Su-27 in USA!

[Haavarla]

Here is an update on those two Su-27UB from Pride Aircraft.

Sukhoi Su-27UB Flanker aircraft performs engine run-ups and afterburner checks in September 2009.

Holy sh*t!
Turn up the speakers on this one

It's almost like i'm standing next to the aircraft.

[ame="http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9By6bPn3DM"]http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9By6bPn3DM[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df3vW5HsPlc&NR=1"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df3vW5HsPlc&NR=1[/ame]

Thanks

 

[nevidimka]

who built this plane? and why is it in US?

 

[Haavarla]

who built this plane? and why is it in US?

Pride Aircraft is an privat company who bought, restorating & modificating two stripped Su-27UB from Ukraine.
As i understand it, these two UB have nothing to do with the US DoD or USAF per say..

But there have been some speculations about the USAF will lease them from time to time for some aggressor or interceptor missions.. However i find it very unlikly.

You can visit them here:

Pride Aircraft: Aircraft Restoration

I think these are the one who will fly them:

The alternative to business as usual

More info here:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=90501




Thanks

 

[Haavarla]

Found an interesting marketing point by TAC AIR:

"Additionally, by revamping the traditional decision-metric of cost per flight hour to a new metric of training or test missions per flight hour, greater cost savings can be realized. As an example, business as usual would involve a simple comparison of relative flight hour costs between adversary aircraft. By this metric, the SU-27 would appear to be more expensive than most other aircraft. However, if a customer looks at cost per training intercept or cost per test run, which is what they are really buying, then the SU-27 quickly becomes significantly cheaper because of its unsurpassed fuel payload (e.g., an SU-27 that can perform four supersonic training intercepts in one hour is far cheaper than typical adversary aircraft that have far less range and endurance, and can only perform a single high-speed training run before requiring refueling."

about our company


Thanks

 

[gf0012-aust]

Found an interesting market point by TAC AIR:

"Additionally, by revamping the traditional decision-metric of cost per flight hour to a new metric of training or test missions per flight hour, greater cost savings can be realized. As an example, business as usual would involve a simple comparison of relative flight hour costs between adversary aircraft. By this metric, the SU-27 would appear to be more expensive than most other aircraft. However, if a customer looks at cost per training intercept or cost per test run, which is what they are really buying, then the SU-27 quickly becomes significantly cheaper because of its unsurpassed fuel payload (e.g., an SU-27 that can perform four supersonic training intercepts in one hour is far cheaper than typical adversary aircraft that have far less range and endurance, and can only perform a single high-speed training run before requiring refueling."

about our company


Thanks

There is an obvious issue with using that metric in isolation. the fundamental issue on through life support is the maint and robustness of the components. if the engine has 1/3rd the availability rate of an F404 (for example), then the amount of time in the air relative to fuel is still subjected to wear and tear.

metrics are quite diverse and varied - its why we take so long in determining TLS for aircraft (or for any platform for that matter)

that metric could not be a baseline condition because it can not ignore the basic TLS and sustainment issues.

 

[Haavarla]

gf0012-aust;183718]There is an obvious issue with using that metric in isolation. the fundamental issue on through life support is the maint and robustness of the components. if the engine has 1/3rd the availability rate of an F404 (for example), then the amount of time in the air relative to fuel is still subjected to wear and tear

.

I believe your post support just what they state.
If one look at the capability and mission of choice, there are very few aircraft that can perform longer intercept mission with out having to land to refuel or an mid-flight refuel.
Those UB clearly have that capability.
But i wonder who would pay up for mission like this..?
Its gonna cost lots of buck anyway..

metrics are quite diverse and varied - its why we take so long in determining TLS for aircraft (or for any platform for that matter)

Well metrics works, it's just what one choose to put in the equation.
And which requirements put up.

that metric could not be a baseline condition because it can not ignore the basic TLS and sustainment issues.

Its not that hard to calculate the metric of those UB, remeber they are not gonna perform under any airforce regulation and doctrine.
Hense they can skip many variables.


