27em and 27er tests

[Ardillita]

SOme days ago, somebody asked about what was better against low flying targets, if the 27em or the 27 er. As there was no exact answers, I did some test. I hope this data will be usefull for someone.The test were performes aginst low flying cruise missiles (tomahawk and agm84 anti ship missiles) and agains low flying aircrafts (little american bombers) at 20 m altitude. My shoots were done at 2000 m altitude and my missiles were fired with the necesary energy so to avoid easy evasions and from a head to head positions. Here are my conclusions:1.- Against cruise missiles, definitly the em perfomrs far far better than the 27er. To say more, I didn´t get a launch signal with the 27er against the low flying missiles (14meters altitude) it seems this missiles can´t be fired against target at very low altitude.2.- Against low flying aircraft the 27em also performed better, but with little difference. But, there is always a but, the 27em seems to be more resistent to countermesures and to ground clutter effect

[FVMAD]

SOme days ago, somebody asked about what was better against low flying targets, if the 27em or the 27 er. As there was no exact answers, I did some test. I hope this data will be usefull for someone.The test were performes aginst low flying cruise missiles (tomahawk and agm84 anti ship missiles) and agains low flying aircrafts (little american bombers) at 20 m altitude. My shoots were done at 2000 m altitude and my missiles were fired with the necesary energy so to avoid easy evasions and from a head to head positions. Here are my conclusions:1.- Against cruise missiles, definitly the em perfomrs far far better than the 27er. To say more, I didn´t get a launch signal with the 27er against the low flying missiles (14meters altitude) it seems this missiles can´t be fired against target at very low altitude.2.- Against low flying aircraft the 27em also performed better, but with little difference. But, there is always a but, the 27em seems to be more resistent to countermesures and to ground clutter effect

 

According to LO's manual EM is modification of ER specially made to intercept cruise missiles at extreme low altitudes. So no wonder that EM performs better... but... actually EM isn't real missile, it's left after FLANKER 2.x. Chizh sayd that EM might be removed in LOBS.

[Pilotasso]

I always use EM's on the 33. They are good to put the enemy in defensive from as far as possible and are awsome for chases.

[Kula66]

According to Janes it has similar status to the AE version and the P version ... developed, mockups/actual hardware displayed at shows, probably tested but nothing on operational status.

 

That things is a BIG missile!!

[Force_Feedback]

I always use EM's on the 33. They are good to put the enemy in defensive from as far as possible and are awsome for chases.

 

Yes, and you can name them the R-27SDGSDGSDGSDGSGSDGSG, the fact remains, aerodynamically wise and rocket burn time, the missile is exactly the R-27ER, never done seeker tests, because there is too much room for error and wrong conclusions, unless it's against a friendly aircraft, but they too will be doing evasive maneuvers, and sometimes that chaff will work, sometimes it won't, so the only logical candidate for such test would be the mig-25RBT, as it lacks countermeasure launchers, but then again, one time the AI will break left, and go to AB after 4 seconds, the other it will do the same, or start doing it later.

You do get 'ПР' farther out with the -EM against TLAMs, hit performance wise I haven't seen any noticable difference between them, one time the EM sucks, the other the ER does (talking about tlam intercepts), but this is only my opinion from doing homemade 'Kuz is under attack, scramble!' missions.

[Stratos]

How you shoot down a cruise missile??

[Ardillita]

How you shoot down a cruise missile??

 

The same as you do with aircrafts :P

 

You must first lock them up. This is not easy, since your radar will detect cruise missiles when they are near of you (20km aprox). Useing the EM, after the lock you will shoot them down easily. In case you have awacs supports, then things are easier since you will see missiles much much sooner

[Ardillita]

Yes, and you can name them the R-27SDGSDGSDGSDGSGSDGSG, the fact remains, aerodynamically wise and rocket burn time, the missile is exactly the R-27ER, never done seeker tests, because there is too much room for error and wrong conclusions, unless it's against a friendly aircraft, but they too will be doing evasive maneuvers, and sometimes that chaff will work, sometimes it won't, so the only logical candidate for such test would be the mig-25RBT, as it lacks countermeasure launchers, but then again, one time the AI will break left, and go to AB after 4 seconds, the other it will do the same, or start doing it later.

You do get 'ПР' farther out with the -EM against TLAMs, hit performance wise I haven't seen any noticable difference between them, one time the EM sucks, the other the ER does (talking about tlam intercepts), but this is only my opinion from doing homemade 'Kuz is under attack, scramble!' missions.

 

 

Ehh... this is where the statistics come into play. If you have a situation and you are able to reproduce it in the same way amny times, enought times, you can get conclusions. In this case, I didn´t just did 1 or 2 flights. I repeated the same flight, the same situation 20 times with each missile, haveing used tha same parameters. With each mission result, you have enough data to say "this missiles is better/equal/worst than this one". And that is how I took my conclusions. We all know the info we have on the manual but... the manual is wrong in many things, and the other day there was nobody able to say "yes, the em is better than the er against low flying targets"

In my test, everything was the same in each mission (wich is very easy since the IA has only intelligence in it name...) so chafs were present each time I repeated the mission (40 times in total). The only different thing was the missile being shoot. I was very very carefull, I fired all the tiomes at the same speed, the same distance, the same aspect, I even turn my plane in the same direction every time! So, if in 20 flights I have 90% of success with 1 missile, and in other 20 flights I have 20% success, the conclusion seems to be pretty clear.

[Ardillita]

According to LO's manual EM is modification of ER specially made to intercept cruise missiles at extreme low altitudes. So no wonder that EM performs better... but... actually EM isn't real missile, it's left after FLANKER 2.x. Chizh sayd that EM might be removed in LOBS.

 

 

Removed??? why???????

[Pilotasso]

There are referrences to the EM missile in my books. And it mentions no such thing as "it will be" bit in after "R-27EM" bit.

[Ardillita]

Sorry Pilotasso, I don´t understand you, what you mean?

[Pilotasso]

^^^^^My books reffer to the EM as a weapon in service rather than one thats going to be in an upgrade. I can be wrong though.

[ericinexile]

According to the Lock-On Encyclopedia (by link on the game's menu page), the EM is capable of manuevering at 20g compared with the -r and -er at 17g. This may be compensation for the missle's slightly higher speed. Incidentaly, the r77 can manuever at 30g--too bad it doesn't fit on my plane of choice.