tavarish palkovnik

These are not random stuffs, these are sequences in order to get answers. I would like, if there is no in free sources full description, and there is no, to get answer how this rocket actually flys. Also I would like to find someone with same enthusiasm (I’m not rocket scientist) to share thoughts. I was reading here lot about R-27, mostly complaints, so I guessed there will be someone, however. If there is no any single photo and drawing of R-27ER than why not to make one by itself. Collecting visual segments and textual descriptions in assembly is possible isn’t it. With knowing how it looks and what is inside it’s easy to describe how it works. Than it is hard to convince me in something else. Further sequences are ballistic characteristics, all that can be calculated, just regular physics and mathematics, some books, some tables, calculator and there it is…source. Next sequence is guiding method together with all previous (not random) and there it is…answer is there. Conclusion is there.

It is very hard to animate anybody in this very interesting stuff, even here nobody want to talk I thought R-27ER is rocket of interest here, at least I got such impression. Anyway I will continue with some more words, at least it will be at one place. So now when having Cx f(M ; H) at zero angle of attack and Cy f(M) also at zero angle of attack and some allowable angles, it is good time to use these numbers for cases when rocket is under overload, when angle of attack starts to be involved. This is simplified mathematic but sufficient enough. So let’s take one time moment, 1km and 2M. Cx0-drag coefficient at zero angle of attack Cy0-lift coefficient at zero angle of attack, 1/deg Cx1-drag coefficient with angle of attack Cy1-lift coefficient with angle of attack, 1/deg A-angle of attack, deg Cx0=0,713 ; Cy0=0,5079 ; and for example A=5 deg Cy1=Cy0-Cx0/57,3=0,5079-0,713/57,3=0,495 (1/deg) Cx1=Cx0+Cy0*A^2/57,3=0,713+0,5079*5^2/57,3=0,935

...

But…all that how-how…however inertial navigation with R-27R/ER is missed completely

It would be indeed (for this and these), but that and those probably you don’t have extracted. However when I see that, for example H-58, is powered with lousy 210s in march, and this rocket is filled with highly energetic composite fuel, and plus to that with 195s in buster , everything can be expected.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Uffff…should we now about available reserved overload capacity after 60 seconds of flight. Or about what “blues” like to call flight with loft what “reds” have also and call it inertial flight with weight compensation

...

R-27 and 27E have turbogenerator which is source of electric power, just to be mentioned

That’s better, and honestly I’m looking forward to read about further actions as I also have some kind of strange interest for these curves and trajectories are in indeed with lot of curves, continuously and frequently changed

This is very ambitious statement. Although not user, I hardly doubt you managed to program mathematical method of inertial navigation of these rockets, method that can be easily described in mathematical form but hardly “molded” in universal form. Please don’t take me wrong, but sometimes it’s better to say, we did our best

...

...

Again again please… “R-27ER outperforms the AIM-7M mostly in everything but weight” Please try to explain this oxymoron to me, or my english is really bad. It means R-27ER is “better” but it is not good because it is heavier?

Oh my god, based on what this conclusion is made?

Р-27Р/Т пнв 1983 г. Р-27ЭР/ЭТ пнв 1985 г. Just to be mentioned when exactly these rockets entered in service www.oboron-prom.ru