Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Aerospace Pictures and Art Thread


LostCosmonaut

Recommended Posts

Here is discussion (in russian, of course):

http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=840&p=14

 

Some parts using google translations with my edits:

"  The problem is that this colonel does not know the structure of the Su-27 air intake (schematics was posted earlier in this thread). So there is no faith to that colonel.

   Second, every aviation expert agree on a fact that such high maneuverability characteristics imposes very high requirements to parameters of engine work, and if such requirements are not reached, it will lead to the engine failures. 

 

(Bitnik's post here, BTW)

If I am not mistaken, he evevn incorrectly identified Su-30MKI engines."

 

They also mention that takeoff procedure is just safety masures, not imposed by engines. 

 

Aha, so they object to the statements about SU-30 FOD problems.  Yes; he mistakenly identifies the engine mfg as Tumansky when it's Saturn.  There are a few other detail mistakes; the MiG-21 bison's radar is Russian, not Israeli.  I think the presenter is mistaking it with a similar Israeli upgrade package for the MiG-21. 

 

I suspect that it is more an issue of the IAF's procedures than any particular problem with the plane.  As the Colonel explained, it's hard for them to source new engines (and when something goes wrong with one of the engines the Indians usually blame the Russians for it, and the Russians usually blame the Indians), so they may be extra-careful with their aircraft to avoid taking them out of action.  It would take a long time to get them back in action, and the SU-30 is their most capable fighter.  Also, I do not get the impression that it is the engines themselves that are vulnerable to FOD; pretty much any engine will be unhappy if you feed it rocks.  Rather, it is the very low placement of the intakes that creates the problem, since they are lower to the runway and more likely to suck up any crap that's sitting on it.  The F-16 has a similar problem for the same reason.

 

As for the FOD mesh, are your comrades absolutely sure that the SU-30 has them?  I know that early versions of the SU-27 had the retractable wire mesh intake screens to protect against FOD, and the early versions of the MiG-29 had bypass ducts for similar reasons.  However, the bypass ducts were ditched on the later versions of MiG-29 because they basically don't work.  Were the FOD screens retained on later versions of flanker?

 

a5647374-146-SU27%20FOD%20screen.jpg?d=1

 

Flanker FOD screen extended to protect the engines

 

Intake_02.jpg

 

Closed for normal flight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1027896989.jpg

 

An SU-34 in Syria being re-fueled and re-armed.  Note the deflected canard.

 

The SU-34, being a medium bomber rather than a fighter, does not need the canards so much for extreme maneuvering.  However, they are still useful.  Because the canards sit in front of the main wing, they normally move the center of lift forwards, destabilizing the aircraft.  The SU-34 is expected to carry heavy and variable loads of weapons and fuel, which also affect its stability.  By "feathering" the canards, that is, allowing them to move freely and align themselves with the direction of the air, the center of lift can be shifted rearwards to compensate for any destabilizing effect caused by the fuel or weapons load.  When the weapons are released, the canards can be "turned on" again, pulling the center of lift forward again.  In this way, trim drag can be minimized and aerodynamic efficiency maintained throughout the mission, even as the load is shifted around.

 

The MiG YE-8 prototype used this trick, although in a more limited way:

 

YE_8_1.jpg

 

At subsonic speeds the canards were "feathered," and free-floated so that they did not contribute to lift.  At supersonic speeds they were locked in place to shift the center of lift forward, to compensate for the rearward shift in the center of lift that occurs over the main wings at supersonic speeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...