Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia’s Legendary Su-27 Fighter Jet Still Second to None in Close Air Combat
Sputnik ^ | 20.05.2017

Posted on 05/21/2017 7:11:41 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
More pix/media at link
1 posted on 05/21/2017 7:11:41 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Kinda partial to Russia eh?


2 posted on 05/21/2017 7:17:34 AM PDT by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

1992?


3 posted on 05/21/2017 7:17:38 AM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I saw a group of these flying suspiciously over voting booths in November. One of them dropped something; I think it was a ballot.


4 posted on 05/21/2017 7:25:46 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
It seems to me that the operative phrase appears that the headline: "in Close Air Combat."

Please correct me if I am wrong because I do not claim any special knowledge in this area, but I understand that United States doctrine is to destroy these planes before the American platforms come within range. Therefore, the relevant question is, do they have enough of them to swarm our long-range defense weapons?

I am mindful of the idea that one of the reasons why the Soviet tanks of World War II are regarded to be among the most effective ever made is that they were so easily manufactured that they could swarm the individually superior German Tiger tanks. One is prompted to inquire whether that sort of thinking has been applied by the Russians to the SU-27 fighter jet?


5 posted on 05/21/2017 7:33:30 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

I believe the F-15 which is something like 125-0 in air to air since 1980 has reduced several SU 27s to airborne scrap metal ( Israel vs Syria, US vs Iraq)


6 posted on 05/21/2017 7:36:36 AM PDT by slapshot ( Speaker Ryan is a sober and less tan version of John Boehner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

Well, look at all the articles I post and then decide.


7 posted on 05/21/2017 7:40:13 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Kinda was more looking at your screename.


8 posted on 05/21/2017 7:45:35 AM PDT by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

Russia left the swarming business after the fall of the Soviet Union. They don’t have enough SU-27s and its derivatives for that kind of role.

The main advantage of the SU-27 was that its large size and range made it useful for operations over Russia.


9 posted on 05/21/2017 7:48:37 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: slapshot

That would be Mig-29s. Syria and Iraq never operated SU-27s.


10 posted on 05/21/2017 7:50:00 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: slapshot

You’d be correct, the quality of the pilot matters too, but the f-15 is a great fighter.

I like the flanker too, she’s a good looking bird.


11 posted on 05/21/2017 7:51:30 AM PDT by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford; sukhoi-30mki

The real advantage the F-15 has over the Su-27 in an all out war situation is something called the E-3. When you can stay in EMCON mode and a plane 100 miles back is lighting up the adversary and feeding you targeting information, that’s quite an advantage.


12 posted on 05/21/2017 7:52:26 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
You bring up the issue of range.

I have been given to understand that American assets, especially carrier-based planes, are suffering increasingly from decreased range which poses a problem of making the carriers vulnerable because they must draw in closer. Do you have any insight?

Am I correct in my original presumption that we should be able to destroy the Soviet planes from afar and need not worry about being swarmed, except as chance might have it on a local basis?


13 posted on 05/21/2017 7:52:49 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
I would assume that the American planes must have standoff capability even without the EMCON advantage?

If that is not so, why would we build a plane inferior to the Russian version for close in combat?


14 posted on 05/21/2017 7:56:31 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Where do you live? Why do you have such an affinity for our enemy?


15 posted on 05/21/2017 8:06:44 AM PDT by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
That would be Mig-29s. Syria and Iraq never operated SU-27s.

Yup, but after all these decades, the Mig 29 has never had a confirmed kill of a Western combat aircraft, neither has the more rare Su-27.

16 posted on 05/21/2017 8:11:07 AM PDT by Snickering Hound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

conformal external tanks on the several f-18 variants have helped a lot, although obviously degrading performance.

no matter where you carry fuel, it’s heavy, and affects ypur performance.


17 posted on 05/21/2017 8:15:42 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

better answer: https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-18.htm

the long term response is the E/F variant.


18 posted on 05/21/2017 8:23:18 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

better answer: https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-18.htm

the long term response is the E/F variant.


19 posted on 05/21/2017 8:23:19 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

This may or may not be the case and I hope we never have to prove which/who is superior but I do remember long about the retaking of Kuwait when the MSM were berating us for even thinking of an attack or ‘hand to hand’ with a SUPERIOR Iraqi Army who had battle hardened troops to go along with the EVER POWERFUL Republican Guard which was advertised to be a combination of Superman, Batman, UDT, SEALs, and all the ‘Special Forces’ of the world.

Yes, the same Republican Guard that surrendered to reporters, threw down their weapons when confronted and ‘we’ covered the distance from Kuwait to Baghdad so fast the ‘powers’ that be didn’t have enough time to slow down ‘Stormin Norman’ and his invading forces.

The vaunted Iraqi forces were stymied by the Marines who never got to play ‘Away All Boats’.

We never seem to learn (Or the people who think ‘WE’ are a bunch of whining pansies)....


20 posted on 05/21/2017 8:41:03 AM PDT by xrmusn ((6/98)"Ask the experienced rather than the learned")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson