[Full cold start procedure from the 1982 Czechoslovakian video]

2 hours ago, Dataduffy said:

Thanks for the quick response.

Is my assumption correct that switching on the pumps is to create a load on the battery for the check?

Can you also please point me to where I can find the checklist you refer to? I have looked through the quick start guide again, but I can't seem to find it. Probably me being blind!

Many thanks again.

It’s not in the guide, I am referencing real world checklist I likely shouldn’t share here 

Fuel pumps need battery power to work. So you are checking both batteries and that the fuel pumps work. When you turn on fuel pumps, green annunciator lights above them turn on. So you are checking that both battery and fuel pumps work 

[Full cold start procedure from the 1982 Czechoslovakian video]

12 hours ago, Dataduffy said:

great video. Thanks for sharing.

Quick nerdy question. at 3:48 in the video, he switches on the two batteries, selects "power from battery", but then switches on Tank 1 & 2 fuel pumps before checking the battery and bus voltages.

He then switches the tanks off again, before hooking up the external power. 

Any idea why he powered up the tanks? Is it to create some current draw on the battery for the tests?

As I said... nerdy question, but I am genuinely interested. 

It’s in the pre start check list. Step 38, power from battery on. 39. parking break check 

40. Service tank 1/2 on 

Check tank 1/2 lights and battery voltage 

 

then turn tank 1/2 off 

[Nose wheel steering operation question]

1 hour ago, AJaromir said:

Why the flaps must be up? I did not find anything about that in manual

It’s just how MiG programmed it so you couldn’t accidentally use it while taking off or landing. It’s in the real manual

[MiG29 speed with external tanks]

Who knows if the MiG-29 has enough thrust to balance the drag. All we know is that it’s above the stated limits for the tanks. These limits could be “safe jettison of tank is ensured/tested up to this speed” or it could be “the pylon/connecrion/tank cannot withstand pressure past a certain airspeed,” which is something DCS doesn’t simulate with FC3. 

[Early R73 missile]

59 minutes ago, Ironhand said:

I’m not clear on something and, hopefully, you can explain it. “Field of regard” is the total area that can be captured by the sensor. “Field of view” is the angular cone that can be perceived at a particular moment in time. What is the “targeting angle” and why is it different from the “field of regard”?

Or is the targeting angle simply how far the sensor can slew? In which case there’s no problem covering the 75* field that it can cover. Sorry. It’s been a rough few days and my brain’s a bit fuzzy.

 

As far as I’ve been able to tell, while it seems possible for the sensor to slew 75 degrees, it can only be aimed 45 degrees before launch. For example, the R-60 on MiG-29 with HMCS seems to have 20 degree off boresight targeting angle even though the sensor can slew 45 degrees. So for some reason, the Soviets/Vympel decided to not take advantage of the whole slew angle for off boresight launches. Perhaps it was for kinematic reasons, or they wanted to make sure the sensor had enough wiggle room to be able to comfortably make off boresight shots without going over any limit. Your guess would probably be good as mine 

[Early R73 missile]

16 minutes ago, WinterH said:

They never necessarily had AIM-9L and M equivalent. They had R-73, which much superior in off boresight, but was somewhat less countermeasure resistant. It is stil not quite an AIM-9X equivalent, which isn't a surprise, as there are like a couple of decades between the two.

The one we have in DCS is, afaik, indeed the cold war R-73.

Wikipedia should be taken with a grain of salt when it comes to things like this.

I think, If the missile launch is only possible at up to 45 degrees off boresight, but the missile still can pull the rest as the angle increases, I don't think that's unreasonable. If the launch is allowed at greater than 45 degrees, than there maybe something wrong.

That's the thing, R-73 was always a high off boresight missile, and indeed if you want to give something without this capability for whatever reason, you should give the MiGs R-60Ms. Which I think still may have slightly greater off boresight launch ability than AIM-9Ms, but are much shorter ranged, and will go "ooooh shiny!!!" whenever it sees flares.

According to MiG-29 weapon employment manual R-60 work off boresight up to 20 degrees 

[Early R73 missile]

On 2/23/2024 at 9:10 AM, Gunfreak said:

So in DCS there is only one R73 missile used by all "semi modern" Russian aircraft (su27 can only use it)

But just going from Wikipedia the original R73 had a off boresight of 40 degrees) a modernised R73M showed up in early 90s. And wiki doesn't say anything about it off boresight capabilities. While the R74 has 60 degrees and R74M has 75 degrees.

In DCS the R73 seems to have 60 or 70 degrees off boresight ability. So not suitable for cold war. So if you want a none high off boresight  missile in your MiG29A you have to give it the R60Ms.

While it's impossible to give the Su27 a cold war missile. 

So basically soviet/Russian aircraft goes from the equivalent of a Sidewinder P5 to a Sidewinder X. Skipping the equivalent of L and M.

With a full fidelity 29A. I hope some of this  can be remedied.

The one in DCS should be the original with 45 degrees off boresight 

The Su-27/J-11 can still use IRST up to 60 degrees off boresight, but should still limit R-73 LA to 45 degrees. I can test it in game 

[Mi-24p Armament]

15 hours ago, badger7966 said:

I saw on a recent news clip that Ukraine has fired hydra 70mm rockets from their Hinds,and equiped them with IR supressors...Be nice to have that ir supressor !

They use the same IR suppressor we use in DCS? Do you have a picture of them using a different suppressor? 

[Ai Petrovich only fires missiles from pylons 1 & 4 (Other issues with those pylons)]

What’s your loadout? Certain loadout will disable the 5-8 missile stations, 1-4 works with any loadout 

For example. You cannot carry 2x S-5 in UB-32 pods with 8x ATGM, 5-8 ATGM will not fire. The FCS thinks S-5 is a bomb, and bombs have same restriction 

[MiG-29A FF: capabilities and how will it fit into the (meta)game?]

Was learning more about IRST/radar, there’s a “Cooperation” switch in front of the throttle next to air/ground switch and emergency rocket release. This switch forces the radar into medium prf. In this mode only do you get both sensors working together, if radar lock drops then it is maintained with IRST and radar/laser ranging; or if IRST lock drops it is maintained with radar.
 

In close combat mode and gun mode the IRST is main station with radar used if IRST won’t lock, and in helmet/phi-o both are used simultaneously and the first to lock on becomes primary. 

If target is being tracked by IRST with this switch on, a second press of the lock on button will transition to Radar STT while continuing back up support by IRST 

In order to do HPRF search this “Cooperation” switch must be turned off. Which is unfortunate but makes sense since the IRST has a nominal range of 12-18 km, which is pretty neatly within MPRF range of 12-30 km (tracking). You would rarely be able to properly use IRST as a backup at the ranges the HPRF would work (25-55 km for tracking.).  

However, this section seems to affirm that when using IRST tracking with quasi continuous radar ranging, there will be no IFF indication. Which would mean you would need a temporary radar lock and disable in order to verify IFF. 
 

Oddly enough, this same switch seems to enable or disable the calculations for high drag bombs when in air to ground bombing mode….

Of note, I cannot figure out the WCS selector (left of HUD) and Radar selector (in front of throttle below delta H selector).

Both have a close combat switch. Only WCS has Opt/Phi-0 modes. I wonder if since IR is selected before these modes on WCS selector, IR is only sensor for OPT/Phi-0, and radar selector only works when WCS is In Radar position. And that the only way to use radar for Opt/Phi-0, is with this Cooperation/High drag switch 
 

EDIT: after reading employment manual, it seems WCS needs to be on radar to use radar selector settings. Selecting close combat/Helmet/Opt/Phi-0 on WCS is purely for IRST UNLESS you select Cooperation/Interaction/High drag switch, OR if you have a radar guided weapon (R-27R, perhaps ER) selected. 
 

Either way, interesting cooperation of Radar/IRST and switchology. Will be lots of fun

 

[Mi24 search and rescue with ARK U2 & R828 not working]

30 minutes ago, DST said:

OK, thank you for the anwers, turns out, I did not press the "squelch" button long enough

What I find strange though is, there seems to be either audio signal or compass needle pointing, not both at the same time. If ADF-VHF 2 Source Selector is in the middle you get audio signal but no HSI needle pointing, when ADF-VHF 2 Source Selector is in FWD position you get no audio signal but HSI needle is pointing in the right direction. In Mi-8 you can get both. Is this supposed to be like that in Mi24?

From reading Mi-24V manual book 1 dated 1987 this seems to be the case. Intended procedure is to heat audio signal first using SPU-8, then switch to COMPASS for guidance to the beacon once you hear the correct audio signal

[In CPG front cockpit . OPEN SIGHT DOORS ?]

3 hours ago, Mole said:

After a certain time not flying the Hind, tried again. But opening the sight doors won't work (actually not working in a self made test mission, but works in the tutorial) , did it as described above, no joy: it says open the sight doors, the "O" key doesn't work, neither the "door" switch is engaged or not. Are there any changes I missed due to updates?

 

Is your gun on? Weapons powered up? 

[DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum]

1 hour ago, PLAAF said:

So is it an axis? Or is it a 3-position rotator switch?

It should be an axis; and if closer to a certain end or middle tells the missile the target is small/medium/large 

[DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum]

11 hours ago, PLAAF said:

Hi guys, just one quick question. Does anyone know what this is?
null

As mentioned. It’s setting wingspan for gun use. 
 

However for missiles, it does something else.

If correctly modeled in game, it will define when the radio correction of the R-27R/ER is expected to end and seeker lock on to begin. For expected seeker lock on its

small it’s 12 km (usually dusted for cruise missiles) 

medium is 25 km, 

large is 40 km 

So usually it’s stuck at medium intended for fighter sized targets. 
 

It also sets fuse delay, it seems, the smaller the target, the less delay after the fuse “sees” something. I’m sure the intention here is to get the missile to explode when near the center of the target, not just when it detects the nose or tail

[Do we have NATO Cold war 4th Gen Fighter with 80s avionic to face Mig-29A?]

Honestly the F-4 with AIM-7M isn’t probably far off from MiG-29 9.12 with R-27R. The closer you get the bigger the advantage to the MiG. Though I think the MiG-23ML is a very worthy opponent for F-4 with AIM-7M, 29 9.12 with 27R improves on it capabilities in some more evolutionary then revolutionary ways, with the focus being on dogfighting with 29

As said, F-14 with AIM-7, even Phoenix A, or Mirage 2000C are good opponents. F-15 with AIM-7 would be a close fight I think, F-15 would have quite the BVR edge with its large radar. 

[Mi24 search and rescue with ARK U2 & R828 not working]

51 minutes ago, DST said:

Yes, the ogg. file is japanese bingo from F16, I couldn´t find different file for use

What is "radio trigger" on the cyclic? There is nothing like that in chuck´s guide?

 

First stage is ICS, second stage is radio. That’s what radio trigger does 

[Generator Failure]

2 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

1. I am fully aware why the rotor RPM lags behind the engines in certain aspects of the flight. You might as well explain it for yourself, because the situations I referred to, are the ones which will provoke the rotor RPM to lag behind, or stay ahead of the engine RPM resulting in fluctuations beyond the preset 95%. If anyone asks, one might explain to them. However I, made it perfectly clear as to what and when. Transient torque is only ONE example, vortex ring state (uncommon as it is) is another. A third would be pulling high levels of acceleration or deceleration (albeit the former is more prononced, as with deceleration, assuming altitude is to be kept, is done at low collective levels, resulting in little effect on rotor speed.). Again, I see no purpose on building this out, as it only solidifies what I

 

EDIT: 1st graph is from a Mi-24 manual (general) from 1976.

         2nd, 3rd and 4th graphs, are from ED's Mi-8 manual.

         5th graph is from Mi-35P operators manual.

         6th graph is from Ka-50 ED's manual.

 

I could list many more, but they are all in Russian. To keep the thread clear, I post only one (Mi-24) manual which is Russian

 

I am aware of all these charts and manuals, I have read Mi-24A/D/V/P and 35M manuals ranging from 1976 to 2011, believe me, I am aware of these. 
 

This chart does not say the governor changes the RPM it holds, only that at takeoff power, to expect it’s rpm to be on the lower side as you are pushing the limit of the engine. There is no “switch” in the system that changes the governor RPM based on power level. You can fly in DCS plenty on takeoff power with 95% rotor rpm or higher, but it’s often on the lower end becuase you are pushing your engine to limit and it can’t always give more to balance the increasing drag of more rotor pitch. 
 

In that chart, the manual is telling you what to expect on average, not that the governor lowers rotor rpm automatically when you enter takeoff power

I only mention the turbine adjust rpm and transient torque as potential causes for why you see rotor rpm as low 87-88% in flight. Outside of those, in steady state conditions, the governor will command max engine power below 94% and command less engine power above 96%, trying its hardest to keep rotor rpm in that 95% +/-1-2% range as much as it can and this is what you see in DCS also. 

[Generator Failure]

2 hours ago, Jascha said:

Great explanation. Thank you.

So my main mistake was to leave engine anti-ice on. Since there is no automatic mode for it (as far as I know) and this system uses so much power, how should it be operated? In icing conditions rotor anti-ice in auto mode work in cycles, the engine anti-ice seems to be most likely continuously on when switches are up. Should I cycle it manually in regular flight?

PS. Oh, and the right engine RPM dropping slightly was caused by engine anti-ice being on too? I wonder why it affected only the right engine.

 

 

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that anti ice used more power over time, it was not a mistake to leave it on. Just that it means you have nearly 20% less power going to your engines, so you get low rotor rpm much easier from the less power. Less power going to rotor = less collective pitch can be used  

Currently in DCS, the right engine decreases in power from anti ice much more. I’m not sure if that’s accurate, but that’s why EPR and PTIT will show different values for them. There are great hover charts that show how much altitude and temperature gives you hover performance, but they are not for anti ice

Charts are from Chucks guide 

[Generator Failure]

Okay, watching your video, your generator failed becuase your anti ice just used up so much power, and you used so much collective your engines couldn’t sustain the rotor rpm

. Becuase you had less power then normal, you needed more collective pitch to compensate. This means you also needed more right pedal to counter the torque, which increases tail rotor drag and further lowers rotor rpm. It looked like it wanted to come back and got close to 90%, but wasn’t able to fully recover as you stayed in a condition that required a lot of power (too much collective for your engines burdened with anti ice.)

This is why in the manual, it mentions you might want to turn anti ice off for takeoff, landing, or any situation that needs high power for a short period of time. Sometimes I only use one engine anti ice if I want to compromise. I think if you had turned off engine anti ice, or entered an envelope that had a smaller power requirement (which does get worse at high altitude, which it seemed like you were at). 

19 minutes ago, Jascha said:

As for the main topic of generator failure, I have reviewed the track. It's too large to upload it here. But I have recorded the video while watching it.

It's a bit long as I have included the descent, you can skip to ~4-5 min.

As it turns out I had engine heaters on with PZU but rotor anti-ice was not on when generator failed. Then shortly after enabling the PZU the right engine RPM and temperature drops a bit, shortly after rotor RPM falls below 85%. Then I was trying to gain control of the aircraft with max right rudder input (it was barely working, letting it spin left would most likely end up in a crash).

If you can find some time to review it and explain to me what exactly happened, I'd be grateful. Are engine heaters the main culprit here? Or some other factors too (PZU probably, but it had to be enabled in these conditions, other than that maybe the wind?).

 

 

[Generator Failure]

19 minutes ago, Jascha said:

Yeah, there is force anti-ice OFF switch for quick disconnection. I think this only affects the rotor blades anti-ice system (which must be then set to manual and back to auto to be turned on again), but I have to verify this.

As for the 17% power consumption - I wonder if this figure relates to rotor anti-ice system AND engine heaters together. As I understand rotor blades heating system is electric and engine (intake) heating system is based on hot air.

 

You are correct, the anti ice off button only affects rotor anti ice. 
 

Let me clarify some of power bleed and update my numbers, 

PZU removes 125 hp from each engine, or 200 kg of takeoff weight. This is equal to about 5.6% of the 2,225 HP engines. 
 

All anti ice together removes 700 kg takeoff weight, which is equal to about 20% power. However; 150 kg of this is for rotor anti ice. If you keep rotor anti ice off but only use engine anti ice, it will use about 15-16% power. 
 

I will take a look at your video and see what I can find 

[Generator Failure]

52 minutes ago, zerO_crash said:

 

I am looking it up, and with regards to the anti-ice in the Mi-24, yes, my bad. On the anti-ice panel (right console by the pilot's door), the left most switch is for rotor anti-ice, beside it the "force anti-ice off" button, and next to that, two switches (one for each engine) to turn on/off the anti-ice. So yes, it is fairly different from the Mi-8 in this case.

 

As to the main rotor RPM, I mean exactly what I write. While the rotor will be mostly held in the "95% +-1%/2%"-range when cruising level, as soon as you start maneuvering, or performing any kind of high-performance turns, the main rotor will be moving outside of that range. The maneuvers can be anything from acceleration/deceleration, hovering (heavy loaded), reducing/increasing altitude quickly, etc... Even when you go faster (speed), you will see that pushing the helicopter in speed, you'll lower the main rotor RPM. The manual for pretty much any Russian helicopter gives under "operating limitations" the permissable high's and low's during different phases of the flight. This is encountered during normal flight, combat/high-performance flight, and emergency.

 

As to not turning on anti-ice, I'm fairly sure that you can get an engine fire, if you leave it off for too long in icing conditions. Not turning on anti-ice for the main/tail rotor, degrades performance. I'm am fairly sure of it.

 The rotor rpm deviates from 95% +/-2%, so really 93-97%. It is for a few reasons. But generally, the governor will do everything it can to keep it right at 95% 

1. If lower then 93-97% it is becuase the engines do not have enough power to maintain the rpm at the commanded rotor collective pitch. Or that they lag and need time to accelerate. Or even transient torque spikes from right pedal and right cyclic 

2. If rotor rpm is higher then 93-97%, it is becuase the engines can’t rev down enough or fast enough to stop the rotor from going to fast, such as in a fast pitch up 

3. You messed with the “turbine adjust rpm” switch on the collective, which changed the governor setting from 95% to as low as 91% or as high as 97-98%. You adjust the governor with this switch, which you often need to do depending on air pressure if it deviates significantly according to manual

If you rotor rpm is deviating from that 93-97% it is for one of those three reasons. I can go to 320 kmh and still maintain 95% rotor rpm. The governor is always trying to maintain it, unless it doesn’t have enough power to overcome the rotor drag, too much rotor inertia/speed that it can’t slow down engine enough, or you deliberately play with the switch that changes governor setting.
 

The sentence in the manual about allowable rotor rpm is for a few reasons 

1. The manual knows that pilots may push collective pitch, or right pedal/cyclic and lower rotor rpm, and that this is allowed to a certain extent, with a rough cutoff of 87%
 

2. The manual knows that pilot may pitch up fast or get into conditions where the rotor rpm goes up too much or too fast for the governor to stop it, and 103% is the hard limit here becuase of the rotor or generator structural limits 

3. It flies best at 95% rpm, and the less the rotor rpm gets the more sluggish its response, the more pitch and thus more torque is needed. The manual even describes it being okay to raise rotor rpm with the “turbine adjust rpm” switch at high altitudes to increase tail rotor authority, or to decrease it to 92-93% with the same switch to help save 2-3% fuel in cruise 

You will find that if you let off collective pitch enough for the engines to have enough power to drive the rotor at 95%, it will do so and keep it there no matter your speed, attitude, or maneuvers. The only exception being transient torque spikes from right cyclic/pedal 

From manual: “When deflecting the collective pitch lever, the gas generators RPM of both engines change, the main rotor RPM are maintained within 95 +/-2% automatically;”

Anytime in the checklist or emergency procedures it wants you to check for best rotor rpm at any speed, it asks you to make sure it is 95% +/-1-2%, and this is how it acts in game except it very perfectly keeps it right at 95% 

[Generator Failure]

Yes Zero_crash is incorrect. The only anti ice function that is automatic is for rotor blades. I also don’t know what you mean about the rotor rpm, in the Mi-24 and Mi-8 the rotor rpm is held by a governor to maintain 95% +/-1-2%. 
 

45 minutes ago, Jascha said:

Thanks. Very informative.

That is still not clear to me. Yes there is automatic anti-ice mode, but engine anti-ice heaters seems to be manual only, as they have independent switches:

And they have separate notification lights:

It seems to me that the first switch with manual and auto mode controls rotor blades anti-ice system only. But I'm nut 100% sure.

[Screens taken from Chuck's Guide for Mi-24D.]

so yes. If you flip auto switch up, when you enter icing, only the main and tail rotor anti icing turns on. You can see this happen with their respective indicator lights

Zero_crash described the Mi-8 procedure, which is totally different from Mi-24 procedure where you turn on both engines at the same time.
 

And you are also right, the engine anti ice is completely manual. The reason this is different then Mi-8 is because instead of reacting to icing warning, for Mi-24 you are supposed to turn on anti icing under 5 degrees Celsius no matter what. However, in DCS you won’t have icing degrade engine performance until 0 degrees Celsius, so you’ll be fine as long as you turn on engine anti ice at 0 degrees or below to “protect” the engines from anti ice. Things like ice chucks from turning it on after ice forms isn’t modeled in DCS, only the slow degradation of engine performance that happens if engine anti ice stays off. Nothing bad happens if you keep rotor anti ice off either. It only draws power more. 

The 17% is a lot, so it’s totally fine to keep it off for takeoff/landing or other times a short term power excursion is needed 

l

[Mi-24 missing features, fixes, updates and Wishlist]

1 hour ago, evanf117 said:

as for inward pylon limitations, this is not the case for adlest the S-8 and GUV gun pods, Neall Ellis ran such weapons with door gunners in Africa and even if it were the case, the crew could dismount their guns and close the windows and in such case there would be no more effect on the cargo cabin crew than the pilot and P/G

as for tip lights, that video is entirely inaccurate for our Hind a Hip, those are LED lights, you can tell by how when you pause the video they look like a dashed line.
our HIP in DCS has accurate blade tip lights, though they are too dim, especially at distance they become invisible. the incandescent lights should form a solid disk according to alphaonesix (Mi-8)(in the ED discord) and im sure the LED lights should too. the reason they look broken on video is due to fast shutter speed. spin something really fast and it looks like a disk, its the same for the lights

as mentioned in my above comment, this is not how the human eye works, our eyes, in a way, have motion blur, one sees a solid disk, there are actually lots of computer monitors that instead of decreasing the brightness of the LED's they just blink them really fast, and yet our eyes dont see them flicker, though in some it does cause motion sickness as the eye can perceive the change but it isnt rendered in your mind

Im sure the restrictions for having a door gunner with a gun hanging out of open cargo doors with 1m barrel is different then here where Ellis team is using the window PKT amounts and likely smaller caliber 

[Generator Failure]

Anti ice takes 17% power, and PZU about 2.5% 

The ice detector turns on and off constantly no matter what becuase it will warm the ice detector while the warning goes off, it will stop warming it after a while and see if it freezes again. As long as it’s going on and off you are in freezing conditions. It’s not a “my engines and rotor are freezing” detector it’s a “you are in freezing conditions detector while I turn off and on.” 
 

If anti ice is off long enough it will reduce engine power and cause possible shut down or fire

1 hour ago, Jascha said:

I had the same issue when playing Mi-24P YoYo's campaign. When entering mountain area, at higher altitude, I noticed that air temperature is close to 0C. I have enabled the clock heater, pitot heater (left and right) and also left and right engine anti-ice heater. Anti-Ice system mode was set to auto (if I understand correctly this switch controls only the anti-ice system for the rotor blades). After 10 minutes or so, I noticed the icing warning light - it was on despite everything being set as described above. It went off after some time. Later, when descending, despite the temperature rising, the warning become visible again. Before trying to perform a vertical landing, I enabled the PZU. Shorty after right engine RPM dropped a bit and soon the "Generator Failure" message could be heard. I have lost all AP settings, rotor RPM dropped to 80% iirc and I almost crashed. Somehow I managed to transition into the forward flight and everything went back to stable.

My questions are:

- How we should actually use anti-icing system in this situation? Is this system modeled properly at current state of the module?

- How exactly does the anti-icing affects the Mi-24P performance? Can it be used together with the PZU?

- Should the battery heater be on in this situation? Does it have some impact on Generator Failure?

- How to fix this situation when close to the ground? Lowering the collective is not really an option.

Could you please explain this in more detail?

Right pedal increases tail rotor pitch, witch puts more load on your rotor rpm 

Miki posted the video in transient torque spikes above, but yes right cyclic will reduce rotor rpm and left will do opposite, it depends on rotor rotation direction. So right turns will push the rotor rpm more, left turns will push it less 

This is why your left turns, all things being similar, will be 20-30 kmh faster then any right turn 

[Expectation on Air to Air missiles of the MiG-29A?]

Ukraine Arsenal sold upgraded R-27T/ET seekers and upgraded R-73 seekers. But their brochure for R-27R/ER seeker shows no improvement or differences and nothing else in their marketing implies such. R-27P/EP is its own matter, but for R-27R/ER just becuase it was made in 2014, does not mean it was performing better from the perspective of the pilot