Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

PLAAF Su-27 Chased U-2 Into Taiwan Airspace

Options
  • 26-07-2011 4:32pm
    #1
    Number Nine
    Registered Users Posts: 552 ✭✭✭


    kkj6lh.jpg
    Here some interesting news from the straights of Taiwan last month that sounds straight out of the Cold War. Apparently, Taiwanese F-16s scrambled to intercept a PLAAF Su-27 Fanker that crossed into Taiwanese airspace while chasing down an American U-2 Dragon Lady spyplane. The Flanker returned to its base after the Taiwanese jets were scrambled
    The U-2 was reportedly flying between Osan Air Base in South Korea to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan when it threaded between the Peoples Republic of China and the Republic of China (Taiwan, but you should know this already). Wait a second, Korea to Japan via the Taiwan straits? The straights sit almost 300 miles to the southeast of Okinawa. Ok, this sounds like a blatant spy mission.
    With all the talk about China’s buildup of area denial weapons and the aftermath of the 2001 EP-3 incident you’d think we’d lean toward using satellites and drones like the U-2’s unmanned sibling the RQ-4 Global Hawk or the stealthy RQ-170 Sentinel (rumored to be flying out of Osan).
    This may be a reminder of just how limited our unmanned airborne intel collecting resources are despite all the talk of sensor miniaturization and the ability of drones (or even a fifth gen fighter) to perform the intel duties of much larger cold war-vintage intel birds. I mean, the U-2 was supposed to have been replaced by the Global Hawk a while ago. But, the Dragon Lady can still carry more spy gear than the Global Hawk and there are more U-2 available for spy missions than there are RQ-4s.


    Read more: http://defensetech.org/2011/07/26/plaaf-su-27-chased-u-2-into-taiwan-airspace/#ixzz1TE3eiPSz


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    Would the Su-27 have caught and shot down a UAV though? I imagine the U2 is a little more speedy (Then again, what do I know :o:D) .


  • Options
    #3
    seanmacc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 771 ✭✭✭seanmacc


    johngalway wrote: »
    Would the Su-27 have caught and shot down a UAV though? I imagine the U2 is a little more speedy (Then again, what do I know :o:D) .

    SU27 does Mach 2.4 (over 2000km/hr). Most UAV's hit the 500-600km/hr mark. The U2 is only about 800km/hr. This was cold war like games, more than likely the yanks were checking to see what the Chinese response time was. Next time they may not be so lucky


  • Options
    #4
    johngalway
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,271 ✭✭✭✭johngalway


    seanmacc wrote: »
    SU27 does Mach 2.4 (over 2000km/hr). Most UAV's hit the 500-600km/hr mark. The U2 is only about 800km/hr. This was cold war like games, more than likely the yanks were checking to see what the Chinese response time was. Next time they may not be so lucky

    Quite a bit slower than I would have thought for the U2 (I hadn't looked it up).


  • Options
    #5
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,503 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    johngalway wrote: »
    Quite a bit slower than I would have thought for the U2 (I hadn't looked it up).

    The U2 is basically an ultra long high aspect ratio straight winged plane which is limited both by its wings aerodynamic design(i.e straight, narrow chord and designed for extreme altitude cruise)and its engine which although fairly powerful is a non afterburning turbofan optimised for high altitude cruise the top corner of a U2's performance envelope is @500mph and 85000ft with cruise speed of @435mph and height of 75000ft being normal operating parameters.

    The original U2 prototype was based on an F-104 starfighter fuselage with a non afterburning engine and the high aspect ratio wing which led some to believe it could be capable of extreme performance.....
    If it tried to achieve anything approaching even transonic performance the wings would likely be wrenched off by aeroelastic twisting as the shockwave shifts position.


  • Options
    #6
    owen26
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭owen26


    Wouldnt the U2 just be able increase its altitude to avoid being tailed by a PLAAF aircraft with a lower ,max altitude?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    muppeteer
    Registered Users Posts: 445 ✭✭muppeteer


    owen26 wrote: »
    Wouldnt the U2 just be able increase its altitude to avoid being tailed by a PLAAF aircraft with a lower ,max altitude?
    If they wanted to they could zoom climb up to the U2 altitude easily enough to say hello, all nice and friendly:)


  • Options
    #8
    Captain Chaos
    Registered Users Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    seanmacc wrote: »
    SU27 does Mach 2.4 (over 2000km/hr). Most UAV's hit the 500-600km/hr mark. The U2 is only about 800km/hr. This was cold war like games, more than likely the yanks were checking to see what the Chinese response time was. Next time they may not be so lucky

    On paper and in a clean config the Su-27 tops out at M2.3, put a few missiles on there and it's top speed would drop to about M1.7-1.8 due to drag from the missiles and pylons. In daily service it would be M2 in a clean config, limited to save on engine life and airframe maintenance, wartime conditions is do what ever you can get out of it.

    The F-15 is M2.5 capable on paper. It's M2.3 limited for airframe life or was at least up to the '90s. Today they are M1.8 limited because of their age. With a normal load of 8 air to air missiles they are limited to M1.7 due to drag. In the '91 Gulf War F-15s never exceeded M1.2 in chasing down Iraqi MiGs trying to run across the boarder. The F-15s even ditched their external fuel tanks to reduce drag and weight to try and catch them.

    Also there was a video on youtube that has been taken down. It showed HUD footage from a Venezuela F-16 intercepting a U2. The F-16 had missile lock with a sidewinder and it was at 66,000ft. The F-16 was just about holding that altitude at high AoA. The F-16 service ceiling is listed as 50,000ft. It was very interesting, I wish I got a copy before it got pulled.:(


  • Options
    #9
    Cardinal Richelieu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Cardinal Richelieu


    Captain Chaos wrote: »
    On paper and in a clean config the Su-27 tops out at M2.3, put a few missiles on there and it's top speed would drop to about M1.7-1.8 due to drag from the missiles and pylons. In daily service it would be M2 in a clean config, limited to save on engine life and airframe maintenance, wartime conditions is do what ever you can get out of it.

    The F-15 is M2.5 capable on paper. It's M2.3 limited for airframe life or was at least up to the '90s. Today they are M1.8 limited because of their age. With a normal load of 8 air to air missiles they are limited to M1.7 due to drag. In the '91 Gulf War F-15s never exceeded M1.2 in chasing down Iraqi MiGs trying to run across the boarder. The F-15s even ditched their external fuel tanks to reduce drag and weight to try and catch them.

    Also there was a video on youtube that has been taken down. It showed HUD footage from a Venezuela F-16 intercepting a U2. The F-16 had missile lock with a sidewinder and it was at 66,000ft. The F-16 was just about holding that altitude at high AoA. The F-16 service ceiling is listed as 50,000ft. It was very interesting, I wish I got a copy before it got pulled.:(

    Dailymotion is your friend


Advertisement