The Red Arrows in USA and Canada

[SusanDoris]

It is the Bournemouth Air Show this weekend and I have been thinking what a shame it is that I simply would not be able to see enough of the Red Arrows to try, and mentioned this to the WFF man who has just been to put another set of meals in my freezer!

He said they won't be there as they're in USA and Canada, so I googled. A few questions:
Does anyone know how they have been received?
Has Trump seen them and realised how superior they are?!
Is this a devious way of making Boris sound less ridiculous? Well, no, I realise that isn't so, but has he tried to make any capital out of it?!
Do you think it will make any difference to prospects of future post-Brexit trade?

[Outrider]

I'm not sure there's a great deal of benefit in comparing the Red Arrows and the Thunderbirds or the Blue Angels (USAF and USMC air display teams) to say that one is superior to the other.  The Hawks that the Red Arrows fly are training aircraft; light, agile and intended to pull off tight manouevres.  The planes the Americans fly are tactical intercept fighters; bigger, heavier and faster.  The American displays are about noise, speed and close formation fly-bys, forgoing the more spectacular displays that the Red Arrows (and the French and Italian teams, for instance) do.

There is a general sense in the flying community that, in general, the RAF pilots are slightly better trained than the Americans, but that the top notch pilots in both are roughly comparable.  The Red Arrows put on a more flamboyant display, but the Americans fly much, much more interesting planes - which is 'better', I suspect, depends on what you want to see from them.

I can't imagine it will make much of a difference to any future trade talks, it's not as though the Americans are going to buy the planes, and if they think our military is best suited to airshows that's just going to undermine us, if anything, although I doubt many of the decision makers in any potential talks will be attending.

O.

[SusanDoris]

Thank you - interesting. And, yes, of course, all those top pilots are just amazing.  I watched some videos of all those groups doing their flying displays some  years ago, but it would not be worth the effort to try now because the cataract has reduced my peripheral vision just a  bit too much. Never mind, I can picture them well enough.

Once, when there was an Open Day at Lynehamwhere my older son was sstationed (he was a Hercules pilot), the Red Arrows were there but he dissuaded me from going to ask for their autographs!

[Spud]

When it comes to air displays, I think the Russian Su 27 and Su 35 and their pilots are the best. These planes can somersault in mid air thanks to their vectored thrust, although this may not help in a dogfight as they lose a lot of speed in the process. Apparently the Typhoon has the edge over the Raptor in within-visual-range combat, which is interesting. I'm not sure about the new "stealth" fighters, too expensive and big. Personally I tried a loop once in a Chipmonk, but pulling out of the dive was pretty uncomfortable and that was a third of the g force you can get in the typhoon.

[SusanDoris]

When it comes to air displays, I think the Russian Su 27 and Su 35 and their pilots are the best. These planes can somersault in mid air thanks to their vectored thrust, although this may not help in a dogfight as they lose a lot of speed in the process. Apparently the Typhoon has the edge over the Raptor in within-visual-range combat, which is interesting. I'm not sure about the new "stealth" fighters, too expensive and big.

thank you. Do the Russians have a comparative display team?

Personally I tried a loop once in a Chipmonk, but pulling out of the dive was pretty uncomfortable and that was a third of the g force you can get in the typhoon.

That is very interesting   how much flying have you done? For my 60th birthday, my ex-pilot son organised a flying lesson for me! I loved it.

[Outrider]

The Russians pioneered the Pugachev's 'Cobra' manouevre for airshows, which is still an intriguing thing to watch (although, I believe, it was SAAB test pilots in the Draaken that actually first performed it). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNY9sCgcyU0

If the Americans ever realise they've overproduced the F-22 and put it into shows I think we'll see something beyond our current appreciation of manouevrability, and I'm intrigued by what the F-35 might be capable of, but the pinnacle at the moment, for me, is the Rafales from what we can see.

The Typhoon will always be the modern incarnation of the jack of all trades dog that the Tornado was - designed by committee and trying to fulfil too many roles to effectively be a world-beater at any of them - it'll do fine against third-world militaries and third-generation throwbacks, but specialist 4th or 5th generation interceptors or fighters will rip it apart.

It might be interesting to see someone buy up the A-10 airframes as they go out of service, they're a surprisingly agile unit with the capacity to operate at really low speeds (useful for both air displays and ground support activities). Of course, if they'd ever followed through on the Grumman X-29 project then, by now, we could have something mind-blowingly agile.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_X-29

I suspect, though, that it won't be long until the airframes reach the limit of human physiology, and we move on to unmanned display aircraft, and that point it's anyone's guess what they'll come up with.

O.

[Spud]

thank you. Do the Russians have a comparative display team?That is very interesting   how much flying have you done? For my 60th birthday, my ex-pilot son organised a flying lesson for me! I loved it.

I don't think Russia has anything comparable to the Red Arrows, but they do like to show off their fighters' supermanoueverability.

I joined the RAF cadets at school, and went up in a Chipmonk once. We did a barrel roll (no problems), then a loop and stall turn, which were great until you have to pull up... at which point the blood starts to drain out of your head and you can't lift your arms!
I also had a few cheap lessons in Florida in a Cessna. I didn't pursue flying after that as the RAF didn't want me (eyesight not perfect).

[Outrider]

The 'Russian Knights' aren't that famous, by comparison, but are still around and currently fly SU-30 Flankers.

O.

[Spud]

The Russians pioneered the Pugachev's 'Cobra' manouevre for airshows, which is still an intriguing thing to watch (although, I believe, it was SAAB test pilots in the Draaken that actually first performed it). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNY9sCgcyU0

Yes I found that out about the Draaken recently too. The Su 35 can do a full back flip though -watch this from 6:20 til the end:

https://tinyurl.com/y39s4vyp

The F-22 can do this as well but not as crazily because its exhaust nozzles can't move side to side, only up and down.

 

[Outrider]

Yes I saw that recently too. The Su 35 can do a full back flip though -watch this from 6:20 til the end:

https://tinyurl.com/y39s4vyp

The F-22 can do this as well but not as crazily because its exhaust nozzles can't move side to side, only up and down.

The 2-D vectoring on the Raptor is all you need to perform a back-flip, there's no lateral impetus required.  What they've managed to do with the SU-35 - which is, fundamentally, an upgraded SU-27 at heart, a cold-war era design that first flew in service in the mid-1980s - is remarkable, but the power-to-weight ratio it has and the muddle aerodynamics (the canards are a mid-life design add-on) mean that it can't hope to rival the purpose-built 5th generation airframes.

O.

[Spud]

The 2-D vectoring on the Raptor is all you need to perform a back-flip, there's no lateral impetus required.  What they've managed to do with the SU-35 - which is, fundamentally, an upgraded SU-27 at heart, a cold-war era design that first flew in service in the mid-1980s - is remarkable, but the power-to-weight ratio it has and the muddle aerodynamics (the canards are a mid-life design add-on) mean that it can't hope to rival the purpose-built 5th generation airframes.

O.

Aye. Maybe the Russian pilots are just more crazy - their back flips seem quicker than the Raptor. What is the benefit of 3-D vectoring, I wonder?

[Outrider]

Aye. Maybe the Russian pilots are just more crazy - their back flips seem quicker than the Raptor. What is the benefit of 3-D vectoring, I wonder?

It maintains lateral manouevrability when you've lost aerodynamic function over the wing, so you can (for instance) break out of flat spins should they develop, or add yaw to turn to lead a target and maintain weapons lock.  As with any TV manouevre, doing so loses momentum and airspeed, so it needs to be deployed with care, but at the right moment in tight confines dogfighting it can be a gamechanger.

O.

[Spud]

It maintains lateral manouevrability when you've lost aerodynamic function over the wing, so you can (for instance) break out of flat spins should they develop, or add yaw to turn to lead a target and maintain weapons lock.  As with any TV manouevre, doing so loses momentum and airspeed, so it needs to be deployed with care, but at the right moment in tight confines dogfighting it can be a gamechanger.

O.

[quoteBill&Ted]Excellent![/quote]

[Roses]

The Rhyl air show in August normally features the Red Arrows, but they were missing this year, as they were across the pond. They usually fly over our house before approaching Rhyl.

[jeremyp]

Apparently the Typhoon has the edge over the Raptor in within-visual-range combat, which is interesting.

That wouldn't surprise me. The F22's aerodynamics are compromised by its stealth capability.

