SU-35 Cobra maneuver useful in combat - pilot's opinion?

The following link is widely circulated to showcase the flight capabilities of the SU-35 and it's ability to go nose up at near zero ground speed.
http://bemil.chosun.com/movie%20link/SU-35.wmv

I would like to know if such a manuver would be practical in a combat senario or is it just a fancy thing they do to make airshow crowds ohh and ahhh.
It seems to me that sheding forward speed while presenting a large aspect of the aircraft to any persuing aircraft would place the SU-35 pilot at an extreme disadvantage. I am also dubious about the ability of the aircraft to perform such a manuver at high speeds.

What do you pilots think? Have there been any practice matchups between current front line fighters against the SU-35?

Thanks
djl

I don't know about the -35 but I do know when Viktor Pugachev first demonstrated the Cobra maneuver in the SU-27 the jet was operating at a non-standard aft CG and the flight control limiters had been overridden via a special switch. Yes the nose pointing ability was awesome, but then you are 'dead in the water' with an energy state near zero.

habu2 wrote:Yes the nose pointing ability was awesome, but then you are 'dead in the water' with an energy state near zero.

Good point...but on the other hand if you're on the wrong side of a close-in 1-v-1 furball and the other guy's closing, wouldn't the obvious overshoot potential such a manuever entertains be of at least some tactical advantage? You're risking stall dangers being so slow but at least the attacker is off your six long enough for you to extend for energy and bug out (or re-engage).

If you're 1v1 then somethings wrong - either your wingman left you, you left him, or he was already shot down - in which case you should be on the SU's 6. Just IMO...

Everybody and their brother will be getting High_Off_Boresight ( HOBs ) Heater / helmet jobs. New fancy ones too. The HOBs heaters don't care about the nth degree of turning or a goofy airshow move in WVR fighting, they will just kill you. Both sides with that stuff WVR? A bar room brawl with shotguns.

Sorry. Not a pilot. But in this case, given what I just said, etc etc.

Good point - I forgot about AIM-9X etc. "if looks could kill..."

Not a fighter pilot either, but in my opine the enemy has just handed me the opportunity to make an energy gaining maneuver while he can't see which direction I have turned. That gives me the advantage because lets say I make a diving turn into him (assuming I pass on one side or the other), it will take him a second to locate me when his radome gets out of his line of sight, while I can watch him over my shoulder all the time. Add in an AIM-9X and he is likely to get a rather big surprise in a few seconds. BTW I have to look at modern SU and MIG designs, but it is possible that the high pitch angle of that kind of maneuver will mask his IR sensors too...

Kevin
The Ejection Site

elp wrote:Both sides with that stuff WVR? A bar room brawl with shotguns.

I guess with such a subject, we have to start the post as "Sorry, not a fighter pilot either"

I was just wondering, why the trouble to design their plane with high AOA capable when their AA-11 coupled with HMD was already dominating WVR fight before the Python and the AIM9X? Hence, elp, as per your above mentioned, with both sides equipped with HOBs-AIM with HMDS, does the Cobra move put the Russian jets in a better position to fire their AA-11 on top of the advantages provided by the high off-boresight characteristic of the missile and helmet?

thanks,

The rule book is being re-written. For something like the USAF, when both sides or even the other side has HOBs heaters, why do WVR at all unless it is a last resort. Note the training in the 90's of the F-16 vs. MiG-29. Yes they practiced WVR so as to have an idea of the MiG-29 ability, but beating something down with AMRAAM is far safer and smarter. NATO had no desire to go WVR vs MiG-29. Why give you opponent an advantage? Beat it down with AMRAAM. As for the Cobra manuver, so what? Its doubtful if that manuver would stop the jet from eating an AMRAAM and if somehow it did, there is another AMRAAM right behind that one. If you are stupid enough to want to go slow so as to do a circus stunt vs. Eagles or other big SU's, you deserve to die. Two; if you are dumb enough to go WVR into a HOBs heater environment when you have all kinds of other BVR sources then the same applies there too.

was just wondering, why the trouble to design their plane with high AOA capable when their AA-11 coupled with HMD was already dominating WVR fight before the Python and the AIM9X?

Good question. I don't think the big SUs had that super AOA manuver in mind with the original design. They wanted a powerful next generation jet and got one. They were too busy making the early ones work ( lots of problems ). Its ability to do a circus stunt doesn't mean much, even with the one goofy video that stupidly implies it as real aircombatteknik . Also remember: Early AA11 (R73) ( most users ) is about a 45 degree cone from center, including going head to head vs. early AA11 there are known F-16 techniques on approach and if you come across that cone or think you are, punch off flares. Newer AA11, Python, AIM-9x etc have a much wider cone and according to the AIM9x pukes, flares aren't going to save you. Meaning, even an average WVR turn/burner is an uber killer with one of these. Even if science could magically wave a wand and allow a manned jet to do 15G turns routinely and keep the pilot awake,.... new HOBs heaters would still kill it. To me, if you have new HOBs heaters your nth degree of manuver isn't needed. There are a whole bunch of current jets that you can pull the stick hard and line up the shot. Also in WVR, the SU is huge, a small jet will probably see you first and get off a shot. Don't play into your weak points. If it was me, I would use a SU loaded up with mostly BVR shots, and keep 2 heaters just in case. The SU is a threat because of its radar, fuel capacity, speed ( along with the abilty to have some sustained speed because of all the fuel capcity ), meaning it can decide how it wants to enter the fight to its own advantage. Create a contempt of engagement thought. You have the ability to engage on your terms and to refuse engagement because of your speed also. Beat down with BVR. Active BVR. Either a Russian R77 ( AA12 ) or the Chinese P whateveritiscalled. Not everyone has that option when facing a SU. Advantage: SU.

You guys are forgetting that the Cobra can only be done by an SU-xx in a non-standard configuration - CG at aft limit and overriding flight controls. No matter what you may read or think it is NOT an operational maneuver.

It is great fun to perform at airshows though.

IMO it is not high AoA maneuvering either - more like an accelerated stall with benign recovery characteristics. In all the Cobra maneuvers I've seen the SU never points its nose (yaw), its always pure pitch -straight up, straight down.

I stand corrected habu2. Thanks I guess I will stick with the term "Cobra" move.

elp, that was quite a response you have back there. Thanks. Can I put forward 2 scenario and set a common platform/system for my better understanding.

[1] 1 Vs 1, Su Vs Su. Gun only. One is prohibited from using the Cobra. Can the other put himself in a better position with Cobra, every time?

[2] 1 Vs 1, Su Vs Su again, AA-11/HMDS fight. As above, one is only performing normal dogfight maneuver. Can the Su executing Cobra put himself in a position to call the first Fox2, most if not all the times?

Just to keep the discussion simple. Both Su pilots are on a par with the best in skill.

Thanks,

Again, the Cobra is a pretty manuver but IMHO that is about it. And/or the 1% of 1% chance that you might find yourself slow and are absolutely defensive / desperate. Consider the guy that would want to do a Cobra in combat anyway. That assumes right there that they are defensive - not the best place to be and you might have other ideas in mind that will keep you alive. Also consider the rear vis out of the cockpit of a big SU. The rear vis is sort of inhibited directly behind you. ( compare an F-16 if you sit in the seat and look directly back, you can see the burner can. ) In order to time your trick move like that, it could require you being able to see directly back into an area blocked by the rear of the jet. Just a thought. I do remember one real pilot here or somewhere else I forget, commenting on what using a cobra would do to the person using it: I believe the comment was "strafe target". Really, the SU has so many other things it can do, because it has gas to burn for quick dashes, station keeping and range. Just my thoughts.

All the combat ability generalizations I can figure out in my head.
The real biggest "secret" I want to know about the new SUs is:

-Is their "ease of maintenance" in the finest traditions of an F-4 , F-15E, or new F-16 / F-18 , or absolute worst case: F-111 ??? That is the big thing I would really love to know. I would love to know the whole maintenance routine all the way to PDM stuff. I mean it could be: "Wow we have a SU-30 !!!! " then reality hits: OK now we have to maintain it. , Just think if you had a SU-30 assigned to a fighter school, is it going to wear out under that kind of stress on that big a$$ airframe like an F-15? ( gumby ), or are panels and doors going to start falling off of it, engine mountings crack etc, after a few months? Or will it suffer all of it with ease?

Thanks again for the responses, guys. Any opinions from the flyer boys?

Well if it was a Mig it would be easy to maintain, as that’s was/ is there building philosophy!