What version of the Su-27 is in REAL use??

[Han]

what about Su-37?

i read somewhere it"s a one of the next-gen aircrafts.is there any of these ones in service?

Was only one prototype-demonstrator. Crashed near Moscow several years ago.

[britgliderpilot]

So the SK is the operational one i saw?

 

The SK is operational, but it's a completely standard Russian AF spec Su27 without guided A2G capability . . . . the only difference is that it's for export.

 

i.e. It can't carry the Kh31 that aircraft is displayed with.

 

 

 

Interestingly, though . . . . . I have a copy of the declassified Su27SK manual, and it lists the R27s as armament.

 

Anyone know how the export deals work regarding armament? Do RusArm or whoever do package deals ordering from Sukhoi and weaponry for delivery to customer?

[Han]

So the RuAF can only produce R-77 and R-73 of it's own right now?

 

They're in a worse state than I expected :(

 

R-77 are not producing for RusAF now becourse Seeker producing in Ukraine, and export variant seeker contains the western electronic.

[Han]

Still better that some... our MiG-29 pilots "practise" by just sitting in their planes and imagening that they are flying :(

 

Oh, and by playing Lock On :D

 

The flight time for RusAF pilots is greater than zero now, but no more than 100 hours per year.

[Han]

You're better look for China - they are only possible (JUST POSSIBLE) and REAL forced enemy for USAF ;)

[Weta43]

So has E.D. sent them all complementary copies of LO/FC ?

[Pilotasso]

You're better look for China - they are only possible (JUST POSSIBLE) and REAL forced enemy for USAF ;)

 

BTW! Theres a new scandal in the aviation world, A taiwanese agent tried to smuggle F-16 engines and cruise missiles to china for reverse engineering.

Looks like the chinese want to overcome the turbojet technological barrier by going turbofan.

 

http://www.f-16.net/news_article1622.html

[britgliderpilot]

BTW! Theres a new scandal in the aviation world, A taiwanese agent tried to smuggle F-16 engines and cruise missiles to china for reverse engineering.

Looks like the chinese want to overcome the turbojet technological barrier by going turbofan.

 

http://www.f-16.net/news_article1622.html

 

Wha?

 

Turbofan in itself isn't a big leap - and they've got plenty of stuff hanging off airliners and other pirated designs. Sukhoi for one - the turbofans in the Su27 are pretty monstrous.

 

A modern F16 engine . . . . the FADEC systems would rock to have, otherwise it's metallurgy to inspect or just to reverse-engineer it.

 

I've got a sneaking suspicion that an awful lot of gas turbine componentry is being exported to China for manufacture these days anyway . . . . I just don't see why they'd NEED an F-16 engine. Most logial reason is to reverse engineer for a new aircraft of similar size.

 

 

A Blackhawk and cruise missiles would be rather bigger deals. Something just smells weird . . . . sounds too bizarre to be true.

[Pilotasso]

Not as bizzarre and downright funny as the story behind US first SR-71 blackbirds. They made a ficticious enterprise in russia to smuggle the planes titanium parts to the USA so that the plane would return as a complete product over the territory of russia...to SPY on them LOL.

 

Also the Chinese only got the Su-30's they have now because russia has previously pressed on them not to copy the engine technology for their own industry as a contract condition. This despite the license building they have, the engines are still built in russia. Not only would they know their rival tawanese egine technology but they could go around the russian terms by copying the technlolgy from someone else, it makes sense to me.

 

On an additional note, you should notice that theres SIGNIFICANT design deifferences between airliner tubofans and military turbofans. These last are more of hybrids between the 2 types than anything else. Turbofans provide ALOT more fuel economy for more power at the same time. Chinese designed jets lack range because of their vintage turbojets.The F-22's engines are so damn powerfull because they managed a bypass ratio of 40%. Of course the bigger the bypass the more difficult it is to make it capable of higher speeds. So theres a reason for the Hype behind the F-22's propulsion. ;)

[britgliderpilot]

Not as bizzarre and downright funny as the story behind US first SR-71 blackbirds. They made a ficticious enterprise in russia to smuggle the planes titanium parts to the USA so that the plane would return as a complete product over the territory of russia...to SPY on them LOL.

