Flying the Su-27 Flanker

Briefing consisted mainly of my asking questions until such time as I felt confident of my ability to operate the aircraft from the front seat.

One of the unfortunate aspects of the flight was that it was planned for quite late in the day. Takeoff was set for 1800hrs but, because the briefing took longer than expected, the flight was considerably delayed and the aircraft was not taxied until shortly before sunset. This led to a curtailing of the flight that had been briefed. Basically what was determined at the briefing was that the flight would be conducted in two parts. In the first part the Sukhoi 27 would fly in formation with an RAAF PC-9 aircraft piloted by Wing Commander Chris Spence, with a civilian photographer in the back seat of the aircraft to obtain a photographic record of the flight. In the second part of the flight I was to explore the handling characteristics of the aircraft before returning to Changi to carry out some circuits and touch and go landings. In the event, the flight consisted of only a small part of what had been planned.

At the aircraft I was fitted out with the Soviet flying gear necessary to operate the aircraft. This comprised a helmet, oxygen mask, throat microphone, and a life preserver. All were of reasonably modern design and all were quite comfortable to wear. I was assisted in strapping into the cockpit and adjusting the seat and rudder pedals. The seat was quite comfortable although, in later conversations, the Soviet pilots offered the opinion that the seat became uncomfortable on long flights. The strap in procedures were similar to those of modern Western fighter aircraft such as the F-16 and F-18. There were no pins associated with the ejection seat. The ejection handle, which was between the pilot’s legs, when snapped up into place was armed; when it was snapped back down, it disarmed the seat.

The cockpit technology was nowhere near as advanced as that of modern Western cockpits. In most respects, the cockpit looked like a Western fighter aircraft of the early 1. 960s. The flight instruments were clockwork instruments displaying basic information and little else. The avionics were also basic and, to a western eye, of a previous technological era.

Starting the engines was a simple process; the throttle of the engine was moved to the ground idle position and the engine start button pressed. Thereafter the whole process continued until the engine started and stabilised. The second engine was similarly started. It was obvious that all necessary procedures could be carried out from the back seat as Victor Pugachev completed all the necessary flight control checks from that seat and also completed the aligning of the inertial navigation platform. During the after start checks, a number of caution and warning lights illuminated as Victor Pugachgev earned out _ a series of checks from the rear seat. In those checks the Soviet equivalent of ‘Bitching Betty’ was heard on a number of occasions.

After completion of the after start checks I checked . in with • h t e PC-9 aircraft and we attempted to negotiate our air traffic clearance. At this stage, it became obvious that ATC was to be less than cooperative about our flight. The controller pointed out that flights of the type we were undertaking were of a special nature and had to be completed by last light. The air traffic controller informed us of the end of daylight at Changi and virtually suggested that we cancel the flight. This we would not do and ultimately we were given permission to taxi. Throughout the flight, ATC was less than helpful and eventually ordered the two aircraft to return to land at Changi. the Su-27 is an easy aircraft to taxi. The nose wheel is linked to the rudder pedals making steering easy and the aircraft was taxied at a reasonable pace on idle power. On the up hill sections of the taxiway a minor increase in power was all that was needed to maintain a good taxi speed. The PC-9 took off first and I requested that my takeoff be as soon as practicable after that of the PC-9. However, once again air traffic control was less than helpful and the takeoffs were separated by about four minutes. This made join up difficult as visibility was not good and the PC-9 is quite a small aircraft and difficult to acquire visually.

On takeoff, in which only military power was used, the Su-27 was easy to control and accelerated quite rapidly. The nose gear was lifted off between 108kts and 118kts and the aircraft lifted into the air at 140kts. I selected 10° nose up attitude on the Al and gear and flaps up. We were cleared be ATC to 3,000ft and I had to conduct some swift mental conversions as both the radar altimeter and pressure altimeter were calibrated in metres.

As cleared by ATC I flew at 3,000ft into the Horsba area where,_ with some difficulty, visual contact with the PC-9 was made and the Su-27 manoeuvred to a formate with the PC-9. Through these manoeuvres, the Su-27 showed itself to be a nice handling aircraft with excellent control response and easy engine handling.

We proceeded to fly the formation as briefed with photographs being taken from the PC-9. Unfortunately, when only about ten minutes into this part of the flight, Changi ATC cancelled our clearance for the flight and ordered both aircraft to return to Changi. Reluctantly, we discontinued the photographic section of the flight and split the formation.

Having come this far I was most reluctant not to put the Su-27 through some of its paces and Victor Pugachev in the back seat indicated he was anxious to have me manoeuvre the aircraft more vigorously than we had to that point in the flight. Consequently, and to the annoyance of air traffic control, I proceeded to take the aircraft through aerobatic manoeuvres including high G turns, a loop and a series of slow and aileron rolls. The Su-27 was a delightful aircraft to fly. It handled all those manoeuvres with considerable aplomb and exhibited excellent handling characteristics.

By this stage, ChangiATC were becoming quite agitated at our lack of progress towards the field and reiterated that we were to return immediately to Changi for landing. We were cleared for an ILS approach to runway 04right and I manoeuvred the aircraft for the approach. Maximum speed for both gear and flap was 243kts and the final approach was flown as briefed at 8 to 10° alpha. The Su-27 was a delightful aircraft to fly down final, being easy to control through the approach. Power setting was in the range 82-84%.

The technique I used for landing was to flare the aircraft and reduce the power to idle which seemed to suit the aircraft well because the touchdown was quite smooth. The landing gear gave the impression of being a ‘soft’ gear with the capacity to make most landings seem smooth. The aircraft was easy to handle after touchdown and the nose could be controlled very easily onto the ground. The brakes were smooth and no difficulty was experienced in bringing the aircraft to taxiing speed and exiting on one of the high speed exits from the main runway. The aircraft was taxied back along the taxiway to our parking position, and the engines shut down.

It had been a great experience for me and one which was professionally very satisfying. Nevertheless, I must admit to a great feeling of relief by the time I had shut down the second engine. The flight had had many difficult aspects to it: the unfamiliar cockpit, the distinctly different instrumentation, the fact that the pilot, Victor Pugachev spoke little English, the difficulties created by air traffic control and the failing light. In fact, the approach and landing were conducted after dark.