su-27 vs. su-33 vs. mig-29

[Noxious]

I own all three aircraft, but i was wondering what the biggest differences are? What role are they suited for and if any is superior?

[BodyOrgan]

The Su-27/33 are considered air superiority aircraft whereas the Mig-29 is more of an interceptor.

Each are extremely capable in the dogfight arena. The Mig will play the rate game much like the F-16, keeping speed somewhere between 700-750 kph. The Su's will play this game too, but at a lower speed with much better control of the aircraft, somewhere around 600-650 kph.

The Su-27 is more maneuverable than its carrier counterpart due in part because it's lighter. It also carries more countermeasures, 96/96 vs 48/48. The Mig-29 only has 60 which can be split 30/30 or all one type.

The Su's are much larger aircraft than the Mig, so they have much greater fuel capacity therefore greater range and or loiter time. Being larger also means their ordnance capacity is greater. Even still, the Su-33 is slightly larger than the Su-27, so it has two additional hardpoints for ordinance.

Of the Mig variants only the Mig-29S is capable of carrying the R-77 active homing missile. Of the Su variants only the Chinese J-11 can carry that missile.

The radar in the Su's is more powerful, capable of detecting fighter size targets out to 100km. The Mig can only detect them out to about 50km.

The IRST in the Su's can be slewed up/down/left/right. The Mig's is only forward facing.

I think that about covers all the differences I can think of off the top of my head.

[KThax]

Escrito originalmente por BodyOrgan:

The Su-27/33 are considered air superiority aircraft whereas the Mig-29 is more of an interceptor.

Each are extremely capable in the dogfight arena. The Mig will play the rate game much like the F-16, keeping speed somewhere between 700-750 kph. The Su's will play this game too, but at a lower speed with much better control of the aircraft, somewhere around 600-650 kph.

The Su-27 is more maneuverable than its carrier counterpart due in part because it's lighter. It also carries more countermeasures, 96/96 vs 48/48. The Mig-29 only has 60 which can be split 30/30 or all one type.

The Su's are much larger aircraft than the Mig, so they have much greater fuel capacity therefore greater range and or loiter time. Being larger also means their ordnance capacity is greater. Even still, the Su-33 is slightly larger than the Su-27, so it has two additional hardpoints for ordinance.

Of the Mig variants only the Mig-29S is capable of carrying the R-77 active homing missile. Of the Su variants only the Chinese J-11 can carry that missile.

The radar in the Su's is more powerful, capable of detecting fighter size targets out to 100km. The Mig can only detect them out to about 50km.

The IRST in the Su's can be slewed up/down/left/right. The Mig's is only forward facing.

I think that about covers all the differences I can think of off the top of my head.

Is it just me or do you think the thrust to weight ratio on the su should be equal to that of the F14's?
I'm just going by the numbers on Wiki

[SSerponi76]

Escrito originalmente por BodyOrgan:

The Su's are much larger aircraft than the Mig, so they have much greater fuel capacity therefore greater range and or loiter time.

A little extra on this: Mig-29 can carry external fuel tanks, none of Su-27/33 can. Sukoi's internal fuel capacity is big enough to almost compensate but this ha an impact on their manuverbility since due to the extra weight you can't drop (you have to consume fuel).

Due to carrier operation constraint, Su-33 fuel capacity is lesser than Su-27, however Su-33 can do AA refuel, while Su-27 can't.

Escrito originalmente por BodyOrgan:

The radar in the Su's is more powerful, capable of detecting fighter size targets out to 100km. The Mig can only detect them out to about 50km.

Although poweful, russian radards are coupled with a really poor avionics system (at least in DCS implemention): only Su-27/33 have a HSI/Radar display/SA, while Mig-29 only uses HUD.
Both Su and Mig are more effective when working with an AWACS.

[Sizigmund]

SU-33 can do aerial refueling, it can be also used as a tanker to refuel other SU-33s. The russian refueling device isn't contains any fuel, it only transfer the fuel from aircraft's fuel tanks to the refueled aircraft, so this is why it is possible to connect this device even to other SU-33 and use it as a tanker. SU-33 can also work from a carrier. SU-33 have two additional small wings in-front of the main wings, they are helps to create additional lifting force, it also have a special afterburner mode that can run engine on 110% and thats why it can take-off from a very short carrier's runway. The rear beam of SU-33 is shorter than SU-27's rear beam, so it can use sharper angle of attack to take-off and land, but it have less passive countermeasures (chaff / flares). SU-33 have folding wings.

SU-27 have more counter measures (chaff / flares) due to its longer rear beam, it can't work from a carrier, it is actually an older variant of SU-33, because previously SU-33 was named as SU-27K. Both SU-27 and SU-33 in DCS world are a very old variants of those planes with a very old navigation and weaponary systems. Nowdays they aren't in use anymore. Because of their old weaponary systems they can't use R-77 missiles with active radar guidance. The only missiles they can use are R-27R / R-27ER (semi-active middle range radar guidance missiles, the "ER" variant have more rocket fuel in it and can be launched from longer distances), R-27T / R-27ET (heat guidance middle range missiles, the "ET" variant have more fuel)., R-73 (short range heat guidance missile).

MiG-29S is my personal favorite. It can use the same missiles as SU-27 and SU-33, but it can use also R-77 missiles, by the way MiG-29A can't use R-77 missiles. MiG-29S is much smaller plane, it can gain speed much faster, it is not as maneuverable as SU-27 and SU-33, but due to it's lightness and right usage it can be much more deadly than SU planes. The only two things you have to remember is to save fuel (you simply can't fly for a long time using afterburner, you will consume all the fuel in no time) and be very carefull during landing. This plane is a hardest plane to land. Again, MiG-29 in DCS world is a very old variant of the plane with old navigation and weaponary systems.

All of the planes have an optical radar system, it can be used to make a surprice attack, because it is a passive device that isn't emmits anything, so your enemy don't know that you already have a lock on him if he don't see you (so it is better sometimes to not use an ECM). Of course you can use only heat guidance missiles with optical radar.
By the way, all palnes MiG's and SU's can be used as a bombers. They can drop only dumb bombs (include cluster bomb) and fire only dumb air to ground missiles because they have a very simple air to ground guidance system. So it is better to use Su-25 and Su-25T for air to ground attacks, but MiG's and SU's can be used for a simple ground targets as well.

And the last thing is. Because all of russian planes in DCS world are older than US planes. It is much harder to use them to fight your enemies. At the start it even seems impossible thing to do, but it is totally possible. You have to learn the air to air battle mechanics and make a lot of practice in order to achive the goal. Remember that these plane are much more maneuverable than US planes. Learn how to dodge the AIM-120C missiles and you will be O.K.

[SSerponi76]

For BVR engagements J-11/Mig-29 are the best options since they can carry R-77 and hence can engage AIM-120 carring planes face to face. Best BVR option for Su-27/33 is to sneak behind the enemy and use R-27ET with IRST (R-27R/ER are practically useless) to achieve stealth kills. However, US planes can rely on better situational awarness that RU planes, so sneaking behind them might be not so easy.

In BFM/ACM you can rely on the Flanker agility and R-73 IR missiles, to be used with Helmet Mounted Sight for off-boresight launch. Keep in mind that F-16C and F/A-18C both have HMS systems and AIM-9X missiles, which IMHO are better than the R-73.

I think no one mentioned, but Su-27/33, J-11 and Mig-29 have AG capability too, carrying rockets and dumb bombs.
However, this is so much limited and primitve that you can completely forget about it.

[Perfect Info]

Let me chime in on the A2G, since I do think the unguided A2G is still fun to do! The Su-27 and Su-33 both have generous hardpoints for mounting A2G weapons, with four six(!!!) sextuple ejector racks being quite a powerful loadout, rivalling the Su-25's 8 quadruple racks. And they will still have room for ample short/medium range A2A missiles to use defensively.

I feel the Su-27 is marginally better in the A2G, because the airframe is lighter leaving you more room for A2G ordinance. Plus if you are doing carrier ops with the Su-33, you're probably going to be constrained to using cluster bombers instead of the sextuple racks to stay under take-off maximum. But for an airfield takeoff, the Su-33's additional hardpoints could make for a better cluster bomb/rocket loadout (with the defensive A2A shifted out to the wingtips).

I honestly haven't tried the Mig-29 for A2G, but the number and positioning of the hardpoints makes it inferior to the Flankers. It can't rack-mount either bombs or rocket pods, so you only have 4 slots of A2G to work with (and that leaves you with only two A2A, when I feel three A2A missiles is minimum viable for solo self-defense). I'd probably carry a pair of rocket pods and stick to light armour/trucks, since singles of unguided bombs have never been that reliable for me.

I fully endorse the Flankers as fun A2G planes, and tentatively say the Fulcrum could work for light-duty. They won't be loitering like an A-10 or Su-25 and racking up double-digit ground kills. But unlike those dedicated CAS platforms, you can comfortably operate a Flanker/Fulcrum in airspace contested by hostile planes on account of the medium range A2A and the afterburners giving you disengagement options.

Edit: Got into game today and took a closer look at various loadout options.

[Borat Sagdiyev]

I still dont get why people think R77 is good its useful at 10km or less it does not match any 120 however we have been working hard as a group behind the scenes having flanker bugs fixed. We are now pushing for SU-27 thrust and fuel consumption. This will hopefully be provided to ED soon. We dont want R family to be better however to have bugs fixed and pushed out.

[Huitzilopochtli]

Aside from what everyone mentioned already, mig29 for climbing, and su27 for turning fights.