flaming cliffs 3 flight manual
LINK 1 ENTER SITE >>> Download PDF
LINK 2 ENTER SITE >>> Download PDF
File Name:flaming cliffs 3 flight manual.pdf
Size: 3184 KB
Type: PDF, ePub, eBook
Category: Book
Uploaded: 2 May 2019, 19:45 PM
Rating: 4.6/5 from 679 votes.
Status: AVAILABLE
Last checked: 17 Minutes ago!
In order to read or download flaming cliffs 3 flight manual ebook, you need to create a FREE account.
eBook includes PDF, ePub and Kindle version
✔ Register a free 1 month Trial Account.
✔ Download as many books as you like (Personal use)
✔ Cancel the membership at any time if not satisfied.
✔ Join Over 80000 Happy Readers
flaming cliffs 3 flight manualThe Su-25 DCS Flaming Cliffs module is on sale in. ED e-shopThe FC3 owners not need to buy. Thank you for your purchase of Su-25: DCS Flaming Cliffs. The A-10A DCS Flaming Cliffs module is on sale in. Thank you for your purchase of A-10A: DCS Flaming Cliffs. This simulation. All corrections on 19.05.2013, which made Derelor. And SiThSpAwN, which improving layout and formatting. Document. English. Any version. Other. Freeware - Free version, Unlimited distributionDocument. Italian. P-51D Mustang. Freeware - Free version, Unlimited distributionUpdated 2012-06-01. DCS: P-51D Mustang is a simulation of the legendary American WWII fighter - P-51 Mustang by Eagle Dynamics. Freeware - Free version, Unlimited distributionI made this to help me learn and use it all the time. I want to add other checklists' (after start, pre take off, shutdown etc.) to this, but I can only find limited information that could be accurate, so any help with good info and I will add to this.Manual del F15-C basico, con todos los controles, funcionamiento y procedimientos. Spanish. DCS: WorldManual de vuelo para principiantes del A-10A. DCS: WorldDocument. DCS: World. Su-27. Freeware - Free version, Unlimited distribution. Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers. Start Free Trial Cancel anytime. Report this Document Download Now Save Save DCS FC3 Flight Manual En For Later 0 ratings 0 found this document useful (0 votes) 560 views 320 pages DCS FC3 Flight Manual En Uploaded by Sam Ahmed Description: DCS FC3 Flight Manual En Full description Save Save DCS FC3 Flight Manual En For Later 0 0 found this document useful, Mark this document as useful 0 0 found this document not useful, Mark this document as not useful Embed Share Print Download Now Jump to Page You are on page 1 of 320 Search inside document Browse Books Site Directory Site Language: English Change Language English Change Language.http://www.tallone.fr/userfiles/file/farmall-f-20-shop-manual.xml
- Tags:
- flaming cliffs 3 flight manual, flaming cliffs 3 flight manual pdf, flaming cliffs 3 flight manual download, flaming cliffs 3 flight manuals, flaming cliffs 3 flight manual guide.
Groups Discussions Quotes Ask the Author To see what your friends thought of this book,This book is not yet featured on Listopia.There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Used: Very GoodYou should get it in a few business days. Spiralbound, stiff covers. Nice clean book. I don't see any names or writing inside. No highlighting. No underlining. Light wear. Very good plus. Ships by priority mail at the standard mail cost. Free 'DELIVERY CONFIRMATION' with tracking number (in case a problem arises). I ship ASAP. We are full-time antiquarian booksellers since 1982. 10-6-16 LPlease try again.Please try again.Please try again. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Register a free business account To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness. It is man ufactured in Komso molsk- on -Amur. The Su -33 as famous Su -27 his is e qually capabl e of engagi ng targets well beyo nd visual range as it is in a dogfi ght given its amazing slo w speed and high angl e attack man oeuvrabi lity. Using it s radar and stealth y infrared search an d track system, the Flan ker can employ a wide array of radar a nd infrared gu ided missiles. In addition to its powerful air- to -air cap abilities, th e Flanker-D can also be ar med with bom bs and unguide d rocket s to fulfil a se condary grou nd attack role. Su - 33 for DCS W orld focu ses on ease of use wit hout co mplicated cockpit interaction, significantl y reducing th e learnin g curve. As such, Su- 33 fo r DCS Wo rld feature s keyboard an d joystick cockpi t commands with a focus on th e most missio n critical of cockpit sy stems.http://www.expert-geo.pl/userfiles/farmall-cub-service-manual-pdf.xml General discussio n forum: Fo llowing th e break-up of the Sovi et Union and th e subsequent downsi zing of the Russian Navy, on ly 24 aircraft were produced. Figure 1: Su-33 on the deck Th e Su-27K carrier-based fi ghter, equ ipped with two AL-31F engin es with a t hrust of 12,500 kgf, was requi red to have a no rmal take- off weight (with out armam ent) of 22,800 kg, an d a maxi mum take-off weight (with air- to -air m issiles) of 26,600 k g. The maxi mum combat l oadout of th e aircraft i ncluded two R- 73 short-range missiles, six R-27 E medium-ra nge missile s, as well as 150 rounds f or the inte rnal cannon syst em. With a full fuel load of 7680 kg, the Su-27K's combat radius could reach 1200 km, and its patro l endurance a t a distance of 250 km from the carr ier could re ach at least 2 ho urs. Compared with the land- based version of t he prototype, t he Su-27K was equipped with a fol ding wing, a rein forced chassis, an arrestor ho ok, as well as special navigat ion equi pment. Durin g the process of its con struction, a number of m easures were env isaged for addi tional pro tection agai nst corrosion f or the chassis, po wer plant an d equipment. The Su-27K surpassed t he MiG-29 K in it s loaded and max imum tak eoff weight by al most 1.5 times; in addition, the Su-27K had almo st twice the f uel reserve which provided it with 1.5 times great er range. Achie ving the same tactical radius an d patrol en durance fro m the MiG-29K was possible only with the u se of extern al fuel tanks - one u nder the fu selage and two unde r the wing, wh ich greatly reduced the MiG-2 9's already palt ry combat lo adout of air- to -air missiles. The downside of all these advan tages was the lar ger size and incre ased produ ction cost o f the Su-27K, which limit ed the nu mber of these fight ers in the carr ier's air wing. The T10-3's fligh t testing be gan on July 24 1982 at th e NITKA comp lex, where t est pilot N.F.https://www.cocreationsmanager.com/blog/duels-planeswalkers-2013-manual-mana-tapping-0 Sadovnik ov performed it s very first take off from the detents. In Augu st 28, the T10-3, also pilo ted by Sadovnik ov, took off fro m the ramp. Based on th e results of the first stage of fl ight testing at the NITKA com plex, a decisio n was made to change the pro file of the take-off ramp. Based o n the calcu lations o f specialists from t he Gromov Flight Research In stitute, the Central Aero-Hy drodynami c Institute, and fro m the Suk hoi Experimental Design Bu reau showed th at the best resul ts could be achi eved if th e surface of the ramp was fo rmed not by an arc of a cylinde r, as on the T-1, but by a cubic curve. As a resul t, the an gle of exit of the aircraft fro m the ski- ramp wou ld increase fro m 8.5? to 14.3 ?. While a n ew ski -ramp, designat ed T-2, was