Author Topic: Jet Performance Graphs  (Read 2548 times)

Offline Ex-jazz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 482
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2010, 04:49:34 PM »
Anything that's not stealth is already obsolete. That includes the Su-27, Su-30, Su-34, Eurofighter. The guy who gets to dictate the fight is going to win every time. Only stealth or insane amounts of speed can do that.

The media term "stealth" is very very relative.

The F22 could be a dead on target practice bird already today by the underestimated forces.

I hope our childes never need to find it out in practice...


Offline Grayeagle

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1487
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2010, 02:16:43 AM »
Well .. Moray ..dood.

I read the 'paper' and some of the references.
'performing better in all cardinal areas of the flight envelope' is an interesting statement.
So ..this guy knows their flight envelopes?

Guess you could buy a Russian fighter off ebay ..prolly a little tougher to get an F-15 tho.

-shrug- .. the Russians have been selling it to the cheap seats for decades.

It's also interesting how he ticks off all the whiz-bang g-whiz stuff that's gonna be on the Mig 35, etc.
If they even get built.

Mebbe they can auction 'em off on ebay to support a production run?
-evil grin-

The Russian fighters are closing the gap on our F-15 as I said.
Took them awhile. There's a bit more to it than just hardware though.

Someone's gonna get spanked hard findin out.

-GE aka Frank
'The better I shoot ..the less I have to manuever'
-GE

Offline Russian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2010, 08:55:44 PM »
After Vietnam = F-4 to F-15 and F-16.
The F-5 went overseas (ie: South Korea)..USAF didnt use 'em much (Aggressors out at Nellis is about it)

There just wasn't anything close to an F-15 in the decades after it was introduced ..it would fly circles around any opponent aircraft. Some in the US inventory (F-14 f'rinstance) would give it a challenge .. but for out and out dog fighting prowess .. the F-15 was and still is an awesome machine.

The Russians put out a *lot* of propwash about their *everything* .. to the point that the F-15 was initially brought into being to counter the uber Mig 25.. I mean . . it was fast and flew high, the planform looked like it was a great fighter.. totally outclassed the F-4 that tried to chase it down.
The Mig was just cruisin and the F-4 jock wasn't sure the Mig even knew the Phantom was there.

Well. Then that pilot defected with one.

Lot of assumptions about the Mig 25 turned out to be pure hogwash.
Turn? . . not in a country mile. Made of mostly stainless steel. *Heavy*
Fast? You bet, if it burnt the engines down, blew out the turbine blades, and destroyed the airframe.. it could go fast. For a little while. To impress someone.
Pure interceptor. Short range point defense.
Not even close to what most thought it was.

Nowadays ..if someone tells me Russian made *anything* is good, well .. I'm not from Missouri, but *near* there .. Show Me.

(like the Bekaa Valley Air War .. can you imagine how empty the flight lines must have been at the end of that day? Talk is cheap)

IMHO, the Yak 9 was their pinnacle.. I'd still rather fly a Mustang .. but, that's just me.

-GE aka Frank

 Mig-25 'short range point defense'? Yak 9 is 'their pinnacle'?

Are you for real?

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2010, 10:16:39 PM »
See Rule #4
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 11:07:55 AM by Skuzzy »
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2010, 10:24:20 PM »
Russian,

I hate using the History Channel as a reference, especially when it's the horribly-narrated (but still fun) Dogfights program...
but they stated that the MiG-25 MIGHT have been a short-range interceptor with no IFR capability. One pilot said that he was told this, but nothing in the show ever confirmed that possibility.

Is it really long ranged and super deadly?

Tell me what's wrong with GrayEagle's post (not trying to put beef between you two  :neener:), I just don't know much anything about modern Russian fighters.
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline Russian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2010, 10:40:05 PM »
Russian,

I hate using the History Channel as a reference, especially when it's the horribly-narrated (but still fun) Dogfights program...
but they stated that the MiG-25 MIGHT have been a short-range interceptor with no IFR capability. One pilot said that he was told this, but nothing in the show ever confirmed that possibility.

Is it really long ranged and super deadly?

Tell me what's wrong with GrayEagle's post (not trying to put beef between you two  :neener:), I just don't know much anything about modern Russian fighters.

I would think of Mig29 as a point defense fighter.  Mig25 has range of 2500km (1900km with +1 mach speeds) and alt up to 30,000 meters (37,650M record).  I don't know what numbers define 'point defense' to GrayEagle, but maybe he should rethink his definition.  

Edit: good website for 'numbers'
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mig-25.htm
25 pretty much 60s technology so I wouldn't expect 'magic super deadly OMFG soviets are coming' interceptor. See 31 for that.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2010, 10:50:39 PM by Russian »

Offline Grayeagle

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1487
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2010, 10:38:41 AM »
-shrug-

Opinions Vary.

Any nation that feels froggy can 'bring it'

Same old story, different day.
Read the same BS being spewed all the years I was in.
It eased up for a few days after Bekaa Valley happened,
but it didn't take long to start up again.

The in-country breifing when I arrived at Taegu (K2) Korea was
interesting and to the point.

The South Koreans don't have 'rules of engagement' ..
..I got the feeling the US was there to keep them from going all the way to Moscow :)

-GE aka Frank
'The better I shoot ..the less I have to manuever'
-GE

Offline Grayeagle

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1487
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #22 on: March 17, 2010, 10:51:04 AM »
re: Point Defense .. as far as I know, a plane that cannot turn, designed as a bomber interceptor, with a short range.
 
Read the book 'Mig Pilot' .. written by the guy who flew one to Japan.
Those huge Tumansky turbines were *thirsty* pushin all that freight.. the plane is so heavy it was g-limited to +2.5.
..the 25 sure as heck isn't an air superiority fighter ..check out the visibility out of that cockpit.
And forget about turning .. even an F-4 would look 'nimble' next to that truck.

But what do I know .. I am sure the Russian hardware has always been so uber it's just a wonder they haven't taken over the world by now ... o .. wait .. all their BS finally caught up to them, didn't it? .. several times.

-GE aka Frank
'The better I shoot ..the less I have to manuever'
-GE

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #23 on: March 17, 2010, 07:41:44 PM »
re: Point Defense .. as far as I know, a plane that cannot turn, designed as a bomber interceptor, with a short range.
 
Read the book 'Mig Pilot' .. written by the guy who flew one to Japan.
Those huge Tumansky turbines were *thirsty* pushin all that freight.. the plane is so heavy it was g-limited to +2.5.
..the 25 sure as heck isn't an air superiority fighter ..check out the visibility out of that cockpit.
And forget about turning .. even an F-4 would look 'nimble' next to that truck.

But what do I know .. I am sure the Russian hardware has always been so uber it's just a wonder they haven't taken over the world by now ... o .. wait .. all their BS finally caught up to them, didn't it? .. several times.

-GE aka Frank

With respect....

There's a difference between peeking over the Iron Curtain trying to figure out what a plane is capable of.....from pictures or drawings taken during chance encounters of straight and level flight....



....and seeing a plane performing maneuvers no allied fighter can match at Farnborough or the Paris Air Show.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Sukhoi-performing-the-Cobra-Maneuver

This is what I think you're missing here.  The current capabilities are not "inferred", they're "observed".
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Grayeagle

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1487
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #24 on: March 18, 2010, 03:40:55 AM »
LOL .. the 'Cobra' has been discussed to death long ago.

Imagine a typical dogfight scenario .. guy gets so slow he may as well be stopped, his nose comes up into the 'Cobra' ..
.. every other aircraft/SAM in the area gets a free shot at a stationary for all intents and purposes target.
(and he better hope a Raptor isn't in the area)

..but it does look nice at air shows.

-GE aka Frank
'The better I shoot ..the less I have to manuever'
-GE

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #25 on: March 18, 2010, 11:55:47 AM »
LOL .. the 'Cobra' has been discussed to death long ago.

Imagine a typical dogfight scenario .. guy gets so slow he may as well be stopped, his nose comes up into the 'Cobra' ..
.. every other aircraft/SAM in the area gets a free shot at a stationary for all intents and purposes target.
(and he better hope a Raptor isn't in the area)

..but it does look nice at air shows.

-GE aka Frank

You know, you really are quite set in your ways, old gray beard.  The relevance is not that the "Cobra" is necessarily an overtly usable tactic in a modern battlefield, it is however a physically and clearly observable indication of the performance envelope of the airframe.  From knowing the airframe can perform that maneuver, you can extrapolate out many other characteristics. 

Obviously, even logical dissection is beyond your stubborn wiring.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline rabbidrabbit

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3907
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #26 on: March 18, 2010, 02:54:46 PM »
How is that low speed maneuvering capability materially useful?  Is it used to peek around mountain tops?

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #27 on: March 18, 2010, 09:51:59 PM »
You know, you really are quite set in your ways, old gray beard.  The relevance is not that the "Cobra" is necessarily an overtly usable tactic in a modern battlefield, it is however a physically and clearly observable indication of the performance envelope of the airframe.  From knowing the airframe can perform that maneuver, you can extrapolate out many other characteristics. 

Obviously, even logical dissection is beyond your stubborn wiring.

Greyeagle is more right than you are, and I am confident that my sources and personal experiences are far more relevant than yours.  Extrapolate all you want, but until you read the flight test report and the FWIC tactics talk, or actually take an F-15 up against a flanker or fulcrum, you have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about.  But you can't, and never will.  I spent over a year where I flew 4-5 sorties per month replicating fulcrum and flanker threats using the best available data, and I've worked with both former GAF mig-29 pilots and F-15C drivers who spent weeks flying DACT against the fulcrums before we had the benefit of our new helmet mounted sights and aim-9x. 

Again, Grayeagle is more right than you are.  I will go further to say that although the flanker is a very capable aircraft, the airshow maneuvers are not very good at all for extrapolating anything except how good the plane is at waving the nose around at low airspeeds.  A well flown F-18 with some flight control software tweaks would probably be able to pretty much the same maneuvers, slightly modified of course to account for the lower thrust to weight ratio.

In the end, the aircraft and weapons are matched well enough that if neither side knows the exact tactics used by the other side, the edge is probably still the US F-15 due to the sheer number of flight hours an F-15 pilot gets and because of the very good cockpit ergonomics and system integration.  If the flanker pilot knows the US tactics however (as I did whenever I "cheated" while replicating russian fighter threats), it then comes down entirely to individual pilot skill even without resorting to the radical maneuvering capabilities of the flanker.  If they're both cheating, then the better pilot wins even though the flanker can pretty much turn up it's own butt, because the F-15 is easier to fly and tactically employ.  Plus the amraam is a freaking deathstick, and 2 amraams coming at you are nearly impossible to defeat so the flanker's maneuverability may not mean anything in most engagements.
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #28 on: March 18, 2010, 10:15:37 PM »
Greyeagle is more right than you are, and I am confident that my sources and personal experiences are far more relevant than yours.  Extrapolate all you want, but until you read the flight test report and the FWIC tactics talk, or actually take an F-15 up against a flanker or fulcrum, you have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about.  But you can't, and never will.  I spent over a year where I flew 4-5 sorties per month replicating fulcrum and flanker threats using the best available data, and I've worked with both former GAF mig-29 pilots and F-15C drivers who spent weeks flying DACT against the fulcrums before we had the benefit of our new helmet mounted sights and aim-9x.  

Again, Grayeagle is more right than you are.  I will go further to say that although the flanker is a very capable aircraft, the airshow maneuvers are not very good at all for extrapolating anything except how good the plane is at waving the nose around at low airspeeds.  A well flown F-18 with some flight control software tweaks would probably be able to pretty much the same maneuvers, slightly modified of course to account for the lower thrust to weight ratio.

In the end, the aircraft and weapons are matched well enough that if neither side knows the exact tactics used by the other side, the edge is probably still the US F-15 due to the sheer number of flight hours an F-15 pilot gets and because of the very good cockpit ergonomics and system integration.  If the flanker pilot knows the US tactics however (as I did whenever I "cheated" while replicating russian fighter threats), it then comes down entirely to individual pilot skill even without resorting to the radical maneuvering capabilities of the flanker.  If they're both cheating, then the better pilot wins even though the flanker can pretty much turn up it's own butt, because the F-15 is easier to fly and tactically employ.  Plus the amraam is a freaking deathstick, and 2 amraams coming at you are nearly impossible to defeat so the flanker's maneuverability may not mean anything in most engagements.


So you're saying a guy that is comparing generation 4 and 4.5 fighters to the ones that lost the Bekaa Valley Air War is.......... right?  :headscratch:

Seriously?

The guy is using the Mig25 as a yardstick to the Flanker.  You really gotta be kidding me, with respect to your service, which is a few years back, if I recall.  The Russians have been working hard in the last ten years to get their electronics up to western standards (Irbis E, etc)
« Last Edit: March 18, 2010, 10:22:24 PM by MORAY37 »
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline rabbidrabbit

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3907
Re: Jet Performance Graphs
« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2010, 10:36:52 PM »
See Rule #4
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 10:29:45 AM by Skuzzy »