Supermaneuverability

[ptldM3]

One of the issues so often ignored in these discussions is mutual support. Fighters never fly without wingmen, usually many, and they work exceptionally hard on clean, concise, clear communications to that they support each other. When/if an enemy attempted some sort of energy-depleting maneuver, you'd have 3 or 4 guys competing to see who would be the first to put an AIM-9 seeker on him. He is totally helpless (and generating a huge heat plume) for many seconds.

Boyd's "Cobra" was simply called a flat-plate maneuver, and is used in two circumstances... to spit an overly-aggressive attacker outside the turn circle, usually resulting in a rolling scissors; or, as a gun jink. In either case, it is a true desperation move, and there is an almost guaranteed chance one will die, and a very good chance both will die.

Back to the original objection - all of the fights in GW 1, with perhaps one excption, fell into categories 1 or 2. Those aircraft that were not killed BVR were killed with energy-depleting turns to bring weapons to bear as quickly as posible (more AIM-7M than AIM-9M); then, the attackers bugged out at high speed.

The sole exception might have been "Rico" Rodriguez' encounter with a MiG-29. I have heard it said that Rico passed up an AIM-9 shot because he wanted to be the only F-15 gun kill, but that is not confirmed. Anyway, after a brief (relative to training) fight, the MiG impacted the desert, and Rico got his MiG-29.

Sustained turning fights are an art form that must be learned and practiced, but the reality is that the bulk of future encounters are going to be high-speed hit and run, preferably flank, with almost no sustained turning. When a fight matures and fireballs begin to light up the sky, it will draw the eyes of every bandit for 50 miles, and they will all beat-feet there (possibly en masse) to get a piece of the action.

Hypermaneuverability = way overblown, IMO. And sorry for the wordy post!

Well said, the Cobra has a narrow window of opportunity and when the cobra pilot has a numarical disadvantage the cobra will get him killed, even if he manages an overshoot his slow speed will leave him volnerable to other fighters.

The Indians used the cobra in red flag but the results weren't too good, at first the Americans were caught off guard but soon after they found the maneuver to be too predictable.

It is always interesting to listen to both sides, many harrier and Sukhoi would agree that the viff and cobra has its uses, on the other hand, pilots in conventional fighters would tend to disagree.

I myself, think that a cobra is a double edged sword, at times (rarely) it can be successful and at other times it can get a pilot killed; it really has such a small window of opportunity for it to work.

 

[M8R]

The sole exception might have been "Rico" Rodriguez' encounter with a MiG-29. I have heard it said that Rico passed up an AIM-9 shot because he wanted to be the only F-15 gun kill, but that is not confirmed. Anyway, after a brief (relative to training) fight, the MiG impacted the desert, and Rico got his MiG-29.

Sir,
Rico Rodriguez did not fire Aim7 or AIM-9 Because he wanted to
VID the bogey as the AWACS did not inform them whether the bogey was hostile of friendly so Rico tried to get into a merge with MIg29 to check the VID and he visually confirmed to his wing man Craig Underhill that it's a mig 29..By now Rico was in a dogfight with Mig29.Rico tried to get AIM9 lock on the mig29 but the mig29 pilot was desperate trying to save himself so mig29 pilot pulled split S at a very low level and collided with the ground.

 

[Chogy]

Sir,
Rico Rodriguez did not fire Aim7 or AIM-9 Because he wanted to
VID the bogey as the AWACS did not inform them whether the bogey was hostile of friendly so Rico tried to get into a merge with MIg29 to check the VID and he visually confirmed to his wing man Craig Underhill that it's a mig 29..By now Rico was in a dogfight with Mig29.Rico tried to get AIM9 lock on the mig29 but the mig29 pilot was desperate trying to save himself so mig29 pilot pulled split S at a very low level and collided with the ground.

Thank you, I did not know the details to this extent. I flew with both Rico and "Mole" Underhill, both excellent pilots.

What I find very striking about the combat of Desert Storm (which really is the latest example we have of significant air to air combat) is what formed the basis of my wordy post. We practiced sustained turning engagements extensively, but they were not needed or used. Instead of attacking near corner velocity, ~420-450 knots, the Eagles were closer to 600 in most cases, and the turns were short, sharp, weapons away, and bug out.

Also very interesting to me was that there were more AIM-7M kills than AIM-9. The AIM-9 was considered the "dogfight" missile, but rather than fly through an AIM-7 envelope to get to the AIM-9, they took advantage and used the AIM-7 to great effect. Of course the AIM-7 is being replaced, but it's effectiveness surprised a lot of people. The ghost of "The Great White Hope" (AIM-7E of Vietnam) was exorcised!

A swirling, large-scale turning fight is a bad place to be, especially when you are flying an expensive and modern hi-tech machine. You make yourself vulnerable to low-tech F-5 and MiG-21 equivalents, and cannot exploit your strengths.

 

[WAQAS119]

which maneuver is this at 1:26 (just look how easily he managed to escape)?

 

[shehbazi2001]

wow...what a beauty ! It took 17 sec for F-16 to complete 360 degree high G turn! Thanks for posting!

This video has been posted several times but no one said what were the speeds of both aircrafts before starting to turn. To compare the turning or maneuverability of two aircraft, both should have the same speed. Speed drastically affects the turning performance. Every aircraft has a "corner speed", over which the turning performance is maximum.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Uhh..no, if the greater TVC ensured LIFT... then the flanker series should be able to fly vertically upwards and hover in flight at any altitude from standstill, I have yet to see a flanker stop in mid air at 180..hover there for a prolonged period at the exact altitude and fly straight up. There is a difference in control and the reality of gravity vs lift. The only thing shown in the fancy videos of the flanker is the aircraft hovering for an instant before pushing down for forward flight. <snip>

.. Here is a video of the cobra by the Su-37..which has TVC as well..observe that throughout the TVC movement the aircraft is losing altitude rapidly
YouTube - SU-37 Doing The Cobra Maneuver

<snip>

Dear Sir,

I am a little mystified by what you mean by the phrases highlighted above.

This is because I have personally witnessed a SU-27 standing on its tail for a protracted period, not sinking as it did so, and then breaking away. This was more than a decade ago, 2002, if I remember correctly, and therefore I cannot say if the breakaway was in level flight or vertical flight upwards. However, the hover was in place and was considerably, considerably longer than shown in these videos.

I have no comment about the rest of the discussion, as that is the realm of the fast jet pilots, but as a designer and a personal eye-witness, I can assure you that your assertion is not correct. Unless your reference is to perhaps three or four minutes constant hovering in place; it did not do so, but it was certainly more than 40 to 45 seconds, at constant, undiminished height, mind you. That it stayed in place was what impressed me the most at the time.

It was awesome to watch 30 tonnes of aircraft hanging in the air, in the company of an absolutely stunned crowd. I was in the ranks of the technical personnel at a horizontal distance of about 500m. from the manoeuvre; the vertical distance may have been a couple of thousand feet.

Sincerely,

 

[Hasnain2009]

 

[SQ8]

Your assumption is correct, I referred to the concept of being able to stand there, 40 to 45 seconds in what configuration?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Your assumption is correct, I referred to the concept of being able to stand there, 40 to 45 seconds in what configuration?

Dear Sir,

I am not able to recollect which it was that was demonstrated. This was in 2003, if I recall correctly; one Aero-India was postponed by 6 months due to various internal factors within HAL which aren't relevant for this discussion.

It may have been either the original Su27 or the following Su30 MKI; was the Su30 flying in 2003? I recall it was still a Russian pilot; as you probably know, all subsequent demonstration of the Su30 after Aero India 2003 were by IAF pilots.

There were reasons why I cannot recall the details, given below.

The reason for my uncertainty is that by that time, I had resigned from my position at the HAL joint venture, and was visiting Aero India as an 'outsider'. We were trying to bid for offset contracts in Hungary on the sale of the Grippen there; some software organisations had banded together and offered their services to the offset team. This particular exhibition, we were busy negotiating with BAE, who represented Grippen in the market, and the entire team was constituted of colleagues turned buyers. Because of this, we had long negotiating sessions, with brief intervals; at one, we headed out to the lunch tent to see this spectacle! My Hungarian colleagues were very 'sniffy'; first, it was a Russian pilot, and they had not yet got over Russophobia. Second, they did not lose time pointing out, their own compatriot in the Hungarian Air Force had been winning competitions and trophies for aerobatics in a Russian MiG 29!

Nevertheless, the spectacle was so compelling, as this huge craft swung into the manoeuvre, hung in the air and after a long interval moved on again that we, along with the rest of the crowd, stood rivetted to the spot.

Sincerely,

 

[anoopsaxena76]

I have to say this has been the most informative thread without indulging in the "I am better than you" confrontations. Awesome. And thank you.

 

[Hasnain2009]

---------- Post added at 05:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:01 PM ----------

Crazy take off.

 

[General General]

I think we should stop comparing F22 with other jets, it uses haxx.
Here's SU 47.

 

[muse]

So, BVR missiles were fired at the Supermaneuverable ship, and while it did super maneuvers, the pilot passed out and missiles fired from a third generation platform killed the supermaneuverable ship?

Isn't it a gimmick? I mean it makes for a good show, but does it have much relevance in kinds of combat most Air forces today plan to engage in?

 

[Luftwaffe]

and i felt like posting this game video.

 

[Luftwaffe]