Strakes.

Ack.  My bad.

LERX

The wing was provided with a leading edge root extension (LERX) that tapered into the fuselage on a level with the cockpit. The LERX made it possible to achieve post-stall maneuvering capabilities at angles of attack exceeding 30 degrees and later even 40 degrees. At high angles of attack the LERX added about 50 percent to the lift provided by the basic wing. Extending the LERX ahead of the engine inlets had the additional effect of guiding the airflow smoothly into the inlets and presented the engines with a full flow of relatively undisturbed air at high angles of attack, helping to prevent engine flameouts. In addition, a long axial slot was cut into each LERX adjacent to the fuselage ahead of the intakes, preventing a buildup of air ahead of the inlet while in supersonic flight. At low-speed and high angles of attack, these slots provided an escape for boundary-layer air which scrubbed across the fuselage ahead of the inlet. In 1968, the LERX were further enlarged, the forward portions continuing ahead as strakes almost to the nose.

The engines were fed by long ducts which admitted air from semi-circular inlets. These inlets originally were provided with a movable half-cone centerbody ahead of the wing. However, by 1971 it was concluded that Mach 2 performance was not all that important a design objective, and these conical centerbodies were eliminated. At about the same time, the inlets were made shorter and brought back under the LERX. That made the large LERX look a lot like the head of a cobra, so much so in fact that Cobra became the Northrop name for the P-530. The inlets were further refined throughout 1971-71, the final shape selected being a canted oval shape with a fixed, slightly-rounded edge, with the top located 4 inches below the underside of the LERX. The inlets were separated from the fuselage by a large rectangular splitter plate.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher4/f17.html

 The F-16 has strakes, so I was half right.

More LEX's…



Many aerospace engineers consider this one of the most aerodynamically perfect aircraft in the sky

Quoted: Quoted: (In Before The F-14 Should Be Brought Back Guys) They had glove vanes (F-14A did anyways). www.topedge.com/panels/aircraft/sites/mats/glove-l.jpg

Quoted: Quoted: More LEX's… www.suchoj.com/ab1953/Su-27/images/Su-27_14.jpg Many aerospace engineers consider this one of the most aerodynamically perfect aircraft in the sky Add Western avionics and engines to it, and it would be amazing. As it is, you have to deal with those less-than-ideal Lyulkas.

Strange but true… the RAF did actually look at buying the SU-27!!!

ANdy

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: More LEX's… www.suchoj.com/ab1953/Su-27/images/Su-27_14.jpg Many aerospace engineers consider this one of the most aerodynamically perfect aircraft in the sky Add Western avionics and engines to it, and it would be amazing. As it is, you have to deal with those less-than-ideal Lyulkas. Do NOT underestimate the capabilities of the on board radar and EW system.  The MMI may not be up to western standards but I can assure you that the electronics combat suite is exceptionally good, which is in keeping with stuff the Soviets had decades ago.  They are very good at EW "stuff". I have no info on the engines.  I suspect that with the latest US engines, and up to date cockpit avionics, they would be the finest fighters in the entire world.

I have some Russian technical books on the Flanker family… they (the SU-27) are pretty hot stuff. The Russians keep the best for themselves.

ANdy

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: More LEX's… www.suchoj.com/ab1953/Su-27/images/Su-27_14.jpg Many aerospace engineers consider this one of the most aerodynamically perfect aircraft in the sky Add Western avionics and engines to it, and it would be amazing. As it is, you have to deal with those less-than-ideal Lyulkas. Do NOT underestimate the capabilities of the on board radar and EW system.  The MMI may not be up to western standards but I can assure you that the electronics combat suite is exceptionally good, which is in keeping with stuff the Soviets had decades ago.  They are very good at EW "stuff". I have no info on the engines.  I suspect that with the latest US engines, and up to date cockpit avionics, they would be the finest fighters in the entire world. I don't doubt the theoretical quality of Ivan's electronics. The problem enters with quality control on the assembly line; Give Russian designers access to Western manufacturing, and the results would be very interesting. +1.  Everything that I have heard about Russian quality control has been negative.  One of the main problems is that pannels almost never seem to fit the way that they are supposed to, and I have never seen a Russian aircraft that looked like it was well maintained.  That is not to say that they do not exist, just that I have yet to see any.  The Russkies do have some pretty neat ideas, many of which the US should consider equiping our aircraft with (the helmet mounted IR missile sight comes to mind).

