Sukoi 30 demo video

[cavelamb himself]

Gulp...
You goys gotta see this!

http://www.crazyaviation.com/movies/CA_SU-30.wmv

[Morgans[_2_]]

"cavelamb himself" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Gulp...
> You goys gotta see this!
>
> http://www.crazyaviation.com/movies/CA_SU-30.wmv

That has to be one wild freakin' ride!

As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a warbird?
Nothing, I think.

Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of environment,
now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron anymore.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter Dohm]

> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a warbird?
> Nothing, I think.
>
I am not so sure. This looks like it might be a "vectored thrust"
demonstration and I have read of a lot more effort being expended on
that--but I lack the imagination to think of all the reasons that it could
have value. About all I can suggest is that, if it does not reduce the
maximum speed of the aircraft but does reduce the minimum speed, that would
increase the utility of almost any aircraft...

However, it did appear to expend a lot of power to accomplish what it
did--and was probably VERY lightly loaded.

Peter

[[email protected][_1_]]

> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a warbird?
> Nothing, I think.
>
> Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of environment,
> now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron anymore.

The Air Force F-22 Raptor combines similar maneuvering capability with
stealth technology, making it a vastly superior weapons platform. The
radar cross-section of the Sukoi is the size of a battleship, by
comparison. It wouldn't last long in head-to-head combat.

Anyone who saw the F-22 demonstration at OSH '06 will never forget it.
It's quite simply an amazing aircraft.

To view a flight demonstration, see this:

http://alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/2006-5-12)Raptor-at-Langley.mpeg

and this:

http://alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/2006-5-13-F22_compilation.wmv

To view all of our military videos, go here:
http://alexisparkinn.com/military_videos.htm
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Morgans wrote:
> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a
> warbird? Nothing, I think.
>
> Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of
> environment, now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron
> anymore.


That is almost exactly what was said when when the F4 was designed without
guns. It didn't work out that way.

[Maxwell]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Morgans wrote:
>> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a
>> warbird? Nothing, I think.
>>
>> Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of
>> environment, now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron
>> anymore.
>
>
> That is almost exactly what was said when when the F4 was designed without
> guns. It didn't work out that way.
>

Yeah, but in all fairness, wasn't that about 45 years ago?

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Maxwell wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Morgans wrote:
>>> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a
>>> warbird? Nothing, I think.
>>>
>>> Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of
>>> environment, now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron
>>> anymore.
>>
>>
>> That is almost exactly what was said when when the F4 was designed
>> without guns. It didn't work out that way.
>>
>
> Yeah, but in all fairness, wasn't that about 45 years ago?

Sure it was. But sh!t happens, especially in combat. And while shooting the
other guy down 100 miles away before he even knows you are there works real
well for defending a CVN during all out shooting war. It doesn't take a lot
of imagination to come up with a scenario where pilots aren't allowed to use
those long range weapons and are forced into a good old fashioned dog fight.

[Maxwell]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Maxwell wrote:
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Morgans wrote:
>>>> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a
>>>> warbird? Nothing, I think.
>>>>
>>>> Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of
>>>> environment, now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron
>>>> anymore.
>>>
>>>
>>> That is almost exactly what was said when when the F4 was designed
>>> without guns. It didn't work out that way.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, but in all fairness, wasn't that about 45 years ago?
>
> Sure it was. But sh!t happens, especially in combat. And while shooting
> the other guy down 100 miles away before he even knows you are there works
> real well for defending a CVN during all out shooting war. It doesn't take
> a lot of imagination to come up with a scenario where pilots aren't
> allowed to use those long range weapons and are forced into a good old
> fashioned dog fight.

Well, call me a hold out, but I would still have to lean a little more
towards Jim's way of thinking. With the situational awarness capibilities of
something like a Raptor, and his ability to supercruise, it sure seems more
and more likely they would be hard to sneak up on.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Maxwell wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Maxwell wrote:
>>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Morgans wrote:
>>>>> As impressive as it is, what good do those types of moves do a
>>>>> warbird? Nothing, I think.
>>>>>
>>>>> Face it, this is a "shoot and kill before you see me" kind of
>>>>> environment, now. Fighters don't play Snoopy and the Red Baron
>>>>> anymore.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is almost exactly what was said when when the F4 was designed
>>>> without guns. It didn't work out that way.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, but in all fairness, wasn't that about 45 years ago?
>>
>> Sure it was. But sh!t happens, especially in combat. And while
>> shooting the other guy down 100 miles away before he even knows you
>> are there works real well for defending a CVN during all out
>> shooting war. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to come up with a
>> scenario where pilots aren't allowed to use those long range weapons
>> and are forced into a good old fashioned dog fight.
>
> Well, call me a hold out, but I would still have to lean a little more
> towards Jim's way of thinking. With the situational awarness
> capibilities of something like a Raptor, and his ability to
> supercruise, it sure seems more and more likely they would be hard to
> sneak up on.

I'm not talking about getting sneaked up on. I'm talking about ROE that have
not a thing to do with the capibility of the aircraft.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote

> I'm not talking about getting sneaked up on. I'm talking about ROE that
> have not a thing to do with the capibility of the aircraft.

Even close in, they have short range missles to do the job.

I'm not advocating not having guns. I just don't think they have much
relevance, in all but the most unusual conditions. I sure could not justify
taking away from an aircraft's ability to stand off and fight, to have that
kind of radical maneuverability.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time that the US took down an enemy
plane with gunfire alone?
--
Jim in NC

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Morgans wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote
>
>> I'm not talking about getting sneaked up on. I'm talking about ROE
>> that have not a thing to do with the capibility of the aircraft.
>
> Even close in, they have short range missles to do the job.
>
> I'm not advocating not having guns. I just don't think they have much
> relevance, in all but the most unusual conditions. I sure could not
> justify taking away from an aircraft's ability to stand off and
> fight, to have that kind of radical maneuverability.
>
> Just out of curiosity, when was the last time that the US took down
> an enemy plane with gunfire alone?

I can't think of anyplace to find that out but in trying so I came accross
this.

http://www.aviationweek.com/avnow/news/channel_defense_story.jsp?id=news/aw010807p1.xml

As the F-22 begins its operational life, interest has turned to assessing
just how well suited the stealthy Raptor is to its role as the premier
air-to-air fighter, while taking a peek at some of the surprises for pilots
and maintenance crews as they explore what the aircraft can do. As part of
the research for this series of articles on the F-22, Michael Fabey flew in
the back seat of an F-15D while the Eagle and Raptor pilots demonstrated
their aircraft's capabilities in the air-to-air ranges at Tyndall AFB, Fla.
(For additional details of the Raptor's unique air-to-air capabilities, see
AW&ST Sept. 6, 1999, p. 84.)

The F-22 is proving it's a dogfighter after all.

While it wasn't part of a hard-turning furball, an F-22--with its Amraams
and Sidewinders expended--slipped into visual range behind an F-16 and
undetected made a simulated kill with its cannon during the stealth
fighter's first large-scale exercise and deployment outside the continental
U.S.

[Blueskies]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message :

snip
: While it wasn't part of a hard-turning furball, an F-22--with its Amraams
: and Sidewinders expended--slipped into visual range behind an F-16 and
: undetected made a simulated kill with its cannon during the stealth
: fighter's first large-scale exercise and deployment outside the continental
: U.S.
:
:
:

They say the F-35 is supposed to be able to do ground support like an A-10, as well and intercept, etc ala F-15.
Multi-mission for sure!