Break a wing Su-27. Utterly frustrating!

[BattleAxes Skinner]

I am sure the Su-27 jocks have faced this nagging problem of their wings breaking. Have been conscious about this and recently wasn't pulling high Gs when they broke again - for crying out loud; this is supposed to be a bloody fighter and pull Gs... And yes, this happens more often after you trim the damn bird...PLZ ED, this has to be a bug and not a PFM idiosyncrasy.

 

Anybody feel my pain? :joystick:

[0xDEADBEEF]

I can feel your pain, I had about a similar frustartion when the change was introduced, but to be brutally honest. Ever since my flying style has changed and I'm not looking back. My turns are way more concious, I manage to preserve my energy much better and yes, I still wrecked two wings in the past month, and everytime I hope it's gonna be the last.

 

To give you a tip on the way: I found that the ACS manages the Gs nicely when below subsonic, as long as you pull symmetrical Gs (only stick aft, no aileron input), what usually breaks my wings is when I'm already high G, and start rolling, creating asymmetric load on the wings. Be concious about when you pull gs and when you roll and how much or not you mix those two components, and your wings will break a lot less!

[Monkey21]

I'm sure it is annoying, but not unrealistic (apparently)

[Svend_Dellepude]

Poke around the forum and you should be able to find quite a few threads about this without working too hard.

[Stuge]

I don't mind the stress damage model, I just wonder if the limiter system really does such a bad job keeping the Gs in check.

 

It does introduce a welcome increase in pilot workload nevertheless. Not unreasonable in any way.

[Drona]

I am sure the Su-27 jocks have faced this nagging problem of their wings breaking. Have been conscious about this and recently wasn't pulling high Gs when they broke again - for crying out loud; this is supposed to be a bloody fighter and pull Gs... And yes, this happens more often after you trim the damn bird...PLZ ED, this has to be a bug and not a PFM idiosyncrasy.

 

Anybody feel my pain? :joystick:

 

Ever since the PFM came out with the broken wings, I have only ever broken it on purpose while testing just to see how much I could pull. You could pull up to 6G on a fully fueled and loaded flanker, but anything more and you start to stress the airframe.

 

You just need to learn how to handle it. Be careful when turning and always have an eye on the G meter when fully fueled and loaded. Don't be mountain hopping in a flanker. That's not the way its supposed to be flown. Most people unfortunately do this and its just an unrealistic way to fly.

 

FYI, it's not a bug, don't blame ED. Just learn how to fly her gently. She's still a deadly bird in the right hands.

[grunf]

She's still a deadly bird in the right hands.

She's deadly in the wrong hands too. For the pilot. :)

[Drona]

^^^LOL, yes...

[DarkFire]

Ever since the PFM came out with the broken wings, I have only ever broken it on purpose while testing just to see how much I could pull. You could pull up to 6G on a fully fueled and loaded flanker, but anything more and you start to stress the airframe.

 

You just need to learn how to handle it. Be careful when turning and always have an eye on the G meter when fully fueled and loaded. Don't be mountain hopping in a flanker. That's not the way its supposed to be flown. Most people unfortunately do this and its just an unrealistic way to fly.

 

FYI, it's not a bug, don't blame ED. Just learn how to fly her gently. She's still a deadly bird in the right hands.

 

This. It's still perfectly possible to fly around with max fuel and max missile war load at cruise throttle (85% RPM) at any altitude, then do an ITR turn to bring yourself down to and through STR corner speed. All without breaking any wings.

 

A couple of other points:

 

1. The old max-rate barrel roll technique for defeating AIM-120's is now very dangerous because asymmetric loads produce much more effective G than single-plane loads do. When fast and heavy roll then pull, or pull then roll, not both at once. You can see this: try a single-plane pull then try the same pull whilst rolling. G will be significantly higher in the second instance.

 

2. Don't expect to easily achieve that ~22 degrees per second max STR with full fuel and a full missile load. The Su-27 was designed, amongst other things, to be an escort fighter and long range air superiority fighter. Obviously the designers factored in an assumed lengthy flight period prior to engaging in combat, hence the G-ratings all being calibrated for an all-up weight of 21,500 Kg. Dogfighting 10Km away from your airfield is one of the primary things the MiG-29S was designed for.

 

3. This goes for all Russian fighters: the flight control system was not designed to hold your hand in any way. It wasn't at all designed with care free handling in mind as you'd find on most NATO fighters. The design philosophy was always that the ACS on the Su-27 (and the same goes for the MiG-29) would allow you to do silly and fatal things, but the designers assumed that the pilot would be sufficiently well trained and sufficiently experienced to know when and how to push right out to the bleeding edge of the flight envelope whereas the care-free FBW system on a NATO fighter would not necessarily allow the pilot to do the same sort of thing, but would be safer than the Russian equivalent.

 

The Su-27 is not an easy bird to fly well or effectively. It absolutely requires but also rewards hours and hours and hours of practice and training. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast. Learn to fly it safely and accurately and only then gradually take it closer to the edge.

 

In a way it's a shame that it is such an awkward beast to master. I fly fairly regularly on the VA server and always see the same 5-10 names in the Su-27. I don't think it's a very popular bird at the moment but damn is it rewarding when it all comes together. So to the F-15C and M2000 crowd I'll say this: come over to the dark side, we have cookies!*

 

 

* Cookies subject to availability and may or may not actually exist.

Edited July 20, 2016 by DarkFire

[rrohde]

Also, just to throw that in there - keep the AOA below 20 degrees at all times when pushing the 27.

[DarkFire]

Also, just to throw that in there - keep the AOA below 20 degrees at all times when pushing the 27.

 

Good point. It'll be obvious when you're approaching 20 degrees AOA: it's at this point that the vibration starts to set in. It's not as obvious as the cockpit vibration in the F-15C but it's there.

[Nash]

This. It's still perfectly possible to fly around with max fuel and max missile war load at cruise throttle (85% RPM) at any altitude, then do an ITR turn to bring yourself down to and through STR corner speed. All without breaking any wings.

 

A couple of other points:

 

1. The old max-rate barrel roll technique for defeating AIM-120's is now very dangerous because asymmetric loads produce much more effective G than single-plane loads do. When fast and heavy roll then pull, or pull then roll, not both at once. You can see this: try a single-plane pull then try the same pull whilst rolling. G will be significantly higher in the second instance.

 

2. Don't expect to easily achieve that ~22 degrees per second max STR with full fuel and a full missile load. The Su-27 was designed, amongst other things, to be an escort fighter and long range air superiority fighter. Obviously the designers factored in an assumed lengthy flight period prior to engaging in combat, hence the G-ratings all being calibrated for an all-up weight of 21,500 Kg. Dogfighting 10Km away from your airfield is one of the primary things the MiG-29S was designed for.

 

3. This goes for all Russian fighters: the flight control system was not designed to hold your hand in any way. It wasn't at all designed with care free handling in mind as you'd find on most NATO fighters. The design philosophy was always that the ACS on the Su-27 (and the same goes for the MiG-29) would allow you to do silly and fatal things, but the designers assumed that the pilot would be sufficiently well trained and sufficiently experienced to know when and how to push right out to the bleeding edge of the flight envelope whereas the care-free FBW system on a NATO fighter would not necessarily allow the pilot to do the same sort of thing, but would be safer than the Russian equivalent.

 

The Su-27 is not an easy bird to fly well or effectively. It absolutely requires but also rewards hours and hours and hours of practice and training. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast. Learn to fly it safely and accurately and only then gradually take it closer to the edge.

 

In a way it's a shame that it is such an awkward beast to master. I fly fairly regularly on the VA server and always see the same 5-10 names in the Su-27. I don't think it's a very popular bird at the moment but damn is it rewarding when it all comes together. So to the F-15C and M2000 crowd I'll say this: come over to the dark side, we have cookies!*

 

 

* Cookies subject to availability and may or may not actually exist.

Agree totally...

Learning to glide in the 27 before jinking it is the key...

Difficult but satisfying bird...

 

Sent from my A210 using Tapatalk

[Drona]

So to the F-15C and M2000 crowd I'll say this: come over to the dark side, we have cookies!*

* Cookies subject to availability and may or may not actually exist.

 

Comrade, in Mother Russia, we no eat cookies, we eat pork and drink Vodka in copious amounts. :megalol:

[Axion]

Someone mentioned, Vodka?

[DarkFire]

Well, hog roast & vodka it is then :D