Originally Posted by SU-4ever

....Eurofighter and the PAK-FA use LE Slats ....

I'll PM you the pics of the Euro and the manufacturers ref to Krueger flap. When extended you can't see day light between the LE of the flap device and the wing. They don't do slats because of LO. Gaps become much more visible to radar.
Since this a tangent on the Euro I'll take it off line.

Well, I have done some pondering. And it seems as if programming for the SU is just as easy if you only have elevator and rudder on the thrust vectoring. However if you want aileron mixed on TV then it needs to programmed like a delta or elevon mixing. Which gives the EF a slight advantage their, but otherwise seem alike the SU out performs it.

Originally Posted by Jwmflying14

Well, I have done some pondering. And it seems as if programming for the SU is just as easy if you only have elevator and rudder on the thrust vectoring. However if you want aileron mixed on TV then it needs to programmed like a delta or elevon mixing. Which gives the EF a slight advantage their, but otherwise seem alike the SU out performs it.

??? If you look at Jandro/SU4Evers vids he has external mixers on his. Thats all you need to add to have all of it. The limit with the 9503 is the mixes. If it had 8 or more it wouldn't be an issue. But if you use the Delta/Elevon mix, you drop flap and elv to flap functionality. It was one of the more common complaints about the JR programming.
Thus the original suggestion to just add a external mixer to make the stabs tailerons. I wouldn't recommend flapperons without the tailerons to maintain roll authority but if you aren't going with flapperons then there really isn't an issue. Thrust vectoring can just take up the last 3 channels.

But like I just explained in the Euro thread, I have the same radio and presently have Flapperons, tailerons, Elv>flp and TV pitch and roll on a on/off switch, along with the right slider being independently in control of the thrust line or TV in pitch.

Okay from my understanding neither of the two will have mixing problems unless I want to incorporate flaperons on the SU.

I wish someone could just tell me one or the other is better.

People keep asking and... I'll keep telling to buy both xD

Unless it is your first jet, then' I'd rather go for the Euro.

They are totally 2 different planes, so it all boils down to preference & some exp. Euro is a better 1st or 2nd while the Su35 is a 2nd or 3rd (I think min.) plane. Some have gotten it as a 1st plane and had success, but wouldn't really recommend that route. Like jandro, max, I , and others have em both suggest u do the same.

ugggh. its just ahrd for me to drop like 600-700 on two plane.... Considering that can buy me parts for my bigger planes. I fly a lot of composite EDF, or conventional high end #3D planes, along with some 165-180mph pylon planes. I just want the best cheap 3d foamy jet possible! lol

Flew this morning 5 packs and I conclude the SU-35 is the best jet I have ever flown.

K well throughing the ball back in your court....
What specifically are you expecting from the model. Your question is like which is better the Extra 300 series or the Yak54. Many will say the 300 but you can do certain things more cleanly or easier with the YAk than the Extra.

Because you mentioned 3D to begin with hopefully the replies are not on the big sky type flying or better quality but pure 3D ability.....

Because you can get a higher TWR from the Euro which is smaller, has a lighter power train and by design has a higher rotational rate with less momentum lose all good for a certain range in 3D.... In fact I found mine was even better with the elevons going from root to tip.
You have 3D turbine Euros, but I haven't seen a 3D turbine SU27 family.... Not sure why!

The wing load and higher range of deflection of surfaces, while under power for the SU, you can do more inertia type 3D.

But asking Jandro, who's displayed a number of mild 3D routines, specifics as to which has been harder or easier time to perform, walls, hover, flat spin vertically or inverted, etc. may your decision.

You'll likely still get both as the answer because they both can do the manuevers but need slightly different approaches. So then it becomes what else they can do or simply which is a better size for you, simpler or which looks better to your eyes, the Russki or Euro....
I think we keep saying both because they are so close in jet foam 3D ability that it comes down to which do you think you like better for other reasons.

Jwm,

Here's another perspective on it. You crash the euro your buying a whole new airframe. If BH supplies the spare parts as the are indicating they will, then I would go the SU35 route. Another thing is what batteries are you going to use? If you have 4000mah 6s (euro) or 5000mah batteries (Su & euro), then that can play a factor as 5000mah is the lowest I would recommend for decent flight times. Soooo... There ya go, iny-miny-miney-moe! Is what a may end up.

Alright thanks for all the help guys! And for putting up with me! I think ilk wait for the SU to come back in stock.

Both are good for 3D, as previously said it's easier to fit more powerful and lighter setups on the Euro, and this one is THE BEST for high alpha purposes out of the box, but I've found that though it is a bit more technichally complex (In flight skill requirements), and a bit underpowered, the SU-35 frame can do things the Euro just can't dream of, and I have more flights on the Euro than on the SU. So each one has its own things, it pretty much personal preference.

Since it seems you are a veteran flyer I'd go for the Su-35 and add the RC Lander turbines, with 70 A Hobbyking Esc which are some 260$ more and you will have a monster 3D machine with even better TWR than Eurofighter.

Though, as Max said, I'm flying it stock setup, and you can see in my videos that it can do lots of 3D in that setup.

Ah, yes, and the flat spin is WAY EASIER to do with the Sukhoi!

The vid we talk 'bout:

EPIC Su-35 flight (10 min 39 sec)

Cheers, and nice shopping!
Jandro.

Thanks Big J! Your the pilot so I didn't want to assume but you do seem to be able to do more with the SU. Just wasn't sure if one was harder than the other.

My ESCs just arrived so soon for me. Woohhhoooooo!

Jwm, keep in mind this is jet 3D. I find a lot translates but these are heavier than the typical Extra/Edge/Yak.

If you get those RCL counter rotating please document it. Initially we mentioned to many that they are needlessly heavy but so far I'm finding I have to move everything back. Like jandro mentioned I'm at the back of the battery tray, moved the RX battery in front of the ESC tunnel entrance and have my ESCs moved back and still have a hard time getting CG160mm. The Wemos are light so the RCLs may balance it out. For the power though they do have a slightly higher amp burn.

Has anyone stepped the tube down to 56mm with a thrust tube? obviously not the CS-10. What results if any?

Originally Posted by SU-4ever

On The Su-27-35 family they seem so but the Eurofighter and the PAK-FA use LE Slats

I thought more of something like this, because the nice thing about slats is the bypass of air to force the flow to attach to the wing, I better explain on pic. It'd be nice to link it to a G-force accelerometer to be deployed on tight turns, and also be able to deploy at will for landing and high alpha purposes.

Cheers!
Jandro.

Sounds like you need slats that come out automatically ( aerodynamically ).....
Like the F 86, the Sabreliner, and some old plane called the Lysander......

Yes we took this discussion off line. The SU doesn't use slats. It has a drooped flap. The trouble with the Sabre type design for this model is you would need several scissor guides to keep the LE from twisting away at higher speeds.

Thus the diagram that I posted has the best of both worlds.... the entire lower edge can be CA hinged, simplest hinge there is, forward pressure would torque the form back to its neutral position and no further, and extended the servo rod or cable would move from pushing to under tension. A coupler would be on the actuator rod so that it would not be able to extend beyond a set limit and if the rod/cable collapsed it would still push the LE back to its neutral position.

Thus preventing the possibility of the video posted a page back where a LE device could twist in the wind at full throttle and influence flight control.

To it has to be very simple for Freewing to manufacture it or they won't both. Actually looking at my sample pic i should turn the LE servo around to follow the arc. So the servo should be moved further forward and reposition the servo arm 180.