Su-25T Discussion

[Sceptre]

I regularly fly the Su-25A and T, the T because it's a better tank killer, the A because I prefer the look.

I've found the Su-25T can definitely give the A-10C a run for its money at killing tanks or other ground targets, and holds a lot more ammo.

The main disadvantage is of course, the avionics. Rule #1 in the Su-25... If you don't see the IR missile fired at you, your day is ruined :P

[uboats]

If you turn on the power, the RWR is powered on as well. While if then turn off the power, RWR is still on. Is this a bug?

[xentxo]

I think its a bug

[jonboede]

Anybody ever see an English manual for the real plane? I am curious about a few things..

 

What is Vle and is Vlo any different?

 

What's Vfe for the takeoff/maneuvering flaps, all the way up to Vne/Mmo?

 

What's Vfe for the fully extended flap position?

 

When landing, what comes down first, flaps or gear? If Vfe is higher than Vlo then seems like first flap position to get a little drag and drop the airspeed to Vlo... but maybe it's the other way around?

 

Dive brakes seem a lot like the boards on the L-39... below 350 kph, no effect, above 500 kph feels like you deployed a parachute, above 700 kph better have your harness tight. :-)

[xentxo]

Vlo <= 400km/h (According to DCS Su-25 Manual)

 

 

---according to "Su-25 Checklists"

ILS landing

1.Flaps one notch at 300Km 2.Gear down 3.Flaps fully down

 

VFR Landing

1) full Flaps <= 320km/h 2) Gear down

[xentxo]

Fuel display broken?

 

Fuel in kg / % of full fuel (3780kg) / lamp in cockpit display

2850kg / 75% / "KP"

1910kg / 50% / "3/4"

0660kg / 17% / "0.5"

[Boberro]

Cheers.

 

Another question about the Su-25;

 

Can anyone explain how IR jamming works in real life in technical detail ? It has recently peaked my interest when I was surprised to see someone's R-27ET sail passed within a few meters from my right wing the other night in MP, and realising it must have been the jammer I enabled earlier.

 

Inside thing are mirrors plus some kind of heater. It heats and sends that via mirrors.

Works for old IR missiles, newer ones can even attract :P

[Bains]

I started with the Su-25T and then moved on to the A 10c just assuming it would be a better experience.

 

But it turns out I miss flying the Su-25T! I find it more fun. I don't mean because it's a less complex sim with less buttons and systems to learn. I like the variety of weapons it can use. All those guided missiles, and the anti-sam weapons. Dare I say it the A 10c feels more limited in comparison. And then it's faster than the A10c.

 

Is it just me or does anyone else feel the same way? Then again it's still early days for me with the A10c so maybe I just haven't got deep into it enough? I'd be interested to read what others think.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Bains

[Boberro]

Su-25T > A-10C. Just that :D

[guitarxe]

I find target acquisition in the Su-25T to be a joke compared to the A-10C.

[Bains]

I find target acquisition in the Su-25T to be a joke compared to the A-10C.

 

How so? Too easy? Not sure what you mean.

[Angel101]

How so? Too easy? Not sure what you mean.

 

No, target acquisition in Su-25 by eyeball or a forward camera, is not posible to orbit in area and scan it like in an A-10C and his TGP.

 

For me: Su-25T < A-10C :music_whistling:

 

Better SA thanks to his RWR and TAD, Data-link capable, slower... yes, but more time on station plus Air refueling capable, and his cannon... nothing beats the feel of shooting that beast.

 

It´s a Badass plane :D

[Bains]

No, target acquisition in Su-25 by eyeball or a forward camera, is not posible to orbit in area and scan it like in an A-10C and his TGP.

 

For me: Su-25T < A-10C :music_whistling:

 

Better SA thanks to his RWR and TAD, Data-link capable, slower... yes, but more time on station plus Air refueling capable, and his cannon... nothing beats the feel of shooting that beast.

 

It´s a Badass plane :D

 

Air to air refueling yes. That is something the Su-25T doesn't give you.

 

What I'm saying is I assumed the Su-25T would be the poor man's option and the a10 c would be a better experience given it was the paid option. What I'm finding is it's just a different experience. Then again I do need to give the a10c more time. But damn it's slow!

[Fri13]

No, target acquisition in Su-25 by eyeball or a forward camera, is not posible to orbit in area and scan it like in an A-10C and his TGP.

 

For me: Su-25T < A-10C :music_whistling:

 

Better SA thanks to his RWR and TAD, Data-link capable, slower... yes, but more time on station plus Air refueling capable, and his cannon... nothing beats the feel of shooting that beast.

 

It´s a Badass plane :D

Not good to orbit lower than few kilometers as weapons and fuselage blocks the view and then lose track etc.

 

The A-10C is slow to attack and requires longer attack runs if requiring to seek target. Su-25A/T is fast to get in and get out of endanger zone while destroying multiple targets with multiple weapons.

 

If I would now update Su-25T, I would only make small changes.

 

1. GLONASS assisted targeting gate returning once in FOV again, so easy to turn around and Shkval is targeting where last time caged gate if wanted.

2. GLONASS navigation like ABRIS.

3. Wider FOV for Shkval like 1x or 2x (2/7/23x)

4. Add a degrees and distance to gate/waypoint position when turning (like A-10C waypoint)

 

And if wanted to make one radical change, add the avionics ball from KA-52 (ka-50 prototype) to bottom of fuselage with retreating inner design. Even if just to give a camera and requiring current manner to guide missiles. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Kamov_Ka-50_in_Moscow.jpg (it is the smaller ball).

 

The main problem I have found is to find previous location if there isn't visual hints. Why I like often to carry a 8TsM rocket pod and depending situation either mark the target area or mark the previous attack line. Then it is easy thing to fly.

 

But I do a lot orbiting (thanks to great autopilot) and use binoculars to observe surroundings. If spotting target, I am faster to destroy it with Su-25A/T than with A-10C.

 

But I do love mavericks capability to fly itself to target, but it isn't so huge benefit after all.

[xentxo]

Valid points (plus give us the Shkval search-mode)

 

The A-10C can identifiy the type of scanning aircraft the Su-25T not. How do you deal with unidentified, scanning planes (cockpit marker in SPO-15/RWR) and you dont know what is it and who he is?

In this situation you should normally abort your mission - or not?

[Fri13]

Valid points (plus give us the Shkval search-mode)

 

The A-10C can identifiy the type of scanning aircraft the Su-25T not. How do you deal with unidentified, scanning planes (cockpit marker in SPO-15/RWR) and you dont know what is it and who he is?

In this situation you should normally abort your mission - or not?

The SPO-15 itself filters the threats. Or example should not react to friendly radar as it knows it is a friendly. And while it knows differences between search and tracking modes and differences between missiles and SAM/AAA, it can give the valid critical info to do decisions at that moment.

 

Sure it would be nice to know is it F-15 or F-5 what scans area, but as Su-25 isn't for dogfight, it is usually better to run or hide. I usually fly boldly to threat areas and I trust to ECM/JAMMER and flares/chaffs. Until threat gets to cannon range and then it is game over.

[xentxo]

Su-25T dumps fuel at approx. 11:20 min

 

Max landing weight: 16410 kg

[Hardcard]

I love it, but I think that its AFM is too sluggish. If you see videos of real Su-25Ts flying, you'll notice just how agile they can be.

In DCS World the Su-25T is still a whale, too clumsy, too slow.

The AFM should be modified, imho.

 

As for the targeting system, it has the tendency of not locking on ground targets. Perhaps this is just a mistake on my side, but the truth is that I follow the procedure explained in the targeting tutorials and yet some targets resist being locked on until I'm too close (they aren't friendlies).

I don't think that should happen.

[kripzoo]

I love it, but I think that its AFM is too sluggish. If you see videos of real Su-25Ts flying, you'll notice just how agile they can be.

In DCS World the Su-25T is still a whale, too clumsy, too slow.

The AFM should be modified, imho.

 

I think the videos you've seen aren't about the "T" model and you can't compare the flight model from some YouTube videos to the game's version...

 

And "too slow" you think it should go 1400 km/h at sea level? :)

Edited August 22, 2014 by kripzoo

[Sceptre]

I don't think it's too slow, I think that the sense of speed in DCS isn't enough, especially when low to the ground. It's a possibility that EDGE might change this but I am not sure.

