Su-27 'flanker' actually means evade incoming F-15C all the time?

[DarkFire]

Assuming that the R-27ER gets... changed... at some point in the hopefully near future, let's not forget the other advantage it has over the AIM-120: speed and acceleration. The boost and sustainer motors on the R-27E missiles are HUGE so it reaches Vmax very quickly and has an impressive top speed. I've seen an R-27ER reach 4,200 Km/h at the point when the sustainer motor burned out. No AIM-120 of any variant could ever hope to reach that sort of speed. This, combined with the ~20% additional range gives the R-27ER a powerful advantage in being able to reach first pole and also hit first.

[Fri13]

Such a fight is only ever going to be in the Eagles favour, you are limited to using an R-27 against his much more capable AIM-120, in real life the F-15 driver would have a massive advantage there, hence why the Russians made the R-77, to try to even the playing field, the problem is that the Su-27 modelled in the the sim can't use that.

 

If you fly the MiG-29S then you get that capability, so I would suggest that if you fly the Su-27 then you need to learn to fight the fights you can win in it.

Su-27S is inferior only when F-15C pilots believe they are superior and Su-27S pilots believe they are inferior. That's it.

[whitehot]

First of all, the oldest Flanker that could carry the R-77 should be the SM version; I believe that it does not have any substantial reworking, basically should be the same SU-27S we have in DCS with an improved Radar with the ability to employ the R-77.

Secondly, many folks are citing the in-game Mig-29S/R-77 combo, yet seems to me that if the 27ER is bugged, the 77 is bugged even more (idk if it has received some tweaks in 1.5, but my impression is that is the same as before). Current missile is severly downgraded in range, to the point that a 27ET would be a better choice (with all its flaws). I recently played the "over the hump" SP campaign and I'm rly unimpressed by the 77 performance

[Capn kamikaze]

Im actually getting really tired of the whole "F-15 is superior in a BVR Engagement" speil.

 

So if I may ask, what makes the F-15 (with its AIM-120s) superior to a Su-27 with its ERs and ETs?

 

Now I get that the F-15 has a much better TWS and also (when pitbull) can go full defensive as his missiles can track on their own.

 

But what I fail to see is how an F-15, with its shorter range AIM-120s is superior to the Su-27s longer ranging missiles. This is because as the Su-27 gets the range advantage (kinematically), it fires first. Firing first means the F-15 gets two choices

 

1.)Run (trash the Su-27s Missiles and show a hot tailpipe for the Su-27s EO sensor)

or

2.)Fly through the gauntlet of ERs so that he may get within range to fire a AIM-120. Which has no guarantee of hitting its target until the missile goes pitbull.

 

So again I ask (because im genuinely confused), why is it superior?

 

I'm getting pretty tired of people pretending (wishing) that the R-27 is anywhere near as capable as the AIM-120, range is not the only thing...

 

Yes, you are confused, the AIM-120 has active terminal guidance the R-27 doesn't, if you break the lock of the R-27 for even a few seconds your chances go up of defeating it, especially if you manoeuvre out of its guiding radar's beam path seperating the R-27's FOV from the beam guiding it, and if it doesn't get an update or you've left that bit of sky that it can see then it will miss, the AIM-120 will go to its predicted intercept point based on its last update, then goes active, all in all that is a huge advantage.

[Darkwolf]

I used to fly the flanker a lot some time ago. I would just go head on against F-15C.

 

It's just about firing first, and then never give a break to the F-15. Amraam are easy to defeat.

 

 

Again, it'll go down to another useless F-15C/Su-27 balance debate....

both plane are even match, most of the tournaments who opposed F-15 to Su-27 were a real close match.

This is hardfact -just check tacview for 104 tournaments...

[Capn kamikaze]

You're comparing the Su-27, and the F-15, but that isn't the issue, the issue is the missiles, what you're glossing over is the guidance advantage that active terminal homing and TWS multiple simultaneous engagement gives you.

 

The fact is those are what makes the F-15 a good BVR fighter, now if you want to compare the AIM-7 to the R-27 then you're making sense, what you need to do is consider the R-27 as being a missile that MAY get a kill at range, but as a TOOL to force your opponent to to defensive, and use that time to get you into close range, and the fact is that the real world intent of medium range missiles is primarily against large aircraft and secondarily against fighter type targets.

[*Rage*]

The above is the correct principle but not applicable in the game currently because of massively overpowered chaff and ground/sky clutter effects. Right now the (E)R is not a tool to force your opponent defensive, nevermind a kill at range.

Edited November 20, 2015 by ///Rage

[c84]

I used to fly the flanker a lot some time ago. I would just go head on against F-15C.

 

It's just about firing first, and then never give a break to the F-15. Amraam are easy to defeat.

 

 

Again, it'll go down to another useless F-15C/Su-27 balance debate....

both plane are even match, most of the tournaments who opposed F-15 to Su-27 were a real close match.

This is hardfact -just check tacview for 104 tournaments...

 

Doing the same. AIM-120 coming? > start descending (about 30 degree) maintain decent speed, beryoza is your friend, when signal near max just pull up hard and AIM-120 surely miss.

Edited November 20, 2015 by c84

[Darkwolf]

People should stop focusing on Aim-120. A simple snake manoeuver get rid of it. I dodge them in Su-25 ! I dodge them even with Mig-21 with his failed RWR. If you can't, that mean your defensive skills need way more training, or you were just in a situation resulting from poor tactical choices. Either way, it's not the aim-120 that is reason of the death, it's your skill. Aim-120 is just the final cause.

 

......And i don't consider myself as a good pilot. I'm way way down below the best pilots. I'm more ground pounder than fighter.

 

 

Su-27 and its weaponry has a lot of advantages :

 

1/ You have a RWR which display range. F-15 jam is obsolete.

2/ You have EOS, allowing silent detection.

3/ You look cool and the blue cockpit is relaxing :D

4/ Weaponry allow first shot.

5/ R27 has mixed heads allowing multiple spectrum shots.

6/ R73. Sidewinder on steroids.

7/ Off boresight shoot. I mean way Off. Cobra + HMS = insta 150° Shooting.

8/ Best manoeuvrability of the game

9/ Did i said you look cool ?

10/ Datalink

11/ Simple and efficient displays, you don't get overflooded with data.

12/ Heaviest loadout

13/ Multiple sensor allow you to play with your target - ex. making him thing you lost look.

 

To me, Eagle pilots should complain. They have a EASIER (not = better) SA thanks to a shitload of information available at hand. But beside their radar, they don't got advantage. It's a tricky fighter that require to be in medium range engagement, their Aim-120 is actually dangerous in his 1/3 of the max range, but very easy to defeat in the other phases.

 

If you think all the mentionned things aren't much advantages, you definitively needs to train more or consider switching to F-15.

 

 

I've been banged by eagles a shitload of time during those last 10 years. Once i started really study tactics and tacview files, and take advantage of my plane, i immediately turned my K/D ratio positive. Just in a matter of days.

 

 

So back to my main point : Su-27 (and its weapons) is as good as F-15 (and its weapon). Anything else is lack of training, bad luck and DCS bugs.

 

just check out tournaments and you'll see how good planes can be when pushed to their edge.

[Nedum]

Doing the same. AIM-120 coming? > start descending (about 30 degree) maintain decent speed, beryoza is your friend, when signal near max just pull up hard and AIM-120 surely miss.

 

You talk about good pilot skill versus spit a single chaff to defeat several ERs... really? :huh:

 

So please don't tell us how the Su27 should be used, that's not the point. Most of this we know exactly.

We are talking about that the ERs are Tigers without teeth.

What you guys do is to tell a man in handcuffs what he all could do if he uses his fists, which now are in handcuffs, in a martial arts fight... do I miss a secret joke here?

The INGAME ERs are useless right now, please understand this single point!

[Capn kamikaze]

We are talking about that the ERs are Tigers without teeth.

 

Yes, they should have teeth, but they are still half blind (analogy comparing them to an active missile).

 

I have this feeling that people want them to be wonder missiles, when technologically they are not, yes there is a problem, they shouldn't be that bad, but they certainly should not compete with the 120 in terms of guidance performance, but the way people are complaining, and it's not like they've only just started, is that they want it to be an instakill weapon, with a pk of 1,000,000%

 

The INGAME ERs are useless right now, please understand this single point!

 

So are the real ones.

 

The R-27 was at least a decade behind the AIM-7, and that didn't exactly have a great reputation, even the later AIM-7's only had a Pk of about 60%, hence the development of the AIM-120, after the active sparrow was cancelled, the R-27 has in reality only achieved a kill ratio of 1/24, (~4%) and that was a proximity hit, not a direct hit, so I'd not expect too much out of it.

 

The fact is it is an outdated weapon, and there was a reason Russia developed the R-77...

 

Basically adapt your tactics, fire multiple missiles, both IR and Radar, and use team work.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Cap'n kamikaze

[*Rage*]

Yes, they should have teeth, but they are still half blind (analogy comparing them to an active missile).

 

I have this feeling that people want them to be wonder missiles, when technologically they are not, yes there is a problem, they shouldn't be that bad, but they certainly should not compete with the 120 in terms of guidance performance, but the way people are complaining, and it's not like they've only just started, is that they want it to be an instakill weapon, with a pk of 1,000,000%

 

 

 

So are the real ones.

 

The R-27 was at least a decade behind the AIM-7, and that didn't exactly have a great reputation, even the later AIM-7's only had a Pk of about 60%, hence the development of the AIM-120, after the active sparrow was cancelled, the R-27 has in reality only achieved a kill ratio of 1/24, (~4%) and that was a proximity hit, not a direct hit, so I'd not expect too much out of it.

 

The fact is it is an outdated weapon, and there was a reason Russia developed the R-77...

 

Basically adapt your tactics, fire multiple missiles, both IR and Radar, and use team work.

 

The same nonsense you spouted before. Lets not repeat it. Before you post again watch the track Ragnarok posted because you really have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Infact here you go:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=152125&page=10

 

Page 10 to 20 and you can relive getting your nonsensical arguments ridiculed.

Edited November 20, 2015 by ///Rage

[karambiatos]

 

 

So are the real ones.

 

The R-27 was at least a decade behind the AIM-7, and that didn't exactly have a great reputation, even the later AIM-7's only had a Pk of about 60%, hence the development of the AIM-120, after the active sparrow was cancelled, the R-27 has in reality only achieved a kill ratio of 1/24, (~4%) and that was a proximity hit, not a direct hit, so I'd not expect too much out of it.

 

The fact is it is an outdated weapon, and there was a reason Russia developed the R-77...

 

Basically adapt your tactics, fire multiple missiles, both IR and Radar, and use team work.

 

Can you stop the ethiopean war please, it has no bearing on anything.

[Capn kamikaze]

Except that it is the only real world example of the R-27 being used....

 

I would bet anything you'd hold it up as an example if it showed the R-27 performing well.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Cap'n kamikaze

[*Rage*]

Yes, and the Aim9 was downgraded between Falklands and Desert Storm.

 

Im up for it. Wanna go another 10 pages of your arguments getting wrecked? I could just quote myself from previous posts to save time!

[karambiatos]

Except that it is the only real world example of the R-27 being used....

Except nothing really known about the launch parameters.

 

If only 4% of missiles in the war actually inginted their motors does that mean that only 4% of launches in the sim should actually be successful?

 

What i'm saying we don't know much of anything about the launch parameters of the missiles in that war.

 

And using percentages is an iffy thing to begin with since it doesn't say anything about the amount of missiles fired.

 

If we knew the exact launch parameters of at least one launch that would be a great thing, but we don't.

 

now let me use 3 full stops ...

[Capn kamikaze]

Sorry, but you just sound like you're ignoring it because it is inconvenient.

[*Rage*]

^^He has no idea how many missiles launched. He has no idea which missile type was launched. He has no idea under what parameters they were launched. He has no idea that it was not russian mercenaries at the controls. He has no idea about anything.

[Frostie]

Except that it is the only real world example of the R-27 being used....

 

I would bet anything you'd hold it up as an example if it showed the R-27 performing well.

 

Where's the tacview of that?

Without an understanding of why those handful of missiles failed to hit their target you have nothing, all missiles miss but in good parameters EDs miss and not just R27s.

[Capn kamikaze]

///Rage, actually I do know how many were launched, I said so in my previous post, 24, and it was Russian mercenaries on both sides, some flying MiG-29's and the others flying Su-27s.

 

You just don't want to accept any source unless it fits your position, you are biased.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-27_%28air-to-air_missile%29

[*Rage*]

Oh well done you!!

 

Reliable source? No. Wiki again and an Eritrean radio station report. I have a reliable source from a USAF LT General that the Pk of the Aim9 in Desert storm was 5%. And I posted it to you. Do you have and equally reliable source about what you're spouting? Of course not. Do you have any sources for the other questions? Of course not...

Edited November 20, 2015 by ///Rage

[Capn kamikaze]

You can check the citations....

[Frostie]

Oh well done you!!

 

Reliable source? No. Wiki again and an Eritrean radio station. I have a reliable source from a USAF LT General that the Pk of the Aim9 in Desert storm was 5%. And I posted it to you. Do you have and equally reliable source about what you're spouting? Of course not. Do you have any sources for the other questions? Of course not...

 

No one in their right mind would argue ED had it right if aim-9 in DCS failed like this.

 

But with R27 cue Captn Kamikaze because DCS has pilots that always conform to realistic life dependent decisions, who'd have guessed with such a nick.

[Capn kamikaze]

The Pk in desert storm was not 5%

 

It was overall, across all services 15%

 

20 of the launches have to be discounted due to them being accidental

 

https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/06/15/air-to-air-weapons-effectiveness/

[Capn kamikaze]

No one in their right mind would argue ED had it right if aim-9 in DCS failed like this.

 

But with R27 cue Captn Kamikaze because DCS has pilots that always conform to realistic life dependent decisions, who'd have guessed with such a nick.

 

I'm not saying ED has it right, I'm saying there seem to be a lot of people here who want it to be a perfect missile that will never ever miss, and even though it has no active seeker it should act like it does.