Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Naval Air Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier?
skrip00    10/24/2005 3:18:08 PM
With just ski-jumps, how much in terms of weight and armament can the Su-33 carry off a Russian carrier? Also, can SU-33s land and takeoff from American Carriers? Or are the landing gear systems incompatible.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Galrahn    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier?   10/24/2005 4:02:31 PM
Armament Basically as Su-27; 12 pylons. Normal AAM options expanded to include R27EM for use against sea-skimming targets. Rudimentary air-to-ground capability is equivalent to Su-27SK; is reportedly able to carry Kh-31 (AS-17 `Krypton') ASMs under wing. Exhibited with inert 4,500 kg (9,920 lb) Kh-41 (3M80 Moskit: mosquito) anti-ship missile on centreline; but this considered as impracticable operational load. Weights and Loadings: Max military load 7,045 kg (15,532 lb) Normal T-O weight 25,000 kg (55,115 lb) Max carrier T-O weight 30,000 kg (66,135 lb) Max T-O weight 33,000 kg (72,752 lb) Max landing weight 24,500 kg (54,013 lb) Max wing loading 486.4 kg/m2 (99.63 lb/sq ft) Max power loading 131 kg/kN (1.29 lb/lb st) (source: Jane's All the World's Aircraft 2001-2002)
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier?   10/24/2005 4:51:33 PM
In real terms, the SU-33 cannot take off from the Kuznetsov with a full load of fuel. So its maximum takeoff weight is somewhere below its "weight empty with full internal fuel" when operating from a ski jump. As far as operating off of American carriers, the SU-33 does not have a nosewheel catapult bar, and the structure surrounding the nosewheel is not reinforced to handle the stresses from catapult launches, so it could not be launched from a conventional catapult.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier?   10/24/2005 6:51:20 PM
Su-33's are STOBAR - US aircraft are CATOBAR. another words russian aircraft have to launch under their own power unassisted. hence why they have probkems with a full fuel load and that effects their absolute loadout plus range. The Russians acknowledged ages ago that the paper specs don't reflect actual capability. OTOH, CATOBAR means that all US CV combat aircraft are able to be launched fully fueled and weaponed up.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier?   10/24/2005 7:17:21 PM
Is it theoretically possible to combine a catapult and a ski-jump?
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier?   10/24/2005 8:19:52 PM
"Is it theoretically possible to combine a catapult and a ski-jump?"/ NFI, but I reckon the nose wheel etc would take an absolute hammering in the long term.
 
Quote    Reply

Professor Fickle    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier? Realy ,just ski-jump    12/6/2005 4:45:52 PM
Russian Carriers only use Ski-jump? Sounds inefficient, they would need to use full afterburner for every take-off… I mean, full afterburner would be needed on a empty plane (no weapons) Yimmi> "Is it theoretically possible to combine a catapult and a ski-jump?"/ gf0012-aust > NFI, but I reckon the nose wheel etc would take an absolute hammering in the long term. CRAZY IDEA>>>> You could have the whole front of the carrier be sloped upwards (I don’t know 7-10 degrees) then the final section sloped SLIGHTLY higher If you think I am crazy please replay… :)
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:How much can an Su-33 carry off a Russian Carrier? Realy ,just ski-jump    12/6/2005 7:22:23 PM
:"You could have the whole front of the carrier be sloped upwards (I don’t know 7-10 degrees) then the final section sloped SLIGHTLY higher If you think I am crazy please replay… :) " you're not crazy, but you're not right. the brits who developed the ski ramp concept worked out the correct lift angles for approach and departure. it's a flat lead in with an angled lift, not an angled deck with a more severe lift. CATOBAR on a ski ramp would cause enormouse stresses on the front end of the plane - I can't see any benefit from such a design. it does raise intersting possibilities if you RATO/JATO the aircraft at the apex of the ramp stage, or if you used COANDA effects at the apex of the ramp (but that would cause a complete redesign of the plane and is less than usefull for fixed wing combat aircraft) If you want max weaps with max fuel and a capacity to hit maximum thrust asap from time of launch, then CATOBAR is the only way to achieve that. STOBAR was always a compromise solution developed out of various necessities.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics