To be born into royalty and then get into Soviet Union's elite military school is no mean feat. Soviet system heavily discriminates against those not from what is considered a proletariat background. This guy must have been good.
J-15 carrier fighter thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
To be born into royalty and then get into Soviet Union's elite military school is no mean feat. Soviet system heavily discriminates against those not from what is considered a proletariat background. This guy must have been good.
Not really that important by the time he came around, a bigger problem would have been his ethnicity, which would have had a noticeable effect on his advancement.
Also a note: The Apakidze aren't really royal, they are a Кня́зь family of Imperial Russia; the Georgian royals one would think of the Bagrationi - and they are very well respected back in Imperial Russian times - you may remember General Pytr Bagration who won great fame in the Napoleonic Wars, or indeed the great operation named after him.
That russian wiki article lists Andrei Fomin's Su-33 book as one of its principal sources, i think. Now, i do have a pdf of that book at my disposal but, sadly, i don't speak/read Russian. If there's a russian speaking member of the forum who'd like to read it and tell us what exact take off figures it offers, that'd be nice. Anyone? It does seem like a very interesting read, as it also includes pretty much whole history of Soviet shipborne aviation, as far as i could tell from countless images, drawings and tables.
The bigger problem I see is that there doesn't seem to be any "carrier take off weight" on that Russian wiki in the first place.
Maybe I'm blind, but unless no one else sees it either, then looking at the original cited book won't prove the 29940 kg figure because there is nothing to prove.
i don't even care about that exact figure anymore. i'm just thinking that in so much text about su33 development there HAS to be a mention of operational take off weights. But i can't extract it from all that cyrillic text. Anyone wanna read through those 250 pages? (lots of images and drawings, like in a magazine, so it's not such a huge task. plus certain areas are clearly about different topics like carrier development, helicopters etc, so those can be skipped)
When he graduated from his intitial military schooling, the people there recognized his capabilities...and, I suppose, his firm commitment and dedication, and recommended him for advancement and notice.
While he was flying SU-27s and before he was assigned to the Aircraft Carrier aviation, he was considered one of the best...if not the best...pilots the Soviets had.
As I say, he was extremely instrumental in keeping the Kuznetsov and its air wing of SU-33s alive through the very difficult financial years after the fall of the USSR. Yes, the guy was good at what he did.
Paralay from keypublishing forum was so kind to do a translation of the few selected paragraphs of A. Fomin's book:
"Su-27K with incomplete filling of fuel tanks, depending on the amount of suspended missiles " air" , ranged from 25 to 28 tons while he was starting thrust 0.9-1.0 and could take off from the 1st or 2nd starting position on the deck of the ship ( the takeoff distance of 105 m ) . With full fuel tanks and maximum ammunition missiles " air" take-off weight increased to 32 tons, and thrust was reduced to 0.8. In this case vzleet aircraft had to be made with the third starting position ( takeoff distance of 195 m ) . Hence , the aircraft could start and the maximum load it with bombs and rockets .
Despite a significant increase in landing weight , compared with the Su -27 , the introduction of a new wing mechanization and canards possible to reduce the approach speed shipborne fighter up to 240 km / h (Su- 27, usually landing with a speed of 270 km / h and only it absorbs the leveling process to 225-240 km / h , depending on the weight of the seat ) . In this case the mean free path of the Su- 27K on the deck when braking its arresting gear was to be only 90 m"
So 28 tons from first position and 32 tons from second position. with, assumption on my part, some standard achievable wind over deck.
Another matter of discussion is empty weight. Fomin says su33 weighs 19600 kg while other sources (with no significant credibility though) say 18400 kg. Difference is, of course, rather big. 8,4 tons of pilot, equipment, fuel, weapons and pylons versus 9,6 tons for the assured launch from the forward launch positions. The former would allow for some 6,5-7 tons of fuel and enough armament. That in itself is still quite a bit, enough for 900-ish km combat radius high flying missions. If that's the worst case scenario like it seems it could be, that's still pretty good.
"Su-27K with incomplete filling of fuel tanks, depending on the amount of suspended missiles " air" , ranged from 25 to 28 tons while he was starting thrust 0.9-1.0 and could take off from the 1st or 2nd starting position on the deck of the ship ( the takeoff distance of 105 m ) . With full fuel tanks and maximum ammunition missiles " air" take-off weight increased to 32 tons, and thrust was reduced to 0.8. In this case vzleet aircraft had to be made with the third starting position ( takeoff distance of 195 m ) . Hence , the aircraft could start and the maximum load it with bombs and rockets .
Despite a significant increase in landing weight , compared with the Su -27 , the introduction of a new wing mechanization and canards possible to reduce the approach speed shipborne fighter up to 240 km / h (Su- 27, usually landing with a speed of 270 km / h and only it absorbs the leveling process to 225-240 km / h , depending on the weight of the seat ) . In this case the mean free path of the Su- 27K on the deck when braking its arresting gear was to be only 90 m"
So 28 tons from first position and 32 tons from second position. with, assumption on my part, some standard achievable wind over deck.
Another matter of discussion is empty weight. Fomin says su33 weighs 19600 kg while other sources (with no significant credibility though) say 18400 kg. Difference is, of course, rather big. 8,4 tons of pilot, equipment, fuel, weapons and pylons versus 9,6 tons for the assured launch from the forward launch positions. The former would allow for some 6,5-7 tons of fuel and enough armament. That in itself is still quite a bit, enough for 900-ish km combat radius high flying missions. If that's the worst case scenario like it seems it could be, that's still pretty good.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
If J15 is to become a successful carrier based fighter it must fulfill all the roles of strike, escort, fleet air defence, force protection, close air support, deep support, reconnaissance and buddy refueling
J15 has a tall order lets hope with time they develop it into a fully fledge true carrier operator
J15 has a tall order lets hope with time they develop it into a fully fledge true carrier operator
Thanks for this, very enlightening.
I want to draw attention to the Take off weights from the two 105m positions and the 195m position.
From the 105m positions, with 0.9-1.0 thrust, they could take off with 28 tons.
From the 195m position, with 0.8 thrust, they could take off with 32 tons.
So the question is whether they have headwind?
I'm going to say no. I'm going to link back to the translated magazine scans again, and I'm going to quote the part which is relevant to these interesting stats you uncovered
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/nav...-programme-news-views-44-6479.html#post247737
The numbers from the book correspond very well with the numbers from the magazine, better than if it was sheer coincidence. That makes me give credibility to the magazine scans, and also the numbers they provide (namely the various loadouts and range/endurance ratings).
Now, there are a few points to polish out:
The magazine says that at 0 headwind, the Su-33 can take off with MTOW (33 tons) from the 195m position, yet the book says it only achieved 32 tons. I suspect this is because thrust was at 0.8 rather than 0.9-1.0
There is also a "discrepancy" in the two sources: 110m vs 105m -- probably attributable to different measurement standards or such. I do not consider it a particular blight on the magazine's credibility.
So basically I have two conclusions:
Assuming Mr A. Fomin's book is fully credible (and there's no reason to doubt otherwise):
-Su-33 could take off with 28 tons and 32 tons from the forward and rear positions respectively, using 0.9-1.0 thrust levels and 0.8 thrust respectively. From comparison with the magazine, (and from the similarity in performance at 0 knots headwind), I believe it is more likely that the stats from the book are taken at zero headwind as well.
-I also conclude that this "proof" of the validity of the magazine's stats in that domain gives greater credence to its other numbers, namely the ones about endurance, range, payload.
The specific loadouts I'm talking about:
Last edited:
thunderchief
Senior Member
29940 kg = 20440kg (empty plane armed with 2xR-27 + 2xR-73) + 9500kg (full internal fuel tanks) . Theoretically , plane could takeoff in this configuration from 195m launch point , but I don't think Russians ever attempted that (could be wrong but there is no proof) . Btw , Su-33 with 4 AAMs would be standard scramble configuration .
33000kg = 19600kg (empty plane without missiles) + 9500kg (full internal fuel tanks) + 3900 kg (weapons) . Well , if you believe Su-33 could takeoff with that , then I have a bridge to sell you ...
Yes , my bad , those are semi-official numbers (although probably without ramp ) . Nevertheless , 10km/h gain remains because of higher acceleration .
Mig-29K internal fuel is somewhere around 4450 kg (5670 l ) . Su-33 has 9500 kg (12100 l) .
Empty Mig-29K is 12700 kg , empty Su-33 is 19600 kg . Full fuel / empty weight : Mig-29K 0.35 , Su-33 0.48 . These are your proportions . I believe that Mig-29Ks engines are more efficient then Su-33s , therefore it needs less fuel - higher proportion of takeoff weight could be given to weapons .
As for lift , I would say on the first glance that Mig-29K body generates more lift (I could be wrong tho ) .