Is The S-37 Fighter Up There With The F-22 ?!?!

many people are annoyed at me for posting like 4-8 times in a row, so i will comment on all the posts, well, ahnyones that there are problems wit

Frosty, u mentioned that while the guy is pulling a cobra, u fire u're AMRAAM, well, no sensible pilot in the world would do a cobra maneuver while in combat, only *epithet removed* pilots would do that, the cobra is soley for air shows, showing the superior maneuverability their aircraft

some guy said that russian jets are crappy, wow, u're dumb if u think that the Eurofighter is better than an Su-37, oh, sorry, take into account that for the cost of one eurofighter, u could get 2 Su-37's, with a 3d thrust vectoring engine, in comparison, the F/A-22 only has a 2d, it is one of the best aircraft ever made, and is currently boasted as the best aircraft in the world right now by many many people, the F/A-22 will probably take that spot unless russia develops the MFI further, the Rafale, is almost an exact copy of the Eurofighter, france pulled out of the project, and look what they have, an almost identical clone, the Eurofighter will get absolutely destroyed even by a single Su-37, and if there are two, it will get obliterated

oh, someone mentioned missile speeds, i have a site that gives u the missile speeds of all major missiles in the world, not a single one can go Mach5, okay, the fastest can go Mach 4.6 www.danshistory.com...

and finally, the last thing, the M1A2, its a great tank because the vrews are trained well, but isn't very hardy, america had to buy a lot of sand screens just so that they could be compatible for the war in Iraq, they cost overly too much, they have no ERA(explosive reactive armour) like russian tanks, are relatively slow because of their massive weight, have a high clearance area(but thats no problem for the Iraq war, because there's plenty of room to maneuver in), they have an average gun(122mm or 125 mm smoothbore) and thats pretty much it, oh yea, Abrams is one hell of a gas guzzler

on the other hand, a T-95 tank, has ERA, is very fast, cuz it weighs 50% lower, is smaller(smaller clearance area), packs as much firepower, if not more because it can fire many many different types of warheads at an opposing tank, has a low silhouette, a kind of tank stealth lol and thats it

[edit on 2-12-2004 by Banshee]

Originally posted by Frosty

Yes you are correct, I just did not understand where you were comming from. But still, if it goes only 150 feet and my craft is traveling at about 800 feet per second, that missile would blow up right in front of me. And the point I am making is I will never be 50 meters from you. The conflict will never arise. I will simply fire my AMRAAM at about 6 miles away make a slight bank to the left and go on to my next target.

remember the craft you are following will be faster so you'll have 150 feet to get clear or for the wreckage to drop.
yeah thats if you have radar suport and the target isnt going low or is stealth.
also at 6 miles the F22 would get picked up so i think that it wont be bothered about engageing.

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by FredT

Im with you there. Have you been following the YF-23 thread? The PAV-1 is not at the USAF test flight museum and the one that was at the Western Museum of Flight in SoCal is on loan to Northrup for refurbishment according to the website.

Coincidence? I think not.

ANd hands down the Black Widow II was the best looking plane I have ever seen.

YES another BW2 supporter!
yeah i have been following , interesting.
hmmm that is a bit......dodgy to say the least.

mmmmmmmm.......Black Widow II.........Too bad Lock-mart has a monopoly on fighters these days.

Originally posted by Frosty


And the point I am making is I will never be 50 meters from you. The conflict will never arise. I will simply fire my AMRAAM at about 6 miles away make a slight bank to the left and go on to my next target.

Oh boy. NEVER say never. F-4 did not have guns...............Then it did. Ask any fighter pilot if he would like to leave the green zone to battle without a gun.

[edit on 11/30/2004 by just_a_pilot]

Originally posted by Dima
u could get 2 Su-37's, with a 3d thrust vectoring engine, in comparison, the F/A-22 only has a 2d

sorry pal, su 37 has 2d thrust vectoring same as the f-22.su 37 info

look it up before spouting off. also the eurofighter and rafale both have 3d thrust vectoring engines in development, unlike the f22 and su37.

euro tv, bottom of page

however bvr weapons make tv a moot point, and i think this discussion should really come down to which aircraft has the better avionics suite and support aircraft. now the su-37 is an exciting aircraft but when it comes down to whose got the better electronics and support i know who my moneys on.

F-15 ACTIVE has 3d thrust-vectoring.
Axisymmetric & Thrust Vectoring Nozzles





seekerof

yo mpcsmith7, the site that u gave me, it confirms that the Su-37 has 3d thurst vectoring, u should have read the article before u just add it, its in the third paragraph, seventh line, third word

wat about the eurofighter, really would like to learn more about it, any spec's?

i cant see what your directing me at! ive read that article over and can see no reference to 3d tv. it states clearly that the engine has axisymmetric nozzles, and later goes on to state that the nozzles can move in the pitch axis only! this means the tv has much the same effect as the elevators on a normal aircraft, or if the nozzles move away from each other it will produce a moment much like that of the ailerons.

the f15 3d thrust vectoring engines were experimental and are likely never to see production. the eurofighter tv system is very similar to that of the f15 system developed by nasa, check my earlier post for info on the euorfighter engine. i will try to post more links (reputable ones) when i have time.

just spotted the 3d reference in the link. its confusing to say the least. it is contradictory to what the post has said previously. i conceed. however i will get a more definite source for this information as i am certain that this aircraft does not incorporate 3d thrust vectoring engines.

Originally posted by Dima
yo mpcsmith7, the site that u gave me, it confirms that the Su-37 has 3d thurst vectoring, u should have read the article before u just add it, its in the third paragraph, seventh line, third word

Well Dima, I hate to break it to you, but that paragraph is misleading. In the preceeding paragraph, they state it more clearly.

The nozzle only moves in the pitch axis, and the nozzles on the two engines can deflect together or differentially to achieve the desired thrust vector for a particular maneuver.

The nozzles on AL-37FU engines in the SU-37 deflected +/- 15 degrees in the vertical (pitch) plane only. They were differential, one could be up while the other one was down, but they did not have yaw vectoring. The MFI did, and the RD-133 and RD-333 are supposed to (if they can get the funding), but the SU-37 didn't.

As a purely practical note, the SU-37 had a very long stinger. Horizontal thrust vectoring would have come very close to burning the stinger off.

There are many, many sources out there with information on the AL-37FU. You will have no trouble verifying this. Here is an article from a Russian source:

galeb.etf.bg.ac.yu...

And here is a link to a picture of a closeup of the nozzle. You can clearly see the actuators and the pivot:

wmilitary.neurok.ru...

And finally, here is a link to an excellent study of the SU-37:

www.sci.fi...

cheers engineer, you saved me the bother of tryin to find these sources. odd how the global security site manages to totally contradict itself in the space of a paragraph. oh well thats the trouble with using internet resources, the amount of erroneus information is quite astonishing.

The Raptor is like a roaring lion whereas the S-37 looks like a crow.

Bottom line:

The Raptor can dogfight with the S-37. The S-37 isn't close in a BVR fight.

Winner = RAPTOR

The R-77s from the Su-37 (aka AA-12) have longer range than the current range of AAMRAAMs,but its the stealth that makes the difference,but do you have any info on the raptor's stealth?I doubt so,so all that talk about the raptor blasting the Su-37 to bits and pieces before it knows it is being fired upon is purely theory.

Interesting discussion...

Well, actually Su37 has 3d thurst vectoring
www.fas.org...

Trick in the engines - they can act separately(sorry, but I can't find proper english word) with different power. Furthermore the nozzles are physically steerable to �15� in any direction but are utilized in pitch only for this phase of evolution.

Personally I think 3d thrust-vectoring engine needed only for aircraft with one engine not for aircraft with twin engines(Raptor, Su XX), maybe I'm mistaken. engineer, what do you think about this?

By the way, it seems that many people confuse Su 37 Terminator

with S-37(Su 47 Berkut)


Another interesting fact, that 3d thurst vectoring is not only way to give aircraft supermaneuverability, on MAKS2004 after SU30M(AL-37FU) goes SU35(SU37 without 3d thurst vectoring) and it performs all manoeuvres of SU30M, all visitors are excited... it's hard to tell what technologies used in fighter to give him such abilities, and fighter are not shown nearby.

I hope you forgive me for my english

Originally posted by ExD
Trick in the engines - they can act separately(sorry, but I can't find proper english word) with different power. Furthermore the nozzles are physically steerable to �15� in any direction but are utilized in pitch only for this phase of evolution.

Personally I think 3d thrust-vectoring engine needed only for aircraft with one engine not for aircraft with twin engines(Raptor, Su XX)...

Hi ExD,
First of all, realize that FAS and Global Security just copy from each other, so the same errors will be duplicated on each site. The FAS article is pretty much word for word from Global Security. The AL-37FU does not vector on the yaw plane. That's not to say the nozzles/actuators/DEC couldn't be modified to do so, but it hasn't been done so far, AFAIK. If they do, it will most likely show up first on the InAF's SU-30MK1's. Look at the picture of the SU-37, and imagine what would happen if you had yaw vectoring. IIRC, that stinger is full of fuel!





Yaw vectoring is somewhat less a factor on twins than singles, because the engines can act differentially in thrust (though the response is slower than if you kicked the nozzle over in the horizontal plane). I tend to agree that it's more important on single engine fighters. The J-10 will probably have all-axis vectoring on the WS-10A, which will make for a very agile AC.

But the main consideration is the role of the AC and potential OPFOR, when deciding if TVC is worth the expense and bother. e.g., the manouverability is only an advantage during close in encounters.

One of the most overlooked, but useful advantages with TVC is the ability to keep a damaged AC in the air. The majority of A2A engagements in the future will be at BVR ranges, where TVC doesn't really give you an advantage. But the ability to get home with one wing or your tail half shot off is nice to have.



[edit on 2-12-2004 by engineer]

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
The R-77s from the Su-37 (aka AA-12) have longer range than the current range of AAMRAAMs,but its the stealth that makes the difference,but do you have any info on the raptor's stealth?I doubt so,so all that talk about the raptor blasting the Su-37 to bits and pieces before it knows it is being fired upon is purely theory.

We have F-15 pilots telling us that they never picked up the raptor untill it entered within visual range (actually, untill it flew directly over head). We know that the stealth is greater then that of the F-117, but slightly less then that of the B-2. We also know that the Raptors radar is better. All of that equals the Raptor having the advantage in BVR combat.

another example of american propagandism, of course those pilots aren't going to say that they saw it clearly, so to add publicity, they say they didn't see it at all until it came right overhead them, lol

Originally posted by Kenshin
just wanting some opinions whether or not the S-37 fighter is up there with the likes of the F-22 and the Grippen ?

Personally I think that it is more than capable of going one on one with any western fighter

Hope you guys feel the same
[edit on 9-10-2004 by Kenshin]

Statistically, no. Russia will not have a counter to the F/A-22 Raptor until 2020-2030 (possibly later), well after every other superpower country. The reason being is that Russia's economy is weak and they can't afford such things. Even if they build a counter, it won't make up the bulk, let alone even a small percentage, of Russia's declining air force.

Originally posted by Dima
another example of american propagandism, of course those pilots aren't going to say that they saw it clearly, so to add publicity, they say they didn't see it at all until it came right overhead them, lol

OR maybe this is why they call it stealth.