Get to see the 'real deal' that the Russian use for their Homeland Air Defence Squadrons… the Russians run two versions of everything. The 'Good Stuff' they use at home, and the 'M' or 'Monkey Model' they sell abroad.

The production plants are at Irkutsk (IAPO), Komsomolsk-on-Amur (KnAAPO) and Novosibirsk (NAPO) and they compete against each other for work.  KnAAPO does the best birds.


ANdy

Quoted: Quoted: Give Russian designers access to Western manufacturing, and the results would be very interesting. Clinton tried his hardest.....

EADS in December paid $65.3 million for 10 percent of Irkut, a maker of Sukhoi fighter jets. Boeing employs 1,200 people at its engineering center in Moscow, where about a third of the design work on the 787 is being done. Boeing is also a consultant on Sukhoi's project to build a new family of midrange aircraft and cooperates with Russia on the International Space Station.

Russian UAV developers forge links with foreign companies
January 09, 2006
Despite the lack of government orders and financing, Russian aviation giants are spearheading work on unmanned technology and have signed a number of cooperation deals with foreign aerospace producers to gain expertise and perhaps future access to global markets.
Work on unmanned technology began in the Soviet era and is conducted mostly at the Yakovlev and Tupolev companies. But the Russian Air Force has yet to work out a concept and tactical characteristics for future unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs).
At the Moscow Aviation and Space Show, known as MAKS-2005, Gen. Vladimir Mikhailov, Air Force chief, said that the technical request for UCAVs may be prepared by the end of this year.


“We have no intention to delay this theme,” Mikhailov said on the sidelines of the August show. He would not elaborate.
Meanwhile, other companies, including Irkut, the privately controlled maker of Sukhoi fighter jets, were demonstrating their own unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developments at MAKS-2005.
Irkut moved into unmanned technology development with the help of an Israeli company, Aeronautics Defense Systems, when in 2003 it purchased license rights for the Israeli company’s Aerostar UAV. Irkut is developing a range of unmanned vehicles that it insists are of Russian origin.
The six types of Irkut UAVs are single-engine aircraft with top speeds ranging from 100 to 150 kilometers an hour and maximum altitudes of 100 to 500 meters for light ones, and 500 to 3,500 meters for craft of 200 kilograms and heavier. The UAVs either operate automatically or by ground-based control post, according to a presentation at the MAKS-2005 show.
The UAVs, fitted with digital cameras and laser mapping systems, can detect a human being at a distance of up to 4.5 kilometers in daylight, and up to four kilometers at night. The data can be transmitted instantly to a terminal installed either in a car, an aircraft or a helicopter, according to the presentation.
The first customer to get the company’s Irkut-60 UAV is Russia’s Emergency Situations Ministry for search-and-rescue operations. The 65-kilogram UAV has a range of 70 kilometers and a flight time of six hours. The ministry and Irkut are testing larger UAVs, the 200-kilogram Irkut-200 and 860-kilogram Irkut-850, both with a range of 200 kilometers and 12-hour flying times.
Irkut so far has used its own money to develop the UAVs.
“We are just at the start of the road [with UAV development],” Irkut President Oleg Demchenko said at a press conference Aug. 17 at MAKS-2005, noting the company incorporated the Yakovlev design bureau’s experience. Irkut in 2004 purchased Yakovlev, where Demchenko was director and chief designer.
Irkut also is pursuing development of UCAVs, and during MAKS-2005 signed a cooperation agreement with Italy’s Aermacchi to jointly explore the use of the Yak-130 combat trainer jet as a UCAV development platform.
Giorgio Zappa, general manager of Aermacchi parent company Finmeccanica, said at MAKS-2005 that Russian airfields will be used as the testing ground for the new UCAV, which will help accelerate Italy’s efforts in unmanned technology. The companies, however, first have to get approval from their respective defense ministries.
Russia’s other aerospace giants — Aviation Holding Co. Sukhoi and Russian Aircraftbuilding Corp. MiG — also are working on unmanned technology, but would not comment for this report. Both companies, Sukhoi in 2004 and MiG in 2005, signed agreements with EADS on the development of unmanned technology. A source in the domestic aerospace industry said there has been little progress between Sukhoi and EADS due to government hurdles about exchanging sensitive information.
— Lyubov Pronina

http://www.c4isrjournal.com/story.php?F=1379977