Su-34 and Su-35 Aircraft: According to reports from the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence, its aerial defence systems were in action on March 2 and were aimed at two Russian aircraft. Anti-aircraft missiles were used in these operations. The Ukrainians claim to have successfully taken down one of the two aircraft—a Su-34, specifically. But their Patriot system did not detect the second one, a Su-35, so they were unable to intercept it.
The Ukrainian sources commented on the Patriot-Su-35 engagement, saying that “the multirole fighter [Su-35 – ed.] displayed commendable evasion skills.”The Russian Ministry of Defence has not yet acknowledged the loss of any Su-34 planes, including those that were a part of the accidents that occurred last week.
Su-34 and Su-35 Aircraft
Towering movies that depict expert pilots outwitting clumsy air defence personnel have always enthralled us. This is a frequent cinematic device when a missile is fired and we are immediately drawn into a minute-long scene in which the pilot deftly avoids the approaching threat while using heat traps.
The dramatic pauses, the tense soundtrack, the amusing exchange between the pilot and the control tower, and a close-up of the pilot’s helmet all work together to create an exciting situation. The drama heightens when they are deftly navigating through a canyon because the anti-aircraft missile, if it has any Bollywood screenplay influence, frequently fires several bullets while mimicking the pilot’s movements.
It’s true that these dramatic interpretations from the movies frequently diverge greatly from reality. The answer to the question, “Can a pilot outmanoeuvre a missile?” is still unwaveringly “yes” in the actual world. Still, a great deal of influencing elements might significantly impact the result.
Patriot has “visible” radar.
A pilot’s training must include a range of anti-missile tactics in the complex world of tactical aviation. None of these tactics, however, particularly deal with the barrel roll pass attempt. The type of missile launched, whether it was from a MANPADS or a longer-range Patriot, its trajectory and distance, the flight conditions and characteristics of the aircraft, and in particular, the unique characteristics of the missile guidance system, could all affect how applicable these techniques are.
We’re examining a typical Patriot equipped with a PAC-2/GEM+ anti-aircraft missile in this particular scenario. With a no-escape zone of around 110 km, this missile is designed to attack an airborne target at a distance about equal to its maximum range of 150–160 km. This missile’s guidance system uses radio orders to work while in flight, and for the last portion of its trajectory, it uses a semi-active missile head (called Track-via-missile-TVM) to determine target coordinates.
Any fighter aircraft, including Russian types, equipped with such a guidance system will be able to identify the Patriot radar’s activation before to the missile launch. The countdown in seconds then starts when the radar switches from tracking to firing mode.
Taiwan detects 19 Chinese military aircraft and seven naval vessels near its borders
Su-34 and Su-35 Aircraft: Hunting Su-35 is more challenging.
When the stakes are high, a pilot’s response to anti-aircraft manoeuvres can make all the difference in the outcome. Put simply, the initial reaction may be to descend quickly, trying to attain maximum velocity and use afterburner settings to extend the distance. In these high-stress situations, every second counts, and a lot relies on the attributes and capacities of the particular aircraft involved.
Let’s now contrast the Su-34 frontline bomber with the Su-35 fighter plane. Whereas the latter maxes out at about 7G, the former can handle stress loads of up to 9G. When placed side by side, the Su-35 possesses a greater thrust armament and weighs approximately 4 tonnes less when empty. In addition, the Su-34’s manoeuvrability is further limited by the requirement to dump its UMPK bombs prior to manoeuvring.
Dear reader, the conclusion is that, although remarkable, the Su-34 has a far lesser probability of avoiding an assault than the more nimble Su-35. Isn’t life in the skies really difficult?
Su-34 and Su-35 Aircraft: High G
Let’s examine the “high g” hypothesis of anti-aircraft missile evasion in more detail. When the pilot detects the approaching missile with his eyes or by using the aircraft’s warning systems, the manoeuvre starts. The pilot then executes a hard turn, which is a rapid change in direction. To do this, move the control stick to one side, which will roll the aircraft and start the turn.
The pilot applies more power to maintain speed while the aircraft makes the turn. This move is crucial since the manoeuvre cannot succeed without great speed. Increased speed combined with a sharp bend causes a large increase in G-forces.
It can be difficult for the pilot to move or breathe when these G-forces increase to many times the force of gravity. Pilots use customised G-suits that compress the lower body to counteract this. This keeps the pilot from losing consciousness due to blood buildup in the legs.
Pilots must also maintain the energy state balance of the aircraft throughout this manoeuvre. They have to keep their balance between direction, speed, and altitude in order to be able to carry out further evasive manoeuvres or take up positions for a counterattack. Furthermore, it’s essential to understand the aircraft’s capacity to avoid stalling or causing structural damage.
Pilots must recover from the difficult high G manoeuvre after successfully dodging the missile. This means slowing speed and easing out of the curve gradually to decrease the G-forces. Pilots also need to reposition and prepare for any risks that may arise.
In summary, performing a high-speed, high-G manoeuvre is a difficult and complex procedure that calls for dexterity, accuracy, and a thorough comprehension of the limitations and capabilities of the aircraft.
