Strike Fighters
An analysis of loaded performance in representative combat scenarios for top-of-the-line Western manufactured fighter aircraft in a mid-2020 timeframe by James “Spurts” Nicklin 1 Table of Contents
1 Aircraft ...... 7
1.1 Size ...... 8 1.2 Load ...... 8 1.2.1 Fuel ...... 8
1.2.2 Systems ...... 9
1.2.3 Weapons ...... 13
1.3 Physical Factors ...... 25 1.3.1 Wing Loading ...... 25
1.3.2 Thrust to Weight ...... 25
1.3.3 Stability ...... 25
1.3.4 Drag Area ...... 26
1.3.5 Lift Area ...... 26
1.4 Aircraft Data ...... 27 1.4.1 F-15SA ...... 27
2 Performance ...... 28
2.1 Loaded Flight Configurations ...... 28 2.1.1 F-15SA ...... 28
2.1.2 Su-35S ...... 28
2.2 Loaded Flight Envelopes ...... 29 2.2.1 Level Flight ...... 29
2.2.2 Turn at 20,000ft ...... 29
2.2.3 Acceleration 0.8-1.2M @30,000ft ...... 30 2.3 Applied Performance ...... 31 2.3.1 Rutowski Push ...... 31
2.3.2 Combat Turns ...... 31
2.4 Systems Performance ...... 33 2.4.1 Detection of Aerial Threats ...... 33
2.4.2 Avoidance of Aerial Threats ...... 33
2.4.3 Detection of SAM Threats ...... 33
2.4.4 Avoidance of SAM Threats ...... 33
2.5 Mission Performance ...... 34 2.5.1 Interception ...... 34
2.5.2 CAP ...... 34
2.5.3 Deep Strike ...... 35
2.5.4 CAS ...... 36
2.6 Total Scores...... 37 2.6.1 F-15SA ...... 37
2.6.2 Su-35S ...... 37
3 Model Validity ...... 39
3.1 F-15SA ...... 39 3.1.1 Fuel Burn ...... 39
3.1.2 Lift and e ...... 39
3.1.3 Thrust and Drag ...... 39
3.1.4 Total validity ...... 39
3.2 Su-35S ...... 39 3.2.1 Fuel Burn ...... 39
3.2.2 Lift and e ...... 39 3.2.3 Thrust and Drag ...... 40
3.2.4 Total Validity ...... 40
2 Table of Figures No table of figures entries found. List of Acronyms A-A Air to Air AAM Air to Air Missile A-G Air to Ground AESA Active Electronically Scanned Array AMRAAM Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile ASRAAM Advanced Short Range Air to Air Missile ATP Advanced Targeting Pod ATFLIR Advanced Targeting Forward Looking Infrared CFT Conformal Fuel Tank DASS Defensive Aid Sub-System ECM Electronic Countermeasures EFT External Fuel Tank EO/DAS Electro Optical Distributed Aperture Sensor EOTS Electro Optical Targeting System EPAAWS Eagle Passive/Active Warning System FBW Fly-by-Wire FLIR Forward Looking Infrared HOBS High Off Boresight IIR Imagine Infrared IRST Infrared Search and Track MAWS Missile Approach Warning System OSF Optronique Secteur Frontal PIRATE Passive Infrared Airborne Track Equipment RCS Radar Cross Section SABR Scalable Agile Beam Radar SPECTRA Système de Protection et d'Évitement des Conduites de Tir du Rafale TGP Targeting Pod TSFC Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption TVC Thrust Vectored Control
Rafale M – The M is the Maritime version of the Rafale and represents the most advanced European carrier-based aircraft being purchased by France. This aircraft is 1 Aircraft equipped with RBE2-AA AESA radar, Optronique Secteur Frontal (OSF) IRST, Système de This study will investigate the multi-role capable aircraft to be manufactured by western alliance Protection et d'Évitement des Conduites de Tir du RAfale (SPECTRA) ECM suite, and countries in the mid 2020’s. The most advanced version of each aircraft with secured funding will M88-s engines. While this aircraft is capable of utilizing CFTs, no customer for the RM be analyzed, regardless of the nation who purchases the aircraft. The following aircraft will be has purchased them so they will not be included in the analysis. investigated in depth across several mission types. All aircrafts performance data will come from a o Data validated against stated performance. detailed performance model generated from the sources listed. F-22A – The most advanced fighter aircraft produced by the United States, purchased by the United States Air Force. This aircraft is equipped with an APG-77(v)1 AESA radar, F-15SA – The most advanced version of the F-15 Eagle in production, being purchased AN/ALR-94 ECM suite, and AN/AAR-56 Missile Approach Warning System (MAWS), and by Saudi Arabia. This aircraft is equipped with Fly-by-Wire (FBW) controls, additional F119-PW-100 engines. wing hardpoints, Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs), APG-82(v)1 Active Electronically Scanned o Data validated against stated performance Array (AESA) radar, Eagle Passive/Active Warning System (EPAAWS), and F110-GE-129 F-35A – The most advanced multi-role aircraft produced by the United States, purchased engines. by the United States Air Force, Austria, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, South o Data validated against F-15E -1 using F100-PW-229 data, mild adjustment Korea, and Turkey. This aircraft is equipped with an APG-81 AESA radar, AAQ-40 Electro made for F110-GE-129 based on HAF-1 for the F-16 to determine difference Optical Targeting System (EOTS), AN/AAQ-37 Electro Optical Distributed Aperture between F100 and F110 thrust and fuel burn. System (EODAS), AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda ECM suite, and F135-PW-100 engines. F-16V – The most advanced version of the F-16 Fighting Falcon in production, being o Data validated against stated performance. purchased by Singapore, Taiwan, Bahrain, and Slovakia. This aircraft is equipped with an F-35B – The most advanced STOVL aircraft produced by the United States, purchased by APG-83 Scalable Agile Beam Radar (SABR) Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) the United States Marine Corps, Italy, and the United Kingdom. The U.K. standard will radar, an unnamed advanced Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) suite, and an F110-GE- be used. This aircraft is equipped with an APG-81 AESA radar, AAQ-40 EOTS, AN/AAQ- 129 engine. While the aircraft is capable of utilizing CFTs, only Singapore has purchased 37 EODAS, AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda ECM suite, and F135-PW-600 engines. them, thus a Singapore F-16V will be the standard. o Data validated against stated performance. o Data validated against HAF -1 using F110-GE-129 data and relative F100 data F-35C – The most advanced carrier based aircraft produced by the United States, for with/without CFTs. purchased by the United States Navy and Marine Corps. This aircraft is equipped with F/A-18E – The Block III update for the Super Hornet is being purchased by the United an APG-81 AESA radar, AAQ-40 EOTS, AN/AAQ-37 EODAS, AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda ECM States. This aircraft is equipped with CFTs, APG-79 AESA radar, an advanced ECM suite, suite, and F135-PW-400 engines. Advanced Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) integrated into the centerline o Data validated against stated performance. external fuel tank (EFT), Radar Cross Section (RCS) reduction measures beyond those of the Block II Super Hornet, and F414-GE-400 engines. This study will use the Su-35S as a threat aircraft as it represents the pinnacle of non-western 4th o Data validated against NATOPS and adjusted for Block III based on published generation multirole fighter capability being purchased around the globe. CFT data. Typhoon TR3 – The TR3 Typhoon represents the most advanced version of the Typhoon Each aircraft will be evaluated against several mission sets utilizing realistic payloads, verified by in production, being purchased by Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and the U.K. This observing operational capability where possible, and the effect of their various electronic aircraft is equipped with CAPTOR-E AESA radar, Passive Infrared Airborne Track equipment will be investigated. Equipment (PIRATE) combined Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) and Infrared Search and Track (IRST), Praetorian DASS ECM suite, and EJ200 engines. While the aircraft is capable of utilizing CFTs, no customer for the TR3 has purchased them so they will not be included in the analysis. The U.K. standard will be used. o Data validated against stated performance. systems, and both the air-to-air loadings and air-to-ground loading potentials of each aircraft. Loads are carried on one of five types of stations; light (L), heavy (H), heavy/wet (H-W), wet (W), 1.1 Size TGP. Light stations typically carry only air to air missiles however Russian ECM systems typically go Strike and fighter aircraft come in a wide variety of sizes. As with any engineering endeavor there on the wingtip light stations and the Hornet series carries TGP on fuselage mounted light stations. are tradeoffs to be made in deciding how large of a fighter aircraft to design and it is largely based Heavy stations are typically rated to carry bombs, missiles (both air-to-air and air-to-surface), TGP, on the primary role of the aircraft. If one lists the pros and cons of large aircraft size the following or ECM pods. Heavy/Wet stations gain the ability to carry external fuel tanks but often lose the is seen. ability to carry air-to-air missiles. TGP stations are used exclusively to carry additional targeting and Pros: Cons: navigation equipment. These dedicated stations are only found on the F-16 and the F-15. more fuel higher fuel burn more weapons greater basing restrictions more room for systems reduced agility 1.2.1 Fuel Fuel is carried both internally and externally for most fighters. External fuel is carried in drop Aircraft size can be measures many ways such as length (from 72.8ft for the Su-35S to 49.4ft for the tanks mounted to a “heavy/wet” station. The trade-off of external fuel tanks is that while they are F-16V), span (from 50ft for the Su-35S to 32.7ft for the F-16V), wing area (from 667ft2 for the Su- being carried they add significantly to drag and while they can be dropped they are not very cheap 35S to 300ft2 for the F-16V), or empty weight (from 43,340lb for the F-22A to 21,200lb for the F- and operationally are rarely dropped. Below we will look at each aircrafts internal, external, and 16V). For our purposes we will use Spot Area (length times span) and density (empty weight total fuel loads as well as the number of external stations used for carrying said external fuel load. divided by Spot Area). A larger Spot Area will indicate greater size for the pro-con list above and a The number in parentheses represents the common fuel tank load used operationally based on greater density will indicate how tightly packaged everything is. All figures listed will be relative to observable evidence. The aircraft will be sorted based on maximum total fuel weight the smallest/least dense aircraft. Table 1 - Aircraft fuel loads Spot Area Density Aircraft Internal External Total “H-W” F-16V – 1.00 Su-35S - 1 F-35B 13,326 0 13,326 0 F-35A – 1.09 F/A-18E - 1.10 TR3 11,020 5,365 16,385 3 (2) F-35B – 1.09 TR3 - 1.15 F-16V 10,172 7,072 17,244 3 (2) F-35A 18,498 0 18,498 0 RM - 1.10 F-16V – 1.18 F-35C 19,624 0 19,624 0 TR3 - 1.17 RM - 1.19 RM 10,400 15,260 25,660 5 (2) F-35C – 1.35 F-15SA – 1.28 F-22A 18,000 8,160 26,160 2 (0) Su-35S 25,400 7,164 32,554 2 (0) F/A-18E – 1.66 F-22A – 1.41 F/A-18E 17,900 16,272 34,172 5 (1) F-15SA – 1.69 F-35C – 1.43 F-15SA 22,300 12,240 34,540 3 (2) F-22A – 1.71 F-35A – 1.48 Su-35S – 2.26 F-35B – 1.65 Here we see that the F-35 family chose to forgo external tanks altogether while Rafale can more From this we can see a few interesting date points. The Flanker is very large but relatively light, than double its fuel load with them. largely due to the long nose and tail cone. The F-22 and F-35 family are extremely dense as they have many things internally that most aircraft have externally.
