@momsbabyboy Remember how it should be, now there's no such thing as Soviet Russia! Today our state is called Russia or the Russian Federation ! And for you to Russia it is still vodka, medved, balalaika. Me you americans sorry, you are living in the 21st century, and about Russia and russians do not know anything !
i remember reading about planes and how cold air causes downward drafts of air pushing on the wings keeping it from lifting quickly.... but thats all theoretical XD
No he does not. He could eject if he wanted (ejection seats are 0-0) ,i think he knew he had enough runway to safely stop + he could cut fuel off and shut the engines ,and that prevented the whole airplane going to flame ,and saved couple of hours of hard labor for firefighters.....
You need a positive rate of climb before you retract the landing gear, or this happens. Yes this is true however you need airspeed Vr before a positive rate of climb can be achieved. But it is cold out here it should have got all the speed it needed a lot quicker. Heavier air density and all. Could there have been mechanical problems beside the obvious?
Holy shit, I thought it would not stop before the end of the runway ... but now they will rape the poor pilot forever in a dark prison cell ... he sabotaged property of mother Russia ... Don't worry pilot, John Claude Von Dom (spelling?) will save you!
Looks like the fore gear didn't deploy and the pilot made a clever decision to land gear up as the two engine nacelles make up a more stable platform than the two main gears and the nose.
I'm not an expert on this aircraft, but many others have a "weight on wheels" switch that prevents undercarriage retraction. The pilots can override this so that the selector is in the UP position without the wheels moving. As soon as the aircraft senses the wheels are off the ground then the undercarriage will move up. Basically this is so that a pilot can show off his skills. If the plane sinks immediately after take off then what happens is exactly what is seen in the video.
The landing gear has weight on ground switches.once the weight comes off the gear will retract.However when it does so it destroys some of the lift and you droop slightly,if you`re not high enough this happens
@MonsterRage Olivier, the voice says that due to a failure in one system, the chassis have been cleaned for a moment before takeoff and the pilot lifted off and slowed down the bottom of the aircraft. it maybe lie i dont know. TU 144 crashed three weeks ago with a hockey team locomotive Yaroslavl. The Reasons not yet been officially named, but it is clear that if the pilot of TU 144 pulled up the belly of the Tu 144 aircraft, the guys would be alive.
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
what an idiot,he retracted the landing gear before he even left the ground, take off WHEN your absolutly sure your off the ground.to all novice fighter pilots and etc.
What is interesting to me is that the fire tender hasn't gotten to him yet, and he has stopped all the way, opened his canopy and is climbing out... no help in sight. They should have already been there, with foam started on the runway around the plane and more ready to go as soon as the pilot got clear. Major fuel danger there....
American fighters like F-15, F-16, F-18 and F-22, because of their inferior build,w ould catch catastrophic fire, explode and disgenerate into million pieces along with their pilot(s) if something like this happened to them.
Considering this video, it's pilot's error when he tried to pull landing gear up before leaving the ground and gaining some height.
Su-27 during Cechen wars returned to base and safely landed with more than 10 heavy machine gun bullet holes in fuselage, engines and hidraulics.
USA's planes have to be carfully maintained after every single flight; Russian ones are usually maintained after 4-5 flights. USA's aircraft need to be in air-conditioned hangars; Russian ones are often snow-covered on their airfields - only few of them are in hangars. USA aircraft couldn't withstand this.
@brox114 that's ignorant. It is true that many Russian jets are manufactured with lower tolerances and less reliance on state of the art avionics (which as the USAF has experienced tends to contain some really expensive bugs in the code), but it means that the parts that do move have extremely short service lives, in the case of early MiG-29 models, something like half of an F/A-18's, and because the engines wear out so quickly on the MiG it can't be overhauled, but completely replaced.
@brox114 Also as far as I know the B-2 Spirit is the only aircraft that needs a climate controlled hangar, and Russia has no aircraft in the same league. And the Su-27 example is ridiculous, F-15s, JSFs, F-22 and F/A-18s aren't supposed to be flying missions so low they can be hit by bullets from the ground (unless Chechen separatists have jets now). The US has an aircraft for CAS, the A-10 Warthog, and you'll find it can take quite a lot of shit too.
@brox114 Su-27 10 holes?? I would not be bragging hell are soda pop cans can take more hits than that?
A-10 had 378 holes and still came back safely and landed with a flat tire. copy and paste this for proof "Battle-damaged A-10 Warthog Desert Storm". As far as hangers and how there maintained my car sets in my drive way with snow on it and I only change the oil every 3000 miles or three months and could go alot longer. But I sure in the hell don't want to fly it into battle.
