sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
Like what? What are the survivability features on the MKI?
What is the sortie rate for the MKI? puh-lease enlighten us..
Who cares, the point was, that you talked about different things, or do you really want to say that the radar range has something to do with the aerodynamic design of the fighter?
That's why I said it does not make sense, distracting with totally unuseful points doesn't make it better.
You wish to discuss aerodynamic features of the two bring it on..
Both feature high-lift devices such as mid-span deflecting leading edges. The F/A-18's leading edge is saw toothed to improve aileron effectiveness. The Su-30 MKI features a canard, close coupled and at level with the mid mounted wings, the canard deflection is limited to a small angle to improve pitch up response necessitated by the heavy radar. The MKI engines are widely spaced which can cause powerful yawing movement due to assymetric engine thrust. One reason why American and European designers like to keep both engines together as close as possible to the aircrafts longitudinal axis.
See now you are really talking about it from an aerodynamic point of view, why didn't you do it from the start?
I disagree, the because as I said before, fighters like the MKI, F15s, EF, or F22 are designed for air superiority, F18SH is not! Things like maneuverability, T/W ratios, speed, wing loads... played only a minor role in its design, because the aim was totally different. The F18 was designed to be a carrier fighter, which requires a design suited for strikes and air defense mainly, therefor the fighter designs of it, or the Rafale differs from real air superiority fighters.With few exceptions such as thrust vector and canard both share many design features.
Let me ask you something in regard of the aerodynamic capabilities of the SH. Let's say IAF chooses the SH and by the close proximity to Pakistan borders one can't rule out WVR combats between F16 B52 and the SH. But both have the JHMCS + Aim 9 combo, so where do you see the advantages of the SH in such a combat?
The funny thing is that the SH has only 1 customer other than the USN and even the Australians just bought them only as a stopgap, because the F35 is delayed, so what does it tell us about how many countries really wanted the SH?and yes the Hornet is a great earth mover unlike the pitch unstable, CG sensitive aircraft you love that no one wants to buy .
If an airforce can choose just by fighter performance and on offer are the SH, or one of the above mentioned air superioity fighters, I have no doubt about it which one will be chosen.
Last edited: