Does the Su-27S climb better than the F-15C?

RadicalDisconnect said:
I highly doubt an F-22 can do much better than that. For one max climb rate is achieved at subsonic/transonic region at low alatitude, and F-22 the aerodynamics optimized for supersonic, instead of that region. And the main benefit is with internal weapons, it can have maneuverability similar to clean 4th gen fighters even when armed. Same goes for Su-57 or J-20.
Click to expand...
An F-22 at 50% fuel has a thrust:weight ratio of roughly 1.33:1.
 
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDXy6wxY_oQ


Here is an interesting video where we can hear what General Major Александр Харчевский has to say about his experience flying with the F-15 on the Su-27 during their visit to the USA in 1992. At 5:47, he said that on takeoff, the F-15 was using the full afterburner, while the Russians were using only a minimal afterburner setting because they were able to stay in formation with them without using the full power. So, for the same mission/task that requires a certain amount of fuel, the Su-27 had higher excess power during the takeoff acceleration/climb.
In another video (that I can't find), he said that the F-15 had a slight advantage in the supersonic region, if my memory serves me well?!
My Russian language skills are rusty these days, so the Russian-speaking members can confirm or deny what I have said.
 
PeregrineFalcon said:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDXy6wxY_oQ


Here is an interesting video where we can hear what General Major Александр Харчевский has to say about his experience flying with the F-15 on the Su-27 during their visit to the USA in 1992. At 5:47, he said that on takeoff, the F-15 was using the full afterburner, while the Russians were using only a minimal afterburner setting because they were able to stay in formation with them without using the full power. So, for the same mission/task that requires a certain amount of fuel, the Su-27 had higher excess power during the takeoff acceleration/climb.
In another video (that I can't find), he said that the F-15 had a slight advantage in the supersonic region, if my memory serves me well?!
My Russian language skills are rusty these days, so the Russian-speaking members can confirm or deny what I have said.
Click to expand...
giphy_3.gif
 
PeregrineFalcon said:
he said that on takeoff, the F-15 was using the full afterburner, while the Russians were using only a minimal afterburner setting because they were able to stay in formation with them without using the full power. So, for the same mission/task that requires a certain amount of fuel, the Su-27 had higher excess power during the takeoff acceleration/climb.
Click to expand...
The F-15 then flew with 3 drop tanks, the Su-27 in a clean configuration. Naturally, in such conditions, the superiority of the Su-27 was absolute. Nevertheless, the Su-27 is indeed superior to the F-15 in acceleration and climb.
 
A12 said:
The F-15 then flew with 3 drop tanks, the Su-27 in a clean configuration. Naturally, in such conditions, the superiority of the Su-27 was absolute.
Click to expand...

Empty weight of the F-15C on tarmac is about 13000kg ,empty weight of the Su-27UB is 17500kg. Total fuel weight of the F-15C (internal + three drop tanks but w/o CFT's ) is about 25000 pounds or close to 12 tons. Su-27UB has total fuel weight of 9.4t.

''Полный запас топлива во внутренних баках составляет 11975 л (9400 кг при плотности топлива 0.785).''

We have : 13t+ '12t' ≈ 25t and 17.5t+9.4t ≈27t . So ,Su-27UB was heavier during take off.

Two Su-27UB , 17 red and 62 red with their pilots A.Harchevsky and V. Kohanovsky in the Grand Forks AFB during visit to Langley AFB on July 1992. We can see escorting F-15C with three drop tanks.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9NycyNlkLs


In fact , AL-31F has more dynamic thrust than F100-PW-220 during take off- initial climb and that was the reason why F-15C took off with Max AB and those two Su-27UB on Min AB mode.
 
Sferrin said:
View attachment 806248
Click to expand...
I can see you are buthurt from our discussion on the F-35 topic, so you are acting childish here; cool!

A12 said:
The F-15 then flew with 3 drop tanks, the Su-27 in a clean configuration. Naturally, in such conditions, the superiority of the Su-27 was absolute. Nevertheless, the Su-27 is indeed superior to the F-15 in acceleration and climb.
Click to expand...

He didn't give any specifics about the F-15 during the takeoff, but it is highly possible that they did have some EFT attached. Those are the benefits of the superior fuel fraction of the Su-27.
From my understanding, they have flown double-seater F-15D and double-seater Su-27UB, and during that time, one US representative (pilot) was in the back seat of the Su-27UB, and one Russian representative (pilot) was in the back seat of the F-15D.
They did have some kind of flight duel (not the classical dogfight), and according to the Russian general, the F-15 was losing speed in a vertical climb faster than the Su-27, and when the speed dropped down to around 650 km/h, the Su-27 had an overwhelming advantage.
I doubt that during these tests the F-15D was carrying EFT.
Worth mentioning is the fact that the Su-27UB's drop in overall performance is considerably higher compared to the single-seater Su-27, and that the F-15D's drop in performance compared to the F-15C is not as significant.

