Author Topic: Related to airshow crash (Read 401 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #15 on:** July 28, 2002, 01:29:39 AM »

The Su27 Family are widely considered to be better airplanes in pure flight performance to the F15 family.

Slash27 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 28, 2002, 05:55:42 AM »

How old is the F-15 design vs. Su27? Took them a bit to catch up hasnt it?

Replicant · « **Reply #17 on:** July 28, 2002, 06:12:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by deSelys
And if you think the F-15 is the ultimate fighter, read Sea Harrier over the Falklands (Author, Sharkey Ward. Publisher,
Naval Institute Press. ISBN #, 1557507562).

Sharkey Ward was the Fleet Air Arm commander who operationally tested the Sea Harrier, then led it into battle at the Falklands war. He tells that when the Sea Harrier went operational, they had mock dogfights with different US squadrons (ate least one was flying F15s). The Sea Harrier won everything. Then they met the Aggressor Squadron, whose members can't be labeled as n00bz...Once again, the Sea Harrier won. Sharkey Ward himself lost only 1 engagement against the Aggressor Squadron leader (which pissed him badly because he wanted a clean record).

I agree that the Sea Harrier hasn't evolved as much as the F15 in the last years, but it shows that the Eagle isn't the miracle of fighters.

As someone said, avionics, weapons and training really give the US pilots the edge.

I work at RAF Cottesmore where 1, 3, & 4 Sqn RAF are based. They all operate the Harrier GR7 (AV-8B). They often practice A2A (RAF Waddington ACM range) versus Tornado F.3, French Mirage 2000, Belgian/Dutch F16C, Finnish F18C, US F15C, German MiG-29s etc... and they're pretty much successful against all of these. I guess it's the thrust vectoring that does all the work. However the GR7 doesn't have radar (only radar warning receivers) but I believe that they use 'Link 16' to connect to data (which includes radar) from E-3D Sentrys.

The FA.2 Sea Harrier will soon be replaced by the GR7A & GR9. Scary thing is that it will not be radar equipped!

deSelys · « **Reply #18 on:** July 28, 2002, 08:54:45 AM »

Lots of people think that, thanks to thrust vectoring or VIFF, the Harrier handles like a dream. According to Ward's book, it's only haf true. The Harrier has a poor sustained turn rate and doesn't shine in slow dogfights (*). However, VIFF gives him an excellent instantaneous turn rate as well as hard deceleration. Moreover, the T/W ratio of VTOL planes is in most configurations superior to 1. Hence, the Harrier is a superior energy fighter....

(*) They found out that the Sea Harrier was able to fly at very slow speed at a high AOA, and still be able to point its nose where wanted. They explain it by the thrust wash passing on the tail control surfaces. However, the land Harrier weren't capable of this (if I recall correctly...).

Nath[BDP] · « **Reply #19 on:** July 28, 2002, 09:23:33 AM »

The first SU-27 prototypes (T-10-1 thru 15) first flew in May '77. The most similar maiden flight of an aircraft to the first Su-27 production models (T-10S) flew in April '81. The Su-27 was designed in response to the F-15 and entered service in '84.

The F15A first flew in July 1972 and entered service in November of 1974.

Wmaker · « **Reply #20 on:** July 28, 2002, 10:31:20 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
well i guess the SU-27's superior performance and maneuverability could not keep it from hitting the earth

And "superior avionics" couldn't prevent US military aircraft from clipping surtain cables in Italy...

Neither of these arguments have nothing to do with what actually happened...just offering you statement what you will see as "nonsense" ...just what I think your statement is.

Animal · « **Reply #21 on:** July 28, 2002, 03:36:20 PM »

^ Agreed.