Thunderbolt A-10 isn't fighter but tank-destroyer and that particular one was hitted monstly by 7,62 mm and few 12,7 mm bullets.
Russian Su-25 (which has the similar role) survived hits by 23x152B AA gun and one direct hit with FIM-92C Stinger. Landed safely, was repaired and returned into sevice few weeks later.
@brox114 Ok, But has a Su-27 ever flown without a wing like a F-15? Has it never been shot down in combat like a F-15? Has it flown as many sorties as a F-15 in a combat ? Remember The F-15 is not a new aircraft.
I'm not aware if it has flown without one wing; but it has flown and landed safely from more than 10 bullet holes in engines, hidraulics, fuselage...
USA's and Israeli's F-15's have been shot in combat, but western media is hiding this (they always report crashes as an "mechanical failure"). For example, F-15E in Libya was shot down by Igla AA missile (western media will not report this). Su-27 is also older aircraft from 70's, just like F-15.
F-15 isn't faster, has service ceiling similar to Su-27 and it's avionics are not superior to Su-27.
Top speed of mach 2,6 or more for F-15 is huge BS and only USA's marketing.
With no weapons load and almost empty fuel tank F-15 could reach mach 2,5 - no more. Su-27 can reach mach 2,1 with FULL fuel tanks, and 4 AAM missiles; with full tank and no weapons load (except gun ammo) Su-27 could reach Mach 2,35. F-15 with full fuel tank and 4 AAM cannot reach even Mach 2.
@brox114 And that's all utterly irrelevant. How often is aerial combat conducted at Mach 2+ speeds? I'll give you a hint: it's not. The F-15 and Su-27 are not dramatically different in terms of performance, any contest between the two would come down to pilot skill and luck.
I know that; I was just explaining diferences. True, top speed doesn't matter much; because aerial fights are usually slightly below Mach 1.
Russian Su-27 is superior to USA F-15 in: accelerations, vertical and horizontal, can withstand more g loads (both positive and negative) without damage to airframe or electronics, has better radar and thus BVR capabilities, is more durrable and requires much less maintenance.
Export Su-27 versions are superior to export F-15's, but not USA ones.
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 avionics? f 15 have simple avionics and su 27 have integral ;) learn more about aviation , f 15 never can do that can do su 27 , su 27 have 27 world records ;) many of them su 27 take from f 15 , lern and have objective opinion ;)
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 you are specialist of radars ? :)))) where you get that info ? su 27 and mig 29 can upgrate every time either , thats becouse we have su 37 and mig 35 :)))
@3dimon3: No, officiall Data. The APG-77 is also better than the russian Irbis-E, which is the best russian Radar. It's better in all aspects, even NIIP doesn't claim superiority over the APG-77.
@3dimon3: No, it isn't. The APG-77 has a much greater range. 240km to track a 1m² target. The Zhuk-AE used in the SU-30 as Example can track a 5m² target on 160km. The Captor-C used in the Eurofighter has a range of 185km to track a 1m² target. Also the APG-77 is unbelievable reliable. The Captor-C does get a critical failure every 100 hours. The APG-77 just every 400h! And no, Patriot isn't better than S-400. But it's made in the 70's. That's over 40 years ago.
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 su 27 , range near 4000 km , speed 2450 km/h , radar range 80 - 100 km , optikal system that can find target without radar 30 - 40 km range , 27 world records 5 took from f 15 eagle , flys higher , and so on , and you told about last versions of radar in f 15 , in su 27 , 35 now radar have more than 300 km range ;) f 15 i worster dont even think to copere this planes , russian planes 4 th gen much better than americans or europeans ;)
@3dimon3: I think you mean 400km, 4000km is a bit to much, haha! Also the F-15 can do 2700 km/h. The SU-27 can fly 18.500m high, the F-15 can do 18.800m. More than 300km Range? That isn't anything special. I told you that the newest russian variant, the Zhuk-Aesa does have a max. Range of 160km to track a 5m² target. The APG-63 Version 2 of the F-15 can track a 1m² target on 145km. So, what's better? Also you can't tell me that the SU-27 would beat the Eurofighter Typhoon. Never.
I thought there was a mechanism that prevents the retraction of the gear on the ground, and I thought such a device was first put into use during the 1940s.
(continued fr below)certain bitch mentality of a so called safety,wastage & enviro pollution issues& US is similarly tied down by not only d a'buv but as well by imprudent public opinion & d poor president being publically elected has 2 abide reelin back on critical research funding deemed unnecessary it's pathetic US public opinion is goin 2 bury d country like taking away car designing fr experts & handing dat 2 de public, people'll jas likely go about designing impractical looking Batmobiles
tis is sheer fantastico aircraft testing(notice d landing gear is 0 malfunctioned,it retracted voluntarily)& it didnt even explode n friction if given any other Fjets even western ones,tis wud've turned out horrifically apart from f22 oc.Kudos to r Russo friends fa U've continuosly taken aeronautical engineering to its highest,unlike d west dat is incessantly impeded ethical & economical issues like motor racing formula cars & bikes shud be granted 2 go at deir possible fastest not curtailed by
@kroki2007 something tells me this guy doesn't care much for ''standard procedure''... I would considerer not pulling the gear up until you're airborne pretty ''standard procedure'' ;)
Was someone relying on the weight- on- wheels switch to do it's job? I soviet Russia, they don't need checklists, that's why their jets are made x-tra tough. They probably didn't even FOD the motors.
Ejecting on the ground is more than fine!!!! never heard of the MartinBaker ZeroZero seat? Zero feet, Zero knots safe ejection. The height out the seat gives you plus the drag from the drogue chute openign will pretty much stop you dead and the aircraft will fly/roll/slide along away from you.
Seriously, popping the eject on the ground only works in the movies. IRL, you're pretty much screwed. And as the description said, if you're not actually moving up when you pull the gear, you come back down on it when it's only halfway out. Which is very, really, super bad.
@ChrisTheGregory ejection seats work without any movement of the aircraft.. thats standard in almost veery modern ejection seat.. and like ThePhillipsg said martin baker made this the golden standard in all of their ejection seats and the company specializes in zero zero not trying to start shit just saying
@AdrianDotis I guess it is actually retracting and not just collapsed because it does go back into the well. You think he just accidentally pulled the gear on the ground? Or maybe a shorted system.
@ 0:20 did he try to put the gear back down lol
basimpsn 1 month ago
@basimpsn yes, he is...gears pulling of make some breaking effect and pushing speed limit..
bazeer 3 weeks ago in playlist Jets
Это ошибка пилота. Слишком рано потянул штурвал на себя, слишком рано убрал шаси. Когда нос поднялся возросло воздушное сопротивление, МиГ сел.
lilian20ful 1 month ago
in soviet russia they fly with gears out and land with gears in XD.
momsbabyboy 1 month ago
@momsbabyboy in your head gears
practikle 1 month ago
@practikle my first 'in soviet russia' joke ever and already people are hating .
momsbabyboy 1 month ago
@momsbabyboy Remember how it should be, now there's no such thing as Soviet Russia! Today our state is called Russia or the Russian Federation ! And for you to Russia it is still vodka, medved, balalaika. Me you americans sorry, you are living in the 21st century, and about Russia and russians do not know anything !
practikle 1 month ago
@practikle what makes you think you know about me pal???
momsbabyboy 1 month ago
@momsbabyboy I'm sorry, but I'm indifferent
practikle 1 month ago
He was very lucky! And the plane remained intact, only chassis repair need.
Dimaangel1996 1 month ago
i have heard of belly landings but belly take-offs?
OHNGAI 1 month ago
Gear handle up before take off.
5479900 1 month ago
"katastrofa" or whatever the fuck you write it .. said at least 5 times .. lost count
juggernautultimate 1 month ago
@juggernautultimate learn of the Russian language
practikle 1 month ago
Russians and their ekranoplans.
2IDSGT 1 month ago
@2IDSGT LOL:D that one was the land version....
Bloodmane1987 1 month ago
needed more cowbell
Patsa2001 2 months ago
Funny how he tries to extend the gear again when sliding down the runway :/
apox555 2 months ago
i remember reading about planes and how cold air causes downward drafts of air pushing on the wings keeping it from lifting quickly.... but thats all theoretical XD
KELLERMANisBACK 2 months ago
hahahahaha
tcp000 2 months ago
why didnt the pilot eject?
poplex222 2 months ago
@poplex222
probably need to be quite high to safely eject
fellXhouseXranger 2 months ago
@fellXhouseXranger
No he does not. He could eject if he wanted (ejection seats are 0-0) ,i think he knew he had enough runway to safely stop + he could cut fuel off and shut the engines ,and that prevented the whole airplane going to flame ,and saved couple of hours of hard labor for firefighters.....
MeskovicZ 2 months ago 2
@poplex222 because he wanted the plane save first maybe.... if ha thinks he can land it he shall try:)
DONE:)
Bloodmane1987 1 month ago
Brave guy - He stayed with it too!!
