Optionally manned, last I heard.

But that may be changing as often as the acronym.



posted on Apr, 11 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Optionally manned means it has to be designed for manned.




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join