[xentxo]

Different configurations for left and right engine

 

I read with a single engine failure (on fire) you need the fire to turn off

(1) with shutting down the specific engine

(2) cutting off the fuel of the specific engine.

 

Is it possible to treat right and left su-25t engines differently?

If yes any experiences with different configurations of right and left engine?

[BitMaster]

I read with a single engine failure (on fire) you need the fire to turn off

(1) with shutting down the specific engine

(2) cutting off the fuel of the specific engine.

 

Is it possible to treat right and left su-25t engines differently?

If yes any experiences with different configurations of right and left engine?

 

 

YES, there is such a way !

 

How do you power them up, together ? If you do so, then there is a button(s) that I don't use and know of.

 

I start them individually by pressing ALT-Gr + HOME for left engine and CTRL + HOME for right engine start. Use DEL instead of HOME to shut them down individually when needed.

 

 

Bit

[xentxo]

I had rather thought of a Simulated Flameout Approach: one engine runs on idle, the other is operating normal.

This is (of course?) possilbe in the real Su-25T and also in DCS, which i figured out lately.

[Raptor9]

Some squadmates and I have been treating the Su-25T like an A-6 Intruder recently with some interesting results. Mainly SEAD and strategic pinpoint strikes on high value targets.

 

Just last night I wanted to see how high I could drop a bomb and still hit a target. If you load KAB-500kr TV-guided bombs, you can hit a target from 30,000ft (just over 9000m), although that isn't practical. 20 to 25 thousand feet is much more feasible.

 

Why attack a target from so high you say? No AAA or SHORAD can hit you. Haven't tested against SA-15's, but Wikipedia lists a max altitude of 20,000ft...we'll see what actually happens in DCS. Bring a pair of Su-25T's to provide SEAD, you got yourself a medium-altitude strike package.

 

I prefer to stay in the weeds, but attacking from higher altitudes is something I've never tried in the Frogfoot. And it would be nice to mount the Kopyo radar pod and Kh-31/35 missiles like the Su-25TM; but alas, these forums have enough wishful posts, so I'll shut up now.

[BitMaster]

Some squadmates and I have been treating the Su-25T like an A-6 Intruder recently with some interesting results. Mainly SEAD and strategic pinpoint strikes on high value targets.

 

Just last night I wanted to see how high I could drop a bomb and still hit a target. If you load KAB-500kr TV-guided bombs, you can hit a target from 30,000ft (just over 9000m), although that isn't practical. 20 to 25 thousand feet is much more feasible.

 

Why attack a target from so high you say? No AAA or SHORAD can hit you. Haven't tested against SA-15's, but Wikipedia lists a max altitude of 20,000ft...we'll see what actually happens in DCS. Bring a pair of Su-25T's to provide SEAD, you got yourself a medium-altitude strike package.

 

I prefer to stay in the weeds, but attacking from higher altitudes is something I've never tried in the Frogfoot. And it would be nice to mount the Kopyo radar pod and Kh-31/35 missiles like the Su-25TM; but alas, these forums have enough wishful posts, so I'll shut up now.

 

 

When I take the Su-25T it's almost always a SEAD run deep into enemy territory.

Depending on the CAP situation I either fly in low ( lot more stress and fuel burn ) or if the airspace is save I come as high as possible to save fuel and time.

 

The reason for HIGH is, when you run against a Patriot it is not THAT good to get too close if you want to come back a 2nd time. Thats why I mostly use a HIGH for the longest possible stand-off distance at about 70-80km away for the Kh-58. Depending on the situation I either keep closing in for the 25-MPU to be launched or dive for the deck to get some cover and get some distance between me and the Patriot.

 

Even if I come in low and counting flowers on my way to the traget I always pop-up as high as possible to get a better range from the Kh-58, dive for the deck and run for cover till I get feedback from what the Kh-58 achieved. In most cases, it needs several runs and some good ARM spamming to overcome the missile defense from a Patriot.

 

Check the linked//attached mission, it os a "automatic movie" so you can start it, lean back, and watch 4 Su-25T attacking a massive SAM site. Change view and see what the Patriot can do and what it can't do... If you call CA your own you can hop into any cockpit you own and take part.

 

The mission is a test scenario, very basic and simple, just for testing Patriot spamming.

 

 

SEAD MISSION: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=127593

 

Bit