1.2 Load The public often only sees fighter aircraft at airshows flying with clean wings for maximum performance. A warplane is no good without a war load, however, so we will look at the fuel load, 1.2.2 Systems Radar Mode PRF Advantages Disadvantages High resolution 1.2.2.1 Radar Track While Scan High- Multi-target tracking Smaller sweep size in mechanical (TWS) Med radars vs RWS One of the most common systems associated with tactical aircraft is the radar. Radar uses, in a Needs to “guess” where the next return most simplified form, radio waves transmitted through an antenna in the nose and then received for a target will be. through the same antenna. Radar has evolved greatly over the ages and continues to evolve. Early Single Target Low Detailed targeting No other functionality available fire-control radars allowed for a beyond visual range surprise attack but needed to “lock” a target Track information in order to get accurate enough azimuth, elevation, range, heading, and velocity data to guide a Ground Target Locating and targeting Detecting moving ground targets missile. This process changed the nature of the radio signal sent. If the enemy aircraft was Track (GTT) stationary ground Seaborne targets equipped with a Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) then the RWR was able to distinguish this objects difference in pulse pattern and could warn the pilot that he was being engaged. Once RWRs became common a new way of surprising your enemy was needed. This lead to Track-While-Scan GMT Locating and targeting Detecting stationary ground targets (TWS) technology. Using this mode the radar transmitted a normal sweeping scan while noting the moving ground targets Seaborne targets delta of a targets location on each pass and using that information to derive all the needed data for SEA Location and detecting Detecting land based targets a weapons lock. A RWR would still detect this signal and let the pilot know an enemy aircraft was seaborne targets searching for him but not when he was actually under attack. SAR Providing visual map of Size of area, range of map, and A more recent advancement is that of the Active Electronically Scanned Array (EASA) radar in which ground area using resolution of map are all dependent on the radar does not have a single large transmitter but hundreds of individual Transmit-Receive (TR) radar radar gain, power, and frequency modules. These TR modules allow the radar to have as big or small of an antenna as needed for a bandwidth (the same way air-to-air given task by working in groups. Each group can transmit in unique directions and on separate detection and tracking ranges are) frequencies. They also will change the frequency transmitted, and power of the transmission, a thousand times a second. By doing this the AESA radar can mask its transmissions, a feature The following will list the specified aircrafts radar systems and what special modes they use. ECCM referred to as Low Probability of Intercept (LPI), and can likely only be detected by a system of will refer to the ability of the radar system to avoid detection and resist jamming by an opposing equivalent sophistication. This is supported by numerous statements made about “teen-series” ECM system through the innate use of PRF Jitters and frequency agility. Ranges calculated using aircraft engaging in BVR training with F-22s (the first LPI AESA equipped fighter) in which none of the AESACalcTrial.xlsx. or here their systems, radar or RWR, ever detected the F-22. For Very Low Observable (VLO) aircraft this is http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne/karte020.en.html an important ability as it minimizes the chances of an enemy knowing even the direction from which the VLO aircraft are attacking. Some AESA radars take the next step and have Electronic Attack (EA), active jamming, built in to the radar system. Modern radars all have the following Table 3 - Aircraft radars capabilities and modes Aircraft Radar ECCM EA 1m2 1m2 tracking Radar detection range range – Display limit Table 2 - Radar modes range – TWS TWS (assumed) Radar Mode PRF Advantages Disadvantages F-15SA AN/APG- 8 No 147nm 114nm 200nm Velocity Search High Med-High Closure Low-No Closure Targets 82(v)1 (VS) Targets No Range info given F-16V AN/APG-83 8 Yes 47nm 37nm 160nm Detection range double TWS F/A-18E AN/APG-79 8 No 111nm 86mn 160nm Range While High- All-aspect, All-altitude Subject to clutter at range TR3 CAPTOR-E 8 No 119nm 92nm 200nm Scan (RWS) Med detection No targeting information Rafale M RBE2-AA 8 Yes 89nm 69nm 160nm Aircraft Radar ECCM EA 1m2 1m2 tracking Radar Table 4 - ECM modes detection range range – Display limit ECM Type Technique Advantage Limitation range – TWS TWS (assumed) Noise Spot Jams specific Frequency agile radars F-22A AN/APG-77 10 Yes 153nm 119nm 240nm frequency HOJ missiles. F-35A/B/C AN/APG-81 10 Yes 133nm 104nm 160nm Better “burn Su-35S Irbis-E 7 No 84nm 65nm 220nm through” resistance S-400 8 No 234nm 182nm 325nm Barrage Wide bandwidth of Increased “burn through” jamming range HOJ missiles Sweep Wide bandwidth of Frequency agile radars 1.2.2.2 RWR jamming Somewhat increased “burn The first step in countering radar is to warn the pilot of its presence. To this end Radar Warning Lower power needs through” range Receivers had become standard equipment in fighter aircraft built after the Vietnam era. Some than barrage HOJ missiles RWR systems provide little more than general direction to an emitter while others can self- Deceptive Range Gate PO Spoofs range of PRF jitters, frequency agile geolocate ground-based emitters. The function of a RWR is integrated with the ECM systems in perceived radar track radars modern aircraft. As such systems that are more or less sensitive may have detection ranges Velocity Gate PO Spoofs Doppler-shift PRF jitters, frequency agile greater than or less than normal. For the purpose of this comparison normal RWR detection range of radar track radars 2 will be scaled to the range at which the radar detects a 1m target as follows. Active Cancelation Reduces return signal PRF jitters, frequency agile When ECCM is greater than ECM radars, multiple radars. RRWR=2*R1/(1+(ECCM-ECM)^2)
When ECM is greater than ECCM When fighter aircraft began utilizing ECM it started with large external pods. As technology RRWR=2*R1*(1+(ECM-ECCM)/10) advanced the pods became smaller. Further advancements allowed the components of the pods to be placed within the airframe itself. Pods and internal ECM both share the weakness that any 1.2.2.3 ECM missile tracking the jamming signal will still hit the aircraft. This led to the development of launched or towed decoys. Launched decoys take up ordnance space while modern towed decoys Other common systems carried by strike fighters are ECM for protection from enemy aircraft and are deployed from inside the aircraft or inside a pylon. Towed decoys are more limited in the types ground threats. Before the “Fifth Generation” aircraft these systems were very large and were of jamming they can perform due to power and waveform restrictions. Simply having a type of often carried externally in self-contained pods. The below list gives the systems used by the jamming capability does not imply that the capability can be used. If the ECCM of a radar is selected aircraft and, if externally carried, what type of station is used to carry it in parentheses. sufficiently more advanced it allows the radar signals to be more discrete and prevents the ECM Early ECM technologies involved trying to mask the return signal of the enemy radar in a blanket of system from even being activated. Again, accounts from “teen-series” vs F-22 BVR training noise. This is countered by transmitting over a wider range of frequencies causing the power indicates that even an F-15 gives the pilot no indication that an F-22 is even in the air with them. output of the jamming to be reduced. Jammers with Digital Radio Frequency Memory can record Meanwhile, the AN/ASQ-239 suite combined with the APG-81 has been recorded detecting and incoming radar signals and analyze their pattern in order to jam the right frequency at the right jamming the signals of an F-22s APG-77. Until such time as other ECM suites can make such claims time. This allows not only for reduced jamming power, due to being able to utilize narrower the ECCM value of the APG-77 and APG-81 will only be matched by the AN/ALR-94 and AN/ASQ- bandwidth, but for more deceptive jamming techniques that may cause the targeting aircraft to 239. track and lock up a false signal track. If the DRFM is sufficiently more advanced than the radar signal pattern it can even theoretically send a signal 180 degrees out of phase, reducing the return signal to possibly undetectable levels. The below table describes some of the ECM modes. http://www.deagel.com/Protection-Systems.htm
The following is a list of the ECM equipment being carried by the aircraft in this comparison. APG-77 Internal 10 Front Pin Noise and Deceptive Table 5 - Aircraft ECM F-35A AN/ASQ- Internal 10 Full High Noise and /B/C 239 Deceptive Aircraft System Location ECM Directional Directional Modes Limitations level Coverage Gain APG-81 Internal 10 Front Pin Noise and Deceptive F-15SA AN/ALQ- Internal 8 Full High Noise and 239(v)2 Deceptive ALE-70 Towed 8 Full Low Noise and Low G, 2- EPAWSS Deceptive way datalink F-16V AN/ALQ- External 7 Full High Noise and defeat 184 Deceptive Su-35S Khibiny- Internal 7 Full High Noise and Unknown Internal 8 Front/Rear High Noise and 10V Deceptive (AN/ALQ- Deceptive 187 ?)
AN/ALE- Towed 6 Full Low Noise Low G, 2- Effects of ECM vary by the technological level of the ECM equipment and the radar being 50 way jammed. The following chart gives both a baseline effect of Noise jamming for the purpose of this datalink comparison and the effects of technological capability. defeat F/A- AN/ALE- Internal 7 Full Med Noise and Table 6 - ECM effects 18E 214 Deceptive Adjust from baseline Gain based on ECM-ECCM ALE-55 Towed 7 Full Low Noise Low G, 2- Gain Low High Pin way Noise added to received signal, 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 datalink dB defeat TR3 DASS Internal 8 Full High Noise and Deceptive impact on missile pK -30% -40% -50% -60% -70% -80% -90% Deceptive
DASS Towed 8 Full Low Noise and 2-way Deceptive datalink defeat Rafale SPECTRA Internal 8 Full High Noise and M Deceptive
F-22A AN/ALR- Internal 10 Full High RWR only 94 EODAS Internal Full spherical 20 nm N/A – Passive only 1.2.2.4 EO/IR On detection if Strike aircraft carry Electro-Optical/Infra-Red (EO/IR) systems to assist in navigation, detection, networked targeting, and identification outside of the use of radar. Detection ranges are based on the ratio of Su-35S OLS-35 Internal Front, limited 19 nm 11 nm the OLS-35 head on subsonic to rear afterburning ratios. If a system is only listed as having a below maximum range then it is assumed to be a rear afterburning target. Visual ID of a target can be assumed to be made at twice the detection range assuming it can be cued by a radar or other sensor. Targeting range is the maximum laser designation range. Aircraft EO/IR Location Coverage Detection Range, Targeting subsonic, head- Range on F-15SA Advanced Pod Front/ limited N/A – A-G only 40 nm Targeting Pod rear, below (ATP) Infrared Search ATP Front, limited 26 nm N/A – Passive and Track (IRST) pylon above only 21 F-16V ATP Pod Front/limited N/A – A-G only 40 nm rear, below IRST21 Pod Front, limited 26 nm N/A – Passive above only F/A-18E ATP Pod Front/limited N/A – A-G only 40 nm rear IRST21 Tank Front, limited 26 nm N/A – Passive above only TR3 PIRATE Internal Front, limited 16 nm 12 nm below Sniper-XR Pod Front/ limited N/A – A-G only 30 nm rear, below Rafale OSF Internal Front, limited 27 nm 12 nm M below Damocles Pod Front/ limited N/A – A-G only 9 nm rear, below F-22A none F-35A / EOTS Internal Front/ limited 30 nm 40 nm F-35B / rear, Below/ F-35C limited above
1.2.3 Weapons All the above items are to enable the aircraft to deploy their weapons effectively. Weapons will fall into two major categories: Air to Air and Air to Ground. Air to Air weapons again fall into the categories of missiles and cannon. Missiles are typically judged by their speed, range, and turning ability. However, all three of these parameters will vary greatly based on many factors. Cannons are typically judged by their rate of fire, muzzle velocity, and weight of the projectile. Air to Ground weapons keep the cannon, as well as air to ground missiles, and add bombs to the mix. Bombs are judged on their accuracy, range, and weight of charge.
1.2.3.1 Air-to-Air Weaponry
1.2.3.1.1 Missile The Primary air-to-air weapon is the missile. Missiles may be guided by radar or by Infra Red homing. Missiles will be scored on several parameters and will have performance calculated by a missile simulator developed for this comparison. Missile launches all take place from 36,000ft and 1.0M at targets also at 36,000ft. Time of Flight (TOF) maximums will be 60s for short ranged missiles, 180s for medium ranged missiles, and 300s for long ranged missiles.
General: (Warhead*MMax *PK*CCM /5) Warhead: Mass of warhead in kg.
MMax: Maximum speed of the missile
PK: Probability that motor, guidance, and warhead all work CCM: Resistance to countermeasures or jamming
Dogfight: (Env*TRD/100) Env: Envelope in degrees off boresight
TRD: Total degrees turn available in first 1s of flight
BVR: (MRange+(TRAve*AAve/20))
MRange: Area under the Mach over Range curve
TRAve: Average turn rate over max range flight
AAve: Average ratio of flight altitude over launch altitude
Total: (General+Dogfight+BVR)/3
R-74M The “Archer” missile revolutionized the way dogfight missiles would be designed. This was the first missile equipped a high off-boresight (HOBS) capability to lock a target up to 75 degrees off its nose and a Thrust-Vectoring Control (TVC) system for rapid orientation right off the rail.
Motor: Boost: 2s @ 4,560 lbt Sustain: 10s @ 912 lbt Loft: 0 deg
General: 15 Warhead: 7.5 kg
MMax: 2.76M
PK: 73% CCM: 5 (IR Flare resistance)
Dogfight: 57 Env: 75
TRD: 75deg
BVR: 26
RMax: 13.6nm (60s)
MRange: 24.5
TRAve: 40d/s
Total: 33
AIM-9X The current standard of short-range missile is the AIM-9X. With an Imaging Infrared (IIR) seeker it is very resistant to traditional flares and it possesses a HOBS capability to lock a target up to 90 degrees off its nose and a TVC system for rapid orientation right off the rail with Datalink to allow Lock On After Launch (LOAL).
Motor: Boost: 10s @ 1,749 lbt Sustain: 0s @ 0 lbt Loft: 0 deg
General: 62 Warhead: 9.4 kg
MMax: 4.21M
PK: 78% CCM: 10 (IR Flare resistance)
Dogfight: 152 (76) Env: 180 (90)
TRD: 84deg
BVR: 59
RMax: 21.9nm (60s)
MRange: 57
TRAve: 35d/s
Total: 91 (66)
AIM-132 The Advanced Short Ranged Air to Air Missile (ASRAAM) was developed by the U.K. during the same time as the U.S. was developing the AIM-9X and AIM-120. Using a larger rocket motor than the AIM-9, the ASRAAM has improved range and speed relative to the AIM-9X. The missile includes LOAL capability for extreme HOBS shots, and TVC systems for initial maneuverability.
Motor: Boost: 2s @ 3,394 lbt Sustain: 20s @ 849 lbt Loft: 0 deg
General: 62 Warhead: 10.0 kg
MMax: 3.99M
PK: 78% CCM: 10 (IR Flare resistance)
Dogfight: 138 Env: 180
TRD: 77deg
BVR: 67
RMax: 23.5nm (60s)
MRange: 65.2
TRAve: 35d/s
Total: 89
MICA The MICA is a French designed missile to replace both the Super 530 and the Magic II. With both IIR and active radar seeker variants, TVC, and LOAL capability through datalink, the MICA is designed to be a threat at close or medium ranges.
Motor: Boost: 20s @ 1,485 lbt Sustain: 0s @ 0 lbt Loft: 20 deg
General: 80
Warhead: 12.0 kg
MMax: 4.27M
PK: 78% CCM: 10 (IR Flare resistance)
Dogfight: 161 Env: 180
TRD: 90deg
BVR: 94
RMax: 43.7nm (180s)
MRange: 91.9
TRAve: 28d/s
Total: 112
R-77-1 The R-77-1 is the Russian answer to the AMRAAM. It is roughly analogous to the AIM-120A in capability, but was designed with enhanced maneuverability in mind.
Motor: Boost: 15s @ 2,569 lbt Sustain: 0s @ 0 lbt Loft: 5 deg
General: 89
Warhead: 22.5 kg
MMax: 4.51M
PK: 73% CCM: 6 (Jamming resistance)
Dogfight: 13 Env: 60
TRD: 22deg
BVR: 102
RMax: 45.1nm (180s)
MRange: 100.6
TRAve: 25d/s
Total: 68
R-27ET The R-27R Alamo was originally analogous to the AIM-7 Sparrow, with the ER being an extended range variant. The use of T instead of R in the designation denotes an IR seeker in the nose instead of passive radar guidance. The R-27ET was a novel implementation by the Russians to allow both a medium-ranged fire-and-forget missile and medium-ranged dual-seeker capability, when used in conjunction with an R-27ER, so that no one countermeasure can fool the incoming missiles. Motor: Boost: 3s @ 13300lbt Sustain: 10s @ 3990lbt Loft: 0 deg
General: 122 Warhead: 39.0 kg
MMax: 4.28M
PK: 73% CCM: 5 (IR flare resistance)
Dogfight: 3 Env: 15
TRD: 22deg
BVR: 74
RMax: 36.0nm (180s)
MRange: 73.3
TRAve: 23d/s
Total: 66
AIM-120D The AIM-120D is the latest version of the AMRAAM line which combined advanced 2-way datalinking, improved ECCM, improved range through optimized trajectory and guidance, and improved HOBS while maintaining a small package in both weight and diameter. Motor: Boost: 8s @ 4470lbt Sustain: N/A Loft: 25 deg
General: 95 Warhead: 18.1 kg
MMax: 4.22M
PK: 78% CCM: 8 (Jamming resistance)
Dogfight: 29 Env: 180
TRD: 16deg
BVR: 157
RMax: 62.9nm (180s)
MRange: 155.5
TRAve: 18d/s
Total: 94
Meteor The Meteor was developed as a longer ranged option to the AIM-120. Utilizing a ram-rocket engine, it allows for sustained engine use throughout most of the flight, significantly enhancing the No Escape Zone. The added complexity of the propulsion system decreases reliability somewhat compared to traditional missiles. Motor: Boost: 2s @ 5600lbt Sustain: 30s@2660lbt (can reduce to 1/10 thrust for ~10x time) Loft: 4 deg
General: 68
Warhead: 20.0 kg
MMax: 4.50M
PK: 72% CCM: 7 (Jamming resistance)
Dogfight: 37 Env: 180
TRD: 21deg
BVR: 318
RMax: 119.1nm (300s)
MRange: 315.8
TRAve: 19d/s
Total: 141
The six-barreled Vulcan cannon was lightened for the F-22. This model weighs 202 pounds and is also 72 inches in length. It fires a 20x102mm cartridge at a velocity of 3,450 feet per second (fps). 1.2.3.1.2 Countermeasures M2 Range: 0.7nm Rate of Fire: 6,600rpm Tactical aircraft carry droppable countermeasures to help fool missile seekers. Different types Weight, Projectile: 102.5g are available to defend against different missile types. This comparison will use the following Weight, Explosive: 10g assumptions. Flares reduce pK of IR missiles by 25% and IIR missiles by 5%. Chaff reduces pK of Pk/sec: 6% radar guided missiles by 25% unless the missile is supported by a two way data link, then this drops to 10%. These reductions, along with the Deceptive Jamming reductions, are multiplicative, not GAU-22 subtractive. The GAU-22 is a version of the 25mm Equalizer that uses four barrels instead of five for use in the F-35. The internal system weighs 416lb while the external system weighs 735lb. The round is fired 1.2.3.1.3 Cannon at a velocity of 3,560 feet per second. M2 Range: 0.9nm While the cannon has not been a primary air-to-air armament since the 1950s, and has not been Rate of Fire: 3,300rpm used in aerial combat since the 1990s, it nonetheless remains an ubiquitous staple in the fighter jet Weight, Projectile: 223g arsenal. Cannons will be compared on their rate of fire, weight of fire, and range at which the Weight, Explosive: 21.8g round still has a velocity of over 2.0M at 36,000ft when fired from M1 at 36,000ft, for consistency Pk/sec: 6% with the missile specification. Pk/sec will be defined as follows. BK-27 RM2*(RoF/1000+WP/100+WE/10)=PK/s A single barrel, revolver action cannon developed by the Germans in the 1960s. Used in the Typhoon. The cannon weighs 220 pounds and is 91 inches in length. It fires a 27x145mm cartridge GSh-30-1 at a velocity of 3,600 feet per second (fps). A single barrel, short-recoil action cannon developed by the Soviet Union. Used in all Fulcrum and M2 Range: 1.1nm Flanker fighter aircraft. At 101 pounds and nearly 78 inches in length it is a compact weapon Rate of Fire: 1,700rpm system. It fires a 30x165mm cartridge at a velocity of 2,950 feet per second (fps). Weight, Projectile: 260g M2 Range: 1.0nm Weight, Explosive: 27g Rate of Fire: 1,500rpm Pk/sec: 8% Weight, Projectile: 390g Weight, Explosive: 48.5g GIAT 30 Pk/sec: 10% A single barrel, revolver action cannon developed by the French to replace the DEFA series of cannons. Used in the Rafale. The cannon weighs 260 pounds and is 94 inches in length. It fires a M61A1 30x150mm cartridge at a velocity of 3,360 feet per second (fps). The six-barreled Vulcan cannon was designed in 1946 and was first used on the F-104 and has been M2 Range: 0.9nm used on nearly every US fighter aircraft up to the F-22. It weighs 248 pounds and is nearly 72 Rate of Fire: 2,500rpm inches in length. It fires a 20x102mm cartridge at a velocity of 3,450 feet per second (fps). Weight, Projectile: 270g M2 Range: 0.7nm Weight, Explosive: 28g Rate of Fire: 6,000rpm Pk/sec: 7% Weight, Projectile: 102.5g Weight, Explosive: 10g Pk/sec: 5%
M61A2 1.2.3.2 Air-to-Ground Weapons AGM-88G The AGM-88G AARGM-ER uses wide body strakes for lift and an improved ram-rocket motor to double the range and improve speed. This variant is designed for internal carry in the F-35 family 1.2.3.2.1 Missiles with external integration on the F/A-18E. Type: Anti-Radar Kh-59MK2 Range: 160nm The Kh-59MK2 is a turbojet powered cruise missile that can target land or sea targets. It utilizes an Speed: 3.0M (0.515nm/s) active radar seeker and INS. It is carried by the Su-35S. Profile: Loft Type: Land/Sea attack Warhead: 66kg Range: 150nm Total weight: 325kg Speed: 0.88M (0.161nm/s) RCS: 0.1m2 Profile: NOE
Warhead: 320kg AGM-84K Total weight: 930kg The AGM-84K Standoff Land Attack Missile-Expanded Response (SLAM-ER) is a heavily modified RCS: 1m2 Harpoon anti-ship missile that incorporates the warhead of the Tomahawk cruise missile. It is
equipped with folding wings and a nose section optimized for minimum radar return. If the launch Kh-31PD aircraft is equipped with an AN/AWW-13 datalink pod then it can provide man-in-the-loop The Kh-31P is a ramjet powered anti-radar missile. It utilizes a passive radar seeker. It is carried by guidance to the missile. It is carried by the F-15SA and F/A-18E. the Su-35S. Type: Land/Sea attack Type: Anti-Radar Range: 170nm Range: 80nm Speed: 0.70M (0.128nm/s) Speed: 2.38M (0.379nm/s) Profile: NOE Profile: Loft Warhead: 900kg Warhead: 87kg Total weight: 676kg Total weight: 600kg RCS: 0.05m2 RCS: 1m2
SPEAR AGM-88E The Select Precision Effects At Range (SPEAR) is derived from the Hellfire/Brimstone anti-tank The AGM-88E Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) is an evolution of the AGM-88 missile. It is fitted with a small turbojet engine and a high aspect ratio wing kit. It can be carried on High speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) that incorporates an active millimeter-wave radar seeker a four-pack SDB style pallet or a specialized triple-ejector rack designed for LO. This system is used as well as INS to improve guidance. It is carried by the F-15SA, F-16V, F/A-18E, and Typhoon. by the Typhoon and F-35B. Type: Anti-Radar Type: Land/Sea attack Guidance: Passive/Active radar with INS Range: 76nm Range: 80nm Speed: 0.90M (0.154nm/s) Speed: 2.0M (0.343nm/s) Profile: Loft Profile: Loft Warhead: 20kg Warhead: 66kg Total weight: 100kg Total weight: 355kg RCS: 0.1m2 RCS: 0.5m2
AGM-154ER
The Joint Stand-Off Weapon-Extended Range (JSOW-ER) is a JSOW glide bomb that uses INS and IIR 1.2.3.3 Surface-to-Air Weapons for guidance and homing with an added turbojet engine to increase range. This system is used by the F/A-18E. Type: Land/Sea attack 1.2.3.3.1 S-400 Range: 300nm To be filled in with detail later Speed: 0.80M (0.146nm/s) Detection distance, 600km assume 3m^2 (430km for 1m^2 listed) for RLS “Niobium” S and UHF Profile: NOE band Warhead: 300kg For 91N6E 390km 4m^2 , targeting range S band Total weight: 600kg 92N6E 400km RCS: 0.05m2 Range against aero, 400km
40N6 400km Storm Shadow 48N6DM/E3 250km The Storm Shadow is a turbojet powered cruise missile designed for long range attacks, It uses INS 9M96/E2 120km and IIR for guidance and homing. This system is used by the Typhoon and Rafale.
Type: Land/Sea attack
Range: 300nm
Speed: 0.80M (0.146nm/s)
Profile: NOE Warhead: 450kg Total weight: 1,300kg RCS: 0.05m2
1.2.3.2.2 Bombs To be filled in with detail later 2k 1k 500# SDBI SDBII JSOW AASM The AASM HAMMER family is superficially similar to the Paveway family of laser guided bombs in that a guidance and control unit are fitted to a dumb bomb. What makes the HAMMER unique is the addition of a small rocket booster. The system is used by the Rafale. Range: 55km?
performance parameters are dependent on excess thrust, or thrust remaining after drag has been subtracted. 1.3 Physical Factors There are many factors that determine the performance of a combat aircraft. The most commonly used metrics are Wing Loading (W/S) and Thrust to Weight (T/W). These two parameters are often used by those who do not grasp the complexities of aircraft performance and below we will look at 1.3.3 Stability why these can be very misleading. Stability comes in two basic forms, Static and Dynamic. Static Stability is the tendency of an aircraft’s nose to pitch down under normal flight conditions without any load on the pitch control surfaces. The cause of this is the center of mass of the aircraft being in front of the center of lift. Think of a paper airplane on a string with the string representing the lifting force. If the string is 1.3.1 Wing Loading behind the center of mass the nose will point down. This has traditionally been countered using Wing Loading is a measure of aircraft weight per unit area of wing and is often used to compare negative lift on the tails, a string on the back pulling the tail down and the nose up. instantaneous turn capability. This value can be very misleading as different wing planforms allow This has two negative effects. The first is that the lifting surfaces, the “main string” if you will, now for different maximum lift coefficients (CLmax), lift curve slopes, load limits, and only takes into have to pull that much harder to balance the total force. This means that at any given time a account the reference wing area. While many people recognize that the bodies of many fighter statically stable aircraft is using less than 100% of the lift being generated by the wing/body to aircraft generate a sizable portion of lift they often fail to recognize that a sizable portion of the maintain flight or turn. The second is that there is now an increase in the induced drag. There is reference area is also “inside” the body of the aircraft. A prime example of this is the F-15, one of induced drag on the tail and an increase in induced drag on the wing/body. This is called “trim which famously lost almost an entire wing and flew home “on body lift.” While essentially the drag.” entire right wing was missing, that only accounts for roughly 25% of the “wing area.” The pilot was These effects were mitigated by trying to minimize the stability margin. also using left roll input that generated positive lift on the right side with the horizontal tails. While a single horizontal tail only equals 8% of the “wing area” it can be deflected to a greater degree Starting with the F-16 there was a new option. FBW controls allowed for an unstable aircraft’s relative to the local airflow (given the medium speed and low maneuver environment of the disturbances to be monitored and corrected dozens to hundreds of times a second. In an unstable remainder of the flight) to allow it to make up the lost lift. Tail area is not accounted for in the “paper aircraft” the nose points up when hanging from the string. A second string is then added to “wing area” and its effects vary with stability. We will look at this shortly. the tail to lift that up as well. This reverses the drawbacks mentioned in the previous paragraph. The aircraft not only gets all of the lift generated by the wing/body, but also that of the tail. As a
result of this level flight is maintained with a lower CL. This reduces the induced drag by a second 1.3.2 Thrust to Weight order. A statically stable aircraft that uses canards instead of horizontal tails gains these benefits as well. Thrust to Weight is a measure of the combined engines uninstalled sea-level static thrust divided by the weight of the aircraft and is often used to compare straight line speed, acceleration, climb, The second form of stability is Dynamic Stability. This is the reaction to gusts, or small changes in and sustained turn capability. The first problem is that no aircraft ever operated with uninstalled angle of attack. An aircraft with positive dynamic stability will naturally reduce AoA if no action is engines and are almost never at zero airspeed at sea level. Installing an engine in the aircraft taken by the pilot. An aircraft with negative dynamic stability will begin increasing AoA. Both reduces thrust available in two ways. The intake reduces the airflow through surface friction and stability factors vary with AoA. flow distortion. Think of breathing in through a curved straw compared to breathing normally. The The F-15SA is a plane that has neutral static stability and positive dynamic stability. A TR3 or Rafale equipment gearbox allows the turbine section of the engine to power all the systems onboard an have positive static stability and negative dynamic stability, The F-22 is a plane with negative static aircraft. To help visualize this reduction in power think of pedaling a bicycle with the back tire off and dynamic stability. Without FBW controls it would be uncontrollable. All aircraft in this the ground. The tire can easily be spun up to almost any speed with a hand. Once the tire presses comparison have FBW controls and can be considered to have no negative trim drag effects when onto the road however work is being done by the system and the energy required to rotate the tire subsonic. at a given rate increases. The summation of these effects on sea-level static thrust is typically about 25% of the military thrust rating based on data of installed thrust ratings for various aircraft. Thrust will then change drastically with speed and altitude increase, generally increasing with speed to the inlet/airflow limit and decreasing with altitude as density drops. Lastly, all the above 1.3.4 Drag Area examine turning ability below corner velocity. At the lowest speeds there are controllability issues but that is outside the scope of this review. Weight for wing loading and lift loading will be clean at So just as we have seen how stability can have positive or negative impacts on aircraft performance a 20% fuel fraction (20% of total weight is fuel). we shall now also look at airframe drag. Drag always has a negative impact. The primary factors Aircraft Wing Area Wing Loading Lift Area Lift Loading for drag are the raw surface area and shaping. More surface gives more skin friction but this is F-15SA 608 76.1 997 46.4 mitigated on aircraft designed for large degrees of radar stealth as the required surface tolerances F-16V 300 84.2 330-501 80.2-50.4 result in a dramatically smoother surface. Shaping based drag can be intersections between F/A-18E 500 78.8 975 40.4 surfaces or antennae sticking up from the surface and even the angle at which a surface meets the TR3 airflow. Again, airframe drag is found using the Idle Descent charts where available, elsewise found Rafale M with wind tunnel data or experimentally matching the benchmark specifications. Drag Area will be F-22A 840 64.5 2016 26.9 the Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient multiplied by the reference wing area and represents the flat plate F-35A 460 79.1 874 41.6 area in square feet of the clean aircraft (no CFTs). Weights for T/W ratio will be clean at a 20% fuel F-35B 460 87.8 874 46.2 fraction (20% of total weight is fuel). F-35C 620 70.2 1302 33.4 Subsonic Transonic Supersonic Installed Aircraft Base T/W Su-35S 668 75.9 1236 41.0 Drag Area Drag Area Drag Area T/W F-15SA 11.69 28.29 25.72 1.38 1.08 Note: CLmax values for F-35 series taken from analysis data implying values of 1.91 and 2.1 for the A/B and C respectively based on calculations of lift enhancing effects. A value of 2.4 was used for F-16V TBD the F-22A based on the statement it could execute a 750 foot radius turn at low level. F/A-18E TBD TR3 TBD Rafale M TBD F-22A TBD F-35A TBD F-35B TBD F-35C TBD Su-35S 12.01 23.78 21.62 1.26 1.02
1.3.5 Lift Area
Just as there is a Drag Area there is also a maximum Lift Area representing the total CLmax of the aircraft multiplied by the reference wing area. Lift Areas are calculated either using stall speeds from flight manuals, where available, wind tunnel data, Computational Fluid Dynamics study, or an analysis or a formula to approximate the lift curve slope based on wing thickness, aspect ratio, taper ratio, sweep, stability, and high lift devices. The formula was first tested against known aircraft for validation. The F-16 and F-35 are anomalies here in that they reduce their max angle of attack as speed increases and as such their maximum value of CLmax changes. This study shows the difference of the values for CLmax and Gmax angle of attack. All stability corrections are already made at this point and this number would be a better reference than traditional wing loading to 1.4 Aircraft Data
1.4.1 F-15SA Empty Weight: 34,200lb (F-15E no CFT) Internal Fuel: 12,915lb (F-15E no CFT) MGTOW: 81,000lb (F-15E) Max Fuel Payload Remaining: 6,474lb Typical Fuel Payload Remaining: 11,211lb Maneuver Weight: 68,000lb (F-15E OWS analysis) G max: 9 Ref Wing Area: 608 o CLmax: 1.64 @ 40 AoA (NASA test) AoAmax: 40o Installed Mil Thrust: 26,520lbt (est) Installed Max Thrust: 46,180lbt (est) Max Range Launch against a 2.5M target @FL750 AB max E: AIM-120D fired from 1.4M @ FL490 Head on: 182nm (110nm flight) assuming limited to 180s on-board power Tail chase: 37nm (109nm flight) chase limited
Mil max E: AIM-120D fired from 0.94M @ FL370 Head on: 149nm (77nm flight) assuming limited to 180s on-board power Tail chase: 11nm (45nm flight) chase limited
Radar Cross Section 2 Performance So far this study has looked at the different physical aspects of a plane and the systems onboard. These physical characteristics do not exist in a vacuum however. We will now look at a few 2.1.1 F-15SA performance parameters for the planes in this study and how they compare with different Clean: loadings. Wt: 41,900lb DI/DA: 0/11.7 WL/LL: 69.0/42.1 FF: 0.18 T/W: 0.49 (T-D)/W: 0.39 RCS: 25.1
2.1 Loaded Flight Configurations Air: CFT, 2xAIM-9X, 6xAIM-120D, 2xWing pylons and 4xLaunchers, ATP, IRST21, 2 dropped EFTs, 5s Flight Envelopes will be shown for aircraft in four configurations. The intent is to show the cannon ammunition. degradation in performance of an aircraft loaded for different types of missions. Level Flight will Wt: 61,1715lb DI/DA: 69/15.9 WL/LL: 102/61.9 FF: 0.30 show speed and altitude performance with different loadings, Turn will show Instantaneous and T/W: 0.34 (T-D)/W: 0.22 RCS:26.9 Sustained turn rates at 20,000ft altitude, and Acceleration will show 0.8-1.2M acceleration at 30,000ft. Ground: CFT, 2xEFT, 2xAIM-9X, 2xAIM-120D, 2xHARM, 4xLJDAM, 4xWing pylons and launchers, ATP, IRST21, 5s cannon ammunition. Clean will be an aircraft with no external stores or CFTs and 60% of internal fuel. Wt: 65,505lb DI/DA: 97/17.6 WL/LL: 108/65.7 FF: 0.28 T/W: 0.32 (T-D)/W: 0.18 RCS: 28.9 Air will be an aircraft loaded with a standard air-to-air loaded of radar and IR guided missiles as well as any targeting pods, ECM pods, and pylons needed for any dropped external tanks. Fuel states Max: CFT, 1xEFT, 2xAIM-9X, 2xAIM-120D, 4xSDB I pallets, 4xSDB II pallets, 4xWing pylons and will represent 60% of take-off fuel or full internal fuel, whichever is less with any EFTs being launchers, ATP, IRST21, 5s cannon ammunition. dropped. Wt: 70,437lb DI/DA: 147/20.5 WL/LL: 116/70.6 FF: 0.23 T/W: 0.29 (T-D)/W: 0.12 RCS: 34.7 Ground will be an aircraft loaded with two radar guided and two IR guided missiles, two ranged strike munitions for SEAD, at least four other air-to-ground munitions, targeting pods, ECM pods, 2.1.2 Su-35S and any external tanks needed. Fuel states will represent 60% of take-off fuel with any EFTs being dropped. Note that this will not represent the heaviest or highest drag bomb load able to be Clean: carried and is instead designed to be roughly uniform across platforms. The Su-35S will be unique Wt: 55,810lb DI/DA: 0/12.0 WL/LL: 83.7/45.2 FF: 0.27 in not matching this load as it is an adversarial aircraft only. T/W: 0.49 (T-D)/W: 0.40 RCS: 9
Max will be an aircraft loaded with two radar guided and two IR guided missiles, and the draggiest Air: 2xR-73, 2xR-77, 2xR27ET, 6xWing pylons and launchers, Khibiny ECM pods, 5s cannon combination of munitions and tanks that get the aircraft to gross weight. Fuel states will represent ammunition. 60% of take-off fuel. This is to show the maximum performance degradation possible. Wt: 59,709lb DI/DA: 60/16.0 WL/LL: 89.5/48.4 FF: 0.26 T/W: 0.45 (T-D)/W: 0.33 RCS: 13.6 The following data points will be reviewed for each loading: Weight of the aircraft Ground: 2xR-73, 2xR-77, 2xKh-59MK2, 6xWing pylons and launchers, Khibiny ECM pods, 5s Drag Index/Drag Area cannon ammunition. Wing Loading/Lift Loading Wt: 63,032lb DI/DA: 85/21.7 WL/LL: 94.5/51.1 FF: 0.24 Fuel Fraction T/W: 0.43 (T-D)/W: 0.22 RCS: 14.6 Thrust to Weight T/W ratio using installed engine thrust at 0.85M at 36,000ft Excess T/W ratio (T-D)/W using installed engine thrust at 0.85M at 36,000ft Max: 2xR-73, 2xR-77, 2xKh-31, 2xKAB-250, 4xFAB-250, 10xWing pylons and launchers, Khibiny 2.2.1.2 Su-35S ECM pods, 5s cannon ammunition. Wt: 65,964b DI/DA: 145/21.7 WL/LL: 98.5/53.2 FF: 0.23 T/W: 0.41 (T-D)/W: 0.21 RCS: 17.8
2.2 Loaded Flight Envelopes 2.2.1 Level Flight 2.2.1.1 F-15SA
2.2.2 Turn at 20,000ft 2.2.2.1 F-15SA
2.2.2.2 Su-35S 2.2.3.2 Su-35S
2.2.3 Acceleration 0.8-1.2M @30,000ft 2.2.3.1 F-15SA
2.3.2 Combat Turns 2.3 Applied Performance Combat aircraft do not sit at one speed and G location during a turn. The amount of pull used by The above information makes for some reasonable comparisons. What it does not do, however, is the pilot varies with the situational need. Here all aircraft will be shown in an Air configuration, as account for how things change dynamically during flight. The below performance will account for described previously. Bingo fuel is described as a fuel state of three times the reserves remaining. changes in speed and altitude. Minimum reposition time will measure time to reach 1.0M at an altitude of not less than 36,000ft following a 180 degree turn starting at max range speed and altitude. 2.3.1 Rutowski Push Not all aircraft will start their accelerations from 0.8M and 30,000ft. We will look at acceleration Minimum time to get the nose on target. For comparison an Su-35 with an Air configuration will from Max End speed and altitude with an Air configuration, as described in Loaded Flight Envelopes be set up for a classic “3-9” pass from 0.5nm into a two-circle fight starting at 50nm conditions above, before any CFTs are dropped. All aircraft will unload to as much as 15 degrees nose down, from the Rutowski push. Maximum G and AoA will be available as whoever gets the missile shot provided they have the vertical space available, and accelerate to their supersonic best rate of off first has the best chance to survive. The turn will begin with maximum G and CLmax with any climb. At this point they then climb back up to 40,000ft while accelerating to best forward speed, additional AoA, if available, to be used only when it will allow the shot to be taken. Once the shot unless a placard limit is reached in which case the aircraft will resume climbing, until a fuel is taken the turn will end to allow speed to build back up. Turn will end after 60 seconds, with the remaining state equal to three times the reserves are met or 50nm is crossed. best difference in time between firing solutions and ability to recover energy being scored. The following data will be recorded: Time to 50nm, Time remaining at current fuel flow, Altitude at Altitude will be traded for turn energy or position as needed. As the F-15SA is the baseline, each 50nm, Speed at 50nm. Altitude and Speed will have a “+” annotation at the end to show if it they second better or worse will be a point and each 1e5 ft2/s2 better or worse will be a point. are still increasing, for reference only. Minimum radius turn. This is when a pilot needs to cash in their chips. The initial pull will be as 2.3.1.1 F-15SA aggressive as possible to CLmax AoA and speed and altitude will rapidly bleed off. Setup will also be Air configured aircraft after the Rutowski as far as load and fuel only. For comparison, an Su-35 Time to 50nm: 218s (10pts) with an Air configuration will be set up as an escort mission (.85M @ 36,000ft) that went south Time remaining: 4.5min (10pts) from a 0.5nm beam position. Turn will end after 15 seconds. Altitude at 50nm: 40,000ft (15pts) Speed at 50nm: 1.778M+ (15pts) Total Score (50pts) 2.3.2.1 F-15SA Notes: Initial conditions were 0.83M at 38,000ft. Fuel used was 4,964lb. Minimum reposition time: 60.0s (15pts) o Initial Conditions 0.85M 2.3.1.2 Su-35S 39,000ft Time to 50nm: 225s (10pts) Minimum Nose on Target: -0.2s (10pts) Time remaining: 3.1min (7pts) Specific Energy Recovered after shot: 1e5 ft2/s2 (10pts) Altitude at 50nm: 40,000ft (15pts) o Having a higher altitude and a 30 degree advantage in off-boresight Speed at 50nm: 1.757M+ (15pts) capability is not enough to ensure that the heavier F-15SA is able to edge out Total Score (46pts) the Flanker, which starts out faster and with 10 degrees more available AoA, Notes: Initial conditions were 0.76M at 37,000ft. Fuel used was 3,607lb. in the two-circle fight. Average Minimum Radius: 3,735ft (15pts) o The F-15SA is falling through 34,250ft while 39 degrees nose down with speed stabilized at .452M, 40 AoA, and 2.1G for a final 2,840ft radius and just shy of 9.0 degrees per second turn. Total Score (50pts) 2.3.2.2 Su-35S Minimum reposition time: 41.4s (22pts) o Initial Conditions 0.75M 38,000ft Minimum Nose on Target: 0s by default (10pts) Specific Energy Recovered after shot: 3e5 ft2/s2 (12pts) o The high available thrust at altitude allows the Flanker to recover energy quickly. Average Minimum Radius: 3,211ft (17pts) o The Su-35S is falling through 35,500ft while 21 degrees nose down with speed stabilized at .469M, 24AoA, and 2.6G for a final 2,310ft radius and around 11.3 degrees per second turn. Total Score (61pts)
Tracked: 130nm/33nm (7pts) RWR range: 168nm (9pts) 2.4 Systems Performance Total Score: (23pts) This section will focus on the summation of what the Systems do to allow Blue air to counter Red forces. We will look at relative detection and tracking distances. While the Su-35S is the Red Air target for this analysis it will be included for comparison purposes. Detection and Tracking 2.4.3 Detection of SAM Threats distances will be Unjammed/Jammed to show the difference, but Jammed will be scored. This will look at the ability of the sensors to detect and track a ground vehicle with an RCS of 500m^2 to represent an S-400 battery or radar site. Ground targets will be assumed to have 35dB 2.4.1 Detection of Aerial Threats of receive noise. This will look at the ability of the sensor suite to overcome the defenses of the sensors onboard an Su-35S with an Air loadout. 2.4.3.1 F-15SA Detection: 89nm RF, 40nm IR (10pts) Track: 69nm RF, 40nm IR (10pts) 2.4.1.1 F-15SA Total Score: (20pts) Detection: 200nm(inst limit)/113nm (10pts) Tracking: 200nm(inst limit)/88nm (10pts) Su-35S RWR range: 147nm 2.4.3.1 Su-35S Total Score: (20pts) Detection: 53nm RF, 16.3nm IR (6pts) Track: 41nm RF, 16.3nm IR (6pts) Total Score: (12pts) 2.4.1.1 Su-35S Detection: 168nm/42nm (4pts) Tracking: 130nm/33nm (4pts) Su-35S RWR range: 167nm 2.4.4 Avoidance of SAM Threats Total Score: (8pts) This will look at the ability of the defensive suite to deny an S-400 system the ability to detect and track the Blue force striker in a Ground loadout as that has the SEAD weaponry.
2.4.2 Avoidance of Aerial Threats 2.4.4.1 F-15SA This will look at the ability of the defensive suite to deny an Su-35S the ability to detect and track Detected: 325nm(inst limit)/101nm (10pts) the Blue force strike fighter in an Air configuration. Tracked: 325nm(inst limit)/78nm (10pts) RWR range: 384nm (10pts) 2.4.2.1 F-15SA Total Score: (30pts) Detected: 186nm/28nm (38nm narrow FoV) (10pts) Tracked: 144nm/22nm (29nm narrow FoV) (10pts) 2.4.4.1 Su-35S RWR range: 185nm (10pts) Detected: 325nm(inst limit)/148nm (7pts) Total Score: (30pts) Tracked: 325nm(inst limit)/115nm (7pts) RWR range: 149nm (4pts) Total Score: (18pts) 2.4.2.1 Su-35S Detected: 168nm/42nm (7pts) 2.5 Mission Performance 2.5.2 CAP All of the previous reviews and data only serve to get help one understand some of the factors that This is a common mission set for an air-to-air configured strike fighter. The purpose of the mission impact mission performance. Several different mission types will be reviewed and they will be is to project a persistent presence with which to defend other Blue assets from aerial assault. Due reviewed in stages of flight for the mission. to Interception of Su-35S with Kh-59MK2 missiles, CAP is being established 150nm from base. For analyses involving missile shots, no aircraft will take evasive action. Instead Blue and Red Aircraft in CAP will detect incoming Air configured Su-35S and will initiate a Rutowski Push. If CAP forces will “joust” toward the pass relying on onboard defensive systems to protect them. Pk for altitude is less than that for best forward speed then a profile climb to combat ceiling will be each shot will be calculated and the total end event odds calculated. A missiles Pk will equal the performed prior to the push maneuver. rated value if the missile reached the target at or above corner velocity. The missiles Pk will decrease in accordance with G available at intercept against maximum G possible. This will account The CAP aircraft configuration will be Air except that any external fuel tanks will be retained until for potential evasive maneuvers. the Rutowski push begins. Initial conditions will assume both the CAP aircraft and the Su-35S begin The Su-35 will not be graded in this section as it only exists as an adversary. their missions at the same time to determine initial fuel loads, speeds, and altitude.
Once tracking and max range missile parameters (1.0M final missile speed) are met then missile 2.5.1 Interception shots will be taken. Missiles will be fired in pairs 5 seconds apart. Follow-up missiles will not be This is a common mission for assets on Air Sovereignty missions in the air-to-air configuration. The fired until after the previous shot pair is resolved. Per doctrine, the Su-35S will fire an R-27ET after purpose of this mission is to rapidly close to visual range with an unknown aircraft detected by each R-77-1 when able. All remaining BVR missiles will be fired 5nm prior to the merge. Each shot early warning assets 300nm out enroute to penetrate notional airspace, 25nm from “base”. A will have a calculated pK based on the basic missile pK, the closure rate at the last second, the period of 5 minutes will be spent on the ground as QRA spools up for takeoff. The targets will be dynamic pressure on the missile relative to dynamic pressure needed for best turn, and any ECM or Su-35S in Ground configuration traveling at 7.85nm/minute. The Interceptors will need to be able droppable CM available. to ID the carriage of the Kh-59MK2 missiles. The Kh-59MK2s will be considered fired if the Su-35S reaches 150nm from base. Items for score will be as follows. No evasive maneuvers will be considered in this analysis. In general, evasive maneuvers will Distance from base that threat is identified. Gives indication of time available to plan a increase the odds of surviving a given shot at the cost of being more vulnerable to followup shots course of action. The F-15SA value will be 50 points with 1 point per nm difference. and increasing the difficulty in getting a shot off. The BVR portion will be treated as a missile joust Distance from base the threat is intercepted. Gives indication of when visual show of to showcase system effectiveness and magazine depth. force can be provided. The F-15SA value will be 50 points with 5 points per nm difference. Once merged, WVR missile and gun shots will be taken “simultaneously” to emphasize how lethal WVR combat is. Missile shot pK will be based on the basic missile pK, relative total energy at the 2.5.1.1 F-15SA merge, relative max available AoA, relative missile score (Gen + DF), and relative Lift Loading. These are the aspects that effect the ease of putting the weapons system on target. Gun shot pK Distance from base threat is VID’ed 178nm (50pts) will be determined by the basic pK/second of the cannon, relative total energy at the merge, Distance from base threat is intercepted. 162nm (50pts) relative Wing Loading, and relative excess thrust over weight at .85M @ 36,000ft as a turning fight Even with a staggering 73,000lb take-off weight the F-15SA is able to climb to 36,000ft will drop in speed and altitude. These are the aspects that effect the ability to manage remaining and reach the wing tank carriage limit of 1.5M in less than 5-minutes from take-off. This energy after the missile shots. Equal numbers of CAP and Su-35s will be assumed for the purpose is however well above the safe jettison speed of 0.95M. The F-15SA then rides this of counting missiles. speed limit up in altitude to over 49,000ft. By the time the Su-35S is 150nm from base Items for score will be as follows: the escorting F-15SA still has 11,400lb of usable fuel during a potential fight. The Su-35S Endurance at Max Endurance flight speeds and altitude a while maintaining a 150nm only has 5,800lb of usable fuel for a potential fight. radius. Total (100pts) Distance from base that first blue missile strikes red air. A score combining the weighted end-event outcome percentages, based on missile shot Pk. o Aggressor destroyed, CAP survives (+126*probability) o Aggressor survives, CAP survives (+63*probability) o The second AMRAAM salvo reaches the Su-35S with the overall effects being o Aggressor destroyed, CAP destroyed (+32*probability) a combines 63% pK, reduced due to the high missile speed impeding o Aggressor survives, CAP destroyed (+0*probability) maneuverability potential. o Probability events are the cumulative, decreasing, probability that any o The first salvo from the Flanker reaches the Eagle with each missile having a outcome occurs. With each potential missile hit the odds of the next launch nominal pK of 73%. The EPAAWS is able to reduce the pK of the R-77 to 22% decrease. through jamming and chaff but is unable to effect the R-27ET. Flares drop While Max Endurance flight regimes are generally too slow and too high for best maneuvering the pK of the R-27ET to 55%. The overall pK of the salvo is 65%. performance this is mitigated by the fact that the extra altitude can allow for a rapid increase in o Both the Eagle and Flanker fire additional salvos. Range is 5.5nm by the time speed. the last missile is fired. o The Eagle is flying at 1.78M @ 47,970ft while the Flanker is flying at 1.88M @ 42,000ft. 2.5.2.1 F-15SA T:402s The third AMRAAM salvo reaches the Su-35S with the a combined 60% pK. Endurance: 214min (30pts) The second salvo from the Flanker reaches the F-15SA with a combined pK of 58%. Range of Engage: 268nm (30pts) T:408s Merged. At current speeds and altitudes both aircraft have several minutes Engagement Score: 100 (40pts) of time in afterburner before needing to RTB. Both are equipped with two missiles and o Aggressor destroyed, CAP survives: 72.2% roughly five seconds of cannon ammo. Probability of both aircraft surviving to the o Aggressor survives, CAP survives: 0.0% merge is roughly 0.8%. Probability of both aircraft surviving the merge is roughly two in o Aggressor destroyed, CAP destroyed: 17.4% ten thousand. o Aggressor survives, CAP destroyed: 10.3% Merge Table F-15SA Su-35S T:0 APG-83(v)3 gets the first look at the Su-35S at a range of 200nm. F-15SA Afterburner time 8.4 min 7.1 min begins Rutowski push from 0.84M @ 36,000ft. Total Specific Energy 3.04 Mft2/s2 3.01 Mft2/s2 T:46s Irbis-E detects F-15SA at a range of 186nm. Su-35S begins Rutowski push Max Available AoA 40 degrees 180 degrees from 0.84M @ 41,000ft. Within seconds, EPAAWS begins jamming the Irbis-E at a Missile Score 138 72 distance of 185nm. Wing Loading 90.1 lb/ft2 83.2 lb/ft2 T:156s Khibiny begins jamming the APG-63(v)3 at a distance of 147nm. Lift Loading 54.9 lb/ft2 45.0 lb/ft2 T:255s APG-63(v)3 reacquires lock on Su-35S at 88nm. At this time the F-15SA is (T-D)/W 0.85M@36kft 0.27 0.39 flying 1.80M at 40,020ft and the Su-35S is flying 1.72M at 42,020ft. The Eagle pilot fires Missile/Cannon shots (pK) 2/5 (56%/4%) 2/5 (48%/10%) the first pair of AIM-120Ds as the combined closure speed of over 3.5M and high altitude puts this comfortably within launch parameters. Total (100pts) T:313s OLS-35 detects the supersonic F-15SA at a range of 55nm but is unable to Discussion: The larger RCS of the Eagle partially mitigates the advantage of the more generate a firing solution due to the 11nm limitation of the laser. Irbis-E begins narrow capable APG(v)3. The EPAAWS, however, ensures that the Eagle pilot has a “first-kill” FoV search opportunity prior to the Su-35S firing at all. The ECM/ECCM advantage of the Eagle also T:356s First AIM-120D pair reaches the Su-35S. The Khibiny tries to jam the onboard means its radar guided missile shots enjoy a significant pK advantage, but in the end this radar of the AMRAAM and deploy chaff but this is resisted by the 2-way datalink to the is largely mitigated by the Russian doctrine for firing radar and IR missile pairs. In this more sophisticated APG-63(v)3. The effect of this is that each missiles pK is reduced situation, the R-27ET has the highest individual BVR missile pK as it is immune to RF from 78% to 42%. The overall pK of the two shots is 66%. The Eagle pilot fires a second jamming and no fighter aircraft carries DIRCM. AIM-120D salvo. Irbis-E reacquires the F-15SA at 29nm and the Flanker pilot fires an R- 77 and an R-27ET. At this time the Eagle is climbing through 47,300ft at 1.78M and the Flanker is accelerating through 1.87M at 42,000ft. 2.5.3 Deep Strike T:389s Strike on S-400 site using a pair of strike aircraft. S-400 will engage when able on both aircraft (with two 40N6 and two 48N6 per plane) and munitions (four 9M96 per munition). Fuel tanks will be dropped once empty for flight planning and all air-to-ground munitions will be planned to be pairs are 57% with total odds that any given HARM is destroyed at 81%. Assuming each HARM has dropped. Strike package will be two ship.. Items for score will be as follows: its own pK of 78%, this means the SEAD mission only has a 44.3% chance of success. If the F-15SAs Max flight radius - Assumes all Air-Ground munitions are spent during combat and continue to press on to strike the target they will be fired upon by two salvos that each consist of a three minutes afterburner use at combat altitude 40N6 and a 48N6. The total odds of a given plane surviving through to strike the target directly in Degrees of sustained turn – three minutes maintaining constant speed the event of SEAD failure is 40.1%. Taken together with the odds of SEAD success, the SEAD failure Max launch range – Max range of munition from launch conditions outcomes are as follows: 9.0% odds both planes make it to the target, 26.8% one or the other plane Min safe launch range – Range at which S-400 can lock the attacking aircraft makes it to the target, 20.0% odds neither makes it to the target. SEAD Odds of Success – based on ability of SEAD munitions to get through to the target Total mission Odds of Success – Sum of SEAD odds of success plus odds one or both aircraft make it to the target in the event of SEAD failure. 2.5.4 CAS The primary role of airpower is to help the troops on the ground. In no mission is that more 2.5.3.1 F-15SA apparent than that of Close Air Support. The “stack” will be assumed to be 300nm from the base with final RTB distance equal to 350nm. For fuel purposes planes will have been in the stack for 30 For the Deep Strike mission the F-15SA will be using two HARM missiles for SEAD and four 500lb minutes at Max End before getting the call, at which point they will accelerate in full Mil power to LJDAMs to strike additional ground targets. It will have the following stats when in the combat 15,000ft toward the target area. Time on station will be at 15,000ft. Items for score will be as phase. follows:
Reaction time to a call for support 50 miles away Deep Strike: CFT, 2xEFT (dropped), 2xAIM-9X, 2xAIM-120D, 2xHARM (fired), 4xLJDAM, 4xWing Max time on station after having spent 30 minutes in the stack. Assumes all munitions pylons and launchers, ATP, IRST21, 5s cannon ammunition, 0.83M @ 37,000ft. are dropped Wt: 60,577lb DI/DA: 86/16.9 WL/LL: 99.6/60.8 FF: 0.26 Number of munitions available for strike. T/W: 0.31 (T-D)/W: 0.19 RCS: 27.7 o Droppable
. ToF Max flight radius: 908nm (25pts) o Forward Firing Degrees of turn: 639o (10pts) Max time between munitions. This is the most time between weapons the pilot can Max launch range: 80nm (10pts) take to reposition. Min safe launch range: 78nm (10pts) SEAD Odds of Success: 44.3% (20pts) Mission Odds of Success: 80.0% (25pts) 2.5.4.1 F-15SA o Total (100pts) For the CAS mission the F-15SA will have a total of eight pallets of SDBs and 5 seconds of cannon
fire. Once on station the F-15SA will have the following stats. Based on the differential data for the F110 vs the F100 the already impressive range of a Strike Wt: 66,303lb DI/DA: 132/19.7 WL/LL: 109/66.5 FF: 0.18 Eagle is enhanced by the F-15SA. The RCS of the F-15SA means the S-400 system can detect it from T/W: 0.59 (T-D)/W: 0.44 RCS: 34.6 a theoretical distance of 440nm, beyond the instrumentation limit of the system of 325nm. This detection range is further reduced by the radar horizon of 252nm for the ingress altitude. 252nm is Reaction time: 5.4min (25pts) within the RWR/ECM range of the EPAAWS of 384nm, meaning the F-15SA is able to jam the S-400 Max ToS: 36.9min (30pts) as soon as it crosses the radar horizon. This allows it to be undetected until 101nm. Once the F- Number of munitions: 37 (30pts) 15SA is within 78nm it is fired upon with one 40N6 missile and one 48N6 missile. However the o SDB: 32 AGM-88E has a range of 80nm allowing the F-15SA to fire from outside the engagement range of . ToF 24sec the S-400. Continued jamming by the EPAAWS reduces the range at which the HARM can be o M61A1: 5sec engaged to 51nm. With a speed of 0.343nm/s the HARM will be exposed for 148s. With four Max time between munitions: 60sec (15pts) 9M96 being fired in pairs at each of four AGM-88Es the individual odds of success for the 9M96 o Total (100pts)
2.6 Total Scores A summation of all the scores such that the overall ability of an aircraft to perform strike and fighter roles in a high threat environment.
2.6.1 F-15SA Applied Performance (100pts) o Rutowski Push (50pts) o Combat Turns (50pts) Systems Performance (100pts) o Detection of Aerial Threats (20pts) o Avoidance of Aerial Threats (30pts) o Detection of SAM Threats (20pts) o Avoidance of SAM Threats (30pts) Mission Performance (400pts) o Interception (100pts) o CAP (100pts) o Deep Strike (100pts) o CAS (100pts)
2.6.2 Su-35S Applied Performance (107pts) o Rutowski Push (46pts) o Combat Turns (61pts) Systems Performance (61pts) o Detection of Aerial Threats (8pts) o Avoidance of Aerial Threats (23pts) o Detection of SAM Threats (12pts) o Avoidance of SAM Threats (18pts)
twelve data point parameters. Deviation cannot be calculated so will conservatively assumed to be 3 Model Validity 5% at 71.1% confidence for 66.1% validity. The study will be done using an excel model for aircraft performance. The model will be calibrated 3.1.3 Thrust and Drag by using available data. The reason for using the model instead of Flight Manuals, where available, is that the model allows calculated performances not covered in the FMs, such as super-sonic Many aspects of derived performance were used to generate the thrust and drag models. climbs, Rutowski pushovers, and loadouts not implicitly specified (a common issue on Sustained G turn rate at 20,000ft was calculated by the model and calibrated against the flight McDD/Boeing fighters). manual. The A-G configuration was used at 62,000lb, for a total of nine data points. The flight envelope in both afterburning and military flight was calculated by the model and Model validity will review the accuracy of the model by measuring the standard deviation of the calibrated against the flight manual for the A-G configuration at 62,000lb and the clean calculated data points vs the expected results. Additionally, the more data points will increase the configuration at 40,000lb for a total of ninety-three data points. confidence. Confidence will be calculated as 1-(1/[#datapoints]^0.5). For each set of data, the The level flight acceleration at 40,000ft was calculated by the model and calibrated against the deviation will be subtracted from the confidence value for a set validity. The average of all set flight manual for the A-G configuration at 68,400lb and the clean configuration at 43,600lb for a validities will equal the total model validity. total of twenty-five data points. The model factors involved are subsonic form drag model, weapon drag model, drag divergence Mach model, wave drag model, induced drag model, and thrust at speed and altitude. Deviation 3.1 F-15SA cannot be calculated so will be conservatively assumed to be 5% at 91.1% confidence for 86.1% The F-15E-1 provides a wealth of information including several parameters to use as a basis of validity. comparison for the model of a F100-PW-229 powered F-15E. The validity reviewed here will be for a -229 powered F-15E. Minor adjustments are made to the thrust profile to account for the F110- 3.1.4 Total validity GE-129 as used in the report, but no validation material is available. OWS will not be considered for simplicity. The A-G load referenced is twelve Mk82s, four AAMs, LANTIRN, CFT, and centerline The total validity for the F-15 performance model is 73.2% fuel tank 3.2 Su-35S Little public information is available on the envelope and performance of the Su-35. 3.1.1 Fuel Burn Speed, altitude, and fuel flow for both Max Endurance and Max Range were calculated by the 3.2.1 Fuel Burn model and calibrated against the flight manual but were then adjusted per the HAF F-16 manual to account for the difference between the F100 and the F110 fuel burn performance. Two The only available data is a cruise range of 1,940nm and a ferry range of 2,430nm. This configurations were used for calibration, A-G at 68,400lb and clean at 43,600lb, for a total of twelve amounts to two data points. The model factors involved are the subsonic form drag model, data points. weapon drag model, drag divergence Mach number model, induced drag model, and the TSFC The model factors involved are the subsonic form drag model, weapon drag model, drag model. Deviation is 0.4% at 29.3% confidence for 28.9% validity. divergence Mach number model, induced drag model, and the TSFC model. Deviation cannot be calculated so will be conservatively assumed to be 5% at 71.1% confidence for 67.5% validity. 3.2.2 Lift and e The CL alpha curve has been calculated from data in the Su-27 flight manual. A generic 3.1.2 Lift and e Oswald’s efficiency factor model was used. The result is only six data points are available. The CL alpha curve and the Oswald’s efficiency factor were taken from or calculated from NASA Deviation cannot be calculated so will be conservatively assumed to be 5% at 59.2% confidence for wind tunnel data. This was used to generate the lift model and the induced drag model that uses 54.2% validity. 3.2.3 Thrust and Drag Listed top speed at low level, top speed at altitude, and service ceiling are the only data points available for deriving a flight envelope. A low level acceleration spec is also available to help derive wave drag. All in all there are nine data points available to derive thrust and drag models. Deviation cannot be calculated so will conservatively be assumed to be 5% at 66.7% confidence for 61.7% validity.
3.2.4 Total Validity The total validity of the Su-35S model is 48.3%