whare are we going now?

[Vosxod]

LOL!

1) I cant believe u guys r talking about it again... and not even bored!

2) That makes me think that thread was created just to talk about it 10000th time...

3) Or some F15 lover had simulated "stupid flanker fan" just to provoke everybody and show how "stupid flanker fans" are really cheap and stupid? :)

[sixer]

A thread titled "I am having trouble with my missiles missing, what am I doing wrong?" would have been a lot more productive Sixer. By now you would have been given enough infomation & tactics by various people & squads to increase your skills (and kill score) a lot in any plane. And you would have learned that the Mig & Su's are deadly with correct tactics.

 

All missiles ingame are very effective when used properly.

 

And yes, talk to the 169th, 44th, 77th, RVE, 504th and other squads who develop tactics, You might actually learn something and you will find most are friendly & willing to share.

 

Cheers

 

lol im in the =RvE= what are you talking about

[sixer]

and the point of this post was not to talk about it was to talk to eagle personel and get things fixed to bring more real flying. and to make the game fun. but i gess evey on wants to talk it to death.

[Galaad]

Yep. However the opinion of Russian weapons designers is that the AMRAAM has a good number of advantages over the R77 ... or more accurately, the RVV-AE which is essentially the export version of the R-77 which apparently doesn't exist in a non-export version yet.

 

AMRAAM wins. ;)

 

???

Here is what said THE specialist of russian aircrafts and weapons, YEFIM GORDON, in his book "Soviet/Russian aircraft weapons, since world war two"

 

"A very distinctive trait of the R-77 is the use of lattice rudders, a feature hitherto unseen anywhere in the world. They generate very little drag when oriented along the slipstream but the drag increases dramaticaly when the rudders turn, creating side forces.

 

.....While having a sligthy lower launch weight than either of its western counterparts (AMRAAM and Matra MICA), it has longer range and superior ability to destroy actively manoeuvring or low flying target. THIS gives aircrafts armed with R-77(RVV-AE) an advantage over fighters toting The AMRAAM or MICA."

 

 

The R-77 WINS :)

[Galaad]

The AMRAAM is combat proven .

 

The F-15 is combat proven

 

The F-22 is not combat proven

 

 

Who is the best? :)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The F-15 is combat proven

The F-22 is not combat proven

Who is the best? :)

Excelent analogy!

[D-Scythe]

???

Here is what said THE specialist of russian aircrafts and weapons, YEFIM GORDON, in his book "Soviet/Russian aircraft weapons, since world war two"

 

"A very distinctive trait of the R-77 is the use of lattice rudders, a feature hitherto unseen anywhere in the world. They generate very little drag when oriented along the slipstream but the drag increases dramaticaly when the rudders turn, creating side forces.

 

.....While having a sligthy lower launch weight than either of its western counterparts (AMRAAM and Matra MICA), it has longer range and superior ability to destroy actively manoeuvring or low flying target. THIS gives aircrafts armed with R-77(RVV-AE) an advantage over fighters toting The AMRAAM or MICA."

 

 

The R-77 WINS :)

 

Um, not exactly that simple. While it is true that the R-77 is more advanced aerodynamically than the AIM-120, and superior kinematically overall, the AIM-120 is superior in guidance. It has a better radar seeker and better software that drives its "brains", creating a much smarter missile that is better at dealing with jamming, clutter and decoys than the R-77. At least this is what I've been lead to believe of all the evidence shown so far.

 

Also, IIRC, there have been issues with the end-game performance of R-77s in that it's lattice wings bleed off speed much more quickly than standard planar fins.

 

BTW, this Yefim Gordon is wrong when he states that the R-77 has a lower launch weight than AMRAAM or MICA. It is much heavier than either missile, around 385 lbs IIRC. AMRAAM is only 335 lbs and MICA is 260 lbs.

 

The F-15 is combat proven

 

The F-22 is not combat proven

 

 

Who is the best?

 

Poor analogy.

 

The AIM-120 never faced off against the R-77; both were designed around the same time period without either Hughes or Vympl knowing much about the "opposing" product, besides the fact that they probably existed.

 

The F-22 on the other hand was designed a generation after the F-15 AND with the knowledge of specific strengths and limitations of the Eagle, so that Lockheed can improve upon it. Plus, the F-22 did in fact face off against the F-15 in some exercises, beating it by a score of over 140 to 0 last I heard.

 

A better analogy would be F-15C (with APG-63V2 radar, AIM-120C-7, JHMCS and AIM-9X) vs. the Su-30MKI/K :p

[Galaad]

Um, not exactly that simple. While it is true that the R-77 is more advanced aerodynamically than the AIM-120, and superior kinematically overall, the AIM-120 is superior in guidance. It has a better radar seeker and better software that drives its "brains", creating a much smarter missile that is better at dealing with jamming, clutter and decoys than the R-77. At least this is what I've been lead to believe of all the evidence shown so far.:p

 

That is not proven

 

BTW, this Yefim Gordon is wrong when he states that the R-77 has a lower launch weight than AMRAAM or MICA. It is much heavier than either missile, around 385 lbs IIRC. AMRAAM is only 335 lbs and MICA is 260 lbs.:p

 

Yes you are right, but Yefim Gordon is not wrong, I thinks it's an error of the translator (traductor), I noticed several mistranslations in the book

 

I hope his english is better than mine :)

 

What Yefim Gordon want to say is : even with a slightly HIGHER launch range, the R-77 is more manoeuvrable than any other western counterpart

 

I thinks it make sense.

 

Poor analogy.

 

The AIM-120 never faced off against the R-77; both were designed around the same time period without either Hughes or Vympl knowing much about the "opposing" product, besides the fact that they probably existed.

 

The F-22 on the other hand was designed a generation after the F-15 AND with the knowledge of specific strengths and limitations of the Eagle, so that Lockheed can improve upon it. Plus, the F-22 did in fact face off against the F-15 in some exercises, beating it by a score of over 140 to 0 last I heard.

 

A better analogy would be F-15C (with APG-63V2 radar, AIM-120C-7, JHMCS and AIM-9X) vs. the Su-30MKI/K .:p

 

I want only mean that if a think (aircraft, armement) is combat proven, do not mean for sure than it is better.

 

My analogy is good

 

I hope you anderstand my poor english :)

[SUBS17]

But I assume there weren't many one on one or 2 on 2 combats without AWACS support on the F-15's side. So, it measn that the surrounding /environment was always prepared to give the F-15 the advantage to succeed, by taking out Sam and then use AWACS with Misisons.

 

So the statistic is rather worthless for Lomac-Modelling. The Reason why the Mig 29 and the Su-27 have good stats in online playing is that they are used with the right tactics.

 

I like the differences of the planes, and everyone has a special advantage. Just learn it, plus the disadvantage of the opponent and use it for your survival.

 

I'd Love to see AEs and R77 on SU's too, but not if they destroy the online gameplay, and I guess the F-15 would be nearly worthless then.

 

 

And if you cant score with russian planes take the F-15, and score with her. Or try and learn tactics, its frustrating to fight agains active missile spammers, but if you kick one's ass, nothing can beat THAT feeling.

 

Those stats include USA and also other countries that the F-15 is owned by such as Israel. So 2 vs 2 or more is quite likely but you would have to research each incident. The F-14s have engaged more than 4 aircraft in an engagement and won. My point is the F-15s real life stats it was the top interceptor for the 70s-90s. It hasn't got much to do with lockon unless they model the F15 in Destroyer IMO the Migs would get pwnd. Theres a few extra features missing from the Migs that is their disadvantage which is probably the main reason why Mig29s have lost most A/A engagements.

[SUBS17]

The F-15 is combat proven

 

The F-22 is not combat proven

 

 

Who is the best? :)

 

If you can imagine an evolved F15 then you get an F22.

[Galaad]

If you can imagine an evolved F15 then you get an F22.

 

If you can imagine an evolved AIM-120, then you get an R-77 :)

[GGTharos]

???

Here is what said THE specialist of russian aircrafts and weapons, YEFIM GORDON, in his book "Soviet/Russian aircraft weapons, since world war two"

 

"A very distinctive trait of the R-77 is the use of lattice rudders, a feature hitherto unseen anywhere in the world. They generate very little drag when oriented along the slipstream but the drag increases dramaticaly when the rudders turn, creating side forces.

 

.....While having a sligthy lower launch weight than either of its western counterparts (AMRAAM and Matra MICA), it has longer range and superior ability to destroy actively manoeuvring or low flying target. THIS gives aircrafts armed with R-77(RVV-AE) an advantage over fighters toting The AMRAAM or MICA."

 

 

The R-77 WINS :)

 

Unfortunately, those nice lattice wings are coupled with poor actuators.

 

AMRAAM -still- wins.

 

And that apparently comes from Russian engineers.

[GGTharos]

If you can imagine an evolved AIM-120, then you get an R-77 :)

 

 

Nnno. You get an evolved AIM-120.

 

The R-77 by all accounts is still playing catch-up.

[D-Scythe]

GG, just let him believe what he wants. Obviously, he's pretty set in his belief that the R-77 is superior, and there's nothing to be gained by proving him wrong.

[peterj]

Unfortunately, those nice lattice wings are coupled with poor actuators.

 

AMRAAM -still- wins.

 

And that apparently comes from Russian engineers.

What source are you referring to regarding the r-77?

 

I know there are few individual parameters for missiles in lockon, which are those?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Plus, the F-22 did in fact face off against the F-15 in some exercises, beating it by a score of over 140 to 0 last I heard.

So F-22 is SIMULATION (excercise) proven, not combat proven. Therefore Galaad's analogy still stands.

[D-Scythe]

So F-22 is SIMULATION (excercise) proven, not combat proven. Therefore Galaad's analogy still stands.

 

Fine, what the R-77 is to the AIM-120 is the same as the F-22 to the F-15. Keep your delusions.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Fine, what the R-77 is to the AIM-120 is the same as the F-22 to the F-15. Keep your delusions.

I have never said that. And I've never said that R-77 is better then AIM-120, nor I've ever said the AIM-120 is better then R-77.

 

I just am trying to use some common sense. After all we are not kids here.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

...or more accurately, the RVV-AE which is essentially the export version of the R-77 which apparently doesn't exist in a non-export version yet.

So, a company in Russia manufactures a Missile that is only good for export airplanes and it does not work on airplanes that belongs to russian Air Force, flowen by Russian pilots? Isn't that something?

[D-Scythe]

I have never said that. And I've never said that R-77 is better then AIM-120, nor I've ever said the AIM-120 is better then R-77.

 

I just am trying to use some common sense. After all we are not kids here.

 

Gee, I wonder what Galaad's analogy was referring too. And since you agree with it, you also share his perspective. A + B = C. It's not that hard.

 

But if you or Galaad cannot see the ridiculousness of that analogy, I'm not going to even bother. It doesn't seem that *facts* count for much in this conversation anyway, just opinions.

[SUBS17]

So F-22 is SIMULATION (excercise) proven, not combat proven. Therefore Galaad's analogy still stands.

 

Not really, although the F22 is an interceptor like the F15 it is too new to make such a comparison and because of its stealth characteristics puts it in a different category. Probably be better comparing it to an EF2000 or JSF.