investigating Thrust to weight ratio: confused

[Kefa]

Perhaps the Mig-29 and Su-27 Clmax figure is at where their limiter kicks in which I think is about 26degrees or slightly more.  For example, F-16 has a Clmax of a little over 1.6 at 25AOA and 1g.  And that is at the limiter, so you give up a few degrees to save airspeed, so to say.

 

Limiters aside, according to Fred Clifton, Mig-29 and F-16 maximum lift occur around 35degrees.

 

 From Ray Whitford's book, lift loss due to trimming (for a stable aircraft) amounts to 10-15% of max lift. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Top Jockey]

Thank you @Kefa, very good insight. 

 

Also, in the various concepts mentioned in the article, we can see again the CG (centre of gravity) and the CL (centre of lift).

I suppose in the article the CL comes as: AC (aerodynamic centre) ?

Regarding that, I recall reading somewhere, that in the MiG-29A both CG and CL are roughly near each other, and in the Su-27 the CG would be more aft than the CL.

Edited December 10, 2021 by Top Jockey

[Spurts]

44 minutes ago, Kefa said:

Perhaps the Mig-29 and Su-27 Clmax figure is at where their limiter kicks in which I think is about 26degrees or slightly more.  For example, F-16 has a Clmax of a little over 1.6 at 25AOA and 1g. 

Bingo.

[captain_dalan]

On 12/9/2021 at 12:48 PM, Top Jockey said:

 

 

1. On the Fulcrum, the issue is me managing my expectations (created through several years - even before internet, from several media sources, sims, etc.), which surely frequently augmented and took to "legendary" levels the Fulcrum's real life maneuverability.

 

2. - take the F-15C's current flight model in DCS;

 

1. Just define maneuverability as the capability to change your energy state in the air, and suddenly the 29 is one of the (if not THE) best planes we currently have in DCS
2. The F-15C is a bit overmodeled (slow) and undermodeled (fast) in DCS anyways. Still fairly close for a FC3 plane

On 12/9/2021 at 6:54 PM, Youda said:

@captain_dalan Do you have them? Can you post them?

Forum rules prohibit such actions. 

[Cmptohocah]

9 hours ago, Kefa said:

...

Limiters aside, according to Fred Clifton, Mig-29 and F-16 maximum lift occur around 35degrees.

...

MiG's manual has max. allowable value of alpha as 26 degrees. For me this means stall. Mind you this value is only for sub-sonic flight v < 0.8M. For other Mach numbers (trans-sonic and super-sonic) these limits are lower.

[Top Jockey]

On 12/9/2021 at 6:09 PM, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

Oh, yes, ok.

I have met very few people who could explain what a statically unstable airplane in a longitudinal channel is in its practical application. They could not explain in simple words what it gives the glider.

This is utopia. In fact, you write about shooting "under the hood". And this is not targeted shooting. From the history of jet aviation of the 4th generation, I do not recall such cases.

If this is one case per 100,000, then this probability can be ignored.

Here you can see how the adaptive wing works on the Su-27 (view from Earth), it is well implemented in the DCS. There are many views of slats (LEX) and flaps at the moments of performing various maneuvers at different speeds and AoA. And the operation of horizontal stabilizers, the installation of negative angles, diff working and etc.

And what is surprising here?

And what is the K (L/D) factor for F-14?

 

I see.

Naturally, for different airframes there will be specific different behaviour characteristics... and sometimes for the "untrained eye", it's not easy to notice / aknowledge which or how these will perform just by superficially looking at them.

 

Also, on F-15C vs Su-27 :

Throughout the web, in several comparisons between the F-15C and Su-27, the Flanker's maneuverability / ACM characteristics are much praised and even regarded as superior to the Eagle.

The way I have to test comparisons is in - DCS... and for instance looking only at the "pitch rate" parameter, I've noticed the following :

Without using the Su-27's "direct link control", it appears to show a slower pitch rate than the F-15C.

