Su-27 Weapon Systems and Missiles

[JunMcKill]

There is no such capability in the R-27ET. To put it another way, that radar doesn't even generate the M-Link if you select a missile with an IR homing head.

 

Who told you that? all the sources I know, including cuban MIG-29 pilots say it's real, the R-27ET is launched using radar and radio guidance. And all the info published on internet about the information I postwd, is wrong? why the ED simulation of the R-27ER never goes pitbull and activate the doppler radar in the final stage? how ED can probe us (the clients!!!) they are giving us the most realistic missile simulation? and not the comercial one, trying to keep an even level with the AIM-120C and F-15 pilots?.

 

I don't think Russian airforce is enough stupid to be flying everyday all their fighters with those dumbs missiles! (if you watch every picture in the avitionist online page, they are always flying with R-27ER and R-27ET in their wings!)

Edited November 20, 2014 by JunMcKill

[GGTharos]

Russian MiG-29 radar technician, and that was the reason why this capability was removed from the game a long time ago.

 

You can certainly cue an ET with radar, but there's no datalink signal generated for an IR homing head ... certainly not in the 80's jet.

And given that even today's IIRC missiles have trouble with LOAL targeting, I can't see how the old missiles would fare any better - likely far worse.

 

Who told you that? all the sources I know, including cuban MIG-29 pilots say it's real, the R-27ET is launched using radar and radio guidance.

Edited November 20, 2014 by GGTharos

[JunMcKill]

Russian MiG-29 radar technician, and that was the reason why this capability was removed from the game a long time ago.

 

You can certainly cue an ET with radar, but there's no datalink signal generated for an IR homing head ... certainly not in the 80's jet.

And given that even today's IIRC missiles have trouble with LOAL targeting, I can't see how the old missiles would fare any better - likely far worse.

 

Then can you answer me, WHY the R-27ET have the range he have? if it's not possible to lock with IR an enemy aircraft less than 25km away?. Why I design a missile with a long range capability if in the real I can't use it !? You have no answer for that logical question, by the way I asked my request of the missile to IASGATG, not to you or anyone of ED, that never listen to others! There is a lot of people, including real pilots of the cuban and venezuelan airforce and technicians, dissapointed with the simulation of the russian missiles by ED.

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html#mozTocId611424

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Kopp

Edited November 20, 2014 by JunMcKill

[GGTharos]

Then can you answer me, WHY the R-27ET have the range he have? if it's not possible to lock with IR an enemy aircraft less than 25km away?. Why I design a missile with a long range capability if in the real I can't use it !?

 

How about shooting down a running B-1B? :) Or a jamming B-52? :) They can have pretty big heat signatures - in real life, of course. ECM isn't a huge factor in-game, but in RL chances are you wouldn't be able to hit a B-52 or B-1 with an R-27(E)R.

 

You have no answer for that logical question, by the way I asked my request of the missile to IASGATG, not to you or anyone of ED, that never listen to others! There is a lot of people, including real pilots of the cuban and venezuelan airforce and technicians, dissapointed with the simulation of the russian missiles by ED.

That's great, IASGATG has the same information as I do, but it's up to him as to whether he wants to do it. Don't go assuming all of this is IASGATG's work alone. He did some heavy lifting for a bunch of things for sure.

 

And that's great that they're dissapointed, so are a bunch of western pilots and technicians.

But this has absolutely nothing to do with a data-link on the R-27ET.

 

And maybe you didn't notice, but this particular work touches on all the missiles - and I insisted on it being made for the Russian missiles as well.

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html#mozTocId611424

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Kopp

Carlo Kopp isn't a good source for missiles.
Edited November 20, 2014 by GGTharos

[TAW_Blaze]

why the ED simulation of the R-27ER never goes pitbull and activate the doppler radar in the final stage? how ED can probe us (the clients!!!) they are giving us the most realistic missile simulation? and not the comercial one, trying to keep an even level with the AIM-120C and F-15 pilots?.

 

I don't think Russian airforce is enough stupid to be flying everyday all their fighters with those dumbs missiles! (if you watch every picture in the avitionist online page, they are always flying with R-27ER and R-27ET in their wings!)

 

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. ER is a SARH and has no onboard radar like the 77 or the 120. It only has a receiver that can use the fighter as a platform to guide it. Nice bash on ED though.

 

Then can you answer me, WHY the R-27ET have the range he have? if it's not possible to lock with IR an enemy aircraft less than 25km away?. Why I design a missile with a long range capability if in the real I can't use it !? You have no answer for that logical question, by the way I asked my request of the missile to IASGATG, not to you or anyone of ED, that never listen to others! There is a lot of people, including real pilots of the cuban and venezuelan airforce and technicians, dissapointed with the simulation of the russian missiles by ED.

 

Technically, it's not long range, but medium range. It outperforms any of the other IR missiles existing in the game at range by a very long shot. The main strength of an ET is being silent. If you even only have to use your radar in TWS to support for the ET, it already defeated the purpose.

 

As far as not being able to lock aircraft X range away with IR seekers go, well it's a pretty tough deal, aircraft positioned head on mask their heat signature very well provided they aren't afterburning, and atmospheric environment also degrades the performance by a hell of a lot more than in any other radar based application.

 

There are lots of people disappointed everywhere, that ain't no proof.

 

My impression is that you're just venting here with no actual knowledge to back it up. Do some work out it's a better and more useful way of relieving the stress.

[Raven434th]

Hi IASGATG, it's possible in your mod to program the R-27ET flight profile and guidance as reality? it means don't need an IR lock to be shoot, you can launch the ET the same way than ER using inertial and radio guidance the 70% of flight, and become active the IR seeker in the last stage of flight?

 

"The practice of Soviet air interception relied on visual range shoot out like missiles provided two different types of homing head against the same target in order to maximize the chances of hit. In this context, and like many other Soviet air to air missiles, the R-27 was built in two main variants: one equipped with semi-active radar guidance and a search for infrared emission (heat). The semi-active radar guided variant was called R-27P (code AA-10A Alamo NATO-A) and passive infrared guidance R-27T (NATO Code: AA-10B Alamo-B).

 

The missile is guided to the target by a combined method of proportional navigation: is guided inertially radio controlled during the first phase of their trajectory (70% thereof), and at the end the seeker head is enabled (semiactive Doppler radar or infrared pulse depending on the version) and this will continue to guide the missile to its target. Once the missile is at the optimal distance from the enemy aircraft (10 to 15 meters), active radar fuze detonates the warhead of the missile, consisting of expanding-explosive shrapnel.

 

This combined approach allows reliable target tracking over long distances. The missile can be guided along paths are pre-computed special favorable conditions that allow for the operation of the seeker head and the proximity fuse. It is able to avoid the estimated lobe approaching enemy radar and a target low-flying from a certain angle."

 

What exactly is being said here??? That they employ 2 missiles to do one job...One radio missile and one IR missile? Or that the missile has two different modes of intercept? Radio guided then IR taking over... Or IR guided with a final burst of radar emission from the head to detonate in close proximity...Or Radio command guided with a final burst of radar emission from the head to detonate in close proximity??

 

Which also begs the question "Where does the R-27EA come into this?" Why no active radar missiles on the Su27's?

Edited November 20, 2014 by Raven434th

[TAW_Blaze]

Su-27 has no 77s ingame because the variant DCS models cannot equip them IRL.

[*Rage*]

The main strength of an ET is being silent. If you even only have to use your radar in TWS to support for the ET' date=' it already defeated the purpose.[/quote']

 

Actually I could see a use for such a missile. In the melee of combat it could be a semi-silent killer. Having an active on your RWR will always focus your senses. Scan tones can be overlooked.

 

Edit: Im sure I read somewhere of a proposed combined IR/Radar seeker somewhere.