Thanks

 

[Haavarla]

who built this plane? and why is it in US?

I forgot perhaps the most crucial info here, those two Flankers are currently on sales for any qualified byer!

Here is the data sheet:

http://www.prideaircraft.com/SU27-specs-01.pdf

And here you can read what the purpose of the procurement of these two UB:

"Now, a few words about these aircraft. For quite some time, there have been rumors and whispers about these aircraft. We even released some photos of them as they arrived in the USA. This led to much speculation and incorrect reports by aviation press sources.

The aircraft arrived here in a completely de-militarized condition -- all weapons systems and military-related hardware had been previously removed, in full compliance with U.S. and Ukranian laws.

They were not brought here for any military purpose. They were brought here to be privately-owned and operated -- just like every other jet "warbird" in America. Because of the freedoms we enjoy here (as aircraft enthusiasts and "warbird" owners in the U.S. and elsewhere are keenly aware), private individuals and/or aircraft museums have the opportunity to collect and operate almost any sport aircraft they desire.

The Su-27 Flanker, while at first glance a serious piece of hardware (and it is!), is a 4th Generation fighter. It was designed beginning in 1972, and the first prototype flew in 1977. It entered service over 25 years ago, in the mid-1980s. Its abilities are widely known, and variants of it have participated in numerous U.S. military exercises against F-15s, F-16s, F-14s, and F/A-18s.

However, the new 5th Generation F-22 Raptor, and other aircraft now appearing on the scene, have rendered any discussion of "cutting-edge" fighter technology completely superfluous. It may seem harsh to say it, but because the Su-27 and aircraft of its generation are now becoming sport aircraft (warbirds) in the U.S., this is evidence that that technological improvements in fighter aircraft have continued to advance far beyond what was once considered "high-tech" and "leading edge." This is definitely not an indictment of the lovely Sukhoi Su-27. It is, and will remain, an extraordinary aircraft with superior performance. But it is now available to private individuals precisely because of these rapid advancements. We fly them for sport because we can.

Pride Aircraft is very pleased to be the only place you can get one (or two!) We look forward to hearing from qualified buyers."


D*mn.. is wish i had Bill Gates credit card


Thanks

 

[Haavarla]

Another update on those Civilian Flankers over at Prideaircraft!

[I"]Flanker N131SU taxied today under its own power. Two taxi checks were accomplished, the first one being a high-speed "takeoff abort" profile with drogue-chute deployment at 130+ KIAS. All systems were nominal.

The second taxi test was to calibrate the aircraft's heading systems and complete the ever-so-important compass correction card."[/I]

You can read more about it here:

Warbird Information Exchange • View topic - Su-27 Flanker Update



Thanks

 

[Haavarla]

This aircraft is the first civilian-operated Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker in the world. Its first post-restoration flight, seen here, took place on 10 December 2009, in Rockford, Illinois, USA. It is registered N131SU.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4lE6HcBPxw"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]

 

[nevidimka]

Not happy with this. I dont belive a civilian organization should be allowed to own n operate a current generation military plane from any country that is still in acitve frontline service with many countries, regardless of whether it has been stripped of its military weapons at all. The plane itself is a military technology by itself.

The sale it self should have been illegal. Its just sad the whole thing happened at all.

 

[the road runner]

Not happy with this. I dont belive a civilian organization should be allowed to own n operate a current generation military plane from any country that is still in acitve frontline service with many countries, regardless of whether it has been stripped of its military weapons at all. The plane itself is a military technology by itself.

The sale it self should have been illegal. Its just sad the whole thing happened at all.

I would assume that all military equipment would have been removed.
Im all for buying ex military equipment.
It would be even worse if this bird was to be grounded/wrecked.
Sukois belong in the air,glad to see its still there.

Regards

 

[Haavarla]

Not happy with this. I dont belive a civilian organization should be allowed to own n operate a current generation military plane from any country that is still in acitve frontline service with many countries, regardless of whether it has been stripped of its military weapons at all. The plane itself is a military technology by itself.

The sale it self should have been illegal. Its just sad the whole thing happened at all.

I respect your point, but i do not agree with you nevidimka.
If these jets will only be used in a non military fashion, like airshows etc etc i see nothing wrong with this deal.
But if those jet are evaluated by USAF personel on the sideline, its a whole different case.
That would be wrong(illegal)..

But i do not think this is happening here.

Do you think Ukraine will be in a position to procure Russian weapons systems after this Su-27UB deal with Prideaircraft?
Ukraine and Russia relationship have been deterioating a a steady pace long before this..


Thanks

 

[dragonfire]

But if those jet are evaluated by USAF personel on the sideline, its a whole different case.
That would be wrong(illegal)..

But i do not think this is happening here.

Really, I doubt if the aircraft Su-27 is not alreadt evaluated by US Military/ Inteligence. It doesnt neccasarily need to be the same units procured by Pride aircraft but the same platform. Also if i am not wrong US also has Mig-29s. Top Gun has in all probability evaluated them or is using them for aggresor training. Even so i dont see anything wrong in it. If a country can get access to other contmeporary aircraft types then air warfare strategies can be fine tuned

 

[gf0012-aust]

Really, I doubt if the aircraft Su-27 is not alreadt evaluated by US Military/ Inteligence.

Thee USAF has a specialised unit which evaluates foreign military platforms. They ran a variety of Migs and Sukhois during the cold war under a Red Hat squadron

It doesnt neccasarily need to be the same units procured by Pride aircraft but the same platform.

At a platform level its the same, going civilian would have had no impact upon extant US knowledge

Also if i am not wrong US also has Mig-29s. Top Gun has in all probability evaluated them or is using them for aggresor training.

It's been a long term view that the USAF had a pair of Su-27's out in desert country for years. In fact they were supposed to have been acquired 6 years ago.

They had 28 Mig 29's. A USAF colleague of mine had one of them static parked outside his office for a few years. They were not used for aggressor training. The USAF and allies did train against the ex East German Mig29's that transferred into the German Air Force when the two germany merged. The ex GDR Mig29's were gifted to Poland for the princely sum of 1 Euro.

Even so i dont see anything wrong in it. If a country can get access to other contmeporary aircraft types then air warfare strategies can be fine tuned

It's been happening for over 95 years. This is not new. The USAF had an amazing collection of Soviet aircraft even during the cold war.

 

[dragonfire]

Thee USAF has a specialised unit which evaluates foreign military platforms. They ran a variety of Migs and Sukhois during the cold war under a Red Hat squadron



At a platform level its the same, going civilian would have had no impact upon extant US knowledge



It's been a long term view that the USAF had a pair of Su-27's out in desert country for years. In fact they were supposed to have been acquired 6 years ago.

They had 28 Mig 29's. A USAF colleague of mine had one of them static parked outside his office for a few years. They were not used for aggressor training. The USAF and allies did train against the ex East German Mig29's that transferred into the German Air Force when the two germany merged. The ex GDR Mig29's were gifted to Poland for the princely sum of 1 Euro.



It's been happening for over 95 years. This is not new. The USAF had an amazing collection of Soviet aircraft even during the cold war.

We are basicaly on the same page

And IIRC some Moldovan Migs were also procured by the US

I guess next on the wish list of the US would be Su-30s (unless they have already done some close inspections already), J-10 and JF-17, the Su-35, Mig-35 and the underdevelopment 5th Gen Indo-Russiann fighters

 

[Haavarla]

Thee USAF has a specialised unit which evaluates foreign military platforms. They ran a variety of Migs and Sukhois during the cold war under a Red Hat squadron
At a platform level its the same, going civilian would have had no impact upon extant US knowledge

It's been a long term view that the USAF had a pair of Su-27's out in desert country for years. In fact they were supposed to have been acquired 6 years ago.

It's been happening for over 95 years. This is not new. The USAF had an amazing collection of Soviet aircraft even during the cold war.

I've heard about the supposed two secret US Su-27 story , but i've never come across anything conclusive.
So i do not think this is reality.
If anyone have anything, pls post it

US should be able get most of the intel out of any Su-27 without having to bring them over to the USA.
They could to this in some other Su-27 countries.
And yes i think it would be very strange if USAF need any further intel from some stripped civilian Su-27UB these days.


Thanks

 

[gf0012-aust]

I've heard about the supposed two secret US Su-27 story , but i've never come across anything conclusive.
So i do not think this is reality.
If anyone have anything, pls post it

LOL, why does it need to be conclusive, the issue is possibity and likelihood based on need.

All the fanboys denied for years that the americans had any russian/soviet aircraft - and yet 2o years later it was officially released that the US had over 7 Mig 21's, a gaggle of Fitters, a few Floggers all flown by the Red Hatters and all maintained in tip top flying condition

US should be able get most of the intel out of any Su-27 without having to bring them over to the USA.

The US would have got all the intel it needed well before a civilian transfer

They could to this in some other Su-27 countries.

well, thats how they got all their other intel. In fact the securing of one Red Hat Mig 21 is still classified. The machine is on display at the smithsonian (which is how everyone found out when it was seen being delivered on the back of a flatbed).

All those UFO fans who hang around Nellis and Area 51 never saw a complete fighting squadron of soviet/russian jets - for over 25 years.

And yes i think it would be very strange if USAF need any further intel from some stripped civilian Su-27UB these days.


Thanks

They don't need it. They'd already have it.

 

[Ananda]

All the fanboys denied for years that the americans had any russian/soviet aircraft - and yet 2o years later it was officially released that the US had over 7 Mig 21's, a gaggle of Fitters, a few Floggers all flown by the Red Hatters and all maintained in tip top flying condition

gf, do have info if some of that Mig 21 that officially acknowledged by US actually coming from us ? After Soeharto's fall it's been opened rumoured that part of Soekarno's Mig 21 has been transfered to US by end of 60's or early 70's.

 

[Haavarla]

gf0012-aust;186834]LOL, why does it need to be conclusive, the issue is possibity and likelihood based on need.

All the fanboys denied for years that the americans had any russian/soviet aircraft - and yet 2o years later it was officially released that the US had over 7 Mig 21's, a gaggle of Fitters, a few Floggers all flown by the Red Hatters and all maintained in tip top flying condition

Some people knew before Red Hatters was de-classified.
Doesn't automaticly mean rest of the world would find out..

well, thats how they got all their other intel. In fact the securing of one Red Hat Mig 21 is still classified. The machine is on display at the smithsonian (which is how everyone found out when it was seen being delivered on the back of a flatbed).

All those UFO fans who hang around Nellis and Area 51 never saw a complete fighting squadron of soviet/russian jets - for over 25 years.

Does this mean it(Su-27) will be de-classiffied another 10 years from now??

If it is true, then US have a couple of older Su-27SK from some african nation.
Funny it's such a big secret, when Pride just bought two Su-27UB produced in 1988,1990

They don't need it. They'd already have it.

That was my point as well, so why don't USAF have it de-classified by now?

Here is a video fotage from inside the "31" cockpit doing a hasty departure

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRA0wczZS3U"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]

 

[gf0012-aust]

Does this mean it(Su-27) will be de-classiffied another 10 years from now??

If it is true, then US have a couple of older Su-27SK from some african nation.

Funny it's such a big secret, when Pride just bought two Su-27UB produced in 1988,1990

That was my point as well, so why don't USAF have it de-classified by now?

who cares why and when they release material? its their business.

again, I point out that the entry of Mig21's into the US is still a classified issue. The Mig 21 at the smithsonian technically doesn't exist as it has no N reg markings and does not appear on any USAF manifests either.

if they're still shy about Mig-21's which they flew for over 20 years in arizona one wouldn't need much imagnation to understand if anything else was gifted from another player.

similarly the US has more russian armour out at aberdeen than some "legit" buyers.

again, the USAF has a dedicated unit that looks at foreign military equipment, be they defectors, be they purchased assets from unknown sources.

by the time the jets got into the US for N reg they were a known quantity.

the rest is just academic