 

In your opinion is this correct as is in DCS ?

For a maneuverable aicraft, shouldn't its pitch rate also be somewhat higher - more akin the MiG-29 or the Mirage 2000C ?

( Truth to be told, other members already mentioned the Su-27 feels a bit sluggish in DCS. )

Edited December 11, 2021 by Top Jockey

[Top Jockey]

14 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

1. Just define maneuverability as the capability to change your energy state in the air, and suddenly the 29 is one of the (if not THE) best planes we currently have in DCS

...

 

1. Although you already know I was expecting more from the MiG-29A in some aspects ( yes - sustained turn rate  ) ; I fully understand you, for a lot of technical reasons and concepts you've shared already:

- very good T/W ratio , acceleration , vertical fight possibility

- 1 circle fights , scissors maneuvers in some cases

- capability to change energy (slow down and accelerate) quicker than other airframes

- pitch rate ...

 

2.  Regarding the bold parts: I understand, but would that be of a 'meaningful' help when fighting the Hornet with its current fligh model in DCS, or even an F-14B excelent performance ?

(As many say in DCS the Hornet is maintaining even better STR than the Viper, which supposedly it shouldn't...)

 

3. Forgeting combat tactics perspective, but purely airframe technical comparison ; would you qualify the Su-27S as a better dogfighting airframe than the MiG-29A, or not at all ?

[captain_dalan]

13 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

2.  Regarding the bold parts: I understand, but would that be of a 'meaningful' help when fighting the Hornet with its current fligh model in DCS, or even an F-14B excelent performance ?

(As many say in DCS the Hornet is maintaining even better STR than the Viper, which supposedly it shouldn't...)

 

3. Forgeting combat tactics perspective, but purely airframe technical comparison ; would you qualify the Su-27S as a better dogfighting airframe than the MiG-29A, or not at all ?

1. If properly employed then yes, against most planes. As for the Hornet....... that is a tough question. I simply can't confirm or deny it's sleek performance. As it is currently modelled in DCS it is arguably the best dogfighter in that configuration. STR is irrelevant here. The Hornet is performing exceptionally well (relatively) in most ACM metrics we can observe. 

2. Two disclaimers:
2-1. This is going to be my personal opinion based on my personal tastes;
2-2. I am nowhere near proficient in the Flanker and the Fulcrum as i am in other planes, so some finer points of their performance characteristics may be lost on me

I find the flying qualities of the Fulcrum superior and more to my liking then the ones of the Flanker. In a purely guns only environment, i would take the former rather then the latter. It's smaller, more nimble and more more E-M capable (by far) then the lumbering Flanker. This doesn't mean easier time in DCS, as already mentioned, proper tactics are more difficult to execute due to poor visibility. But, as we are forgetting tactical implementation, then 29 all the way. 

If however, HOBS, HMS and Archers are present, then airplane performance become less relevant and simple nose pointing is the main factor, then go for the Flanker. Not because it's a better plane, but because it will perform that first turn easier and let you have the first shot. IF you survive that long. 

[Dell_Murrey-RUS]

20 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

Also, on F-15C vs Su-27 :

Throughout the web, in several comparisons between the F-15C and Su-27, the Flanker's maneuverability / ACM characteristics are much praised and even regarded as superior to the Eagle.

Air battles are not won by maneuverability alone. And an air battle of opposing groups does not make economic sense if the maneuverability qualities, acceleration characteristics and combat onboard armament complex of their fighters are identical or very close to each other (the spread of differences in parameters does not exceed ~ 10-15%).

There must be a significant comprehensive superiority. Just as the F-22 is superior to the F-15/Su-30 and etc.

20 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

The way I have to test comparisons is in - DCS... and for instance looking only at the "pitch rate" parameter, I've noticed the following :

DCS is a toy in the simulator genre. Some things she simulates well, and some things she doesn't. Do not focus on games.

