CA_SU-30 Amazing Russian Fighter

[Tom P]

<DD>Russian Jet-- Read before viewing</DD>

<DD>An amazing plane and pilot.


<DD>The red smoke coming from the wingtips is only there to demonstrate to

<DD>spectators on the ground the direction the plane is actually moving

<DD>through the air. Normally the smoke wouldn't be there. When the

<DD>smoke is streaming behind, the airplane is moving fast forward etc.

<DD>When the airplane is engulfed in smoke, it means the airplane is

<DD>almost stopped in mid-air. The maneuverability of this plane is

<DD>incredible. This plane would be nearly

<DD>impossible to defeat in a dogfight.


<DD>Russia may now have the #1 fighter plane in the world...

<DD>SU-30- Vectored Thrust with Canards... As you watch this airplane,

<DD>look at the canards moving along side of, and just below the canopy

<DD>rail. The "canards" are the small wings

<DD>forward of the main wings.

<DD>The smoke and contrails provide a sense of the actual flight

<DD>path, sometimes in reverse direction. This video is of an

<DD>in-flight demonstration flown by the Russian's-30MK fighter aircraft.

<DD>The fighter can stall from high speed, stopping forward motion in

<DD>seconds. (full stall).


<DD>Then it demonstrates an ability to descend tail first without

<DD>causing a compressor stall.


<DD>It can also recover from a flat spin in less than a minute.


<DD>These maneuver capabilities don't exist in any other aircraft

<DD>in the world today..


<DD>Take a look at the video with the sound up.. This aircraft is

<DD>of concern to U.S and NATO planners.


<DD>We don't know which nations will soon be flying the SU-30MK,

<DD>hopefully China isn't one of them..


<DD>Friends worked with advanced aircraft flight control systems

<DD>and concepts for many years as an extension of stability control and

<DD>means of control. Canards

<DD>and vectored thrust were among many

<DD>concepts examined to extend our fighter aircraft performance.


<DD>Neither our current or next generation aircraft now poised for

<DD>funding & production can in any way match the performance of this

<DD>Russian aircraft


<DD>Somehow the bankrupt Russian aircraft industry has out

<DD>produced our complex politically tainted aerospace industry with this

<DD>technology marvel.


<DD>Scratch any ideas of close in air-to-air combat with this

<DD>aircraft in the future.<DD><DD>YouTube - ‪CA_SU-30.wmv‬‏


</DD>

 

[Keith]

Wow! A great attraction at any airshow.....

 

[David Morton]

YouTube - ‪SU 30 crash‬&rlm;

Think again Baldrick...........

 

[Keith]

I remember this. The last of the tail draggers... :laugh:

Exceptionally good value at air shows...

 

[David Morton]

Yes - but it spoils your lunch, causes major upheaval in the flying program and it interupts your day. I normally plan my lunch to be 1230 to 1430 (usually the peak part of the display) and an arrival such as this causes silence over the airfield for about two hours ( They need to replenish the fire engines for the next crash). I recall Pee Wee Judge with the Wallis at Farnborough in 1970 and on another occasion Bill "Supersperm" Loverseed with the De Havilland Buffalo in 1984 and I was at lunch in the De Havilland chalet on the first and Embraer on the second.
Quite annoying really.
Quite a good advert for ejection systems and parachutes though. Notice the captain was the last man out. Definitely NOT a time honoured tradition in fighter aeroplanes.
I remember getting a briefing once - If I tried to reply or question the word Eject I would be speaking to my self.
Some quite funny anecdotes from fighter pilots and their take off briefings. Another time ?

 

[Keith]

Not at all. Go for it... This thread is nailed...

Edit: Have you finished your pony yet?

 

[David Morton]

Not yet.
H2O is off - I forgot I'd drained the system earlier today as I'm in plumbing mode.

 

[Keith]

Damn! A dry one... that would not have been even slightly amusing... :shifty:

 

[Jim Craik]

I'm fairly sure that the SU30 will make one of the all time great "airshow" craft and not much more.

For the last 50 years, the military industrial complex has been telling us how the next new USSR/Russian fighter is way better than anything we have, and certin folks will always believe them.

Good God, the "fighter gap" is back?

The world has changed, in current combat envirments those fancy manuvers are useless. But they can practice their airshow program as they fall to earth! (A Fokker tri-plane will outmanuver a P51 as well)

(Que Dr Strangelove) My God, we must not allow an "Airshow gap"


COME ON DAVID, (PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE) WE ALL LOVE YOUR STORIES!

 

[David Morton]

How about Lt Dave Allan on 819 sqn RN and his take off briefing on the cat on board the Ark Royal.
"As the Cat takes hold. with both Speys in full reheatand we have reached the bow, please be assured we are committed to flying. For none jewish crew, the mildly pleasant sensation during the acceleration is your foreskin sliding backwards. Please just cross your arms in front of you and do not use the handle between your legs to keep your arms from flying around. A word of warning is that if you do manage to pull that handle , you cannot swim faster than the Ark and you may just end up with the carrier running you over. If you see me eject, then that will be an invitation for you do do the same so do not hesitate and don't ask any questions as you will be speaking to yourself. There is no cabin service on this flight."

​

Dave ended up as one of the senior 747 pilots and Union Rep in Cathay. Always a lot of fun on a HKG night stop.