under constru ction, S ummer of 1983, saw th e beginni ng of the second stag e of the ai rcraft's flight t esting in NITKA - with arresting gear- assisted landi ngs. Fu rther te sting, as well as the operation of the first Sovi et ship-based figh ters onboard th e Admiral Ku znetsov, revealed a n umber of sig nificant advan tages of ski-ramp t ake-off ov er the tradi tional catapu lt-assisted take-off employed by West ern aircraft carri ers. The Su-27K lo ng-range fi ghter-interceptor was creat ed on the basis of the Su-27 front- line fighter, preserving t he existin g weapons system at the first stage. Further do wn the road, design ers inteded to provide the Su-27K the capabi lity of employin g a newer fire control system, as well as gu ided air- to -surface missil es that were i ntended for use on t he modern ized Su-27M fighter. On the Path to the SU- 33 The Decree o f the Cent ral Committee o f the CPSU an d the Cou ncil of Ministers of th e USSR on Apri l 18, 1984 was t he offici al recognition of the many years of work by the staff of t he P. O. Sukho i Machine-Bu ilding Plan t devoted to the project of dev eloping a n aval version of t he SU-27 fighter. As a result, massi ve efforts went underway on de velopin g the blue prints and then the engin eering developme nt of the Su- 27K naval fighter (giv en the f actory code of T-10K). All the work on the sh ip-based fighter was ov erseen by th e General Design er of the Sukhoi Machin e- Buildin g Plant: Mikhai l Petrovich Simon ov. In 1984, Kon stantin Khristoforov ich Marbashev was appointed h ead of the Su-27K project in the Sukhoi Experimental Design Bureau. The SU-27K, a sin gle-seat superso nic carrier-based fighter, was created as a modif ication of the Su- 27 fighter, th e mass productio n of which by that ti me had already been unde rway at the Komsomol sk- on -Amur Aviatio n Plant (named aft er Yuri Gagarin). W hile ret aining the basi c design and layout so lutions of the basic mo del and hav ing a high degree of con tinuity wit h it in terms o f the power plant, equipment and armament syst em, the S u-27K also had to i mplement in its design a number of significant changes determin ed by the i ntricacies and deman ds of the ai rcraft's future carrier-based o perations an d naval combat assign ments.A mong the main concerns raised was t he need to improve t he combat capa bilities o f the Su -27K in carrying o ut its com bat mission s over the sea. Operational requi rements fo r the Su-27K formulat ed by the 30th bra nch of the Cent ral Research Insti tute allowed for t he aircraft 's deploymen t not onl y as air cover f or the aircraft carrie r, but also f or combatting h ostile surf ace ships. Accordi ng to the leaders of t he P.O. Sukh oi Machine Bui lding Plant, by t he end of the 80s, such an approach would have allowed to pre ss into servi ce the first serial-producti on supersoni c carrier-based fi ghters, whil e the developm ent of new weapon s systems wou ld require co nsiderably more time. They were suppo sed to be int roduced at t he second stage of t he creation of the Su-27K. Neverthele ss, the commi ssion managed to insist that, at the first stage, unguided m eans of defeat ing surface (ground) t argets - air bom bs and unguided rockets - at t he very least m ust be inclu ded in the Su -27K armament. This and the other com ments made by th e client's com mission were t aken into acco unt by th e developers du ring the f inalization of the draft de sign. As a result, in February 1985, th e draft of t he Su -27K project was appro ved by t he comman ders of the Air Force and th e Navy of t he Soviet Uni on. The S. O. S ukhoi Machine Buildin g Plant then bega n to work on the full-scale dev elopment of the carrier-based fi ghter. Ov er the course of its con struction, the aircraft underwent a number of further changes. The weight of the rada r system, reach ing almost 200 kg, i n comparison with the figu res laid down in the preliminar y weight calcu lation, meant t hat the cente r- of -gravity on this new versio n of the Su- 27 could be displace d substantial ly forwards, alte ring the f ocus point. The aircraft became statically stable alon g the lon gitudinal axis and as a con sequence it be came necessary t o balance it by deflectin g the stabilizers down wards. As of the n, however, pra ctical tests on the applicatio n of front canar ds on fight er aircraft had ye t to begin, and the first ser ial Su-27s practically lost the i nherent advan tages of th e unstable conf iguration - depending o n the cent er- of -gravity, they had ei ther a neutral or positive longi tudinal static stabi lity, albeit with a very small margin. The idea of using fron t canards on Su-27 type ai rcraft retu rned in 1982, when devel opement be gan on the a m odification (Su-27M) of the fi ghter with a m ore powerfu l and, consequen tly, heavier r adar. Naturally, the center- of -gravity on the aircraf t moved ev en further, and th e coveted l ongitudinal static instabili ty would become al most impossible t o realize. At the same time, deflection o f the front canards was decide d to be used fo r more effective contro l of the aircraft at lar ge angles of at tack. As is widely kno wn, Su-27 fight ers can successf ully fly in a wide range of angles of attack, bu t there is a certain cri tical valu e of the angle of attack at whi ch the ho rizontal tail is caugh t in a lo w-energy wake generat ed by the win g; its efficien cy drops, and t he deflection of the stabili zers, even nosed up at the max imum design ed angle, would n ot be enou gh to creat e the necessary diving f orce to retu rn the aircraf t to normal f light. In such cases, t he front canards installed in f ront of t he wing and connected t o the fly- by -wi re system resolve t he problem. Even later, other i mportant advan tages of the applicat ion of forward can ards were discovere d. General Desi gner M. P. Simo nov became t he init iator of the forward canard f light te sts on experimen tal aircraft. An unexpect ed result o f the tests condu cted on th e T10-24 with forward canards was also the discovery of a significan t increase in th e maximu m lift of the aircra ft due to the favorable int erference of the can ards and the al l-body with the chosen layout sche me. Thanks to al l these adv antages, it was decided that t he front canards were to be u sed as an inte gral elemen t of the aerodynamic lay out of the ne w Su-27 variants - t he first of which was t o be the Su- 27K naval fighter. The instal lation of t he front canards required ch anging th e contours of t he influx of the fighter' s wing and final izing the fly- by -wire system, as well as t he hydraul ics system of t he aircraft, into which t he canard contro l units were incorporated. It was decided that t he Su-27's fly - by -wire syste m was to be Another m ajor change i n the design of t he carrier f ighter was a chan ge in the scheme o f the fo lding wings and the i ntroduct ion of folding can ards. This was du e to the fact that, in the origin al version of the layo ut, the ove rall width of th e Su-27K with the fol ded wing cons oles was about 10 m, while t he other carri er fighter design, the MiG-29K, had onl y 7.8 m. Taki ng into acco unt a fu selage that was longer by 4m ( 21.2m compared t o 17.3m) le d to the con clusion t hat the MiG-29K held th e advantage over the Su-27K by the n umber of aircraft that can be st ored in th e hangars and on t he flight deck of the Kuzne tsov. As a resu lt, the board of th e Ministry of Aviation In dustry in the m id-80's even raised the issue o f the termin ation of the Su-27K deve lopment pro gram and th e transfer o f the Admi ral Kuznetsov air group excl usively to the l ighter MiG-29K naval f ighters. After condu cting research on several new var iants of fo lding wings in th e Sukhoi De sign Bureau, (over the co urse of which saw con siderations on the possibility of double-folding wing layo uts, in which each con sole was to consist of three parts: one fixe d and two rot ary parts, on e relative to the other), th e decision was mad e to imple ment a simpl er and more technological scheme. Now the wing was to fold appro ximatel y at the middle of the gen eral span (the distance between t he folding axes being 7.0 m, wi th the win gspan ratio o f the fixed an d rotary part s of the wing bein g 1: 3), while preserving t he fuel t ank-compartments in both the fixed and rotary parts. The overal l width of t he fighter with th e wing folde d down under t he new scheme was redu ced to 7. 4 m and became ev en smaller t han that of the MiG-29K. Du e to the f act that the sweep o f the canar ds on the Su -27K was 9.9 m, its pan el was also de cided to be fo lded abo ut half way along their span (the distance be tween the folding axes and the wing being 7.0 m ). And, t o reduce th e overall len gth of the ai rcraft in the h angar of the ship, desi gners also consi dered the po ssibility o f folding the fuselage's cen tral tail boom upwards, as well as raisi ng the no se cone t hat hou sed the radar system. The latte r idea, howev er, was later abando ned, due to the limits im posed by havi ng to fol d the bar of the air pressu re receiver. The developme nt of the aircraft co ntinued. Addition ally: in the i nterests of creati ng the Su-27K, th e Sukhoi De sign Bureau in the mid-80's finalized sev eral mode ls of the Su-27 and Su -27UB aircraf t. In 19 84-1987 up unt il the appear ance of the first pro totypes of t he Su-27K, a large amou nt of te sts was carried out on these mach ines at th e NITKA complex i n order to de velop and impro ve the te chnique of perfo rming short ened take-offs fr om the ski- ramp as well as landi ngs on the arrestor syste m. In 1986, the experiment al production section of the P. O. Sukh oi Machine Bui lding Plant began assembling th e first, an d then the second, pro totypes o f the Su-27K, which receiv ed the design ations T 10K -1 an d T10K-2. One of t he significant differences between the Su-27K ship fi ghter and t he Su-27 base model was the design of th e wing. Wit h the preservat ion of the pre vious wingspan (14.7 m), the wing ar ea of the Su -27K increased by al most 10 i n comparison with the S u-27's, reaching 67. 84m 2. This was The to tal area o f mechanizatio n of the trailin g edge of the wing increased by 84 in compari son with th e base model S u-27. The now three-pi ece leadin g edges saw an increase t o their are a by 17. The un derside of th e fixed part o f each panel saw the installat ion of one addi tional pylo n for the suspen sion of ai r- to -air mi ssiles. The next gro up of chan ges concerned t he take-off an d landing dev ices of the aircraf t. The mai n and front suppo rt of the aircra ft's undercarriage was re inforced, wh ile the f ront support was equipped with a tele scopic rack and two gears. Al l of the undercarriage 's struts were outfi tted with sh ip-based mooring an d towing un its; additional landing l ights and a three-col or signaling dev ice were instal led on the fo rward strut, t he lights of which in formed th e Landin g Signal Officer abou t the positio n of the aircraft on the glide pat h. A drop-down lan ding hoo k was install ed under th e central tail bo om (stinger) fixed to th e fuselage. The hook is equipped wit h a deploym ent, liftin g and dampin g system. The con figurati on of the cent ral stinger and it s end also saw changes: the beam was short ened, raised, and the lo wer surface wa s made flat. In order to i ncrease the i nitial thrust of th e aircraft t o ensure a short take off from the flight deck and a safe missed appro ach in case of an un successful att empt to lan d on the arresto r system, plan s were made to o utfit t he aircraft with modified A L-31F series 3 engines, whi ch, in compari son with t he serial AL-31F, were equ ipped wi th an addit ional speci al mode of o peration, at wh ich the thrust rose for a short time to 12800 kgf. Th e modifi ed engine al so differed from th e standard mode l in terms o f its structu ral material and coat ing that prov ided a high de gree of corrosion resistance. An automatic throttle syst em was also proposed for the engine con trol system in order to simplif y the control of the aircraft duri ng approach t o the steep carrie r glide path wi thout t he pre-touchdown fl are. While pre serving almo st the same fue l reserve as on the base Su-27 model, the design of the Su-27K saw changes to th e configu ration of th e fuselage f uel tanks, and n ew tank compartme nts were installe d in the foldi ng sections of th e wing panel. Th e total fuel reserve on the ai rcraft was 9500 kg (compared to 9 400 kg on the S u-27). An emerge ncy fuel dra in was in stalled on the aircraft fo r the purposes of en suring an em ergency lan ding on th e ship, affordi ng the pilot a f ew minute s to reduce the flight weigh t of the aircra ft to allow for safe landing on the deck. An in-fl ight refueling sy stem was impleme nted in o rder to increase th e aircraft's m aximum fl ight range and pat rol durati on over the sea. At t he same ti me it was int ended that all S u-27K aircraft would be equi pped with a ret ractable fue l rod. With a bu ddy refuel ing p od (quipped with a deployable hose) mount ed on the centerline py lon, an Su-27K could by itself serv e as a refuel ing aircraft fo r others. For mid-air r efuelin g of the aircraft, the pilot mu st release the recei ver rod and make wi th the con e of the tank er's refueling h ose. Once reliab le contact i s established be tween the rod an d the cone, the refuelin g process begins, an d pressurized fu el begins to pass through t he refue ling hose. D uring night con ditions, the bar an d the refu eling cone were illuminated by special headlight s, which were rele ased from th e left an d right sides of th e head of the fu selage. The modif ications ma de to the aircraft stru cture also cau sed significant ch anges to the hydra ulic system, which re ceived addit ional funct ions: contro lling the can ards and the me chanizatio ns of the wings; folding t he wingti ps and stabilizers; depl oying an d retractin g the landi ng hook, refu eling rods, etc. The pne umatic syste m was also modif ied to allow fo r the emergency release of t he landing ho ok and refuel ing rod. The naviga tion equipme nt of the naval f ighter al so included systems t hat provi ded assitance duri ng flights ov er the sea and fo r landing approache s to the carri er. The lan ding main inst rument was the on -board A-380 automat ic radio faci lity fo r short-range navi gation, flight contro l, approach an d landing of shipborne ai rcraft, the Resistor-K42 landi ng aid. To en sure ef ficient o peration and av oid electrical i nterference, all airborne radio electro nic equipm ent of the aircraf t was brought i nto compliance wit h the requ irements of en suring ele ctromagnetic compa tibility wit h the radio-electronic equipment of the sh ip. The weapons con trol syste m of the Su-27K was mo stly anal ogous to that of the Su-27: it used th e same N001 radar dev eloped by t he Tikho mirov Scient ific Research Insti tute of Instru ment De sign. However, in stead of th e OLS-27 IRST present on the Su- 27, a new OLS- 27K IRST was used - t he main diff erence bein g the operating soft ware. The improve d weapons cont rol system fo r the shipborne f ighter Su- 27K (SU-33) allowe d for the succe ssful inte rception of air t argets in the expected combat conditio ns. The array of air- to -air weaponry employed by th e new fighte r also corresponded t o the armament s employed by the base Su- 27 model, bu t the Su-27K mo del saw the to tal num ber of missile hardpoint s increased to 12 - resul ting in a l arger combat l oadout. The Su- 27K could load u p to six R- 27ER, two R-27ET, and four R- 73 missiles sim ultaneo usly. Future plans were made for th e moderni zation of the Su-27K for a new weapo ns control system, developed m ainly fo r the Su-27M figh ter. Taking in to account all the modificat ions of th e design, the in stallation of n ew equipment, as well as the rein forcement of t he chassis, fuselage an d wing structure (due to th e rigorous dem ands of no- flare carrier l andings, v ertical G's and descent spee ds far greater t han tho se experienced wh en landing on conventio nal airfields), th e empty weigh t of th e aircraft greatly in creased by more than 3000 kg compared t o the base S u-27 model, reachin g 19 600 kg (whil e the Su-27 weighed 1 6 400 kg). As a consequen ce, there were some deterioratio ns in the flight ch aracteristi cs of the fighte r. Its maximum f light ran ge decreased by 30-40, while its ma ximum fl ight speeds and service ce iling decreased by 7-9. At the same time, th e Su-27K could take o ff from th e deck with a wei ght of up t o 33,000 kg (the maximum t ake-off weight of the Su-27 was 28,000 kg), havi ng up to 6,5 00 kg of its co mbat load on W ith a ful l fuel load an d the maximum l oad of air- to -air mi ssiles, the take off weight of the aircraft in creased to 32 tons, an d its thrust- to -weight ratio decre ased to 0.8. In this case, th e takeof f of the aircraf t would begi n from the third tak e-off position (wit h a distance o f 195 m). From h ere, the pl ane could t ake-off even with a maximum co mbat load of unguided bombs an d rockets. At the same ti me, the length o f the Su-27K's landi ng roll al ong the deck, with arresto r cable assistance, was to be only 9 0 m. Such fligh t characteri stics provided the Su-27K parity wit h modern fight er aircraft e mployed by the potenti al adversary, and, in terms of han dling charact eristics - maneouv erability, tu rn and ascension ra tes - was outrigh t superior to t hem. A signi ficant intern al fue l supply and th e possibilit y of mid-air refuel ing provi ded the Su-27K wit h the endu rance for exten ded patrols ove r the sea in the vicinity of o f its batt legroup, lead by the aircraft carri er. The maxi mum patrol tim e of the figh ter, with a loadout of two medium- range R-27E missile s and two R-73 clo se- combat missil es, at an alt itude of 11 km and a distance o f 250 km fr om the carri er, even wit hout mid -air refue ling, could reach 2 hours. In the summ er of 1984, the i nstallati on of the ne w T-2 ski-ramp (with a h eight of 5.6 m, a length o f 53.5 m, a width o f 17.5 m, an d an an gle of descen t of 14.3?) was completed at the NITKA co mplex: replicatin g the design o f the ski-ramp on th e Admiral Ku znetsov ai rcraft carrier that was being built at the same ti me. The ne w profile of the sk i-ramp, form ed by a thi rd-order curve, was designed to allow for smoot h increase in Gs on take- off. August to O ctober of 1984 saw a total o f 160 approaches made by th e T10-25 aircraft with a touchdown an d second approach, includi ng 44 automati c approaches, 9 lan dings on th e arrestor system, and 16 take- offs from t he T-2 ski-ram p. Unfortu nately, the flight career of T10-25 wa s to reach an abrupt end: on Nove mber 23 of 198 4, during fli ght at th e testing groun ds of the St ate Scientif ic Test Red Bann er Institute of th e Air Force in Akhtubinsk, due to destructi on of the hy draulic system's pipeli nes leadin g to the rudders, th e pilot, N. F. Sadovni kov, had to eject; The pl ane crashed and was destoyed. The plan e became uncont rollable. I had to However, only 6 fligh ts were performed acco rding to th is program: on the 20th o f January, 1987, t he T10-24 was in volved in anothe r accident, wit h the test pi lot, A. Puchkov, m anaging to eject. The role o f the T10-24 in NITKA wa s filled by yet ano ther test ai rcraft, the T10U-2, equi pped with the mid-air refu eling syste m and an arrestor h ook. With in two mon ths, the test pi lots carried out 12 flights on the T10-U 2, having perf ected the approach procedu re for night lan dings assisted by the Glissada-N system. Fate, howev er, wou ld decree that this prototy pe was also to be lo st several ye ars later in an accident. In the summ er of 1987, the exp eriment al production sect ion of the P. O. S ukhoi Machi ne Building Plant fin ally saw the comple tion of the assembly of t he first Su-27K prot otype - the T10K-1 aircraf t, receiving t he tail numbe r of 37. The tail number was dete rmined by t he fact th at the T10K-1, according to t he end- to -end nu mbering of th e experimental bureau, was the 37t h aircraft o f the Su- 27 family that was passed on t o the design bureau fo r testing (and t herefore, its factory code was T10-37). Initi ally, the T10K-1 had a no n-folding wing an d canards, b orrowed from th e base Su- 27. Six mont hs later, the seco nd copy of t he Su- 27K - T10K-2 (with a tai l number of 39 and a second designatio n of T10-39), also asse mbled fro m the Kom somol units, was deploy ed for testi ng: the principal dif ference bei ng the presence of the folding wings i ntended fo r the carrie r fighter, an enlarged wing ar ea, and ne w wing mechan isms. Inten sive work was performed o n both pro totypes to determine the basic fli ght characteristics of t he modif ied aircraft, to assess its stability ch aracteristics and maneou verability, to check a numbe r of the desi gn improve ments implemen ted, in par ticular the new fly- by - wire system, th e front canards, and th e mid-air ref ueling system (fo r which the bu ddy refuelin g p od was used, with the T10-U2 carrying it. ) Sum mer of 1988 saw th e T10K-1 equi pped with a set o f foldin g wings. Its first f light wit h this modificat ion was perform ed on August 25, but af ter only a month, on September 27, 19 88, the plane crashed. The t est flight required the pil ot of the T10K-1, N. F. Sad ovn ikov to perfo rm several task s at once: the det ermination of the strengt h of the ai rcraft's design in supersonic fl ight, and t he study of the stabil ity and maneo uverability of t he aircraft at large angles of attack, and the imitation of engine failure du e to defects in the hydraulic syst em. There was a fai lure in the control syst em of the horizont al canards, due to which the aircra ft entere d a stall, and th e pilot was, as a consequ ence, forced to eject and leave the first-ever Su-27K to its demise. The second Su- 27K, piloted by V. G. Pugachev, was t hen left to perform the bulk of the factory flight tests after t he T10K-1's accident. I n the y ear after the l oss of the f irst prototype an d until the beginnin g of flight te sts based on the carrier, abou t 300 flights were carri ed out on the T10K-2.