20 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

Without using the Su-27's "direct link control", it appears to show a slower pitch rate than the F-15C.

Why do you need pitch speed? Where in air combat will you actively use this parameter?

And you're comparing two different fighters. The F-15 is designed classic and has a more simple and fast control system on board. The Su-27 is statically unstable in the longitudinal channel and has its own special control system.

The control system of the old Su-27 is analog, and besides, it is made with a reaction delay (up to 0.5 seconds). The developers of OKB Sukhoi's did this on purpose. In later modifications, when switching to a digital control system, the reaction delay was removed. Therefore, for the Su-27, the "conditionally" slow response to the rapid displacement of the control stick of the aircraft is real. 

The implemented control law in the Su-27 automatic control system - speed stability (artificial).

The implemented control law in the F-15 automatic aircraft control system - overload stability (may be wrong terminology, sorry).

Two different control systems, two different laws and two different principles of aircraft control for pilots.

20 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

In your opinion is this correct as is in DCS ?

For a maneuverable aicraft, shouldn't its pitch rate also be somewhat higher - more akin the MiG-29 or the Mirage 2000C ?

( Truth to be told, other members already mentioned the Su-27 feels a bit sluggish in DCS. )

Ok. 

MiG-29 as well as F-15 is made by a classic stable aircraft. And it has a very simple control system, without long-term dampers. Therefore, the MiG-29, as well as the F-15, can increase overload faster and more sharply. Personally, I don't see a mistake here.
The Mirage-2000 has a history similar to the Su-27, it has some degree of static instability in the longitudinal channel, and it also has a special control system, only it is digital and faster.
Digital control systems are installed on the Su-30 and more recent modifications (including the Su-35), so they are faster in increasing overload.

[Ironhand]

@ Top Jockey,

Your comment about always having to use the "S" key in the Su-27 to get a shot against a MiG-29 has sort of bothered me. So I'm going to leave two quick track files which will, hopefully, play back correctly. In neither one do I use either the "Y" or "S" key.

Gunzo is something I never practice. So I'm making all sorts of mistakes. However, since you fly primarily against the AI, I get the feeling that you are trying to do too much too fast. A degree of patience always seems to work best. BTW, in both I'm not interested in a quick snap shot. Normally you'd drive for the rear and saddle up. From that point on, you own the AI.

If they don't play back correctly and you're interested, let me know and I'll try a video instead.

 

Su-27 vs MiG-29 H2H-1.trk Su-27 vs MiG-29 H2H-2.trk

Edited December 12, 2021 by Ironhand

[Top Jockey]

18 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

1. If properly employed then yes, against most planes. As for the Hornet....... that is a tough question. I simply can't confirm or deny it's sleek performance. As it is currently modelled in DCS it is arguably the best dogfighter in that configuration. STR is irrelevant here. The Hornet is performing exceptionally well (relatively) in most ACM metrics we can observe. 

2. Two disclaimers:
2-1. This is going to be my personal opinion based on my personal tastes;
2-2. I am nowhere near proficient in the Flanker and the Fulcrum as i am in other planes, so some finer points of their performance characteristics may be lost on me

I find the flying qualities of the Fulcrum superior and more to my liking then the ones of the Flanker. In a purely guns only environment, i would take the former rather then the latter. It's smaller, more nimble and more more E-M capable (by far) then the lumbering Flanker. This doesn't mean easier time in DCS, as already mentioned, proper tactics are more difficult to execute due to poor visibility. But, as we are forgetting tactical implementation, then 29 all the way. 

If however, HOBS, HMS and Archers are present, then airplane performance become less relevant and simple nose pointing is the main factor, then go for the Flanker. Not because it's a better plane, but because it will perform that first turn easier and let you have the first shot. IF you survive that long. 

 

Sure, I asked preciselly your opinion.

Interesting to see different points of view from different members regarding these 2 airframes.

Fair enough, that's what i wanted to know.

[Top Jockey]

12 hours ago, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

...

1. DCS is a toy in the simulator genre. Some things she simulates well, and some things she doesn't. Do not focus on games.

2. Why do you need pitch speed? Where in air combat will you actively use this parameter?

And you're comparing two different fighters. The F-15 is designed classic and has a more simple and fast control system on board. The Su-27 is statically unstable in the longitudinal channel and has its own special control system.

3. The control system of the old Su-27 is analog, and besides, it is made with a reaction delay (up to 0.5 seconds). The developers of OKB Sukhoi's did this on purpose. In later modifications, when switching to a digital control system, the reaction delay was removed. Therefore, for the Su-27, the "conditionally" slow response to the rapid displacement of the control stick of the aircraft is real. 

...

 

 

Very good - several details which are new to me.

 

1. Indeed, sometimes I tend to forget that.

 

2. Oh come on, regaring the pitch rate I believe you know much more than that... I'am by no means an expert on the subject, but in the fluidity / dynamic process which is the dogfight:

- it can allow for a first shot oportunity, given the other circumstances being similar;

- it can allow for a snapshot, which can be crucial as other shot oportunity might not arise;

- it can make the difference in aiming at the bandit while on the HUD, or never catch him again anymore;

Example: when already on the bandit's 6 o'clock, in the MiG-29A I feel I can put the cannon gunsight on him almost always I want (sure with some loss of speed)... in the Su-27 sometimes pursuing high energy fighters, I feel I must wait so it can start turning inside the bandit's turn radius so its cannon gunsight gets on him...

- it can help slowing down one's aircraft quicker if needed while maneuvering;

- ... and more tactics that I don't know;

 

I'm not saying pitch rate is the "be-all and end-all", but I mean: Hornet, Mirage and Fuclrum pilots do praise this capability...

 

3. The last bold describes preciselly what I do feel when flying / fighting in the Su-27.

So I'am curious: why did the developers of OKB Sukhoi did that 0.5 second reaction delay on purpose ?

What would be the benefit ?

[Top Jockey]

5 hours ago, Ironhand said:

@ Top Jockey,

Your comment about always having to use the "S" key in the Su-27 to get a shot against a MiG-29 has sort of bothered me. So I'm going to leave two quick track files which will, hopefully, play back correctly. In neither one do I use either the "Y" or "S" key.

Gunzo is something I never practice. So I'm making all sorts of mistakes. However, since you fly primarily against the AI, I get the feeling that you are trying to do too much too fast. A degree of patience always seems to work best. BTW, in both I'm not interested in a quick snap shot. Normally you'd drive for the rear and saddle up. From that point on, you own the AI.

If they don't play back correctly and you're interested, let me know and I'll try a video instead.

 

Su-27 vs MiG-29 H2H-1.trk 498.27 kB · 0 downloads Su-27 vs MiG-29 H2H-2.trk 401.89 kB · 0 downloads

 

 

Hello,

No, I didn't wrote that in the first bold;

I'm perfectly capable versus the A.I. of shooting down whichever of those 2 airframes, while flying one or the other.

And my tipical operating fashion is the one in the second bold of your post.

 

What I meant about the pitch rates was :

- without using "direct link control" in the Su-27 (using only the 'paddle switch'), its pitch rate will be lower than the MiG-29A (for instance) ;

- I was originally expecting in real life, the Su-27's at the least to equal the MiG-29's in that parameter, as it is afterall a more modern and refined design ... but Dell_Murrey-RUS already explained that it isn't to be expected.

 

I'll send you feedback when I try your tracks - thank you for your time.

[Ironhand]

Just now, Top Jockey said:

 

Hello,

No, I didn't wrote that in the first bold;

I'm perfectly capable versus the A.I. of shooting down whichever of those 2 airframes, while flying one or the other...

Ahhh... I misread, then. My apologies.

[Dell_Murrey-RUS]

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

2. Oh come on, regaring the pitch rate I believe you know much more than that...

Ok. Like fast pitch speed aircraft? Su-27 can give you > 50 degrees/sec. Any plane more?

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

I'am by no means an expert on the subject, but in the fluidity / dynamic process which is the dogfight:

- it can allow for a first shot oportunity, given the other circumstances being similar;

He may or may not give the first shot. The probability of such a situation is extremely small.
Do not forget physics, the achievement of such high turning speeds in aerial combat is achieved by reducing potential energy, and as a consequence, reducing airspeed. It's bad in aerial group combat.

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

- it can allow for a snapshot, which can be crucial as other shot oportunity might not arise;

How likely such a scenario is at all?

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

- it can make the difference in aiming at the bandit while on the HUD, or never catch him again anymore;

May be, may be not.

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

Example: when already on the bandit's 6 o'clock, in the MiG-29A I feel I can put the cannon gunsight on him almost always I want (sure with some loss of speed)... in the Su-27 sometimes pursuing high energy fighters, I feel I must wait so it can start turning inside the bandit's turn radius so its cannon gunsight gets on him...

The speed of aimed firing from cannon should clearly be below 800 km/h and overload should not exceed 4-4.5 g. Otherwise, a miss is guaranteed.

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

- it can help slowing down one's aircraft quicker if needed while maneuvering;

Slow fighter = dead fighter.

This is possible when the situation of air combat is 1 on 1 and you confidently went to six to the enemy. But, how likely such a scenario is at all?

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

I'm not saying pitch rate is the "be-all and end-all", but I mean: Hornet, Mirage and Fuclrum pilots do praise this capability...

The Su-27 gives a high pitch speed.

You just need to be able to use the control system properly and build a dogfight a few steps ahead, like in chess. Then everything will be very cool.

13 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

3. The last bold describes preciselly what I do feel when flying / fighting in the Su-27.

So I'am curious: why did the developers of OKB Sukhoi did that 0.5 second reaction delay on purpose ?

What would be the benefit ?

The fewer fast movements of the aircraft, the less likely it is to get into a dangerous flight mode. Beginners after flight schools crash such planes less. And there are many more reasons. Now there are no such delays on modifications OKB Sukhoi's aircraft.

 

P.S. It is impossible to design a device that would be universal for all occasions. Any aircraft designed will be a set of compromises.

Edited December 13, 2021 by Dell_Murrey-RUS

[Top Jockey]

15 hours ago, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

1. Ok. Like fast pitch speed aircraft? Su-27 can give you > 50 degrees/sec. Any plane more?

...

The Su-27 gives a high pitch speed.

2. The fewer fast movements of the aircraft, the less likely it is to get into a dangerous flight mode. Beginners after flight schools crash such planes less. And there are many more reasons. Now there are no such delays on modifications OKB Sukhoi's aircraft.

P.S. It is impossible to design a device that would be universal for all occasions. Any aircraft designed will be a set of compromises.

 

 

Thank you Dell_Murrey-RUS,

 

1. Oh, now I'm starting to understand : if in real life the Su-27's pitch rate can get that quick, then it's quick enough for me.

However I called its pitch rate somewhat slow, because in DCS current flight model it doesn't feel as reaching > 50 degrees/sec... feels a little sluggish on that parameter.

But I might be wrong, need to test more.

(Besides, there's what you mentioned above also - some things DCS can simulate very well, others are more difficult.)

 

2. Interesting details, ok I wouldn't guess part of the motive for the command delay woul also be safety reasons.

 

Edited December 13, 2021 by Top Jockey

[Dell_Murrey-RUS]

15 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

1. Oh, now I'm starting to understand : if in real life the Su-27's pitch rate can get that quick, then it's quick enough for me.

However I called its pitch rate somewhat slow, because in DCS current flight model it doesn't feel as reaching > 50 degrees/sec... feels a little sluggish on that parameter.

Did you not see the figure "dynamic braking (Cobra Pugachev)" performed by the old Su-27UB?

