DarkFire

It is possible to run in to the limit of the trim system, but the only times I've experienced it have been at higher speeds than 800 Km/h. Normally you have to be in burner at under 1,000m. Not sure why you're getting it at that speed. Try resetting the trim (hold down ctrl-T for several seconds) and see if it still happens.

Same. I usually come over the threshold at anywhere between 290 - 310 and am wheels down at around 260, but I tend to be obsessive about conserving fuel so I'm usually heavier than recommended :D

Oops, just saw the dates of the original posts! That'll teach me to pay attention... :doh:

Agree with all of this. It also helps if your IRST can look up, so that it sees a relatively hot airframe against a relatively cold sky, instead of looking down where it can have problems, especially against a warm ground.

You can change the ACS to direct mode at anything up to roughly 400 Km/h. I've never tried it at anything above 350 because the faster your air speed the more pronounced the instant nose-down moment is. You can prepare for it by pulling back on the stick as you change the ACS over in to direct mode, but at anything over about 400 the nose-down tendency becomes unmanageably violent. Why you would ever want to do this during a landing approach is another matter :)

Not sure what the maximum safe speed is, but I've never tried it above 400 Km/h. As for the T:W ratio: Su-27 empty weight = 16,380Kg Weight of R73 = 105 so 2 = 210Kg AL-31F thrust = 7,575Kg dry, 12,500Kg full reheat. 2 engine thrust: 15,160Kg dry, 25,000Kg full reheat. Empty weight + 2 x R-73 = 16,590Kg So, at 100% RPM with no afterburner your T:W ratio will never be above 1:1. With full afterburner your T:W will be 1:1 at 89% fuel load, with only 2 x R-73 missiles loaded.

Stage 1 & 2 of the ACS aren't modelled in the DCS Su-27, it's either in full automatic or full direct mode. IIRC as Wild Bill said the maximum disengagement speed is 400 Km/h, though I'd be very careful disengaging it at anything over about 350.

All true! If I'm just flying around on the VA server, I actually feel guilty if I dump my chute on the runway as I know that in reality everyone else landing would be delayed by the idiot who just caused an obstruction that some poor ground crew member is now going to have to run out and retrieve :D I vaguely remember reading the real life landing speed restrictions for the Su-27. I think it was something quite complicated like 'maximum landing speed is 250 Km/h (I made that up as an example) so long as only 5% of total landings are conducted at that speed'. I also wonder how the Russian AF deals with the issue of hot brake disks, or whether the Su-27 is designed so that this isn't a problem, particularly as the real aircraft has an automatic braking system and in reality the only time the chute is actually used is in conditions where the surface traction of the runway is impaired by e.g. ice. IIRC the F-15 has quite stringent speed restrictions on when the brakes can be used to avoid bursting tyres killing members of the ground crews. I wonder if the Su-27 has those too.

As Feefifofum said, the HDD in the MiG-29 is only a HuD repeater, you don't get the same HDD as on the SU-27. The tachometer will not show when your afterburners are engaged, it will only display from 0-100% RPM. The extra 20% movement on your HOTAS throttle probably represents going from 100% RPM to afterburner. Not sure if the engines on the MiG are the same, but the AL-31F engines on the Su-27 don't have a staged afterburner. Instead they have a metered fuel flow afterburner which is (IIRC) fully variable so that last 20% of your throttle movement would represent going from minimum afterburner to maximum burner.

And finally, here are some very useful training videos on YouTube: First, a final navigation & landing tutorial featuring the man himself (Wags): Tubular Xcom has an excellent video showing how to do a non-ILS landing: Finally, IronHand has a very good video on dead-stick landings. You should definitely check out his other videos on the Su-27.

Wanted to add a few points: 1) Navigating back to your chosen airfield: when you chose "return" mode, the navigation system will not direct you back to the airfield but to the point at which you should intercept the glide slope. This assumes a straight-in approach and not a circuit approach. 2) This will be shown on your head-down display: you'll see a line connecting you to the start of the glide slope. The compass directions of runways are fairly accurately shown on the HDD, so you should aim to intercept the glide slope in a direction that's parallel to the direction of the runway shown on the display. If you do this you'll already be lined up with the runway direction when you intercept the start of the glide slope. 3) If you accurately intercept the start of the glide slope then the system should automatically change over to landing mode, at which point the system should display the director circles for the ILS system, as long as the airfield you're landing at is equipped with a Russian ILS system. Not all of them are. 4) If your airfield doesn't have an ILS system then maintain the 3-degree glide slope at a 5 m/s sink rate. You'll see that the runway threshold will stay roughly in the lower 1/3rd of your HUD. Pay attention to this HUD picture because once you get sufficiently used to it you won't need to be in 'landing' mode and you'll be able to land successfully by developing a feel for where the aircraft is actually going, despite the fact that the Su-27 doesn't have a flight path marker. 5) As Frostie said, aim to come over the runway threshold at anything between 280 - 300 Km/h. A gentle flare will see you touch down at somewhere between 240-270 Km/h which would be fast for a real Su-27 but perfectly fine in DCS. 6) Don't bother holding your nose in the air once you've touched down - aero-braking in the Su-27 isn't particularly effective, though you can do it if you want. For a shorter roll-out immediately but gently drop the nose and pop the chute. Once your speed is below ~150 Km/h you can help the chute by gently applying the brakes. 7) Don't taxi too fast, or you'll run the risk of popping your tyres. Though the minimum speed your HUD will show is 80 Km/h, try to taxi at under 40. You can switch to external F2 view to get an idea of what your actual speed is while taxiing. Slow down even more before going around any sharp corners. Hope this helps, and happy landings! :)

Don't think so. Other than PFM's and updated 3D models, I think that the ED policy is that all future aircraft will be DCS standard and that the FC3 aircraft will not be developed further.

