EvilBivol-1 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 I might be wrong, but I believe the general thought was that the R-27T/TE could only be carried on the inner-most wing pylons for the Su-27. Nope... http://forum.airforce.ru/viewtopic.php?t=403&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=140 - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
chrno120 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 I think the R-27T/ET loading between the engine Nacelles were already part of the Default loadout.. anyways there is LOPE btw that airfield seems a very lovely place to land:D The most stupid member in the forum
Dudikoff Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 The aircraft with a T version of the Alamo is not a Su-27, BTW. It's probably a Su-30. i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Alfa Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 I might be wrong, but I believe the general thought was that the R-27T/TE could only be carried on the inner-most wing pylons for the Su-27. Nope... http://forum.airforce.ru/viewtopic.php?t=403&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=140 Well I think the general thought was that it couldn't be carried on pylons that would restrict its seeker view and that the reason it is most often seen carried on the inner-most wing pylons is because these restrict its FOV the least :) . Cheers, - JJ. JJ
Alfa Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 The aircraft with a T version of the Alamo is not a Su-27, BTW. It's probably a Su-30. The aircraft in the photo is an Su-27UB. All versions of the Su-30 have an IFR probe ;) . Cheers, - JJ. JJ
Pilotasso Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 A missile in such position would be no good but to be launched against a retreatin target while looking down. These misssles clearly arent for dogfights as we use them ingame. .
Force_Feedback Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 In RL the R-27(E)T are a last resort weapon, if all your radar guided missiles have missed, you launch the T missile. Nice pics with real weapons BTW. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Kula66 Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 FF, I thought they designed to chase down fleeing Tornadoes and F-111s on burner. Also, standard tactics were to fire one of each ... but how would that work if one has a comms link and one doesn't. That would imply the T was a BVR weapon, like the R ... hmmm.
Dudikoff Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Well I think the general thought was that it couldn't be carried on pylons that would restrict its seeker view and that the reason it is most often seen carried on the inner-most wing pylons is because these restrict its FOV the least :). I thought it was because (for the same reason) only the innermost wing pylons had the necessary wirings for IR seeker's coolant. But Fomin doesn't mention any restrictions in his book. Maybe all the pylons/hardpoints provide the necessary coolant. i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Dudikoff Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 The aircraft in the photo is an Su-27UB. All versions of the Su-30 have an IFR probe ;) .Cheers,- JJ. The first demo plane of the Su-30MK programme doesn't, for one. :) Ok, I just made the wrong assumption, my error (I'm kind of stressed after my 300EUR 7900GT card started artefacting in 3d mode for no good reason. And she was only 2 weeks old.. :( i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Kenan Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 The aircraft in the photo is an Su-27UB. Cheers, - JJ. Let's get to the point: if Su-27UB can carry 1 ET under belly (front pylon), that means singleseater version should be also capable of having one, thus putting this is as a standard online payload and having even more opportunity to shoot down bandits with one extra ET, just the way we love it.:joystick: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Commanding Officer of: 2nd Company 1st financial guard battalion "Mrcine" See our squads here and our . Croatian radio chat for DCS World
Pilotasso Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Let's get to the point: if Su-27UB can carry 1 ET under belly (front pylon), that means singleseater version should be also capable of having one, thus putting this is as a standard online payload and having even more opportunity to shoot down bandits with one extra ET, just the way we love it.:joystick: uh-oh here we go again!:lol: .
Force_Feedback Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Pylon wise there should be no reason why the -(E)T can't be hung, as the wiring is all the same, the only difference is that the pylons that carry radar guided missiles usually don't have the coolant tanks installed, so the seeker will be less sensitive. But if they bothered to install the compressed gas tanks, then the only limitation is the fov. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Pilotasso Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Thing is that each pylon carrying the ET needs a Bottle and a pump of liquid nitrogen. Standard aircraft have only 2. This one has 1 on centerline pylon and theres no reason to believe that can carry 3 since in the pics there arent any underwing ET's at all. It could be that they preferred to carry only 1 as theres no real advantage to have 3 since all their BVR power IRL lies with the radar variant and having 3 ET's means less ER's and lesser combat persistence at BVR. Imagine having 3 ET's in the hopes of finding 3 retreating targets with less BVR missiles. What are the chances of that? .
Breakshot Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 thus putting this is as a standard online payload and having even more opportunity to shoot down bandits with one extra ET, just the way we love it ETs! More ETs! At appears that the plane can also carry them in the back pylon as well! Tim "Breakshot" Mytrofanov | C.O. of 51 ПВО / 100 КИАП Regiments | twitch.tv/51breakshot
Kenan Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Well, it's clear Flanker can can carry more then 2 ETs. Sorry Pilotasso. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Commanding Officer of: 2nd Company 1st financial guard battalion "Mrcine" See our squads here and our . Croatian radio chat for DCS World
Pilotasso Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 LOL, how can that ET at the back can ever aquire its target? Could it be that they mounted the missiles just for some sort of trial? You can as many ET as you like once ED fixes the ET reaquisition bug. ;) .
Kusch Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 LOAL (Lock After Launch). Give me "flying telephone pole" (SA-2)!
Kenan Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 LOL, how can that ET at the back can ever aquire its target? Could it be that they mounted the missiles just for some sort of trial? It's all a conspiracy. They put it there just to piss you off. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Commanding Officer of: 2nd Company 1st financial guard battalion "Mrcine" See our squads here and our . Croatian radio chat for DCS World
Pilotasso Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 naaa. you just made too evident that is funny. :D .
Crusty Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Umm do they have helmet mounted high off boresight system?...wouldnt that let it aquire a target even if the seeker couldnt yet see it? sorry if its silly question..im a frog man meself oo err...missus:animals_bunny: ** Anti-Pastie**
nscode Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 It could... after the first one is gone... if it's lense is not full of smoke :D maybe its a trial.... maybe it's a 'just hang what ever is at hand for the press' Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
Pilotasso Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 LOAL (Lock After Launch). wich is not the same as reaquisition, but I know that would give the back pylon feasibility to mount that ET. I just dont know what use would it be, except to confuse and desinformate. I mean in real life not ingame. ;) .
Kusch Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Geophizika was responsible for the 36T IR seeker for the R-27T > air-to-air ... it can be fired in lock-on-after-launch (LOAL) mode. Give me "flying telephone pole" (SA-2)!
Breakshot Posted July 23, 2006 Posted July 23, 2006 Geophizika was responsible for the 36T IR seeker for the R-27T > air-to-air ... it can be fired in lock-on-after-launch (LOAL) mode. Do u have a source for that info? Would be nice to review Tim "Breakshot" Mytrofanov | C.O. of 51 ПВО / 100 КИАП Regiments | twitch.tv/51breakshot
Recommended Posts