In DCS you can do this too.

Pitch speed for Su-27 glider more big than classical design aircrafts. The algorithms of control system with a large damping coefficient are where what you call "pitch slowness".

15 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

2. Interesting details, ok I wouldn't guess part of the motive for the command delay woul also be safety reasons.

Smooth entry into the maneuver is less speed loss. This is better than a dynamic pitch speed aircraft, but quickly losing speed (energy).

[Top Jockey]

1 hour ago, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

Did you not see the figure "dynamic braking (Cobra Pugachev)" performed by the old Su-27UB?

In DCS you can do this too.

Pitch speed for Su-27 glider more big than classical design aircrafts. The algorithms of control system with a large damping coefficient are where what you call "pitch slowness".

Smooth entry into the maneuver is less speed loss. This is better than a dynamic pitch speed aircraft, but quickly losing speed (energy).

 

Very good, then (although not 100 % sure) I believe it isn't yet implemented in DCS Su-27 flight model... as I have the impression it still shows a considerably slower pitch rate than the MiG-29.

 

(The last time I've compared the 2 aiframes pitch rate in DCS was an year ago or somehting.)

Edited December 14, 2021 by Top Jockey

[Dell_Murrey-RUS]

16 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

Very good, then (although not 100 % sure) I believe it isn't yet implemented in DCS Su-27 flight model...

Flight model Su-27 has already been implemented correctly and corresponds to the prototype.

16 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

as I have the impression it still shows a considerably slower pitch rate than the MiG-29.

This is not a bug, this is a feature.

16 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

(The last time I've compared the 2 aiframes pitch rate in DCS was an year ago or somehting.)

So... ok. I don't understand why you need it, especially about "fast pitch speed". But look at this Su-27 DCS solo aerobatic program and tell me if any other fighter can show similar figures and maneuvers in DCS or real life?

[Ironhand]

17 hours ago, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

… But look at this Su-27 DCS solo aerobatic program …

A joy to watch.

[Top Jockey]

On 12/15/2021 at 6:21 AM, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

Flight model Su-27 has already been implemented correctly and corresponds to the prototype.

This is not a bug, this is a feature.

So... ok. I don't understand why you need it, especially about "fast pitch speed". But look at this Su-27 DCS solo aerobatic program and tell me if any other fighter can show similar figures and maneuvers in DCS or real life?

 

Ok then, glad to know it is correct as is.

So in that case, as I always mentioned - in DCS the Fulcrum's initial pitch rate does seem to be higher than the Flanker (without this one resorting to "direct link control").

This always was easily perceivable by observing in the F2 outside view, as when giving a sharp pull on the stick on both aircraft, the Fulcrum's nose can 'sling' around somewhat faster.

 

Thank you for the Su-27 solo aerobatic program - it is indeed a joy to watch !

( Looking carefully at the cockpit I could even recognize Mr. Viktor Pugachev inside. )

 

Several interesting moments:

- at 4:10 yaw maneuver with assimetric thrust ; at 5:00 the aricraft briefly stops in the air ; at 9:26 a complete roll at very low altitude ; and others...

 

One curiosity:

- the pitch maneuvers from 1:43 to 1:51, were done using the "direct link control", correct ?

 

[Dell_Murrey-RUS]

16.12.2021 в 02:48, Ironhand сказал:

A joy to watch.

Thanks ))))

8 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

Thank you for the Su-27 solo aerobatic program - it is indeed a joy to watch !

( Looking carefully at the cockpit I could even recognize Mr. Viktor Pugachev inside. )

 

8 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

So in that case, as I always mentioned - in DCS the Fulcrum's initial pitch rate does seem to be higher than the Flanker (without this one resorting to "direct link control").

This always was easily perceivable by observing in the F2 outside view, as when giving a sharp pull on the stick on both aircraft, the Fulcrum's nose can 'sling' around somewhat faster.