 

[Jim Craik]

David,

That reminds me of an article I read about a journalist who was preparing for a flight in a Harrier................

The pilot tells the guy that when in the vertical mode, it we have to eject, you will know because I'll be gone!

I suggest you follow quickly!

 

[Keith]

David,

That reminds me of an article I read about a journalist who was preparing for a flight in a Harrier................

The pilot tells the guy that when in the vertical mode, it we have to eject, you will know because I'll be gone!

I suggest you follow quickly!

Jim, you are on fire tonight! Er, metaphorically speaking of course....

It is a matter of record that American pilots generally could not operate the Harrier (no offence intended, please notice the spelling) which is why it was redesigned to it's current (and very enhanced) capability. The Harrier was the final genius product of the last analogue era and probably the final Trump! in British aviation innovation. It is easy to forget, perhaps, the contribution that Britain made to contemporary flight, next to the Russians, who had all the right ideas but at the point of a gun.

 

[Jim Craik]

Keith

I thought I smelled something burning

 

[Keith]

David old bean, what an utterly fab pic!

Jim, put your pants in the toilet. That should put the fire out mate....

 

[Jim Craik]

The Harrier was the final genius product of the last analogue era and probably the final Trump! in British aviation innovation. It is easy to forget, perhaps, the contribution that Britain made to contemporary flight

Posted by Keith

Keith,

I have not forgotten the British contributions.........

Just off the top of my head....

Jet engines
Carrier angle deck (why didn't I think of that?)
Steam cat
Mirror deck landing system
Jet airliners
Merlin
Harrier (Still an incredable design)
Concord
Ski jump carrier launch
Mosquito
Radar
P-51 (I know, I know, but if the GT40 is a US car then the P-51 is a Brit, think about it)

I'm sure there are many more.............David?

 

[Mike]

Good video on the SU-30 crash. That was new to me.
Re. maneuverability, no question the SU-30 would have an advantage in a gun fight (the ability to point the nose is impressive). On the other hand, gunfights are very last resort things to get into, because you slow down to nothing, and are a duck for anybody else in the area. Great fun, but something to be avoided if possible. If not possible, the SU-30would have a slight advantage at slow speeds, at a cost of weight and complexity (canards). Note that at very slow speeds, with no aero force, the canards wouldn't do anything and all the maneuvering would be powered by the dual plane nozzles (pitch and roll). Almost everybody has helmet mounted sights for the current heat seekers, so pointing the nose/nose authority isn't as big a deal for close in missile fights.
Comments: If you saw the speed brake up on final approach, that's just to keep the fans spooled up.
The ejection systems in the dual seat config. is sequenced so the rear seat always goes first (just over a second in the F-4, and I believe in the family nodel F-15). This a)prevents collisions bewtween front and back seats, and equally important b) keeps the back seater from getting fried by the front seat rocket motor. The back seat can select 'single' ejection for himself, obviously the front seat can not.
Re. the Harrier, Ben Parks (a member our squadron here at St. Louis along with most of the McDonnell Douglas test pilots) was one of development pilots on the Harrier AV-8B. The improvements in flight characteristics over the A model was significant, especially in the slow/hover phase. Improved flap and nozzle configurations, along with a CAS system (fancy dampers) took out all the 'balancing on the head of a pin' charcteristics of the earlier model.
Finally, stealth is probably the single biggest change in air combat. With it, everything else is easy. The fighter pilot ideal is not to outfight the other SOB but to kill him before he knows he's in a fight.

 

[Fred W Ballinger]

Seeing as we are talking flying vids, is this impressive?

YouTube - ‪Lynx Helicopter Operating Limit Development‬&rlm;

Cheers

Fred W B

 

[David Morton]

Very much Fred. Some masterly skills there. Still using the Garmin Street pilot I see.

 

[John Fitzpatrick]

It's a very impressive demonstration of low-speed stability and control, but in air to air combat, low and slow realy isn't where you want to be in the energy maneuverability envelope.

And David, is your government really dropping the Harrier from its inventory?

 

[David Morton]

Yes indeed John. It's already been dropped and a mass final fly-by happened last December.
Last sight of the Harrier in flight

Sky-bye ... Harriers soar above clouds on final flypast





BAE Systems to axe 1,400 jobs


DEFENCE giant cuts 1,400 jobs — and blames Govt slashing of Forces budgets

• MoD Scrooges axe heroes’ Xmas
• Final Harrier jet leaves Brit ship
• Armed forces budget slashed
• Chancellor £83bn axe on spending

BRITAINS Harrier jump jets performed a final flypast - before being axed.



A 16-strong fleet flew from RAF Cottesmore in the East Midlands on a farewell journey.



Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...-flypast-before-being-axed.html#ixzz1NLVJdtSb







I think most of the pilots have now gone on or gone out on a golden bowler scheme (maybe not quite as golden in these austere days). One of our tabloid news papers featured a photo of the aeroplanes (about sixty in all) all crammed in two hangars and covered in inhibitor waxed paper. I really think it's a stupid decision but at least they havent crushed them. Yet.
Your comments about low and slow was the hallmark of the Nimrod when on patrol. It had various armaments during it's R.A.F. service but it was always very vulnerable and every exercise we ever took part in showed how vulnerable it was from carrier based fast jets.