His conclusions are in line with other Su-27 and F-15 pilots:


Major General Vladimir Alexeyev (retired), former head of Combat Training Directorate:​

In March 1997, I demonstrated the Su-27 in flight for U.S. Air Force General Mike Ryan, at that time commander of [U.S. Air Forces in Europe] and later U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff. After the takeoff, I gave him the controls, and he immediately pulled 7Gs! He wanted to see how quickly the Flanker pulls up. The Eagle is a little wooden when pulling up, a little slow. The General wanted to compare and pulled the stick back quickly, as you do in an F-15. The Flanker immediately pulled up, almost vertically. Mike Ryan didn’t expect that he would pull so many Gs when doing that, because he was flying like in an F-15, with quick, wide stick movements, which you can use in the very stable Eagle. He reacted very well, pushed the stick forward immediately.

When we met in the States the following year, he told me he was surprised by how well the big and powerful Flanker maneuvered.
Click to expand...

Colonel Yury Bulavka, deputy commander for pilot training of the 831st Galatska Tactical Aviation Brigade.​

I first flew in an Su-27UB twin-seat combat trainer in fall 2004. However, because of a fuel shortage in the air force at that time, it wasn’t until 22 April 2007 that I first flew in a single-seat Su-27. It accelerates faster than the twin-seater and is more powerful. The most difficult part of that flight was the landing—nobody was there to assist and monitor me from the rear cockpit, and that was unnerving.

The maneuvering capabilities of the Flanker are excellent, of course. For example, during air combat maneuvering training at the Clear Sky 2018 exercises—with the F-15C Eagles of the 144th Fighter Wing of the California Air National Guard—we won in three out of four engagements. Naturally, you need to survive long enough to close to visual range, because the Eagle’s electronic equipment and armament are much better. Ukraine has factories that manufacture air-to-air missiles, but we are not quite at the level of modern technology. We need fire-and-forget missiles, because illuminating a target with your radar after launch (with semi-active radar homing) is now a relic of the past. The Russians have the R-77 missile with active homing, while our R-27 is still semi-active.

A significant advantage of the Flanker is its long range. It is as if we are carrying extra fuel tanks, but internally, rather than under the wings. This allows us to carry more weapons on the under-wing hardpoints.
Click to expand...

Colonel Dmitry Fisher (retired), former squadron commander in the 831st Galatska Tactical Aviation Brigade.​

I flew during Safe Skies 2011, both escort missions and air combat training against F-16s. The dogfights with the F-16s were predominantly two versus two. The Flanker was superior in visual-range combat, but you’ve got to keep in mind that the Flanker and the F-16 belong to different categories of fighters—the Flanker is more powerful. [But] there is another side to the coin. I took a flight in an F-16 and realized that our systems are long obsolete. That’s why the F-16 is superior in beyond-visual-range combat. I can’t get information about the tactical situation in the Flanker, because it was designed on the principle that it would be supplied with tactical information from ground control stations. With those stations available, I would see information on my cockpit display. Now the systems no longer exist, and the only way I can get tactical updates is by voice radio from the ground control officer. The F-16 is completely different. They have a tactical information display and they “see” each other even without making electronic emissions, such as switching on radar.
Click to expand...

Colonel Sergey Zhuravlev (retired), former senior inspector pilot of the Combat Training Directorate.​

I got the chance to fly an F-15E once, following the transatlantic transit flight of Su-27s from Myrhorod to Seymour Johnson [Air Force Base in North Carolina] in 1998. I remember clearly how long the preflight check took. For us, you jump into the cockpit, start the engines, and then you are away in five minutes. In the F-15, we sat there for 20 minutes just to check the systems. We sat there, then some kind of onboard failure was discovered and we switched to another fighter, which was checked for a similar amount of time.

Over the range, the U.S. pilot took his hands off the control stick—do what you want! First he showed me maneuvers, then I controlled the aircraft and repeated them. We communicated mostly by signs; the language barrier didn’t allow for more back then. Overall, the F-15 is “softer.” You pull the stick, and it goes smoothly in that direction. In the Flanker, you can achieve greater vertical speeds and angles of attack. In the turn, the Su-27 is also more maneuverable.
Click to expand...

hushkit.net

Flying & fighting in the F-15 Eagle: Interview with F-15C Eagle pilot

For forty four years potential foes have feared and respected the F-15 Eagle. An utterly uncompromised air superiority fighter of vast proportions, it has a combat record second to none. Throughout…
hushkit.net hushkit.net

Major Shari Williams (rtd)

What was the general opinion of the ‘Flanker’ in the F-15 community?
“The Su-27, and more so the Su-35, are formidable opponents. The planes manoeuvrability/ power is on par with, and can often eclipse the F-15C. As with most Russian equipment, they suffer in lack of situational awareness when approaching the merge, particularly in large force scenarios. So for an Eagle driver, you want to kill the Flanker before you merge with it, or merge with such an advantage that you can get a quick kill and move on. You will not out run it, and it generally carries a lot of weapons and gas. Typically the best of any countries pilots find themselves in the Su-27/35, and they are well trained and moderately experienced pilots. But with good teamwork and overall battle situational awareness (SA), I would expect Eagles to do well, but not come out unscathed. At least that was my experience.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
There is no need for this. Data exits on Su-27 acceleration. We only need similar F-15 IMG_0613.jpeg data.
 
PeregrineFalcon said:
He didn't give any specifics about the F-15 during the takeoff, but it is highly possible that they did have some EFT attached. Those are the benefits of the superior fuel fraction of the Su-27.
Click to expand...
When they were fighting, the F-15 had 3 EFT. During the fight, the F-15 was constantly flying at full afterburner, and its angle of attack was maximum (24 or 26 degrees). The Su-27 used non-afterburner thrust and sometimes used minimal afterburner but not full afterburner. Its angle of attack did not exceed 18 degrees. The Su-27 won easily.
 
A12 said:
When they were fighting, the F-15 had 3 EFT. During the fight, the F-15 was constantly flying at full afterburner, and its angle of attack was maximum (24 or 26 degrees). The Su-27 used non-afterburner thrust and sometimes used minimal afterburner but not full afterburner. Its angle of attack did not exceed 18 degrees. The Su-27 won easily.
Click to expand...
If the Su-27 didn't Sukhoi should hang their heads in shame.
 
Sferrin said:
If the Su-27 didn't Sukhoi should hang their heads in shame.
Click to expand...
Both combat and sports aircraft of Sukhoi (Su 9/15/24/25/27 etc / Su-26M/29/31) are one of the pinnacles of the global aircraft industry.
 
A12 said:
When they were fighting, the F-15 had 3 EFT. During the fight, the F-15 was constantly flying at full afterburner, and its angle of attack was maximum (24 or 26 degrees). The Su-27 used non-afterburner thrust and sometimes used minimal afterburner but not full afterburner. Its angle of attack did not exceed 18 degrees. The Su-27 won easily.
Click to expand...

From the interviews I have watched, Russians never mentioned that the F-15 was carrying 3 EFT's.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZvMljUNCeU&t=3814s


Here is the video with English translation, and at 1:02:20 general is describing the event, but he doesn't mentioned that the F-15 had 3 EFT?s. What is your source for that claim?!
If that is true that comparison makes little sense.
 
"Here is the opinion of General A. Kharchevsky:

'The F-15 is a well-controlled machine with excellent unbounded visibility in all directions. When you steer it in different directions, the nose stays where you point it without tendency to bounce. During maneuvering the Eagle retains its controllability up to 25 degrees AOA. The controls are easy and the aircraft responds excellently with less force than is necessary in the Su-27. However the aerodynamics are less perfect than in the Sukhoi: it accelerates more slowly in maneuvers and decelerates more quickly. Nevertheless, in a level-flight "race" the various characteristics of the two aircraft are about equal. Supersonic flight occurs a little sooner in the F-15 than in the Su-27. You can detect it from a slight increase in the cabin noise. The takeoff of the F-15 is slower, than the "Sukhoi" (in a group of four aircraft, consisting of two Su-27UB and two F-15, the Russian jets were using minimum afterburner to maintain formation with the Americans taking off on full afterburner). The minimum speed of the F-15 is 210 km/h. It's significantly higher, than in Su-27 or MiG-29. However the effectiveness of the stabilizator on the runway is maintained down to a speed of 100 km/h. The F-15's turn radius is larger than the Su-27's.'

In general, in Kharchevsky's opinion, the Eagle has inferior maneuvering characteristics to Su-27 or MiG-29. Other pilots evaluate the Eagle's maneuvering capabilities as more analogous to MiG-23MLD."

''John Jumper -

Air Force Chief of Staff has said publicly on many occasions that in head to head combat simulations with USAF pilots flying in Su-27s vs USAF pilots in F-15s, the F-15s will consistently lose.

That's why the F/A-22 is now working up to enter service.''

Source:
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom