Incredible manouvers
Moderator: Shared Resources Group
15 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Incredible manouvers
by Buran » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:31 pm
Well, this film is a presentation of the SU-37 and shows incredible manouvers the VF pilots maybe should remember and use 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1o3rov7 ... ed&search=
and here are some more manouvers whitout CGI round it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDXm9bt0s1Y
Enjoy and close your gaping mouth after you have seen the videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1o3rov7 ... ed&search=
and here are some more manouvers whitout CGI round it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDXm9bt0s1Y
Enjoy and close your gaping mouth after you have seen the videos
by Skadi » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:45 pm
I do! But I can't show anyone.... and it's not online. My buddy that works at Lockheed brought a few promo disks home for me to see. I think they get released to the airforce. Nothing you know tops eceret or nothing. He can't tell me about that stuff, but it's some impressive footage. Plus I see them zip over my house every once in a while.
si e kono e wa ki, my one and only,
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
by Buran » Thu Dec 07, 2006 4:45 pm
Skadi you mean videos liek this ones?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f5oIcS03_I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19N9T5v8qQo
enjoy Xuric
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f5oIcS03_I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19N9T5v8qQo
enjoy Xuric
by Thorn » Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:25 pm
You know, these become a whole lot less impressive when you take away air resistance. Fighting VFs in space like this... well, a lot of the surprise advantage of flying backwards goes away in a full 3D vectored-thrust environment without any kind of resistance. The fact that the vast majority of anime LOOKS like there's an atmosphere in space doesn't mean there IS an atmosphere... just that the animators decided to rewrite the Battle of Britain for the Xth time.
Sorry, just a gripe I have about space-based animation in general. One of the unsung classics of SF space combat is "The Last Starfighter's" 'Death Blossom' scene. Without pesky external forces like drag and gravity, no reason you SHOULDN'T always be flying around like that.
Sorry, just a gripe I have about space-based animation in general. One of the unsung classics of SF space combat is "The Last Starfighter's" 'Death Blossom' scene. Without pesky external forces like drag and gravity, no reason you SHOULDN'T always be flying around like that.
by Skadi » Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:20 pm
MMmm... Starfury combat. That was some cool sequences.. I'm gonna have to go back and watch the DVDs now.
Buran, havn't checked the links yet as they won't let me check them at work and I totally spaced on it last night so I dunno if those are what I seen or not.
Buran, havn't checked the links yet as they won't let me check them at work and I totally spaced on it last night so I dunno if those are what I seen or not.
si e kono e wa ki, my one and only,
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
by Sparky » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:38 pm
I would bet on an F-22 in a dogfight between the Raptor and SU-37. My favorite Fighter was always the F-14, but sadly, all are decomissioned now...I only got to see one in my life, and that was when I lived on Pearl Harbor. My father and stepfather were in the Navy.
"Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing." - Optimus Prime
by Skadi » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:25 pm
Unfortunately I beleive it wouldn't stand a chance. I'm not sure about the SU-37, but the F-22 Raptor has I beleive a 204 to 0 kill ratio in war games (since it hasn't been feilded yet in combat). THey had one of them up in Alaska for their games and it was never hit. It took down pertty much everything in that we use in the air.
si e kono e wa ki, my one and only,
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
by Skadi » Sat Dec 09, 2006 3:55 am
OK after watching the videos... I must say that, no those are not the videos I have. They're kinda like those, but not those. If that made any sense at all.
si e kono e wa ki, my one and only,
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
all i want is to hold you, but your not here,
if i wake and find it's only a dream,
i'd gladly take you back into my arms...
-Unknown Artist-
by Thorn » Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:59 am
Given that the Su-37 is an updated technology-demonstrator version of the Su-27, which was developed roughly in parallel with the F/A-18, I would be very surprised if an F-22/Su-37 match was an equal fight. It's an apples-and-oranges comparison. As for the Eurofighter... that's a tough call. The Eurofighter's development was marginally later than the F-22's, but the US more or less owns the patents on passive-stealth aircraft. The closest competitors were the Soviets, and they (and their aerospace industry) are the way of the dodo.
Regarding simulations by the United States, I am somewhat skeptical about the results of any wargame run by the developers. According to Colt, for instance, the M16 could fire forever without ever buying a cleaning kit (which was why American soldiers thought it required excessive cleaning, leading to a backlash myth, but that's another story...).
Argh... starting to think my job description here ought to be "Kannonenkoenig," and a gold star to whoever tells me where the name comes form first.
Regarding simulations by the United States, I am somewhat skeptical about the results of any wargame run by the developers. According to Colt, for instance, the M16 could fire forever without ever buying a cleaning kit (which was why American soldiers thought it required excessive cleaning, leading to a backlash myth, but that's another story...).