Only this does not cause the same abrupt changes in the trajectory. Such a fast change in the direction of the nose of the aircraft occurs around the center of mass. Therefore, I still do not understand what the practical meaning of fast pitch speed in air combat is.

8 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

Several interesting moments:

- at 4:10 yaw maneuver with assimetric thrust ; at 5:00 the aricraft briefly stops in the air ; at 9:26 a complete roll at very low altitude ; and others...

9:26 - in fact, this is the famous death maneuver "Touch-roll-touch" by F-104. Not every fighter will be able to perform such a maneuver. Su-27 can do.

8 часов назад, Top Jockey сказал:

One curiosity:

- the pitch maneuvers from 1:43 to 1:51, were done using the "direct link control", correct ?

Yes. Invert dynamical braking (invert Cobra). )))

[Top Jockey]

On 12/12/2021 at 2:52 AM, captain_dalan said:

1. If properly employed then yes, against most planes. As for the Hornet....... that is a tough question. I simply can't confirm or deny it's sleek performance. As it is currently modelled in DCS it is arguably the best dogfighter in that configuration. STR is irrelevant here. The Hornet is performing exceptionally well (relatively) in most ACM metrics we can observe. 

2. Two disclaimers:
2-1. This is going to be my personal opinion based on my personal tastes;
2-2. I am nowhere near proficient in the Flanker and the Fulcrum as i am in other planes, so some finer points of their performance characteristics may be lost on me

I find the flying qualities of the Fulcrum superior and more to my liking then the ones of the Flanker. In a purely guns only environment, i would take the former rather then the latter. It's smaller, more nimble and more more E-M capable (by far) then the lumbering Flanker. This doesn't mean easier time in DCS, as already mentioned, proper tactics are more difficult to execute due to poor visibility. But, as we are forgetting tactical implementation, then 29 all the way. 

If however, HOBS, HMS and Archers are present, then airplane performance become less relevant and simple nose pointing is the main factor, then go for the Flanker. Not because it's a better plane, but because it will perform that first turn easier and let you have the first shot. IF you survive that long. 

 

Hello again,

 

These 2 bird's specific BFM aerodynamic capabilities continue to catch my attention... and so, from time to time here I'm I reviewing many of the fine details you and others shared here.

 

Which gets me to notice the bold :

- what do you mean specifically with it, exactly in which aspect is it by far ?

- when I see "E-M", I tend to remember E-M diagrams... do you mean with that bold, the Fulcrum's ability to pull more Gs than the Flanker at higher speeds + 800 kph ?

 

 

[captain_dalan]

On 2/3/2022 at 10:35 PM, Top Jockey said:

 

Hello again,

 

These 2 bird's specific BFM aerodynamic capabilities continue to catch my attention... and so, from time to time here I'm I reviewing many of the fine details you and others shared here.

 

Which gets me to notice the bold :

- what do you mean specifically with it, exactly in which aspect is it by far ?

- when I see "E-M", I tend to remember E-M diagrams... do you mean with that bold, the Fulcrum's ability to pull more Gs than the Flanker at higher speeds + 800 kph ?

 

 

No, i mean the ability to regain it's spent energy. This can manifest through greater acceleration under g and unloaded, or through climb rates. 

[BBCRF]

On 12/15/2021 at 9:21 AM, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

Flight model Su-27 has already been implemented correctly and corresponds to the prototype.

On 12/12/2021 at 12:12 PM, Dell_Murrey-RUS said:

The control system of the old Su-27 is analog, and besides, it is made with a reaction delay (up to 0.5 seconds). The developers of OKB Sukhoi's did this on purpose. In later modifications, when switching to a digital control system, the reaction delay was removed. Therefore, for the Su-27, the "conditionally" slow response to the rapid displacement of the control stick of the aircraft is real. 

Во первых она не аналоговая, а Аналогово-цифровая. Второй момент где там в уравнении СДУ задержка 0.5с?