[TAW_Blaze]

Actually I could see a use for such a missile. In the melee of combat it could be a semi-silent killer. Having an active on your RWR will always focus your senses. Scan tones can be overlooked.

 

Edit: Im sure I read somewhere of a proposed combined IR/Radar seeker somewhere.

 

But in close range you wouldn't need that radar support would you. It's pretty moot IMO. When some guys are merged surely it will be hard to realize there's some other guy painting you, compared to an ER launch. It could be useful to help your friendly that's merged but then again completely freaking him out may as well be the better type of help. Nobody likes it when they disturb their merge :D

[Fri13]

Su-27 has no 77s ingame because the variant DCS models cannot equip them IRL.

Isn't the variant Su-27SK?

 

And wasn't it brought up that one country (don't remember what) that states owning Su-27SK is carrying in photos the R-77? (It was by someone just saying that it then can't be a Su-27SK but must be Su-27SMK or was it a Su-27MK... Even when markings matches on plane to register)

[GGTharos]

Yes, it's the Su-27SK. There is a Su-27SK manual available. If you see any mentions of the system working with R-77 in there, let people know and I'm sure it'll be looked into.

 

Isn't the variant Su-27SK?

 

And wasn't it brought up that one country (don't remember what) that states owning Su-27SK is carrying in photos the R-77? (It was by someone just saying that it then can't be a Su-27SK but must be Su-27SMK or was it a Su-27MK... Even when markings matches on plane to register)

[159th_Viper]

Isn't the variant Su-27SK?

 

SK version is just the export version of the first production model, the SU-27K (Flanker-B) which entered service in the mid 1980's. Now seeing as the R-77 only entered into production in the 1990's you can be pretty sure that that right there is the head-shot that effectively neutralizes ANY attempt at endowing the In-SIM Flankers with actives - not going to happen.

[Fri13]

SK version is just the export version of the first production model, the SU-27K (Flanker-B) which entered service in the mid 1980's. Now seeing as the R-77 only entered into production in the 1990's you can be pretty sure that that right there is the head-shot that effectively neutralizes ANY attempt at endowing the In-SIM Flankers with actives - not going to happen.

So this is valid list of variants and main upgrades? http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-27/su-27_variants.htm

 

Meaning Su-27SMK is first to carry R-77?

[159th_Viper]

 

Meaning Su-27SMK is first to carry R-77?

 

IIRC the SMK was never operational, ie a prototype only.

[NineLine]

Pretty sure they said our Su-27 in the sim is a "S" but I could be wrong...

[Fri13]

IIRC the SMK was never operational, ie a prototype only.

Indonesia has those in operational.

 

"The three Su-27SKM single-seaters (serials TS2703 thru TS2705) were delivered in September 2010, with the first two on September 10 and the final example on September 16. After the official handover on September 27, this completed the 2007 order"

 

http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-27/su-27_operators.htm

http://www.mars.slupsk.pl/fort/sukhoi/su-30-id.htm

 

The strange thing is that other states some being SK and other being SMK (SKM?).

[159th_Viper]

Pretty sure they said our Su-27 in the sim is a "S" but I could be wrong...

 

Aye, that was my typo.....should have said SU-27S instead of SU-27K (swapped the K and S) :)

[159th_Viper]

Indonesia has those in operational..

 

Yes but I'm referring to the Russian 27's. In any event, with those birds the R-77 will in all probability be replaced by the new RVV family of missiles, which is really besides the point when discussing the DCS Flanker :)

[Raven434th]

Su-27 has no 77s ingame because the variant DCS models cannot equip them IRL.

 

But my question isn't can it carry R-77 active...but rather can it carry R-27EA active? Which is already of the R-27 family...

[159th_Viper]

But my question isn't can it carry R-77 active...but rather can it carry R-27EA active? Which is already of the R-27 family...

 

No.

 

The EA never made it past development/prototype phase and as a consequence never operational.

 

Remember: The In-SIM SU-27S is time-locked to 1985 (give or take a year). Any subsequent development/advancement to the SU-27 and it's armament is irrelevant/not modelled for the purposes of the SIM.

Edited November 20, 2014 by 159th_Viper

[Raven434th]

No.

 

The EA never made it past development/prototype phase and as a consequence never operational.

 

Remember: The In-SIM SU-27S is time-locked to 1985 (give or take a year). Any subsequent development/advancement to the SU-27 and it's armament is irrelevant/not modelled for the purposes of the SIM.

 

Ahh...I did not know that...then is this missile mod locked to 1985 data as well?? Valid question I think.

[Raven434th]

On a side note...I found this on a thread as listed above by Fri13:

 

The SARH models of the R-27 do have inertial navigation to fly toward what the Soviets describe as mathematical targets till the launch aircraft paints the target and the missile homes on the reflected energy.

That means they are lock on after launch and fly towards a point in the sky where the target is calculated to be when the missile gets there.

The IR models don't have INS systems and require lock on before launch. The inertial guidance period of the R-27R and ER is described as being up to 60% of its flight trajectory. (Note for the R-24R that figure is given as 20%). The R-77 is 80% and has Lock on after launch capability.

 

My question is how are they launching missiles without radar lock???What mode?

[GGTharos]

The SARH models of the R-27 do have inertial navigation to fly toward what the Soviets describe as mathematical targets till the launch aircraft paints the target and the missile homes on the reflected energy.

 

The aircraft paints the target at all times, and updates the target position via missile data-link. The reason for this is that the seeker's own little antenna needs to get a lot closer to pick up that reflection compared to the aircraft's antenna.

 

That means they are lock on after launch and fly towards a point in the sky where the target is calculated to be when the missile gets there.

 

No, it doesn't mean that. There R-27ER flies a proportional navigation regardless of where its data is coming from.

 

It's not like an AIM-120 or 77 or very modern versions of AIM-7 that will calculate a fly-out point and fly to it.

 

My question is how are they launching missiles without radar lock???What mode?

 

They aren't. A Su-27S must be in either STT or be tracking with EOS to launch a missile normally.

 

There are override modes for two basic situations:

 

The 'Boresight' mode for missiles where you get direct feedback from the seeker, and you point the nose of the aircraft at the target to lock it on, then launch it. This is for IR missiles.

 

The 'launch override' will let you shoot outside of the DLZ, but not without a seeker lock.

 

Finally there's another 'forced launch' of the pylons which don't have an ejection system. The missiles are launched without cooling or FCS data - it's the equivalent of jettison, but you have to do it by firing off the rocket motor.

[Raven434th]

So its not broadcasting data link data to the missile then?(makes me wonder why that is since the launch aircraft knows where the target is) I wonder why this guy says what he says then...it puts his statements in the "extremely wrong" category...providing he is wrong of course.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Raven434th

[GGTharos]

The data link signal is generated when launching a radar guided missile. It is not generated when launching an IR missile.

 

I don't understand what you're asking now.

 

The process looks like this:

 

lock target -> tune missile/feed data to missile if radar missile, or cue seeker if IR missile -> weapon launch launch is pressed -> generate Mlink on radar antenna if radar missile / throw the missile overboard.

 

There's a limited amount of data-link channels, and you typically want them for your SARH missiles. The IR homing missiles were just not conceived with a LOAL capability. There can be any number of reasons for this, including cooling issues, weather problems, false IR targets etc.

 

IR LOAL is not new: It was used on space interceptors, but not so much in A2A. It's relatively new for A2A, and IIRC MICA IR was the first to bring it in - but don't quote me on this, it might be wrong :)

 

So its not broadcasting data link data to the missile then?(makes me wonder why that is since the launch aircraft knows where the target is) I wonder why this guy says what he says then...it puts his statements in the "extremely wrong" category...providing he is wrong of course.

Edited November 20, 2014 by GGTharos