Unfortunately for the Typhoon pilot, the F22 doesn't have to get in visual range. There were some mock engagements between German Luftwaffe Typhoons and US F22's a while back, the result was always the same: the Typhoon was shot down before the pilot was aware the F22 was even there.

[Outrider]

That wouldn't surprise me. The F22's aerodynamics are compromised by its stealth capability.

Unfortunately for the Typhoon pilot, the F22 doesn't have to get in visual range. There were some mock engagements between German Luftwaffe Typhoons and US F22's a while back, the result was always the same: the Typhoon was shot down before the pilot was aware the F22 was even there.

I think, should anything approaching real warfare kick off anywhere, the USAF will reveal that the F-22 and F-35 were largely work-creation programmes masquerading as justifiable defence spending, and cheap, long-distance, possibly disposable automated weapons platform drones will be deployed en-masse for most of the work.  The capacity of drones for warfare, particularly the US drone range, is a widely under-regarded and under-reported facet of military capability and spending.

O.

[Walter]

For anyone interested in plane spotting, I'm currently parked in the viewing area of RAF Lakenheath watching the comings and goings of the USAF 48 fighter wing
Flying F-15's  very impressive !

[Spud]

That wouldn't surprise me. The F22's aerodynamics are compromised by its stealth capability.

Unfortunately for the Typhoon pilot, the F22 doesn't have to get in visual range. There were some mock engagements between German Luftwaffe Typhoons and US F22's a while back, the result was always the same: the Typhoon was shot down before the pilot was aware the F22 was even there.

True...
There's some debate about affordability, though.
If it can take on a Mig or Sukhoi, the Typhoon may be as good an option as a 5th gen, as it's more affordable. Better still, the Saab Gripen looks as manoeuvrable as any 4th generation fighter and is cheaper still and more versatile. Finland apparently bought them to defend against Sukhois. Whether they can beat them I don't know.

[Outrider]

There's some debate about affordability, though.

I'm not sure it's a debate, any more, they're colossally expensive by comparison with other airframes.

If it can take on a Mig or Sukhoi, the Typhoon may be as good an option as a 5th gen, as it's more affordable.

Depends on which Mig or Sukhoi - the newest generations in the Russian air force it's a tough call, the older ones in (say) the Indian or Veitnamese air forces (say) probably.  Are they likely to be what the Typhoon is sent up against, though?  We're still largely in the dark (at least, in civilian circles) about the capabilities of the latest generation of Chinese planes and, if it all kicks off, whose to say that we won't need to send them up against one of the Middle-Eastern outfits that's been buying F-15s, F-16's and the like?  Against a dedicated dogfighting airframe from the 4th generation, towards the edge of its deployment envelope, the Typhoon is going to struggle, particularly against 4th generation airframes that have been retrofitted with newer avionics and updated targetting systems.

Better still, the Saab Gripen looks as manoeuvrable as any 4th generation fighter and is cheaper still and more versatile.

Versatility is great against 3rd world military technology like Afghanistant, but it doesn't hold up against dedicated airframes.

Finland apparently bought them to defend against Sukhois. Whether they can beat them I don't know.

For Finland they're a poor option, but still an option, given their particular geography.  There are significant questions about the Grippen's range and durability, which isn't so much of an issue for Finland looking at the particular threat of Russia, but for a more versatile air force - particular one that wants to be able to operate in distant warzones - it's not a particularly good option.

O.

[Outrider]

On the topic of drones potentially replacing manned aircraft, there's this in the Guardian this morning:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/16/middle-east-drones-signal-end-to-era-of-fast-jet-air-supremacy

O.

[Udayana]

On the topic of drones potentially replacing manned aircraft, there's this in the Guardian this morning:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/16/middle-east-drones-signal-end-to-era-of-fast-jet-air-supremacy

O.

Could be seen as progress? More targeted attacks could avoid deaths.

[Outrider]

Could be seen as progress? More targeted attacks could avoid deaths.

Equally, without the risk of harming their own pilots, it could encourage more aggressive, offensive use of air-power, and it's questionable as to whether there is any greater accuracy - if there's a push for cheaper 'disposable' airframes with fire and forget weapons then it could well be that part of the cost-saving will be cheaper, less accurate avionics.

O.