R-27 ET "Anomalies"

[EvilBivol-1]

Currently, you can launch the -27T prior to seeker lock by overriding the computer - which is designed to only provide the "LA" cue upon seeker lock - and still have a chance of hitting your target. This is either an oversight by ED, or perhaps intentionally designed. It happens because your aircraft's sensor lock (via radar or EOS) is providing targeting data to the missile and once it is fired, it heads off toward the target, eventually attaining its own seeker lock.

 

We don't know if the real thing has an "override" function to allow the employment of targeted weapons prior to "LA" cue, but no evidence for this has been found. The only thing found thus far is the ability to conduct emergency launches and jettisons, which aren't likely to pass on any targetting information to the weapons. In fact, the weapons probably aren't even armed. That brings up a good question that I don't have an asnwer for... are the weapons on the pylons already armed and ready to blow? I doubt it, they must be armed prior to being pickled off, right?

[Cobra360]

Don't missiles go ballistic and self destruct if they don't find a target or lose lock/guidance IRL. Or does that only apply to radar guided SAMs?

 

That must be a bug on the EOS. The highest tracking range I have seen for that is listed at 50km max for a large target.

[GGTharos]

Yes, if they're hot enough ... you're -probably- looking at a target tail-on in AB, right?

 

Evil, weapons do NOT arm until they leave the rail ... they arm after experiencing a classified amount of acceleration for a classified amount of time (so if the motor sputters out, they won't arm either)

[EvilBivol-1]

Roger, that's what I figured. Just makes sense that the "uncontrolled launch" function is simply firing off the weapons without even arming them.

[GGTharos]

Yeah, otherwise they would be a danger to everyone around ... and unlike the AMRAAM, these weapons were never designed to be launched ahead in some sort of snapshot (ie. maddog) mode.

 

AFAIK, the 'winder doesn't do it, the R-60 doesn't do it, the R-73 doesn't do it, and all for the same reason: Seeker issues.

[Ironhand]

Roger, that's what I figured. Just makes sense that the "uncontrolled launch" function is simply firing off the weapons without even arming them.

Aren't they "armed" on the ground? As in having a safety device (pin or whatever) pulled? Perhaps that's simplistic. Once launched, however, this allows whatever fully arms the warhead to come into play as GG suggests. But if that's the case then, Evil, your "uncontrolled launch" would arm it. Yes? No?

 

Rich

[EvilBivol-1]

Not necessarily, because, as mentioned, the "uncontrolled launch" is performed via a separate control panel, which would lead me to believe that the firing "chain of events" within the WCS is different and is specifically designed for such circumstances.

 

The other funny thing is how much this flight manual is being taken as a bible while barely describing missile tactics or WEZ's ...

You know, it may not be as practical as that, but it sure is packed with information. Most notably, its quite an eye-opener for just how simplistic our virtual combat is. What does concern me more, is the fact that this is an Export version manual. Exactly what avionics functions (such as data-link capable IR missiles, for example) might be removed is anyone's guess...

[GGTharos]

Quite true ... though given the seekers used on those missiles, I just don't see the datalink working ...

[Ironhand]

Not necessarily, because, as mentioned, the "uncontrolled launch" is performed via a separate control panel, which would lead me to believe that the firing "chain of events" within the WCS is different and is specifically designed for such circumstances.

 

 

You know, it may not be as practical as that, but it sure is packed with information. Most notably, its quite an eye-opener for just how simplistic our virtual combat is.

I suppose it would all depend on how the warhead is actually armed. Does an electrical switch have to first be closed? Or is it a simple mechanical connection of some sort sort--similar to the impeller on a bomb, for instance.

 

I've never for a moment thought that what we have in this sim (or any other) is particularly close to what actually takes place in the cockpit or outside. :)

 

Rich

[GGTharos]

You have to provide power to the weapon first of all, it has to run it's BIT etc ... if this is just a jettison action, it really doesn't matter -what- the mechanism is, it won't arm, or guide :)

[EvilBivol-1]

I've never for a moment thought that what we have in this sim (or any other) is particularly close to what actually takes place in the cockpit or outside.

 

Heh, I suppose I didn't either, but all this talk about notching, F-Pole/A-pole, diving and climbing and so on makes us look (feel?) a lot cooler than we really are. :D

[Ironhand]

Heh, I suppose I didn't either, but all this talk about notching, F-Pole/A-pole, diving and climbing and so on makes us look (feel?) a lot cooler than we really are. :D

It's only you A2A pukes that have to worry about that stuff. Real men do A2G and we already know we're cool. :D

 

Rich

[AJ.eightFive]

I'm familiar with F-pole but... A-pole? Do tell...

[GGTharos]

They're almost the same.

 

You hold the F-Pole until impact. You hold the A-Pole until your missile goes active (requires you to be shooting actives)

[S77th-GOYA]

Late for the party again.

 

In an effort to save some brain cells, I'm not reading all of this thread. So, sorry if this has already been covered.

 

What is the seeker field of view of the ET? And has it been tested in game?

 

Would the seeker move within its gimbals to search for a heat source if fired without a lock? Or is this about firing with a lock and using override? I seem to remember reading that the ET doesn't receive in flight guidance from the launching a/c. Is this accurate?

 

It has been stated in the past that the ET MUST have a heat source locked in order to fire it. What is the source of this statement? Is there any data to disprove this?

[Breakshot]

EvilBivol

Headon/Rear/Close/Long Range/low alt/High alt/

 

When u state different measurments, it becomes a "profile" for the flight, so once again u didnt quite get me there.

 

Well, yes, you did. That's what "maddoging" an ET would be for

 

The question at stake was: Was it physically possible to release a missile without a lock. And I answered it, by clearly showing that it was possible. What situation it could be used etc etc is not up to us to judge, its the pilots. Once again u are just twisting my interpretation. U are getting good at that.

 

The only valuable point in ur whole post is from pg 152, which Ill check later. For now I am off.

[Pilotasso]

Late for the party again.

 

What is the seeker field of view of the ET? And has it been tested in game?

 

Yes. On the first page you got 1 track showing the ET's tracking and Guimball limits.

In adition in page 11 there are other tests donne on the AIM-120... And just skip the text in between. ;)

 

It has been stated in the past that the ET MUST have a heat source locked in order to fire it. What is the source of this statement? Is there any data to disprove this?

 

That "theory" has been heavily contested by a few but some highly recomended people still suport it. ;)

 

Also that the point of this thread is to let these issues be known, this was not meant to be a debate to see if they should remain on the game or not, although everybody here expressed his opinion to that including me.

[tflash]

Pilotasso, you definitely will be remembered as the guy who inadvertently started the "Definitive English Translation of the Su-27 manual" project.

 

While you might have to explain yourself to a couple of KGB officials, I'll join the rest of the crowd who are already honing their skills in the new maddog mania! :)

[Pilotasso]

well...I trying to counter that and when I do, it will be a waste of missiles. I want to believe thats only a temporay nuissance.

 

Meanwhile keep on the manual, it should have been translated before IMHO for convenience. ;)

 

About the KGB dont worry Im going to lay low for a while.

[Cosmonaut]

Online gaming will never really match real life stats even if we had perfectly modeled missiles and avionics that match their real world counter parts exactly. That's the thing about online gaming versus realism; .. gaming usually wins and whether its a flightsim or fps the guy with the "BFG" will always have the most kills. The online mentality is to get the kill regardless of whether the tactic/s are realistic or not and if they can exploit a feature or exploit a capability then so be it as long as they can increase their score. IMO if you want realistic engagements then play offline or coops but if you want some friendly competition then play online.. I do both and have great time even though I personally never maddog or spam but I have to say that if the current trend continues then all we're going to have is a room filled with maddogged spammed aim120's, R77's and now IR 27's with everyone on an RTB course ;)

[Force_Feedback]

well...I trying to counter that and when I do, it will be a waste of missiles. I want to believe thats only a temporay nuissance.

 

Meanwhile keep on the manual, it should have been translated before IMHO for convenience. ;)

 

About the KGB dont worry Im going to lay low for a while.

 

 

When I was stoned, I had that idea as well, but after the high wore off, I realized that it's a crapload of manual pages and I'm a crappy translator cuz I barely understand it myself with all the abbreviations used in it. :p

What, will the KGB (FSB) hunt you if you try to translate it?

[fbm]

P-27T/ET can be maddogged as far as guys from ED know.

 

question&answer in russian

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=184199&postcount=464

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=184352&postcount=465

[Alfa]

Furthermore, having now read a few more pages in the manual, I am even more convinced. It turns out that the "uncontrolled launch" and "jettison" are actually one and the same, except that a "launch" is used from the "АПУ" (APU) rail pylons, and the "jettison" from the "АКУ" (AKU) pylons and/or "БД" (BD) bomb mounts. Page 103.

 

Bingo Evil! :) .

 

Considering that the Su-27 use both the APU-470 rail launcher as well as the AKU-470 ejector launcher for the R-27(all versions of the weapon) depending on the mounting position on the aircraft, it is logical that there needs to be two different ways of getting rid of them in case of an emergency situaton.

 

The procedure for the jettison a weapon from an ejector rack is straight forward, but how to do it from a rail launcher.....if not by an uncontrolled launch?. :) .

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Pilotasso]

P-27T/ET can be maddogged as far as guys from ED know.

 

question&answer in russian

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=184199&postcount=464

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=184352&postcount=465

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question:

The following question taken from English branch. There discuss realized in LO uncontrollable start-up (without reception ПР) rockets Р-27Т with independent capture of the purpose on a trajectory - maddoged. This rocket on such is capable in a reality? Or таки " feature of realization "?

 

Answer:

Like as there are data that is capable, for this reason did.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well it seems to me that your question mentions fire and forget R-27ET missile "uncontrolable launch" as associated with the word maddog wrongly.

 

Dmut therefore gave an answer but probably not to the question you made because it was badly put.

 

As you can see and it has been mentioned on this very page that "uncontrolable lauch" is simple the jettioning of a missile mounted on an external wing rack (all IR missiles) by its motor intead of an ordinary ejector present on the belly pylons. Dmut may even be referring to the data of same manual we are discussing right here. Jetison of a missile will imply that it will go cold off the pylon.

 

As such it would only be logical not to waste time activating the seekers cooling system and thus it would go BLIND. Maddog would require to put the missile on standby and then release it. It sure doesnt sound like an "uncontrolable launch".

This being speculation on my part, I would like to see a confirmation of this just to be sure.

 

I would also like to see Dmut reply here, where he can see the background of this issue better and clear out the ambiguity of his answer.

[fbm]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question:

The following question taken from English branch. There discuss realized in LO uncontrollable start-up (without reception ПР) rockets Р-27Т with independent capture of the purpose on a trajectory - maddoged. This rocket on such is capable in a reality? Or таки " feature of realization "?

 

Answer:

Like as there are data that is capable, for this reason did.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Well it seems to me that your question mentions fire and forget R-27ET missile "uncontrolable launch" as associated with the word maddog wrongly.

 

Dmut therefore gave an answer but probably not to the question you made because it was badly put.

 

As you can see and it has been mentioned on this very page that "uncontrolable lauch" is simple the jettioning of a missile mounted on an external wing rack (all IR missiles) by its motor intead of an ordinary ejector present on the belly pylons. Dmut may even be referring to the data of same manual we are discussing right here. Jetison of a missile will imply that it will go cold off the pylon.

 

As such it would only be logical not to waste time activating the seekers cooling system and thus it would go BLIND. Maddog would require to put the missile on standby and then release it. It sure doesnt sound like an "uncontrolable launch".

I would like to see a confirmation of this just to be sure.

 

I would also like to see Dmut reply here, where he can see the background of this issue better and clear out the ambiguity of his answer.

 

There is no ambiguity in that question and answer. May be i was slightly incorrect, but im quite sure he understood me correctly. We told about launching the missile without LA and its ability of finding targets during the flight without assistant.

 

May be the missile jettisson by launch and the launch without LA are DIFFERENT procedures. And/or when you lock target by radar or КОЛС with chosen R-27T missile it means activating the seekers cooling system because it is necessary for missile to see target, so it get ready for use.

Sorry for poor english