Read the forum code of contact
By: 2nd October 2000 at 01:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
i tend to favor the Su-30MK/MKK/MKI over the F-15. Both have good legs, both are IFR capable to extend range if needed, and both have (or will have) good avionics suites. Where I think the Su-30 series excels is in its weapons loadout. The Su-34 also gets the same nod over the F-15 in this aspect (I do think the Su-34 is a better strike aircraft than the Su-30). Look at the current Beagle weapons. You see a lot of unpowered weapons, relatively short-ranged in the scheme of things. JDAM, Paveways, LGB's, they all fit here. The Su-30 has weapons like the Kh-59M Ovod-M, the AS-17, the AS-25, and various other missiles in its weapons rack.
Basically, I like the Su-30's standoff capabilities better than those of the Beagle. This means you can release your weapon farther away from a potential threat system (such as Patriot or S-300), making the aircraft more survivable.
Comments?
By: 2nd October 2000 at 02:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
I would choose the F-15E and here is why.
1. The F-15E is combat proven. The Su-30MKI is not.
2. The F-15E has American avionics not Russian
3. The F-15E has American engines not Russian
I think Russia makes good engines and avionics but they are not as good as American's engines and avionics.
J33Nelson
By: 2nd October 2000 at 03:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
The SU-30MKI has been modified specifically for Indian Airforce requirements.These modifications consist of French avionics in place of the standard Russian suite.
The fleet of SU-30KI which are serving in India now have suffered from engine problems (as have the SU-27's in PLAAF service)however,the Russians claim that these problems arise from the poor quality fuel used in that region,and future deliveries of SU-30's to India will be equipped with engines which have been modified to handle such fuel.
By: 2nd October 2000 at 03:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
I think that problem has already been fixed even in the planes already in India.
Odysseus
By: 2nd October 2000 at 09:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
The last few batches will have completely new engines and the older one's eventually changed.
By: 2nd October 2000 at 18:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
This is because the last few batches will be to full MKI standard with thrust-vectoring engines, and the earlier aircraft will be modified to this standard later.
By: 2nd October 2000 at 19:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
I think we shouldn't judge an aircraft by its weapon load unless it couldn't handle it in a physical sense...because its pointless to say i like this plane because it carries this missile. So what? If the Russians use NATO standard racks/pins or vice versa then it goes back to the original question...which plane is better, not weapons. The E is more than a decade older than the Su-30, yet they are comparable in performance while the Su-30 doesn't even have the complex avionics of the E...enough said...
By: 2nd October 2000 at 21:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
Beagles?
As in Il-28 Beagles? Or as in the imaginary H-5E Strike Beagle?
Probably a typo, but certainly a nice one ;o)
I would prefer the Su-30MKK also because it not only has the AGM capabilities mentioned here, it can still act as the mini-AWACS the original Su-30 was designed for. And the basic fact that the MKI will be fitted with TVC engines does suggest the aircraft will be used for AA combat just as well.
Regards,
Arthur
By: 3rd October 2000 at 01:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
For once and for all::::
The Su30 is already derived from a very capable low speed high AOA airframe...that means TVCs will not do much to increase its agility, maybe just to get back its Su-27's roots but nothing more...its most valuable use is only for minimizing cruise drag, thus enhancing range. All this for a heavier tail means that the payload will be less than without TVC...
By: 3rd October 2000 at 01:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
they may not have the same preformance figures but they are tough as hell. A western can't digest a tiny little nut with out it tearing the $h!+ out of the engine, but a russian engine are designed so that they can digest alot of stuff before it gets wrecked. That's because russian aircraft and engines are designed for messy battle field air fields, they not designed only for spotless and very clean air fields like western aircraft are designed for.
but i can't comment on avionics but i assume they aren't upto par with most western aircraft, but it's the skill of the pilot that ultimately decides how successful a mission is na d not a computer (though they are nice to have the help around when you need it).
By: 3rd October 2000 at 01:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
That's very untrue...differences are in blade design/materials and cooling....but, most of current russian ability to be tough in face of FOAs are to prevent them from going in....not take a brutal frontal assualt, very unlike the previous generation which used very elegant methods empahsizing on simplicity(less parts count), but lower TWRs (normalized by similar life times). Engines that have materials that actually go into them are more or less damaged by probability...sometimes you can lose quite a lot of blades but its ok..sometimes not...don't mix with "tales"
By: 3rd October 2000 at 02:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
obviously they don't don't go out and look for foriegn object to get sucked into the engines, but the can deal with the object more easily.
Sorry what do you mean by "tales" like as in stories. I'm just using info that i have learnt over a few years ago. if western engines have become more tougher or russian weaker i haven't unfortunately haven't seen any material on the subject. Excuse me for my error.
By: 3rd October 2000 at 08:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
I don't think you're right here. The TVC on the Su-30MKI/37 is 3D, not 2D. A two-dimensional TVC nozzle would make sense for minimal cruise drag, but a 3D is obviously for agility.
Also, you shouldn't forget that the Su-27 was designed to be agile at low weight, but not as a fully loaded long-range interceptor or bomb truck. The TVC nozzles compensate for the poor T/W balance when the aircraft is fully loaded.
Regards,
Arthur
By: 3rd October 2000 at 16:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
F15E ...
By: 3rd October 2000 at 16:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
2D..3D, think what you'll gain by adding that 3D, nothing much actually, if its so, every single F-16 and F-15 in the US inventory will be added with it since the US actually demonstrated the first axis-symmetric nozzle, the first stealthy 3D axis-symmetric nozzle, but why wasn't it deployed...yes, yes lots of reasons, but one technical reason is that at the tail end is where you're gonna add ~200-500lb of weight...that's very very significant buddy...and think what kind of rotations you can get other than pitch that's useful...
1) for roll, no enough moment arm without taking away forward thrust, too slow to use thrust axis modulations...
2) for yaw, not enough damping authority, can cause rapid departure...again, not fast enough to do thrust axis modulations...
thru some exhaustive effector tests a few years ago, it was concluded that at the moment, all effectors are competitive if not better than TVC unless at very low speed high AOA, Eureka, that's why the US is spending lots of money on:
1)decreasing TVC unit weight
2)increasing life and thrust axis response time
3)increasing to higher velocity regimes...
Ever wonder why the F-22 can perforrm all specs without the TVC? Aerodynamics is not out of the contention yet....Again, don't ride too high on hype...TVC is a great device, but you gotta weight compromises!!! especially the very "rough" way the Russians are approaching their TVC designs...
By: 3rd October 2000 at 16:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
to your answer is yes, this is a problem with materials...the russians are great aerodynamicists, so the way they look at the problem is to use standard materials, but cool it extremely efficiently with thin fluidic films, the western view, is "research more on exotic materials" ie, single crystal blades. In the end the Russians also want to use these materials in addition to their aerodynamic cooling, that's why their "stated" performance is actually "leading edge", but here's the catch, they are not very mature in this technology....
By: 3rd October 2000 at 16:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
Explain the rough way the Russians are approaching their TVC designes.
By: 3rd October 2000 at 17:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
Beagle comes from bomb-eagle
By: 3rd October 2000 at 18:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
ok...instead of using existing parts to crate an oblique nozzle during axissymmetric vectoring, the Russians used the quick and dirty approach by mounting the whole nozzle on another swivel...this not only increases weight but has detramental effect on the nozzle life span due to sealing problems and unsmooth exhaust flow...further more, in order to obtain 3D direction, another swivle has to be incorporated, therfore, don't be mistaken, the 3D nozzle is actually a stacked 2D design..and notice that due to the structure of the Su-30...the other direction is heavily hendered...I wouldn't be surprised to see their next design having a totally different TVC nozzle, more akin to the western axisemmetric, multi seal nozzles...by the way, using trig and the amount of thrust the SU-30's engine is producing, you'll notice that TVC is not all that impressive at high velocities...!!! It does have the indisputible ability to decrease trim drag, which is very significant since due the the optimizing nature of aircraft design, you'll only find one drag efficient AoA which is usually selected at the trim position of design cruise speed...TVC allows that AoA angle to be decreased in actuall flight while maintaining a constant drag efficient AoA at much larger velocity envelopes..
By: 4th October 2000 at 16:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-RE: F15E versus Sukhoi 30 MKI
Okay, thanks.
Posts: 3,671
By: Geforce - 1st October 2000 at 17:48
Again, an original question: which one has the best A/G capacities? The original Su30s was designed as a long range interceptor (kind a like the Mig 31) and forward air control. The new MKI version seems to have good A/G options, but still, not comparable to the mudhen.