 

Also the Chinese only got the Su-30's they have now because russia has previously pressed on them not to copy the engine technology for their own industry as a contract condition. This despite the license building they have, the engines are still built in russia.

 

 

I'd heard that one, it's a superb irony . . . . . grin.

 

IIRC it was only the raw material that was purchased there - A-12 parts being built in Russia, ooof . . . . . .

 

You read Skunk Works?

Well worth it if you haven't - tells the story of the U2, the F117, and the A12/SR71. Written by Ben Rich - ran the place for a long while after Kelly Johnson retired.

 

 

 

Honestly, I don't think the Chinese give a stuff about contracts and copyright - Jeep were puzzled recently about the numbers of Jeep clones on Chinese roads.

 

Chinese were licenced for one factory. Seven.

 

The Germans recently sold them a magnetic-levitating train-thingy. Guess what the Chinese fielded the next year, claiming it was entirely original and all their own work . . . .

 

 

They don't even have to steal the design outright - they can learn as much from the engine design on the Sukhoi as they could from the F-16. IIRC the basic engine on the Sukhoi is actually NEWER . . . . . just strip it down and take notes.

[Pilotasso]

 

Honestly, I don't think the Chinese give a stuff about contracts and copyright - Jeep were puzzled recently about the numbers of Jeep clones on Chinese roads.

 

Yes I know that, they dont recognise patents. We make jokes about that at the UNI.

 

This is why I stressed the russian deal small letter clauses. Its not a patent. Its a real deal term wich the russians told they better comply or no deal.

 

^^^^BTW I have edited my last post

[britgliderpilot]

On an additional note, you should notice that theres SIGNIFICANT design deifferences between airliner tubofans and military turbofans. These last are more of hybrids between the 2 types than anything else. Turbofans provide ALOT more fuel economy for more power at the same time. Chinese designed jets lack range because of their vintage turbojets.The F-22's engines are so damn powerfull because they managed a bypass ratio of 40%. Of course the bigger the bypass the more difficult it is to make it capable of higher speeds. So theres a reason for the Hype behind the F-22's propulsion. ;)

 

There is a lot of difference, but there's plenty of info they can usefully get.

Max thrust for min fuel burn is a big deal for the civil market, you can actually learn quite a bit from the cores.

 

 

I was under the impression the Raptor engine pushed out all that thrust for more reasons than bypass ratio - I haven't been able to find the numbers on that, but the F135 only has 0.2:1 bypass on it. F135 is actually more powerful than F119 . . . .

 

I should know the reason why the F119 pushes out all that dry thrust . . . . I've seen the reasons for older engines, but not that one.

 

There's more than a few gas turbine modules on my course, and this year I'm building parts for 'em - so it's kind of a pet topic at the moment ;)

[D-Scythe]

Well, actually, until the F-35 engine came out, the F119 was actually the world's most powerful fighter engine. It's estimated that it may be 4000 lb more powerful than previously believed, generating ~39 000 lb of thrust. GE's F135 was more powerful at the time the YF-22 was pitted against the YF-23, but one of the main reasons P&W won the engine competition was that it argued that it's engine technology was more mature and that it could scale up the F119 to produce more thrust by the time the F-22A is put into production.

 

It seems that they did, considering the F-22/F119 combination now is capable of cruising at Mach 1.7, compared to the YF-22/F135's Mach 1.5-6.

 

The JSF engine produces something like 50 000 lb in reheat, which is insane.

[britgliderpilot]

Well, actually, until the F-35 engine came out, the F119 was actually the world's most powerful fighter engine. It's estimated that it may be 4000 lb more powerful than previously believed, generating ~39 000 lb of thrust. The JSF engine produces something like 50 000 lb in reheat, which is insane.

 

Yup - it's the same core as the F119, though.

 

Pity they're cancelling the RR F136, that puppy would have been equally fun.

 

 

Been flicking through my notes from Uni to remind me, and the basic principles sound simple enough - can play with the bypass ratio a bit (aim is max mass flow for minimum work, matching exit velocities to airflow as much as possible), but imagine the biggy for this one is the compression ratio. Ramp that up (all those exotic metals, uber-internal-cooling and clever simulation come in handy) and your performance suddenly looks much nicer!

[VapoR]

Yep. And AA-10 are no longer manufacturing for RusAF becourse the factory is located in Ukraine, in RusAF are only "storaged" AA-10.

 

Is this factory in the Crimea, and if so is it in Lock-on? Would be a cool target to attack/protect.

[Pilotasso]

 

The JSF engine produces something like 50 000 lb in reheat, which is insane.

 

Yeah I dunno why they decieve readers when they say the F-35 was not aimed to perform better than the F-16 when the F-35's engine makes the falcons powerplant look like a wind sail. I wish they upgraded our falcons with that (and AESA like japans F-2's) That would be AWSOME. Untill the F-35 comes that is. But of course thats highly hypothetical, the JSF's engine may even not fit into the falcons airframe.

 

Anyway the F-35 will be a monster in climb rate. Even if its mass will be greater than that of the falcon, its T/W will still put it to the dust.

The F-35's will be able to fly circles around the falcons due to their much much better sutained perfomance. The falcon will drag by comparison.

[Pilotasso]

I was under the impression the Raptor engine pushed out all that thrust for more reasons than bypass ratio - I haven't been able to find the numbers on that, but the F135 only has 0.2:1 bypass on it. F135 is actually more powerful than F119 . . . .

 

Despite not knowing the full details either Im pretty sure the bypass ratio is a big deal for thrust power. You get plenty mass flow for less fuel consumption. Turbojets had a faster gas exaust but even that does not compensate for the total flow without a bypass. This is the main reason why turbofans are more powerfull (not only that but as they accelerate much faster as well), more economical and quieter.

The F135 engine may be more powerfull, but then I bet they achived that at the expense of fuel economy. Is the JSF capable of supercruise at the same ranges of combat as the F-22? I seriously doubt that, and thats not because of internal fuel carrial.

[Ogami Musashi]

hey Han how are you?

 

What is the reason for SU-27P?

is there any improvement for air superiority in this variant or just for economical reasons?

[Sealpup]

hey Han how are you?

 

What is the reason for SU-27P?

is there any improvement for air superiority in this variant or just for economical reasons?

 

I'll take a SWAG and say it's probably a simpler bird in terms of structure and avionics (doesn't need to carry heavy bombs, doesn't need to know where they'll fall). Easier to fix and wont break as much.

 

Of course, it could just be the exact same bird, only with bomb and rocket ballistics deleted from the computer and placarded as A2A only.

[nscode]

A2G was deleted due to some international agreements on limitation of number of ground attack aircraft...

[BladeLWS]

Putting the JSF's engine into a F-16 will probably break the wings off lol.

[nscode]

No... not the wing... but it WOULD just fly out of the airframe :D That's why it has throttle limiting ;) (just one of the things US has been laphing at russian planes for, and is now using it :))

[Jetfire]

Relating the Su-27 we have in Lockon, what Zhuk radar are we using? Is this the radar:

 

 

If not I would love to have a pic of the Su-27 radar we have in Lockon (perhaps for my sig :) ).

[Pilotasso]

The russians DO have very nice features on some of the aircraft they make, but none will be for RuAF. All of them are being sold to who has the money instead.

[Cobra360]

Relating the Su-27 we have in Lockon, what Zhuk radar are we using? Is this the radar:

 

 

If not I would love to have a pic of the Su-27 radar we have in Lockon (perhaps for my sig :) ).

 

We have the N-001 radar.