MovieMad007 2 months ago
who else thought that fucker was going to explode at the end???!
nahonix13 2 months ago
You need a positive rate of climb before you retract the landing gear, or this happens. Yes this is true however you need airspeed Vr before a positive rate of climb can be achieved. But it is cold out here it should have got all the speed it needed a lot quicker. Heavier air density and all. Could there have been mechanical problems beside the obvious?
groundpounder35 2 months ago
I'd like to see any other non-russian plane manage that.
Shackalul 2 months ago
katastrjofa niko stradjal
booze505 2 months ago
Holy shit, I thought it would not stop before the end of the runway ... but now they will rape the poor pilot forever in a dark prison cell ... he sabotaged property of mother Russia ... Don't worry pilot, John Claude Von Dom (spelling?) will save you!
Byron10301 2 months ago
@Byron10301 lol - Jean Claude Van Damme!!!
MovieMad007 2 months ago
@MovieMad007 thanks!
Byron10301 2 months ago
@Byron10301 he he he no probs mate any time!
MovieMad007 2 months ago
chuck norris doesn`t need wheels
zibbledy 2 months ago 2
Looks like the fore gear didn't deploy and the pilot made a clever decision to land gear up as the two engine nacelles make up a more stable platform than the two main gears and the nose.
GeoSciful 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ching chong chang iesdngioavokaduvnalkdrfgbuaowd'g
Crossfade543 2 months ago
Looks like the gear was attempted to extend 3/4 of the way through the slide. Didnt get the jet up though. Im sure it wasnt pilot error, never is!!
StickA3031 2 months ago
sure landing gear is poland pussies polish pilot's are the best :D b767 without gear :D
MakarowskiVideo 2 months ago
professional russian!
hitju10 2 months ago
The description is incorrect. What was said is that because of some failure the gear retracted itself
RUS38 2 months ago
doesn't look too bad, hopefully this was repairable
suprafrase 2 months ago
In Soviet Russia, people make shitty, unoriginal jokes about how everything is the opposite to how it is in the normal world.
Gargantis2 2 months ago
@eminidisMike Landing gear is for pussies ! HAHAHAHA LOL !
ibnuhajaru 3 months ago
In Soviet Russia, planes land you
local1114 3 months ago
In Soviet Russia, life fucks you!
TBird4490 3 months ago
nice grind .)
HybOj 3 months ago
And your f16 or f 15 so can?
No? so silent!
RUSKA1L 3 months ago
Vodka shots + MiG 29 fighter jet = best ride of his life.
Nelmistro 3 months ago 19
He put the gear up to soon then tried to put them down again.
launchsa 3 months ago
In soviet Russia, that how u land.
MegaCobra14 3 months ago
the best pilot, and he is very lucku:))
TheDiggger 3 months ago
nooob
motomorfo 3 months ago
no katastropha in this video!
mastouris69 3 months ago
"You know, Yuri...when pilots make a gear up landing...most of them had at least left the ground first."
SCE2AUX 3 months ago 2
it's not a crash it was just a test of the engine's were strong enough to take off without gear :P
hallo54521 4 months ago
thats the last time russians are getting their planes built by china
MashkurKaoz 4 months ago
thats the last time russians are getting their planes built by china
MashkurKaoz 4 months ago
Njet spatsiba!
MultiT66 4 months ago
omg !! O.O soooo did the plane survive ?
aeiou772 4 months ago
pulled in landing gear be four takeoff :)
Yamhal 4 months ago
THX 4 HD
banksbanks3 4 months ago
VODKA
PicRiza1 4 months ago
That's bad for the airplane.
antimattercrusader 4 months ago
I'm not an expert on this aircraft, but many others have a "weight on wheels" switch that prevents undercarriage retraction. The pilots can override this so that the selector is in the UP position without the wheels moving. As soon as the aircraft senses the wheels are off the ground then the undercarriage will move up. Basically this is so that a pilot can show off his skills. If the plane sinks immediately after take off then what happens is exactly what is seen in the video.
ianisme 4 months ago
In Soviet Russia, the earth lands on you!
JustFlyDammit 4 months ago 28
Vtec just kicked in yo!
vfIskullangel 4 months ago
He didn't eject? Ballsy!
kylewaaagh 4 months ago
@kylewaaagh ejecting form that height in a mig..yeah no thanks haha
stiksoldier 4 months ago
Chuck Norris landing ...
immerrocknroll 4 months ago
...yea, landing gear are for pussies. lets get them all in a plain and send them flying
crazykiller2012 4 months ago
☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭
ЁJЁЖГ!..... ЁJЁЖГ!...... ЁJЁЖГ!.....
☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭
Drfusebox 4 months ago
I dont need no stinking landing gear!!!!
Mondscheinfpv 4 months ago
The landing gear has weight on ground switches.once the weight comes off the gear will retract.However when it does so it destroys some of the lift and you droop slightly,if you`re not high enough this happens
xfire7 4 months ago
That reporter has an well-oiled jaw. Damn ..., distasteful babble.
ForAll23 4 months ago
USA dogfighters anit no big deal compared to russians fighters...
russians will kick US ass!
John3121000 4 months ago
dumb pilot!!
alokraja1 4 months ago
0:05 ... do you hear that? That's the sound of Russian tax dollars screaming.
Tigerbeetweenie 4 months ago
pilot acidently retrieved d landing gear .. :D :D
Belayen81 4 months ago
Low rider.
dfawfzx 4 months ago
i like russian voice but i don't understand :p
MonsterRage 4 months ago
@MonsterRage Olivier, the voice says that due to a failure in one system, the chassis have been cleaned for a moment before takeoff and the pilot lifted off and slowed down the bottom of the aircraft. it maybe lie i dont know. TU 144 crashed three weeks ago with a hockey team locomotive Yaroslavl. The Reasons not yet been officially named, but it is clear that if the pilot of TU 144 pulled up the belly of the Tu 144 aircraft, the guys would be alive.
AndreyUral 4 months ago
@AndreyUral Thank you for replying!
MonsterRage 4 months ago
Landing gear is for pussies!
EminidisMike 4 months ago 46
@EminidisMike wow, you must be tough, I wish I was tough like that
p52xtra 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EminidisMike wow, you must be tough, I wish I was tough like that
p52xtra 4 months ago
@EminidisMike wow, you must be tough, I wish I was tough like that
p52xtra 4 months ago
the pilot rushed in retracing the gears and it could not use tail conards to take off.
just a careless pilot.
eshshakchi 5 months ago
It's Garnaev, he is a congressman now.
Outsourcingfighter 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
SeekTruthN0w 5 months ago
Hope he has insurance
universalparamount01 5 months ago
those crazy russians ^^
rudejoni 5 months ago
Tak, na pewno takiego zdarzenia nie "przeżyłby" żaden F-16. Zawsze twierdziłem i twierdzę, że mieliśmy kupić te maszyny.
PL0691 5 months ago
what an idiot,he retracted the landing gear before he even left the ground, take off WHEN your absolutly sure your off the ground.to all novice fighter pilots and etc.
PaperbatVGFAN67 5 months ago
that's not how you fly a plane
maayaa77 5 months ago
In Russia ...Ground crash into Plane.
digglyda 5 months ago
What is interesting to me is that the fire tender hasn't gotten to him yet, and he has stopped all the way, opened his canopy and is climbing out... no help in sight. They should have already been there, with foam started on the runway around the plane and more ready to go as soon as the pilot got clear. Major fuel danger there....
aaftabj 5 months ago
A friend of my fathers ejected on the strip, he scraped the back of his helmet and head and ended up with a metal plate in the back of his scull.
37Flat 5 months ago
@37Flat was it a zero zero seat though?
liakyh 5 months ago
@37Flat
I will ask my father and get back with more facts :)
37Flat 5 months ago
Шасси само по себе не убирается.
Revvavver 5 months ago
American fighters like F-15, F-16, F-18 and F-22, because of their inferior build,w ould catch catastrophic fire, explode and disgenerate into million pieces along with their pilot(s) if something like this happened to them.
Considering this video, it's pilot's error when he tried to pull landing gear up before leaving the ground and gaining some height.
brox114 5 months ago
@brox114
Inferior build? I'd love to see a MiG or Sukhoi pilot land their plane with one wing after a mid-air collision.
F22RaptorSquadron 5 months ago
@F22RaptorSquadron
Inferior build.
Su-27 during Cechen wars returned to base and safely landed with more than 10 heavy machine gun bullet holes in fuselage, engines and hidraulics.
USA's planes have to be carfully maintained after every single flight; Russian ones are usually maintained after 4-5 flights. USA's aircraft need to be in air-conditioned hangars; Russian ones are often snow-covered on their airfields - only few of them are in hangars. USA aircraft couldn't withstand this.
brox114 5 months ago 2
@brox114 that's ignorant. It is true that many Russian jets are manufactured with lower tolerances and less reliance on state of the art avionics (which as the USAF has experienced tends to contain some really expensive bugs in the code), but it means that the parts that do move have extremely short service lives, in the case of early MiG-29 models, something like half of an F/A-18's, and because the engines wear out so quickly on the MiG it can't be overhauled, but completely replaced.
liakyh 5 months ago
@brox114 Also as far as I know the B-2 Spirit is the only aircraft that needs a climate controlled hangar, and Russia has no aircraft in the same league. And the Su-27 example is ridiculous, F-15s, JSFs, F-22 and F/A-18s aren't supposed to be flying missions so low they can be hit by bullets from the ground (unless Chechen separatists have jets now). The US has an aircraft for CAS, the A-10 Warthog, and you'll find it can take quite a lot of shit too.
liakyh 5 months ago
@brox114 Also coalition attack aircraft were landing in makeshift airfields in the middle of the desert during Desert Shield.
liakyh 5 months ago
@brox114 Su-27 10 holes?? I would not be bragging hell are soda pop cans can take more hits than that?
A-10 had 378 holes and still came back safely and landed with a flat tire. copy and paste this for proof "Battle-damaged A-10 Warthog Desert Storm". As far as hangers and how there maintained my car sets in my drive way with snow on it and I only change the oil every 3000 miles or three months and could go alot longer. But I sure in the hell don't want to fly it into battle.
gizmotwadlebutt 5 months ago
@gizmotwadlebutt
Thunderbolt A-10 isn't fighter but tank-destroyer and that particular one was hitted monstly by 7,62 mm and few 12,7 mm bullets.
Russian Su-25 (which has the similar role) survived hits by 23x152B AA gun and one direct hit with FIM-92C Stinger. Landed safely, was repaired and returned into sevice few weeks later.
brox114 5 months ago
@brox114 You said aircraft not fighters, Ok the F-15 with one wing that is a fighter. Cut the wing off a Su-27 and fly it.
gizmotwadlebutt 5 months ago
@gizmotwadlebutt
I was talking about fighters first - look for my first comment here; later while replying I mentioned characteristics of aircraft in general.
However you responded on my comment about Su-27 with "tank destroyer" A-10.
Tank-destroyers (close air support aircraft) are designed to be better protected than fighters.
In general, F-15C is no match for Russian Su-27 in terms of durability, maneuvarability and avionics.
brox114 5 months ago
@brox114 Ok, But has a Su-27 ever flown without a wing like a F-15? Has it never been shot down in combat like a F-15? Has it flown as many sorties as a F-15 in a combat ? Remember The F-15 is not a new aircraft.
gizmotwadlebutt 5 months ago
@gizmotwadlebutt
I'm not aware if it has flown without one wing; but it has flown and landed safely from more than 10 bullet holes in engines, hidraulics, fuselage...
USA's and Israeli's F-15's have been shot in combat, but western media is hiding this (they always report crashes as an "mechanical failure"). For example, F-15E in Libya was shot down by Igla AA missile (western media will not report this). Su-27 is also older aircraft from 70's, just like F-15.
brox114 5 months ago
@brox114: The F-15 is faster & can fly higher than the SU-27, also it's avionics are more advanced, sorry.
G0LD3NGAM3R1989 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989
F-15 isn't faster, has service ceiling similar to Su-27 and it's avionics are not superior to Su-27.
Top speed of mach 2,6 or more for F-15 is huge BS and only USA's marketing.
With no weapons load and almost empty fuel tank F-15 could reach mach 2,5 - no more. Su-27 can reach mach 2,1 with FULL fuel tanks, and 4 AAM missiles; with full tank and no weapons load (except gun ammo) Su-27 could reach Mach 2,35. F-15 with full fuel tank and 4 AAM cannot reach even Mach 2.
brox114 4 months ago
@brox114 And that's all utterly irrelevant. How often is aerial combat conducted at Mach 2+ speeds? I'll give you a hint: it's not. The F-15 and Su-27 are not dramatically different in terms of performance, any contest between the two would come down to pilot skill and luck.
ClancD 4 months ago
@ClancD
I know that; I was just explaining diferences. True, top speed doesn't matter much; because aerial fights are usually slightly below Mach 1.
Russian Su-27 is superior to USA F-15 in: accelerations, vertical and horizontal, can withstand more g loads (both positive and negative) without damage to airframe or electronics, has better radar and thus BVR capabilities, is more durrable and requires much less maintenance.
Export Su-27 versions are superior to export F-15's, but not USA ones.
brox114 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 avionics? f 15 have simple avionics and su 27 have integral ;) learn more about aviation , f 15 never can do that can do su 27 , su 27 have 27 world records ;) many of them su 27 take from f 15 , lern and have objective opinion ;)
3dimon3 4 months ago
@3dimon3: However, the F-15 has the better Radar, also it can be upgraded every time. I already said, the F-15 is faster, however.
G0LD3NGAM3R1989 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 you are specialist of radars ? :)))) where you get that info ? su 27 and mig 29 can upgrate every time either , thats becouse we have su 37 and mig 35 :)))
3dimon3 4 months ago
@3dimon3: No, officiall Data. The APG-77 is also better than the russian Irbis-E, which is the best russian Radar. It's better in all aspects, even NIIP doesn't claim superiority over the APG-77.
G0LD3NGAM3R1989 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 this is opinion of yours spesialist , thay never take a truth , even now they think that Patriot better than s 300, 400 :))
3dimon3 4 months ago
@3dimon3: No, it isn't. The APG-77 has a much greater range. 240km to track a 1m² target. The Zhuk-AE used in the SU-30 as Example can track a 5m² target on 160km. The Captor-C used in the Eurofighter has a range of 185km to track a 1m² target. Also the APG-77 is unbelievable reliable. The Captor-C does get a critical failure every 100 hours. The APG-77 just every 400h! And no, Patriot isn't better than S-400. But it's made in the 70's. That's over 40 years ago.
G0LD3NGAM3R1989 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 where you get that info ?:)))))) su 35 have 300 km attak range :))) and radar range is more
3dimon3 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 su 27 , range near 4000 km , speed 2450 km/h , radar range 80 - 100 km , optikal system that can find target without radar 30 - 40 km range , 27 world records 5 took from f 15 eagle , flys higher , and so on , and you told about last versions of radar in f 15 , in su 27 , 35 now radar have more than 300 km range ;) f 15 i worster dont even think to copere this planes , russian planes 4 th gen much better than americans or europeans ;)
3dimon3 4 months ago
@3dimon3: I think you mean 400km, 4000km is a bit to much, haha! Also the F-15 can do 2700 km/h. The SU-27 can fly 18.500m high, the F-15 can do 18.800m. More than 300km Range? That isn't anything special. I told you that the newest russian variant, the Zhuk-Aesa does have a max. Range of 160km to track a 5m² target. The APG-63 Version 2 of the F-15 can track a 1m² target on 145km. So, what's better? Also you can't tell me that the SU-27 would beat the Eurofighter Typhoon. Never.
G0LD3NGAM3R1989 4 months ago
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 su 35 is newest version of su 27 - i thing this is better plane than eurofighter , nothing to compare
3dimon3 4 months ago
@3dimon3: However, the SU-35 is equipped with Zhuk-Aesa & it's not produced in Mass. There are 13x more Raptors than SU-35's.
G0LD3NGAM3R1989 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@G0LD3NGAM3R1989 APG-79 detection range against a su 27 target 200-250km.
N011M BARS detection range against su 27 target: 350km.
IRBIS E detection range against su 27 target 400km+
so you see APG-79 is not even close to the modern russian radars...
3dimon3 4 months ago
@F22RaptorSquadron I would like to see a US plane do that too
pilotos123 5 months ago
@pilotos123 Check out "F-15 lands with one wing" it's right here on youtube. Then you will have seen it.
gizmotwadlebutt 5 months ago
@brox114 I agree with u!
pilotos123 5 months ago
@brox114 Glad you know it all....Check out "F-15 lands with one wing" it's right here on youtube. The pilot didn't even know the wing was gone.
gizmotwadlebutt 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I thought there was a mechanism that prevents the retraction of the gear on the ground, and I thought such a device was first put into use during the 1940s.
DeloreandudeTommy 5 months ago
Comment removed
DeloreandudeTommy 5 months ago
In soviet Russia plane lands you !
2FasTT 6 months ago
(continued fr below)certain bitch mentality of a so called safety,wastage & enviro pollution issues& US is similarly tied down by not only d a'buv but as well by imprudent public opinion & d poor president being publically elected has 2 abide reelin back on critical research funding deemed unnecessary it's pathetic US public opinion is goin 2 bury d country like taking away car designing fr experts & handing dat 2 de public, people'll jas likely go about designing impractical looking Batmobiles
beaggyboy 6 months ago
tis is sheer fantastico aircraft testing(notice d landing gear is 0 malfunctioned,it retracted voluntarily)& it didnt even explode n friction if given any other Fjets even western ones,tis wud've turned out horrifically apart from f22 oc.Kudos to r Russo friends fa U've continuosly taken aeronautical engineering to its highest,unlike d west dat is incessantly impeded ethical & economical issues like motor racing formula cars & bikes shud be granted 2 go at deir possible fastest not curtailed by
beaggyboy 6 months ago
@kroki2007 something tells me this guy doesn't care much for ''standard procedure''... I would considerer not pulling the gear up until you're airborne pretty ''standard procedure'' ;)
evildeathmonkey1 6 months ago
es obio que fue un error en el tren de aterrizaje xD
sirax4d4 6 months ago
Looks like a possible hydraulic failure...gear failed to lock
globalpilot76 6 months ago
Don't put your landing gear up till your off the ground. Ha. IDK what really happened but I'm surprised he didn't eject!!!!
mtnhrdwearman1 6 months ago
Was someone relying on the weight- on- wheels switch to do it's job? I soviet Russia, they don't need checklists, that's why their jets are made x-tra tough. They probably didn't even FOD the motors.
