02.07.2013, 09:32
In the Cold War when these characteristics were being examined closely with many millions of dollars spent on research and alpha development (quite a number of cancelled projects, actually), the main adversary was thought to be the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) or "Russia" as we say in the west (though it was much more than just Russian). Increase in speed, acceleration, climb rate, and service ceiling were considered top priority against the USSR being the only power in the world to pose both a threat in numbers and speed of both fighters and bombers. The USAAF fighters were expected to keep the multi-role characteristics in variants of fighter types and frontline types keep the air superiority role, but speed was generally needed over maneuverability when forced to choose between the two. However, Russian aircraft which we see here were initially conceived in the final stages of the Cold War and outperformed USAAF fighters in many categories. It was this occurrence which gave extra motivation for the US Defense Department leadership to insist on maintaining top speed and service ceiling while focusing more on digital/electrical avionics and STEALTH characteristics. In this regard the USAAF has been able to stay 1-3 iterations ahead of Russian Air Defense, but I feel that the gap has slowly been closing in the last 30 and especially recent years.
Now, nobody said that slow speed and maneuverability are useless in all situations for all air power nations. As I indicated, I am not very familiar with the Su-27 and the variant called the Su-33, though it appears to me that thrust vectoring is mitigated in these planes for the sake of other factors, perhaps cost being one of them. It is well known by military aircraft history buffs that Russia has made the combination of economy of cost and general performance high priorities in order to provide the possibility of export sales in the future. They truly are masters of balance and compromise in aircraft concepts, no doubt in anybody's mind - right?
Now, nobody said that slow speed and maneuverability are useless in all situations for all air power nations. As I indicated, I am not very familiar with the Su-27 and the variant called the Su-33, though it appears to me that thrust vectoring is mitigated in these planes for the sake of other factors, perhaps cost being one of them. It is well known by military aircraft history buffs that Russia has made the combination of economy of cost and general performance high priorities in order to provide the possibility of export sales in the future. They truly are masters of balance and compromise in aircraft concepts, no doubt in anybody's mind - right?