Be very careful about the indicated speed in ILS mode - it's usually wrong. Why? The real Su-27S requires a maximum landing weight of IIRC 23,000kg. This is very close to the empty weight - it assumes no weapons and very little (~10% +emergency reserve) fuel. A successful landing requires that you intercept the 3-degree glide slope at the correct range (15Km for most airfields) and at the indicated altitude. Real pilots will dump fuel if necessary to come below this maximum weight. Once you're at the right place and the right altitude a successful landing then requires a 3-degree glide slope at a 5 m/s sink rate, to the point at which you flare and touch down. This notional landing does not specify your speed, so your speed will effectively be dictated by your weight. The heavier your aircraft, the faster you'll need to go to maintain the 3-degree glide slope and 5m/s sink rare. The lighter you are the slower you'll be going to maintain these conditions.

There's a Spanish or Portuguese translation of the Su-27S flight manual floating around the internet somewhere. While I don't agree 100% with everything in that guide, it's a very good place to start.

Your best tactic will depend entirely on the specifics of the situation you're in. Can you describe the mission for us?

The Ultimate Argument campaign has Russian voiceovers (though I don't speak Russian they sound very realistic) and the difficulty ramps up fairly gently as you progress through the campaign missions. Don't forget if you get really stuck on any particular mission you can always enable god mode and then turn it off again once you've progressed to the next mission.

In both the air superiority and long-range escort roles it would indeed make complete sense to operate the radar. In the interceptor role Soviet doctrine was absolutely to use GCI control and to use aircraft radar only for final lock-on & missile guidance. PVO got the baseline Su-27 before the VVS got the Su-27S. Thinking about the data link I was more considering the position of a lone aircraft as opposed to a flight of 2-4. Operating as a team it would make sense for each flight member to operate their radars for maximum coverage, though I can envisage scenarios under which it might be sensible to rely on AWACS or EWR for positioning prior to an engagement with radar silence to maintain the element of surprise.

As Weta pointed out, the entire philosophy behind the design of the Su-27 systems was that under most conditions it should be flying with AWACS or EWR support. In this case the primary purpose of the HDD is not to provide accurately measurable data but to provide a 360-degree view of the airspace around you, with emphasis on the front aspect. This is something that I feel many many Flanker drivers seem to miss: if you have AWACS or EWR support, your situational awareness is better than that available to pilots of all the current Western types available in DCS, precisely due to the fact that you have a display of all surrounding air contacts on your HDD. In reality western aircraft with Link-16 capability would have the same thing, but that isn't implemented in DCS. For the Flanker pilot with the appropriate AWACS or EWR support, your SA comes from the HDD and SPo-15 RWR and your own radar should be off unless you're attacking a target with SARH missiles.

This goes for the Su-27 and the -33. Answer: I don't use a visual reference. I use the vertical velocity indicator along with the altitude readout to infer where I'm going. In reality there will come a point at which you become so used to flying the -33 or -27 that you can 'feel' where it's actually going under any given flight conditions. This is in fact quite an important skill to develop as it's very useful during cross-wind landings.

Yes, I think it's a known problem by now. Nice Maiden reference by the way. Up the irons!

I suppose we've drifted a bit off topic, but in the interests of parity (not balance) these are what I'd love to have in DCS: 1) DCS: Su-27SM. 2) DCS: F-15C. 3) DCS: Su-24M2. 4) DCS: F-15E. 5) DCS: Tornado GR4. 6) DCS: EF Typhoon. Would give both US, EU & Russian aficionados good choices in terms of fighters, multi-role aircraft and tactical bombers.

Absolutely, I agree.

I don't think there has ever been an official post or announcement on the subject, but legality is the most logical explanation. I agree that if we had an Su-27SM then the Su-27S would be entirely redundant, but I think it would be worth keeping the baseline Su-27S as an FC3-level aircraft with the more capable Su-27SM as a DCS level module. Another potential part of the problem is that if ED created a DCS-level Su-27SM then they would pretty much be forced to also make a DCS level F-15C, otherwise there would be a huge forum riot.

I wouldn't say the scale is useless, it's just that the entire HDD display isn't a whole multiple of the range scale, which makes accurate estimations somewhat more complicated. In any case, the HDD is at its most useful when you have AWACS or EWR support, in which case you can always get an accurate BRA from them.

ED apparently have, or had, a plan to do a much higher fidelity (probably DCS standard) Su-27SM, however it appears that doing so would have left the company vulnerable to Russian military secrecy laws and as such the project appears to have been shelved for now. Personally I highly doubt that we'll see any Russian 4th or 4+ gen aircraft made to DCS standards in the near to medium term future. It really is a great shame, especially as the Su-27 is where everything began, but ultimately part of ED are a Russian company and therefore have to comply with Russian laws.