9Apilot 6 months ago
The million dollar walk of shame.
fastfiddler1625 6 months ago
180 knots... v1, positive rate of climb... v2 rotate..
jeffroboy48 6 months ago
How do you say, "Fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck!" in Russian? I bet that pilot knows.
PootStip 6 months ago
@PootStip
We say: Blyad' Blyad' BLYAD'!!!
And when we understand that it's few seconds before potential death and we can't do anything, we say: "Vsyo, pizdets..."
:)
AgentVRush 6 months ago
Ejecting on the ground is more than fine!!!! never heard of the MartinBaker ZeroZero seat? Zero feet, Zero knots safe ejection. The height out the seat gives you plus the drag from the drogue chute openign will pretty much stop you dead and the aircraft will fly/roll/slide along away from you.
ThePhillipsg 6 months ago
Young blood, too many flying dreams. Chicken and chips. lol mig29 = flying chickens
wa51mmm1 6 months ago
hey man, see how I slide!
danielwayy 6 months ago
Seriously, popping the eject on the ground only works in the movies. IRL, you're pretty much screwed. And as the description said, if you're not actually moving up when you pull the gear, you come back down on it when it's only halfway out. Which is very, really, super bad.
ChrisTheGregory 6 months ago
@ChrisTheGregory ejection seats work without any movement of the aircraft.. thats standard in almost veery modern ejection seat.. and like ThePhillipsg said martin baker made this the golden standard in all of their ejection seats and the company specializes in zero zero not trying to start shit just saying
jeffroboy48 6 months ago
maybe an engine failure
vitalsfading 6 months ago
@vitalsfading LOL, now that's funny. I always retract the gear when an engine fails.
Stickman53fe 6 months ago
Wonder how the KGB looked after him and how long they gave him in lubjanka or was a bullet to the head cheaper
flammabletube 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Its supposed to do that.
blackhawk438 6 months ago
Well now we know the MiG29 makes a good rocket sled. Probably the only thing its good for these days...
JdmTheMilitaryMan 6 months ago
that pilot has @@.
Ellines and Russians are the best pilots...
gvjkh1 6 months ago
In soviet Russia, that's how pilot land
BigFatBoy911 6 months ago
I think the ejection seat failed too :D
ICEGTN 6 months ago
that guy's doom
darrenlimmx 7 months ago
jgkl
DevilCondori 7 months ago
oooooooooo
DevilCondori 7 months ago
No gear failure, pilot thought he'd be cool and raise the gear real early. Typical Russian fighter pilot, always crashing their jets.
deltaMIKEone 7 months ago
@deltaMIKEone Well not exactly, The reporter said that it was a system failure and gear raised for a moment.
during take off. Then he turned of his jets and saved the plane.
Anarkyua 7 months ago
WHAT RUSSIA MADE A DRIVING PLANE TOO GEEZ lol
airplanekid77 7 months ago
Vtec just kicked in yo~!
vfIskullangel 7 months ago
looks like a take off and a apparently the crash was pilot error raised the landing gears too soon
DanielMadrigalC 7 months ago
Looked like gear failure.
ahz123 7 months ago
MiG 29 UB?
hgrgic 7 months ago
Мертвый канал ТВ6
PredatorGLScene 7 months ago
amazing to see the plane did not catch fire.. maibe al fuel was expended..?
NLglimmerNL 7 months ago
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing.
nukeleus1 7 months ago 13
@nukeleus1 any take of you can walk away from is now apperently also a landing
benspreen 7 months ago
@nukeleus1 looks like a failed take off to me. Gear collapses before rotation.
viper8red 5 months ago 9
@viper8red gear was retracting, not collapsing.
AdrianDotis 5 months ago
@AdrianDotis I guess it is actually retracting and not just collapsed because it does go back into the well. You think he just accidentally pulled the gear on the ground? Or maybe a shorted system.
viper8red 5 months ago
@viper8red pilot error. probably heard he was being filmed and pushed the aircraft for a quick take off and gear retraction.
AdrianDotis 5 months ago
This is not a pilot error or a failed take off it is testing.....it was posted 100000 times before...this is testing
pentraksil 4 months ago
@viper8red yeap,gear got in before take off...
akburushovmiras 4 months ago