BlackPixxel

@Chizh Is there a document about the battery runtime of the extended range R-27 being 60s? Or is it just assumed to be the same 60s as the short range version?

MiG-29 manual says that it can also be fired from Phi-0 mode with radar turned off, similar to a heat seeking missile.

I agree. While the Su-27 provides less information than other aircraft, the way that the information is presented is very intuitive. For example the radar elevation in the RWS mode. You get a visual representation of the radar angle on a +/- 60° scale. In the F-15 there is no such thing, it just gives you a number of the altitude range covered, but nothing visual.

If the target was locked in BVR mode, then this is indeed a bug. Close combat does not lock targets beyond 10 km with radar, but with EO it can lock further if the heat signature is strong enough.

He is in close combat mode, HUD says BVB in the bottom left. BVR mode would be DVB.

This is perfectly normal. You only get the additional information in BVR mode. In all the close combat modes, the HUD is more minimalistic.

What I want is that I can break the F-18's radar lock as he tries to lock me just has he can do the same with me. If ED does not implement a similar automation as on the hornet, then doing it manually is the only way to go. But with an artificial delay of 15 s it does not work.

Why 5 seconds? The real one has no delay.

But in DCS the 120B has a dual stage motor, and the 120C a single stage one. In the table it is the opposite. Which is why I am not sure about the accuracy of the table.

Interesting, it says that the R-77 can be used on the Su-33 I only found this (user made?) table in some fourm. Aim-120 values seem off, at least their motor configuration is not how we have it in DCS. But maybe the R-77 value is correct to achieve the 79.

It is about 110 Kg for the empty 120B and 122 Kg for the empty R-77. Both should have almost the same fuel fraction. Not sure about the grid fins, there is a reason they are still used on the R-77-1, I doubt it is only about actuator size.

On this timestamp is a video of a R-77 launch. It is hard to tell when the motor stops exactly, due to the angle and the camera movement, but it appears to be somewhere around 5 seconds. There are also some other nice launches in the video.

The big improvement for the R-77 will be the loft and the autopilot update. Similar to how the Aim-120 fired without loft has quite a poor performance compared to the R-27ER. The loft of the 120 in DCS gives it an gigantic range increase, it feels like it gets twice the engagement range. Extra thrust in the thrust config, or extra thrust in the missile flight calculation? R-27ER certainly has the correct thrust values, not enlarged, in the config.

Maybe it could be approached by giving it a very aerodynamic shape after the tail, but even then it would create some additional friction.

Nice work! Something to consider (which is implemented with the new FM I think) is that as long as the motor is burning, the rear of the missile will not create a zone of low pressure. So during the motor burntime, the drag would be reduced.

But what does that have to do with the question of whether the permitted launch zone graph shows the absolute maximum aerodynamic engagement ranges, or whether it has some energy reserve left?

Well, the missile has to have at least the same speed left as the target, plus the additional speed difference required for the proximity fuze. Or are you refering to something else?

Quite an odd recommendation, but I highly doubt it is related to kinematic range, especially since no speed parameters are given. Rear hemisphere is the whole area behind the targets 3/9 line. I am sure the R-27R will way fly further than 3 km if the target is for example engaged at a 120° aspect. The fact that it is only about the radar guided variants and not about the IR ones (R-27T/ET, R-73) makes me think it might be seeker related? But even then, R-27R and R-27ER should have roughly the same seeker limitations.

Only under the questionable hypothesis that the available graphs show the aerodynamic range. MiG-29 manual says: "Разрешенные дальности пуска ракеты Р-27ЭТ практически такие же, как и у ракеты Р-27ЭР однако в ППС они ограничены дальностью захвата цели ТГС." Note how it says that the permitted launch zones are practically the same. So if a SR-71 was to be engaged, the R-27ET would have basically the same permitted launch range as the R-27ER. The ET would of course reach the target with less energy. Same with the following graph, showing that the permitted launch zones of the graph are valid for R-27ER, R-27ET and R-27EP. With current DCS logic (permitted launch zone = absolute kinematic range) the ET would never hit. Similar things were said by certain russian pilots here on the forums (at maximum permitted launch range there is still some speed left for some maneuvering, but it is unknown how much).

You can change the radar operation channel AND the missile illumination channel (two independend things) during flight using the following selectors: "LITERA 27 I 33" is the selector for the missile illumination channel. So you can indeed switch to the channel of your wingmen during flight. Only the channel on the missile itself is set on the ground. But what is much more interesting: While in the manual of the export Su-27SK the switch has the label "LITERA 27", here in our domestic Su-27S and also in the Su-33 the switch has the label "LITERA 27 I 33". So it looks like the implementation of the R-33 on the Su-27 was at least planned at some point.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/newsletters/newsletter08012021-txeuwna3q8uxe2dqmg6xelf4w2tfy3ek.html?bx_sender_conversion_id=0&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=mail&utm_campaign=weekend_news Nice, looks like R-27/R-77 rework is getting delayed even more!

The missile at the max range in the graphs have some speed left in case there is some target maneuvering. It will certainly not allow for very serious maneuvering of the target, but at least for some. If the upper range mark was the absolute aerodynamic range, then the manual would never recommend to fire it at that range, but at a value at least a bit below. Think about it, everything about the HUD in the Su-27 is about making target interception simple and almost automated for the pilot. It automatically prioritizes targets. It automatically locks the most dangerous target as soon as it gets within weapon engagement range. Depending on the selected missile the guidance ring will guide the pilot into the most favourable intercept path. It shows the pilot when to abort the attack if he gets to close, and in which direction he has to pull away from the target. It only makes sense that the DRmax1 mark shows the pilot a range at which he has a somewhat decent chance to hit the target. A max aerodynamic range will definetly not be a good enough chance.

As soon as radar is enabled in the close combat modes (either radar only or radar + IRST) it will only use the radar for scanning, and it will skip every target beyond 10 km. The 10 km maximum range for the radar in the close combat modes is from the real world MiG-29 manual. That still does not explain why the IRST has a reduced detection range in the close combat modes in DCS.

I think the graphs are what ED took as reference when doing the old FM. They would change the different coefficients by hand until it fit the graph. Which leads of course to bad results, as the graphs has some reserve for target maneuvering. How much is unknown.

R-27R chart was the one with 700/900 and 900/1100 for target/shooter