mikoyan Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 There is a video on the net, what I saw was that they were upgrading the su-30s and su-33s; I don't know the details since it was in Russian.They show them being upgraded, on yellow primer paint. I don't think that the su-33 is a cow if it can nearly hover at slow speed without crashing, look for the videos on YouTube.
GGTharos Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 No one is arguing about the Su-33's high AoA handling. It's still a cow :D 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Flаnker Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 No one is arguing about the Su-33's high AoA handling. It's still a cow :D I do not agree that Su33 is a cow. his maneuvering characteristics as in Su27. He is worse acceleration capabilities. Мои авиафото
GGTharos Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Worse in sustaining turns as well, though it should have the same incredible ITR. I do not agree that Su33 is a cow. his maneuvering characteristics as in Su27. He is worse acceleration capabilities. 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Flаnker Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Worse in sustaining turns as well, though it should have the same incredible ITR. I do not understand ...:( Мои авиафото
GGTharos Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 It means that it cannot pull as much g as a Su-27 in a level turn and not lose speed. ITR (Instantaneous turn rate) is the turn rate you can achieve when you just pull the stick back as much as you can and you do not care about losing speed. 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Alfa Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Good news for the Su-33!. Thanks for posting the video Flanker :) . JJ
Alfa Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 It means that it cannot pull as much g as a Su-27 in a level turn and not lose speed. ITR (Instantaneous turn rate) is the turn rate you can achieve when you just pull the stick back as much as you can and you do not care about losing speed. No but as you know that is something of a universial issue with naval(deck) fighters due to higher weight and larger wing area - the MiG-29K(including the new version) also has a lower G-rating than the land based versions. JJ
GGTharos Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Not a g-rating Alfa (but yes, I am aware of what you are talking about :) ) but sustained g capability. At low altitude and high speed the maximum g factors into this, at high altitude, not. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Alfa Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Whatever :D But if we then instead use the official term of "maximum G-load", its stated as 8 for both the Su-33 and MiG-29K(and IIRC something similar for the Hornet), while it is 9 for the respective land based variants. At any rate, to return to the topic of the thread, it can hardly be a cause for more "sluggish" controls......quite the opposite in fact :) . Edited January 12, 2011 by Alfa JJ
GGTharos Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 That was a software issue - it was a bad control input file :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Alfa Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Yeah I suspected as much(since I don't have that issue myself) - I was refering to some of the earlier comments in the thread concerning the nature of the Su-33 vs. the Su-27. JJ
ФрогФут Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 Screw the MiG. The '33 has better range, and is a better starting point. IMHO stick with '33 + whatever upgrades. Putting a MiG on a Carrier is like putting peanut butter on a wedding cake. The MiG will always be a point defense scrapper. The '33 has the potential to more of a force projection platform, maybe in the future for shore assist, and more potential for a standoff fleet defence role Good for us, you don't decide what to put on our carriers.:) By the way Su-33 pilots were very impressed, flying on a MiG-29K simulator.;) 1 "Я ошеломлён, но думаю об этом другими словами", - некий гражданин Ноет котик, ноет кротик, Ноет в небе самолетик, Ноют клумбы и кусты - Ноют все. Поной и ты.
mikoyan Posted January 12, 2011 Posted January 12, 2011 No one is arguing about the Su-33's high AoA handling. It's still a cow :D In that case the f-18 is also a cow. What is the wing loading of the su-33 then; it is heavier but it also has more wing area; canards and flaps are different too.
Jinro Posted January 12, 2011 Author Posted January 12, 2011 Speaking of the Su-33 and carriers.....why don't the blast plates on the Kuz-whatever retract?
revalence Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 Don't forget it's thrust to weight ratio 0.87 (its quite horrendous, compared to 1.12 for F-15C). But then again, more fuel equals for fun! :D And it doesn't hurt to have 12 pylons! (Think! 12 R-27EMs!):) -Andrew (Revalence)
104th_Crunch Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 Good for us, you don't decide what to put on our carriers.:) By the way Su-33 pilots were very impressed, flying on a MiG-29K simulator.;) DCS: MIG-29K vs F/A-18E = Blockbuster! :D
104th_Crunch Posted January 13, 2011 Posted January 13, 2011 Good for us, you don't decide what to put on our carriers.:) By the way Su-33 pilots were very impressed, flying on a MiG-29K simulator.;) By the way, can you say if this simulator is using an ED engine? Thanks
revalence Posted January 14, 2011 Posted January 14, 2011 By the way, can you say if this simulator is using an ED engine? Thanks It does look exceedingly similar, save for the HUD and clouds. Truly, that looks just like the original LOMAC! Amazing! I'll try to pinpoint the maker in the meantime. :thumbup:
revalence Posted January 14, 2011 Posted January 14, 2011 Ok.... retraced back to Youtube, and found an interesting link..... http://www.marketmats.com/ check it out for yourselves. It looks like a scaled down version of Lock On, but I doubt its the same thing. Maybe the same engine. The handling looks frighteningly familiar. -Andrew (Revalence)
shadowborn Posted February 7 Posted February 7 (edited) On 1/12/2011 at 12:49 AM, Jinro said: but when I tried the fly the Su-33 the controls were extremely sluggish. Necroing a thread for a good reason: 14 years later, and I have had the same exact problem. SU-33, the virtual stick in the plane on screen would move like molasses, leading to extremely sluggish controls and massive over-corrections. I checked for any conflicting controls - none. No curves, everything 100% range, no deadzones. I cleared and rebound my axis controls multiple times. Eventually, one last try of clearing the category and setting everything up again AND then exiting the mission, and restarting it, solved it. edit: FC SU-27 has the same problem, can still replicate it with it. Also, the stick on screen only moves on the pitch OR roll axis, whichever input is greater on the physical stick. It never moves "diagonally". Looks like there is some weird controls config artefact for FC3 planes lingering somewhere. Edited February 7 by shadowborn "I crash, therefore I am." A10-C II Tank Killer - AH-64D - AJS-37 Viggen - AV-8B Night Attack V/STOL - Black Shark 3 - F-4E Phantom II - F14 Tomcat - F-16C Viper - F5-E Tiger II - F/A-18C - Mosquito - Mi-24P - MiG-21bis - SA342 Gazelle - UH-1H Huey - Flaming Cliffs 3 - Supercarrier - Combined Arms. Caucasus - Mariannas - Nevada - Persian Gulf - Syria - Channel - Normandy 2.0 (I might have a module collection problem - send help!!) HP Reverb G2, Winwing F16EX, Orion 2 w/ F/A-18 Grip, VKB Pedals.
Czar66 Posted February 8 Posted February 8 17 hours ago, shadowborn said: Necroing a thread for a good reason: 14 years later, and I have had the same exact problem. SU-33, the virtual stick in the plane on screen would move like molasses, leading to extremely sluggish controls and massive over-corrections. I checked for any conflicting controls - none. No curves, everything 100% range, no deadzones. I cleared and rebound my axis controls multiple times. Eventually, one last try of clearing the category and setting everything up again AND then exiting the mission, and restarting it, solved it. edit: FC SU-27 has the same problem, can still replicate it with it. Also, the stick on screen only moves on the pitch OR roll axis, whichever input is greater on the physical stick. It never moves "diagonally". Looks like there is some weird controls config artefact for FC3 planes lingering somewhere. I think it would help that you post this on the FC2024 bug section and link this thread there instead of necroing this one. Visibility wise. 1
Recommended Posts