R-27ER Experiment & Findings

[Capn kamikaze]

Are you suggesting removing ARH, which is pretty much the general notion around but for the sake of balance remove 27ER because it outranges AIM-7 while the fact that AIM-7 greatly outranges 27R is irrelevant.

Please more F15 pilot wisdom needed for this thread.:)

 

No, I am suggesting NOT to do that, I am suggesting that nothing be removed at all, I am saying that if you start removing one thing, then all that will happen is the fanboys of the other side will start whinging about it, and then you end up with something else removed and then something else and we end up with Camels vs DR.1's.

 

The ONLY reason people want the AIM-120 banning from servers is because they want to slant the playing field in their direction, simple as that.

[TAW_Blaze]

I could see 120, ER and ET removed alltogether. R+T vs 7 is fun, reasonably balanced and most important of all significantly more skill dependent than what we have now. Forcing SARH vs SARH fight would benefit the good pilots more and also (hopefully) educate the community to in general become a better pilot.

[apocom]

Why not just removing the 120C? Just for a test? No server does that. The 120B is still better than the 27ER, but has a little bit less kinetic energy and is therfor easier to defeat.

[Frostie]

ER vs AIM-7 is about is badly balanced as AIM-120 vs ER is. In that scenario it's a complete 180 from the current playfield where 15s have to try and force merges because in a face to face fight you simply can't go against the ER, unless you're an idiot who will gamble on the ER going dumb all the time (which it doesn't). I'm not saying the current playfield is fair, but reversing it with a completely idiotic and historically nonexistant scenario is quite silly. Unless of course you want 15 drivers to suffer a bit. :D

 

27R+T vs AIM-7 is a fairly balanced fight. AIM-7 might be slightly better in kinematics but it's easily overcome by pilot skill.

 

Historically nonexistant?

R-27ER is an 80s missile, AIM-120A was late 91/92, and AIM-120B late 94, and the 120C5 used in DCS was 2000.

 

 

The ONLY reason people want the AIM-120 banning from servers is because they want to slant the playing field in their direction, simple as that.

 

Perhaps they are tired of being the underdog and would like to see an alternate scenario.

I'm still trying to figure out whether you like balance or not or is it only when it's moderate balance and only in your favour. Seems to me people tend to play the balance card even having already derided balance as being unrealistic.

 

Just to be clear i'm not suggesting any changes, I prefer full loadout to anything else.

Edited March 1, 2017 by Frostie

[TAW_Blaze]

And tell me again, where did the 27ER fight the AIM-7? Oh wait, it did not.

 

R/T vs 7 is a reasonably fair fight and if we consider removing things to gain balance without major updates to the game this is the best solution. Anyone who thinks ER vs 7 is anything remotely close to fair with a straight face is completely clueless.

 

Also interesting you throw in 80s when it comes to ER but < year accuray of service entry in case of american missiles. :) So when did exactly the ER enter service? The only source I was able to quickly find says '85 with a big ?. Considering the R entered service in '83 that seems rather early.

[red_coreSix]

Also interesting you throw in 80s when it comes to ER but < year accuray of service entry in case of american missiles. :) So when did exactly the ER enter service? The only source I was able to quickly find says '85 with a big ?. Considering the R entered service in '83 that seems rather early.

 

Maybe that is why he wrote "80s"...

[TAW_Blaze]

Maybe that is why he wrote "80s"...

 

Missed the point mate. 80s could be 80, 81, or 89.

[Capn kamikaze]

I'm still trying to figure out whether you like balance or not or is it only when it's moderate balance and only in your favour.

 

HAHA, no, that is all the people who want to either ban the AIM-120, pretend the R-27ER doesn't out reach the AIM-7, or want to make the R-27R/ER act like it has an active terminal seeker.

[red_coreSix]

Missed the point mate. 80s could be 80' date=' 81, or 89.[/quote']

 

Well, I couldn't find an exact service entry date for the ER either. Some sources go as far back as 85, as you said, and others quote late 80s and even early 90s. But definitely before either AIM-120B or C.

[Frostie]

And tell me again, where did the 27ER fight the AIM-7? Oh wait, it did not.

 

R/T vs 7 is a reasonably fair fight and if we consider removing things to gain balance without major updates to the game this is the best solution. Anyone who thinks ER vs 7 is anything remotely close to fair with a straight face is completely clueless.

 

Also interesting you throw in 80s when it comes to ER but < year accuray of service entry in case of american missiles. :) So when did exactly the ER enter service? The only source I was able to quickly find says '85 with a big ?. Considering the R entered service in '83 that seems rather early.

 

Not sure if AIM-7 fought R-27R or ER fought 120 either, I don't understand your point.

 

I don't know the exact date, like has been said some sources state back to 83, 85 who knows. The R-27 is a modular design so i'd guess it was all one package.

 

Maybe an emphasis on teamwork to overcome the ER with 7s is something the airquake environment many believe exists could benefit from.

[TAW_Blaze]

Still missing the big picture. Not to mention I wasn't even talking about 120 vs ER, but don't mind that.

 

Point is, we are the leaders of the community, we need to be ( and we are) bigger than this nonsense of feeling hurt over having an unequal playfield and trying to push it over to the other side.

 

AIM-7M entered service around '82, R-27R entered service around '83, they are a reasonably fair opponent, or case in point, MUCH MORE FAIR than ER vs 120 or ER vs 7. Sure, there were some intervals of time where it could've been possible to have ER face 7s, and my memory of 90s conflicts is a bit foggy atm but I think ER did face AMRAAMs. Not that it really matters, again.

 

My point is, we either leave it to ED or if we want to remove things to create fair circumstances then R/T vs 7 would be the ideal way to go. Why?

 

1) Historically they existed in the same era, quite closely

 

2) Currently in the game they represent similar capability to each other ( and will probably continue to do so, even if numerous missile issues are fixed). This is significantly more important than the historical background. Why?

 

a) This gets rid of the never ending toxic atmosphere of one side having it better than the other. Seriously, if ever was something to cockblock community growth and individual progress, this is it.

 

b) Creating a more fair environment will help the community grow and will also help them have more fun and become better pilots. The community achieving a higher quality in turn will catalyze further growth of both size and quality of the community. It will become more competitive, more entertaining and more accessible, accepted or generally known to other people. Think of a JW, Red Flag, Blue Flag or other similar event hosted on a scale of hundreds of highly competent, passionate and motivated good pilots. Sounds incredible, right?

 

3) We don't need all this modern gadgets to create an engaging, competitive, challenging and entertaining combat flight simulation. Hell, in my opinion SARH era of air combat was one of the most challenging times of air combat. Not saying that ARH combat and 21st century air combat takes less skill, but it evolved in a different direction and takes a lot of different kind of skill. Lots of things that are difficult to represent in our game, partly because of lack of information and partly because of other reasons.

 

Eventually we will probably stick with what ED has but alternate options have nothing to hide either. Or what if we could involve ED with creating a vision that would take away all these things and land us in an environment like the 80s with only R/Ts and 7s for example.

[TAW_Blaze]

Not sure if AIM-7 fought R-27R or ER fought 120 either, I don't understand your point.

 

I don't know the exact date, like has been said some sources state back to 83, 85 who knows. The R-27 is a modular design so i'd guess it was all one package.

 

Maybe an emphasis on teamwork to overcome the ER with 7s is something the airquake environment many believe exists could benefit from.

 

Sure it puts emphasis on teamwork but it also completely destroys your ability to even remotely stand up in a straight fight. Read my new post and you'll understand what I mean, and you'll probably agree too.

[*Rage*]

ER vs AIM-7 is about is badly balanced as AIM-120 vs ER is. In that scenario it's a complete 180 from the current playfield where 15s have to try and force merges because in a face to face fight you simply can't go against the ER, unless you're an idiot who will gamble on the ER going dumb all the time (which it doesn't). I'm not saying the current playfield is fair,

 

27R+T vs AIM-7 is a fairly balanced fight. AIM-7 might be slightly better in kinematics but it's easily overcome by pilot skill.

 

Actually no. The ER vs Aim7 is much more balanced compared to R vs Aim7. Check the Missile flyout charts. The difference between the ER and Aim 7 in speed and range is far less than the difference between the R and Aim7. The R is a concrete block in comparison. I have the flyout charts somewhere (probably buried deep in our forums) but you can do it very easily with Tacview.

 

but reversing it with a completely idiotic and historically nonexistant scenario is quite silly.

It is historically accurate. ER entered service ~1986-1988. 120A entered service Sept 1991. 120C 1996. Edited March 1, 2017 by ///Rage

[*Rage*]

And tell me again' date=' where did the 27ER fight the AIM-7? Oh wait, it did not.[/quote']

 

eh? What relevance does that have? Has a Su27 ever fought an F15?

 

Anyone who thinks ER vs 7 is anything remotely close to fair with a straight face is completely clueless.

 

As I posted above. its not a fair fight. But its a fairer fight then R vs Aim7.

 

This is all beside the point though. Should missile giudance/ECCM be fixed then we wont need to have this conversation.

[JunMcKill]

Not sure if AIM-7 fought R-27R or ER fought 120 either, I don't understand your point.

 

I don't know the exact date, like has been said some sources state back to 83, 85 who knows. The R-27 is a modular design so i'd guess it was all one package.

 

Maybe an emphasis on teamwork to overcome the ER with 7s is something the airquake environment many believe exists could benefit from.

 

The ER/ET should enter in Soviet service about 1989, in the same time Cuba received the R-27R/T and R-73 with the MIG-29A (I was in the Command Staff of the Cuban Army Forces then), thats why the russian already had the ER/ET in their airforce and the R-77 already develop by the end of the 80s. Meanwhile the AIM-120B entered in service in 1994 and the C in 1996 AFAIK.

 

What I've been asking to ED is to change the way the MIG-29S use the TWS system and solution fire for their dual shot mode of the R-77, IRL they cant LOCK at all to launch two missiles to two different targets, they should use volumetric narrow scan without lock (like the F-15 TWS).

Edited March 1, 2017 by JunMcKill

[Cik]

this thread is the stereotypical thread on this topic it goes like this

 

"balance is not important, only realism"

"you shouldn't have the AMRAAM then"

"ah that would be unfair"

 

every tiem

[JunMcKill]

this thread is the stereotypical thread on this topic it goes like this

 

"balance is not important, only realism"

"you shouldn't have the AMRAAM then"

"ah that would be unfair"

 

every tiem

 

I think that realism is more important if we want to fly a simulator, if I want balance then will fly IL-2 or another WWII sim

[*Rage*]

Heres some realism for you :megalol:

 

 

[JunMcKill]

yeah, disgusting! :(

[TAW_Blaze]

I've done both R vs 7 (this from both sides) and ER vs 7 (only from 15 side, but here it's irrelevant) to know that in DCS R vs 7 is far closer to an equal fight than with an ER. Outside the usual rng dumb-off-the-rail effect and the occasional retarded opponent you really have zero chance of winning against an ER with a 7 in a neutral BVR fight. The only winner card here is element of surprise to buy a long enough margin of first shot advantage that by the time his missiels could be a threat he's dead already, or never even gets to launch.

[*Rage*]

Im afraid flyout chart trumps personal opinion. The only practical difference between R, ER, and 7M is speed and range. The flyout chart will tell you everything you need to know and it clearly shows that the difference between an ER and Aim7 is much less than an R and Aim7. Do it and see for yourself.

[Frostie]

I've done both R vs 7 (this from both sides) and ER vs 7 (only from 15 side' date=' but here it's irrelevant) to know that in DCS R vs 7 is far closer to an equal fight than with an ER. Outside the usual rng dumb-off-the-rail effect and the occasional retarded opponent you really have zero chance of winning against an ER with a 7 in a neutral BVR fight. The only winner card here is element of surprise to buy a long enough margin of first shot advantage that by the time his missiels could be a threat he's dead already, or never even gets to launch.[/quote']

 

I understand your points from your previous post and agree mostly.

 

But back in the day before ED screwed the missiles up with crazy drag multipliers etc. the 7 v R worked well. But now it is a different story, it's not just the ranges and lack of being able to perform BVR much less effectively than ER vs 120 but also the inclusion of the Mirage into the fray with the 530D which outclasses both 27R and AIM-7. The drag factor really hits the R-27 family, take a look at these tests and tell me which is the fairest face off.

 

Attacking an aircraft that is moving 30 degrees off the nose.

 

Launch parameters

6000m (20,000 ft)

Mach 0.9

 

R-27R hits at 30km max

AIM-7M hits at 41km (22nm) max

R-27ER hits at 44km max

[Cik]

I've done both R vs 7 (this from both sides) and ER vs 7 (only from 15 side' date=' but here it's irrelevant) to know that in DCS R vs 7 is far closer to an equal fight than with an ER. Outside the usual rng dumb-off-the-rail effect and the occasional retarded opponent you really have zero chance of winning against an ER with a 7 in a neutral BVR fight. The only winner card here is element of surprise to buy a long enough margin of first shot advantage that by the time his missiels could be a threat he's dead already, or never even gets to launch.[/quote']

 

so it's unfair. weren't you the guy two pages back saying that's irrelevant? beating an AMRAAM as a sukhoi is also basically impossible except every now and then there's an idiot who doesn't pop the three flares necessary to dodge an ET.

 

remove AMRAAM from game it's too unbalanced. quote: me, except also you

[TAW_Blaze]

Im afraid flyout chart trumps personal opinion. The only practical difference between R, ER, and 7M is speed and range. The flyout chart will tell you everything you need to know and it clearly shows that the difference between an ER and Aim7 is much less than an R and Aim7. Do it and see for yourself.

 

Yet I remember a dozen of acmis of inhouse training fights with R vs 7 being extremely close to the point where a slight mistake in the setup or the followup maneuvers could easily cost you the fight.

 

ER not only is faster and longer range but also accelerates significantly better, even more than the slammer.

 

But back in the day before ED screwed the missiles up with crazy drag multipliers etc. the 7 v R worked well. But now it is a different story, it's not just the ranges and lack of being able to perform BVR much less effectively than ER vs 120 but also the inclusion of the Mirage into the fray with the 530D which outclasses both 27R and AIM-7. The drag factor really hits the R-27 family, take a look at these tests and tell me which is the fairest face off.

 

When did that happen? Do you mean after FC2 days?

 

7 vs 530D - I've had no problems winning this match so far. I think I also found some specific weakness against Mirage avionics but I'd have to test that further to be sure.

 

so it's unfair. weren't you the guy two pages back saying that's irrelevant? beating an AMRAAM as a sukhoi is also basically impossible except every now and then there's an idiot who doesn't pop the three flares necessary to dodge an ET.

 

remove AMRAAM from game it's too unbalanced. quote: me, except also you

 

Don't really get your point, but looks like you still missed mine, I proposed a scenario that is most balanced according to all my of experience. It would also be historically accurate, for all those people who care about that.

[apocom]

7 vs R/T is the most balanced setup when both sides have the M2k.

 

But again, why not 120B vs ER/ET?