Peregrinefalcon[ATTACH=CONFIG]217077[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]217078[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]217079[/ATTACH]….Yeah, bla, bla ….

I’m starting to believe (and I have already heard, from persons in US embassy) that you (Western) people have no capacity (or system limits you from the time you are born) to have wider picture of things around you.
What do you have to offer, what can we learn?
I didn’t say “fighter pilot does not know the relation between AoA, speed and G force”…these are simple things, but anything above that: which configurations, engines at what speeds, altitudes can do what.. that requires technical base.
TVC nozzles: links you gave does little to support that. 12.500 kg thust w or w/o TVC. Nature does not work that way. Both engines are in 12.500 kg thrust class ! Exact figures are expressed in tens of kg. Anyway I was talking about dynamic thrust loss.
You guys made me to loose time searching these simple things…one should never look at them.
Here’s some graphs about SL speeds and Su-27’s hi-alt speed in table:

Problem with you guys (without sound technical base) is that you can find literary everything on internet…and without knowledge what are the limits of airframe, engine…and how they work, you can found yourself lost in fiction about capabilities of that machines. That applies for enthusiasts, pilots, engineers, journalists, intelligence officers, gov officials…
As I said, another problem are authors of fiction material on internet. As we saw that can be even aircraft manufacturers. Western corporations are usually purposely deceiving public, while Eastern make mistakes usually presenting their products in ‘darker light’.

EPIC Fail#1:
For example you are reading this graphs like a child..it is true that ROC axis does not begin with 0, but it is also true that there is a mistake in ROC scale. You can find from this graph that MiG-29 can fly level at M 2.5 at 13 km altitude !!

EPIC Fail#2:
As I said, you people w/o tech.knowledge, do not differentiate between allowed speed & Mach number and one in level flight ! Of course that internet is full of this kind of rubbish.
And you agree that MiG-29 can sustain 5g at Mach 1.3 altitude 1 km or fly level at about Mach 1.7 ?!?!
There are certain laws of physics that are above such bull****, often depicted in graphs or text !!

EPIC Fail#3:
Described above
Also, F-16 blk50 graph is for clean a/c at the weight 1000 kg above W empty !!
With missiles and half fuel a/c (GE129 engined) has max SL level speed of Mach 1.16 !!

Can I give-up ? This debating leads to nothing. It seems that I was doing wrong with SEP for last 30 years and govt paid me in-vain.

Purpose of the chart is to show that a/c or engine can not achieve 1600 km/h SL, level flight.
I put TVC graph only because of its availability. Of couse, such an a/c does not need TVC to fly level, although it could relieve tailplane for trimming and trim drag can be excessive at high Mach. Imagine F-111 at Mach 2, 45.ooo ft with tailplane full LE down deflection.

Any explanation of MiG-21’s advantage at VERY LOW speeds, over F-5E ?

What is “tough” is that your inability to use graphs properly. So you also claim MiG-29 can sustain 325 m/s climb rate?

You are looking for max level flight speed at a given altitude. You dismiss level flight envelope graph and level flight wing lift graph and take **instantenious** climb rate graph to assume max level flight speed. Excellent!

You say Russian graphs are not precise, and you manage to find the only graph in 900+ page manual that speed ends at M1.1. However more likely scenario is MiG-29 is not tested above M1.1 for climbing as it would be utterly pointless. Russian graphs are more than precise where it matters the most, that graph is meant to show climb rate. You are possibly the only person in the world to use climb rate graph to get maximum speed.

Nonsense, one after another… What sharp thrust drop? Mach number is dimensionless, compressibility at same Mach number S/L is the same as 50k feet. If that were true same shart thrust drop would also occur at 40k feet, and would have similar airspeed limitation. You are tell me to read engineering magazines, yet you do not have a clue about something that is thought at the 3rd day of fluid mechanics course.

And you claim a multi shock variable inlet pressure limit reaches at 1.15? Laughable. As far as inlet/engine perf concerned, even NSI inlet of F-16 would have ZERO problems exceeding M1.15 at sea level. But with such bias towards MiG-29 and Su-27, I would expect you to claim F-16’s inlet design is actually superior to those types.

Purpose of this graph is to show speed limit at different altitudes, and it clearly shows the difference between reached speed and allowed speed at 14000m altitude (M2.1 vs M2.35). As it shows no such difference at S/L, it 100% surely can reach 1500 km/h (M1.21) at Sea level. Questioning this by nitpicking small details from graphs which has ZERO relation to max speed is childish and utterly stupid.

Alpha limited but not MAX alpha limited. You can also say a/c is alpha limited through the envelope in order not to exceed g limits. There is a big difference in those claims. Take F-16 for example.

What TVC has to do with max speed? Are you drunk?

First, either you didn’t read what I have wrote a few posts above, or matter is really beyond your understanding. To summerize AGAIN; You are comparing pilots handbook G limit of Su-27 with G limit for combat performance, from supplemental manual.

Compare apples with apples; From that analogy, IF Su-27 has 8G limit at 21.4 tons, then F-15C has 7,33G limit at 37000 pounds. IF, Su-27 can only reach 9G at 19 tons, than it doesnt matter, F-15C is still limited to 7,33Gs at 30000 pounds.

Secondly, baseline Su-27’s empty weight is 16.3 tons, just as baseline F-15C is 28000 pounds. If you take different versions, thats a different story.

Compared to what exactly? Compared to F-16 for example it has no advantage throughout the flight envelope.

Mach limit:
(Sustained..as opposed to zoom) climb is one where there is no loss of true-speed at that altitude. It means that 29 can hold, say 1170 km/h and climb at 325 m/s at SL, 300 at some higher alt …still holding that true speed. If climb rate or SEP is 0 then there is no excess thrust over drag and no climb/acceleration or speed/Mach increase !! Indirect and useful max speed indicator ! Other graphs easily does not differentiate between level speed and allowed speed (in slight dive).
Usually journalists and non-technical authors makes that mistake, you can find Janes yearbooks full of that errors.

Thrust limit:
As I said, engine/inlet duct is limited by excess air pressure (ratio) and temperature (that comes at the end of compressor as a result of Mach stagnation temp and compress PR) !!! Otherwise engine would burn/inlet duct/comb.chamber would be damaged. That limit for MiG-29 is 1500 km/h, M 2.35, the same as for airframe flutter and cockpit transparency. Any engine has this kind of limits. At low altitude it is the same for F-15 and F-16, inlet is there no factor.

TVC engine has nozzle loses.
Su-27 g limits and weights are from FM !
F-15C is re-certified for 9g at the weight of 17.ooo kg.

I’m asking again:
Interestingly official USAF comparison with MiG-21 states that MiG has advantage at very high AND VERY LOW speed range. What is your explanation ?

29’s SEP, note max Mach at SL and 27 TVC 1g envelope..

I’m having trouble with ‘computador’ (you will understand life in undeveloped countries) so I will give only short answer..
I’m saying, alpha limits is for spin resistance, increasing Mach or carrying stores softens dyn. directional stability.
Do not rely much on pilots for the explanation how aircraft works. They are busy man driving machines. I remember one F-15 pilot saying that it can not achieve MiG-21’s alpha because F-15’s radar is much heavier – a/c is more stable. What about vortical flow or h.stabilizer position …
How a/c work is science, that require time to read 1000s of engineering pages. You can not expect getting knowledge without reading more complicated text.
Same for best time 360 deg turn. Modern planes are not F-106 that have great difference between alpha for max inst. and alpha for max sust. turns, that have huge deceleration at max alpha. Modern fighters, at low altitudes, at medium subsonic speeds, have small deceleration at instant. turns. That is why their best time 360 deg turns is achieved at max alpha at a speed higher than corner speed that can cover average deceleration for 360 deg.
See Technical note in attachm. on page 3 with eng.text for explanation

It seems that the timing of procurement of new fighters for the Serbian AF is tied to current event – sale of Serbian territory – Kosovo, because of need to pay off the Military not to revolt about it. It is also talked about increase of wages.

What is the purpose of Military and AF fighters if not to prevent that? Bribery makes it possible unthinkable to become reality.

It seems that this will help Military to agree with the fact that oligarchy is selling part of Serbian territory, and these new fighters would be used only in the raids on the resources of free countries (such when many countries went to Libya) when small countries served only as a cover to show that these resources are ‘saved’ by UN and not by big countries.

What has become of the once glorious national army of Yugoslavia!
Mercenaries who would stop at nothing to keep their job.