Argh... starting to think my job description here ought to be "Kannonenkoenig," and a gold star to whoever tells me where the name comes form first.
by Buran » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:00 pm
Kanonenkönig -> Alfred Krupp
He is the son of Friedrich Krupp, the founder of the Thyssenkrupp AG (formerly called Kruppsche Gussstahlfabrik). He recieved the byname Kanonenkönig (meaning King of cannons or is it more cannonking?) because he was the biggest weapon producer during his period (1812-1887)
do I get a gold star now?
And for the fact of the Eurofighter (but I think you are more refering to the Saab Grippen), it has only 1 engine not two as usual modern fighter so there he looses some in maneuvrability, and no it isn't at all stealth. The main strenght of the fighter is actually the relatively low price and the extremly low maintenence time and the really really low maintenence cost (the fact that it has only one instead of two engine is for this reason)
So I would say that in the dogfighting classifica the SU-37 would be on top, then the F-22 and sadly the Grippen as last (I must say sadly because the company I work in produces droptanks for them^^)
But if it comes to nromal fighting and today that means stayin some Kilometers away from eachother and fireinf missiles at eachother the F-22 would do the race since it has the hint of passive stealth, then the Su-37 since it simply has greater firepower than the Grippen imho.
He is the son of Friedrich Krupp, the founder of the Thyssenkrupp AG (formerly called Kruppsche Gussstahlfabrik). He recieved the byname Kanonenkönig (meaning King of cannons or is it more cannonking?) because he was the biggest weapon producer during his period (1812-1887)
do I get a gold star now?
And for the fact of the Eurofighter (but I think you are more refering to the Saab Grippen), it has only 1 engine not two as usual modern fighter so there he looses some in maneuvrability, and no it isn't at all stealth. The main strenght of the fighter is actually the relatively low price and the extremly low maintenence time and the really really low maintenence cost (the fact that it has only one instead of two engine is for this reason)
So I would say that in the dogfighting classifica the SU-37 would be on top, then the F-22 and sadly the Grippen as last (I must say sadly because the company I work in produces droptanks for them^^)
But if it comes to nromal fighting and today that means stayin some Kilometers away from eachother and fireinf missiles at eachother the F-22 would do the race since it has the hint of passive stealth, then the Su-37 since it simply has greater firepower than the Grippen imho.
by Thorn » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:37 pm
Yes, you get your gold star, and an extra one for not confusing Friedrich Krupp with Fritz Krupp, nor Alfred with Alfried. You lose the second one for confusing Fried. Krupp of Essen with the Gusstahlfabrik, though. That was the main Essen steel plant, and only part of the empire.
Regarding the one-engine debate... that's been going on for a while now, and while it isn't conventional for modern fighters to have just one engine, it seems to have worked out really well over the course of its service life for the F-16, which was one of the best all-around fighters of its generation. In other words, it's been proven to be possible.
No, I'm not confusing the Eurofighter with the Gripen, though that would be understandable. I'm talking about the Eurofighter Typhoon, developed jointly by a variety of NATO member-states to replace the Tornado and, in Britain, the Jaguar, with the possibility of export sales. The Eurofighter looks to have quite a bit more in common with the E/F generation of F-18s than with the F-22, but that's hardly surprising - in a lot of ways, the US Navy got left out in the cold in the stealth-aircraft race until the JSF project began to move forward.
I'm still going to have to point out that the Su-37 has a lot more in common with the F/A-18E than with the F-22 if you were looking to do a fair comparison. The Soviet-leftover fighters that you're looking for are the Su-41 (I believe that's its official bureau number now; used to be just the S-37) and the MiG Art. 1.42. At least the Article 1.42 was never developed into a production fighter, and there are some doubts about whether it even flew.
Regarding the one-engine debate... that's been going on for a while now, and while it isn't conventional for modern fighters to have just one engine, it seems to have worked out really well over the course of its service life for the F-16, which was one of the best all-around fighters of its generation. In other words, it's been proven to be possible.
No, I'm not confusing the Eurofighter with the Gripen, though that would be understandable. I'm talking about the Eurofighter Typhoon, developed jointly by a variety of NATO member-states to replace the Tornado and, in Britain, the Jaguar, with the possibility of export sales. The Eurofighter looks to have quite a bit more in common with the E/F generation of F-18s than with the F-22, but that's hardly surprising - in a lot of ways, the US Navy got left out in the cold in the stealth-aircraft race until the JSF project began to move forward.
I'm still going to have to point out that the Su-37 has a lot more in common with the F/A-18E than with the F-22 if you were looking to do a fair comparison. The Soviet-leftover fighters that you're looking for are the Su-41 (I believe that's its official bureau number now; used to be just the S-37) and the MiG Art. 1.42. At least the Article 1.42 was never developed into a production fighter, and there are some doubts about whether it even flew.
15 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests