Tips for F-15 vs Su-27 online guns only

[flyICE]

P-42 is a prototype aircraft with special modifications. The front-line combat aircraft Su-27S has HALF the climb rate of the F-15C above 6000m. This may change now that SM1/3 is upgrading the engines, but the F-15 is getting upgrades as well.

 

I know that you're talking about real aircrafts, but is this also true in FC2?

[GGTharos]

Yep. Half might be an exaggeration (I would have to look at the charts again) but try this experiment:

 

Load an F-15 and Su-27 with fuel so that their weight is equal. Take off from the airfield and fly LEVEL, on full AB until M0.9 (Don't fly higher than 500'). Once you hit 0.9M (use mach meter, not airspeed indications in kt/kph), pull up completely vertical, at THE SAME G for each plane.

 

Keep it vertical, and see at what altitude each one stalls out. You'll understand the difference then.

 

The other experiment is sustained climb: Same setup with the planes in terms of weight, but start in level flight at 6000m. Accelerate to 0.9M, stay in AB. Raise the nose so that you maintain 0.9M just by pitch - this means the higher you get, the more you need to reduce the pitch to maintain 0.9M.

Try it side by side with a friend, see which plane gets left behind.

 

I know that you're talking about real aircrafts, but is this also true in FC2?

Edited July 11, 2011 by GGTharos

[RIPTIDE]

How did you not see him from miles and miles away? Where you flying low in the hills? You should of been able to zoom up above him, spiting out flares to decoy that r-60/73 and hope that they work. I have never heard of a 25 killing a fighter like that, unless they surprised it.

A lot of people have killed fighters using A-10's/Su-25's... ;) It happens from time to time. If you browse through the stats on the 104th for example, you'll find a few Bomber>Fighter kills. I might be going out on a limb here but I have exclaimed before how I considered SU-25t/A-10A chaff to be quite effective. Maybe even "overmodelled" to borrow a phrase. Not to mention that IR jammer the Toad has.

 

I was online on the 104th server at the time. Moreover, "SHOGUN" (adder, here) was south of kras lake. I saw the Su-25 facing into him. Was waiting for the Su-25 to go down then saw the message about the R-60. :D

 

 

Adder: TO answer your question... don't go headon with a striker like that until he can eyeball you. :) It can lead to embarrassment. You lock him up from the front, and he can see you, you just make it easy.

Edited July 11, 2011 by RIPTIDE

[Zakatak]

I've managed to beat an Su-27 in a gunfight before (not online) without too much knowledge of dogfighting, though it took me a few tries. I just tried to "go faster", for lack of a better term.

 

Question somewhat related to the thread: what does the MiG-29 offer that the Sukhoi and Eagle don't? I have honestly never flown it in this game (maybe twice). It doesn't have as much payload as the others, and basically runs on fumes the moment you light the afterburners.

Edited July 11, 2011 by Zakatak

[Cali]

Zak, there are a lot threads discussing the mig 29 already do a search for it.

 

EDIT: Here are a few threads

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=75200&highlight=f-15+su-27

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=57424&highlight=f-15+su-27

Edited July 11, 2011 by Cali

[RIPTIDE]

If you want a AI challenge offline, try that little Mirage on Excellent settings. Hard to see and moves like a UFO.

[mikoyan]

And it would still have half the rate of climb of F-15 above 6000m. ;)

 

so the p-42 had half the climb performance of the eagle?

Edited July 12, 2011 by mikoyan

[mikoyan]

so the p-42 had half the climb performance of the eagle?

 

The mig has better power than the su-27 but it has smaller sweet spots for turn rates; so you really need to be good if you want to beat a light su-27 or a f-15. I guess that on the mig you want to start the turn from 800km/h to 700 to get the best turn rates; and make the flanker loose energy; around +-550-480km/h your turn rate gets better but below that; the mig start to loose energy like crazy so you become like a flying brick. The real deal can go to higher aoas but as the pilot reaches them; a stick kicker push the stick to reduce the alpha by 5 degrees; there is a video on youtube on which you can see the kicker (looks very clucnky) , maybe the flanker can also reach more than 30 degrees of aoa; also there is in flight video of the eagle doing like 35; but that is units not degrees so I'm not sure what is the maximum aoa on the eagle.

one thing to look out agains flanker pilots is their speed; lock them to se how fast they are going; most of then go low at exactly 600km/h so right there you can tell that they want to play on their territory and use the maximum turn rate doing either a tight loop or a tight turn to get you while you turn into him; instead of playing their game you what to keep your energy going higher and faster.

 

You can tell that most su-27 pilots use that tactic of turning like crazy from 600km; but if you play right they don't have enything else to play other than bleeding speed to out turn you. The good flanker sticks know when to use the maximum turn performance and the tight turn radios only when necessary. For example there is a guy (forgot his sig) that instead of trying to get me on a single turn he would decend below me and do a loop arround 800km keeping more energy than me without getting killed by my tighter turn; after that he would repeat the loop but this time he had the advantage because he had better energy and angle to get me while I was slower.

This stuff is like kung fu; you have to flow like water and adapt to the situation to hit with the force of a wave:weight_lift_2:

 

 

[GGTharos]

Did you fail to read and understand all that was written? Was I somehow unclear?

 

so the p-42 had half the climb performance of the eagle?

[mikoyan]

Did you fail to read and understand all that was written? Was I somehow unclear?

No I didn't the previous statement said something about tripping the su-27 of unnecessary wight and you said that it would still have less climb performance than the f-15; wasn't the p-42 a tripped down aircraft? seriously you never loose; I guess even the su-35 is going to loose in climb performance to the f-15c even though I have yet to see the real numbers of both.

[mikoyan]

here is the whole comversation to make my point:

comment before your statement:

Su-27 - a good turn

F-15 - a good climb

F-15 might lead to the Su-27 high altitude and try to attack through the benefits of climb. But it can end a frontal attack, and defeat the one who shoots more accurately. Do it on F-15 will only experienced pilot.

F-15 lose to bend the Su-27

Modern fighter aircraft designed for combat in the light of short-range missiles. In this battle, better turn such aircraft as the Su-27 and F-16.

If real fights were just on guns, the Su-27 would remove all the equipment you need not, and it would be an excellent rate of climb

 

Sorry for my English, it Google translator

 

and you said:

Originally Posted by GGTharos

And it would still have half the rate of climb of F-15 above 6000m.

 

so again isn't the p-42 a stripped down su-27; so in other words you state that the p-42 would had less climb performance than the f-15?

[GGTharos]

No, it isn't. It's far more than a stripped down Su-27. The F-15A Streak Eagle for example had things like paint and flaps removed, but you can't completely remove the weight of the radar because it'll cause a dangerous CG shift.

 

The P-42 on the other hand was a prototype dedicated to doing just one thing: Taking the time-to-climb record. The production Su-27 has nothing on it.

 

As for Su-35's? Who knows. They're getting a much more powerful engine than even the 27SM upgrades AFAIK.

[Spetz]

I saw couple times a player fighting smoke on, does that mean that he considers himself so good that he's purposely giving opponents some advantages?

 

5 pages and this was never answered...

 

We use it sometimes so we have an easier time finding each other if we are just doing fast gunzo engagements for something to do...

[mikoyan]

Oh my holy OMG, what the heck is with wrong with those guys. He has missed a few meters the zenith luck of getting his HUD printed in his face and his eyeballs rolling over the deck, and even more scary is the ignorant title "unsuccessfull cobra landing attemp" :shocking:

 

He was going to land; the description on the video is wrong

[ААК]

so the p-42 had half the climb performance of the eagle?

P-42 has a world record climb 6000m

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CF-42

 

I think Su-27S/P does not need a high rate of climb, because its P-73 surpass the F-15 climb :)

 

No, it isn't. It's far more than a stripped down Su-27. The F-15A Streak Eagle for example had things like paint and flaps removed, but you can't completely remove the weight of the radar because it'll cause a dangerous CG shift.

Su-27 - a statically unstable aircraft and has a special control system, so it can remove the radar, but with the F-15 can not, because he be statically sustainable. This is another advantage of the Su-27.

Edited July 12, 2011 by ААК

[GGTharos]

Wrong. AIM-120 surpasses anything the Su-27S/P carries, and the only way the Su-27 can counter for range is with R-27ER from high altitude ... but the F-15 will get there first.

 

Why do you think Su-27's are getting upgraded engines? For fun and giggles? Why are fighters always made to get higher faster than the other guy?

 

I think Su-27S/P does not need a high rate of climb, because its P-73 surpass the F-15 climb :)

Edited July 12, 2011 by GGTharos

[mvsgas]

Is it this time of the year already? Alright!

[ААК]

Tactical Electronic Warfare System (Bereza, ALQ-135) may make it impossible to work such missiles as the R-27 and AIM-120. But in Lock On it is not implemented...

Why do you think Su-27's are getting upgraded engines? For fun and giggles? Why are fighters always made to get higher faster than the other guy?

The new engines not only increase the rate of climb, and turn. Rate of climb well, but in close combat with rockets by not climb away from the enemy.

Edited July 12, 2011 by ААК

[GGTharos]

Also wrong. You remove the radar, you need balast. Even in Su-27.

 

Su-27 - a statically unstable aircraft and has a special control system, so it can remove the radar, but with the F-15 can not, because he be statically sustainable. This is another advantage of the Su-27.

[GGTharos]

Again wrong. EW superiority on the eagle both in ECCM and ECM is such that by the time Su-27 can launch R-27, AIM-120 has gone active. You need a much more modern aircraft than even Su-27SM to defeat a contemporary eagle+amraam combination. Su-27 as used by PLA and Su-35 are better examples.

 

Don't try to compare an aircraft that remained inferior electronically to the 10-year old aircraft it was supposed to compete with ... the Su-27S was inferior since it entered service in BVR, and has remained so to this day. ACM is another matter, but the gap has been closed shut with introduction of AIM-9X.

 

Tactical Electronic Warfare System (Bereza, ALQ-135) may make it impossible to work such missiles as the R-27 and AIM-120. But in Lock On it is not implemented...

[GGTharos]

Better climb=ability to energy fight ... better sustained turning is always good. Just because you cannot point the nose up and climb away like crazy doesn't mean you can't energy fight AAK. You're inventing scenarios that were not part of original discussion.

 

The new engines not only increase the rate of climb, and turn. Rate of climb well, but in close combat with rockets by not climb away from the enemy.

[ААК]

AIM-120 has gone active.

Why do you think that the weak radar active missiles can operate in noisy environments? A P-27 at least semi-active, it works with a powerful radar of a fighter.

Also wrong. You remove the radar, you need balast. Even in Su-27.

I know that with P-42 took off the radar. I do not know whether the ballast.

but the gap has been closed shut with introduction of AIM-9X.

Yes, the AIM-9X - the most serious opponent for the aircraft.

[FLANKERATOR]

Related to climb performance, here is some open source data for Thrust to Weight Ratio equal to or above 1 (100%internal fuel, Clean).

 

1.37- F-22A (with round nozzles)

1.30 - Su-35BM

1.29 - F-15K (Korean version)

1.26 - Su-27S/SM (RuAF)

1.25 - Eurofighter

1.24 - Mig-35

1.23 - Su-27SK & J-11A

1.19 - Rafale C

1.19 - Mig-29M/M2

1.19 - F-15C

1.18 - F-22A (with standard Flat nozzles)

1.16 - Su-30MKK

1.15 - F/A-18E/F

1.15 - Mig-29B (9-12)

1.14 - Su-30MKI

1.13 - Rafale M

1.13 - Mig-29 (9-13), S, SD, SE & SM

1.10 - Mig-29 BM & SMT (T/W = 1.15 during Emergency Thrust*)

1.09 - F-16E Block 60

1.09 - Mig-29K

1.09 - F-18C

1.09 - J-8III(or J-8C)

1.08 - F-35A

1.08 - F-14 B & D

1.06 - F-16C Block 52 (Block 50: T/W = 1.055)

1.05 - J-8IIm

1.04 - AV-8B+ Harrier II

1.03 - F-2A (F-2B: 1.02)

1.03 - JH-7

1.02 - F-16A Block 10

1.01 - J-8II & J-8IIb & J-8IId

1.00 - F-35B

1.00 - Harrier GR7A

[mvsgas]

F-22 round nozzle?

Edit

Never seen "pic" nor read about F119 having different nozzles.

Not all F-15K have the same engine (limited number with GE build by Samsung Techwin Company)

Edited July 12, 2011 by mvsgas

[ААК]

With 100% of fuel in action fly only kamikaze :) F-15A/C is superior to the Su-27S/P thrust-to-weight.