R-27EA (AE) on Su-27

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Quote the rest of the message too lol

There is no need. His complete post is higly visible.

[nscode]

I wonder what diference there would be with a different radome shape other than aerodynamic in nature? Its transparent to radio waves. Could be as simple as subsquent manufacturer change.

 

Well, if it's a different seeker it might have a different antenna shape. Also, it's not simple as that, a material being "transparent". It's transparent to certain frequencies at certain conditions. Radiating from the missile might need a different material. Different material might need a different shape structure-vise.

 

All just wild guesses...

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Do me a favor and take into consideration two basic facts: there is no R-27AE missile but there is universal 9B-1103M ARH warhead.

9B-1103M is Active Radar Homing Seeker made by Агат. Take a look at that Агат and you will be surprised what family of missiles the 9B-1103M is referring to.

 

If you wish you can order in Vympel company one R-27RE missile equipped exclusively with 9B-1103M, then photograph it and bring image back here.

You would waste lots of money carrying ARH missiles on airplanes that can only employ SARH missile. BTW I really don’t know what was the point you tried to make?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Well, if it's a different seeker it might have a different antenna shape. Also, it's not simple as that, a material being "transparent". It's transparent to certain frequencies at certain conditions. Radiating from the missile might need a different material. Different material might need a different shape structure-vise.

 

All just wild guesses...

You are my man!

 

Поздрав,

[Force_Feedback]

Yes, but nobody knows how it exactly works, but so can the Su-27 with ordinary R-27ERs.

[Pilotasso]

Roko, your creating a litle too much rukus for whats worth, realy.

[Alfa]

How do you explain the different radome shape then (see picture above)? And that picture above came from completely different source then Yefim Gordon.

 

Hajduk - the damn thing is a mock-up :D .

 

It would be more relevant to discuss whether it is made of wood or plastic.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Hajduk - the damn thing is a mock-up :D

R-73 on the same picture is mockup as well. :smartass:

[Force_Feedback]

R-73 on the same picture is mockup as well. :smartass:

 

Shall we start again on the differences between mock-ups, rocket motor test models (engine test), and low quality wooden mock-ups?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Shall we start again on the differences between mock-ups, rocket motor test models (engine test), and low quality wooden mock-ups?

According to your description, a white missile with black stripes include fully functional seeker that can be used for practicing the use (lock procedures?) of a missile. Thus, the EA missile in post #290 on this thread has a fully functional seeker. The only thing I am not sure at this time is what radar system is required to use that seeker?

[GGTharos]

Perhaps you failed to read his description, or you deliberately ignored the point you do not like - there's an OR in that sentence, but I guess you overlooked it. You should go read FF's description again ... actually, I'll quote it for you, and I'll quote it for you again if you fail to comprehend what he wrote yet another time.

 

BLACK STRIPES, WHITE BODY=Training dummy, this can be either a non-working dummy, but with the correct drag and weight distribution, OR it is a captive training missile, to practice with the seeker, this version has a seeker, be it IR/radar/passive.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Perhaps you failed to read his description, or you deliberately ignored the point you do not like …

Certainly not deliberately. There is so much info and I could have overseen something.

 

… - there's an OR in that sentence, but I guess you overlooked it.

All right. So the OR means either way right? So the EA missile on the picture COULD have had the true, fully functional seeker, that we know exist (and existed since way back) right?

 

You don’t have Yefim’s book to see this same missile on Su27SKM #305 (page 189) to even talk about this subject. Go get the book, and then we can talk about EA missile.

[GGTharos]

Certainly not deliberately. There is so much info and I could have overseen something.

 

All right. So the OR means either way right? So the EA missile on the picture COULD have had the true, fully functional seeker, that we know exist (and existed since way back) right?

 

I'd think a missile displayed at an airshow wouldn't have functioning anything.

 

You don’t have Yefim’s book to see this same missile on Su27SKM #305 (page 189) to even talk about this subject. Go get the book, and then we can talk about EA missile.

 

We don't need to talk about the EA missile. It was never purchased by Russia. That much was explained by a representative of AGAT, and ED has their own contacts in the VVS to corroborate such.

[Pilotasso]

Hajduk quote the rest of the message too lol

 

Perhaps you failed to read his description, or you deliberately ignored the point you do not like

 

Precisely my point for ages, thats why we keep at this all the time. :)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Precisely my point for ages, thats why we keep at this all the time. :)

Answer the question in post #317.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Here's another example of EA missile. Take a look at the radome shape. Also, take a look at the front of the missile (radome conical shape) in background.

 

http://www.airwar.ru/image/i/weapon/su-27k-33.jpg

 

Note that both missiles are painted red.

 

[Pilotasso]

Answer the question in post #317.

Pilotasso, a year or so ago you claimed no Russian airplane in service could engage multiple targets. You were saying that based on remembrance as well? Here’s the link, post #5,

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=18466&highlight=multiple+targets

 

Thats because it was only after that, Russia has fielded its first batch of SU-27SM's. :) And thats With RVVAE's mind you.

 

 

That’s why you were so wrong to begin with. You based your discussion on this thread on your “remembrance”, which was wrong to begin with. This thread alone has numerous pictures of the R-27ER® with ogival radomes, not one (that I know of) with conical. I wonder why didn’t you just take a look at the pictures on this thread? Why were you ignoring the pictures on this thread and relied on your memories that turned not to be accurate?

 

I am not ignoring anything,I wouldnt care less about the shape of the radome as long as not even russian sources confirm it is an actual EA, everything else you "conclude" is merely speculation. That fact there are more than one radome shape migth simply mean that while maintaing the missiles they had swiched parts from other manufacturers or made themselves some. Thats donne all the time. (I do that for a living on aircraft)

If I cared about it the slightest I would probably find conical shape R-27's with R-27ER's labels on them.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Thats because it was only after that, Russia has fielded its first batch of SU-27SM's. :)

Subsequent discussion developed about MiG-31, which you denied it could engage multiple targets. Check your post #5 in that thread.

And thats With RVVAE's mind you.

Raketa Vozdookh-Vozdookh Aktivnaya Ekpsortnaya, (ait-to-air missile, active (radar homing), export version). MiG 31 did not need RVV-A(E) to engage multiple targets simultaneously.

I am not ignoring anything,I wouldnt care less about the shape of the radome as long as not even russian sources confirm it is an actual EA, …

”Russian Sources” like who? Who would be “the source” you would consider credible? Leave the Eagle Dynamics out of this, they are smart enough not to engage into this kind of discussion.

…everything else you "conclude" is merely speculation.

I also provide evidence, pictures, book quotes from writers that are not afraid to put their names behind their words. You denied pictures and quotes as evidence.

That fact there are more than one radome shape migth simply mean that while maintaing the missiles they had swiched parts from other manufacturers or made themselves some.

I am beginning to doubt you have anything to do with aviation industry.

Thats donne all the time. (I do that for a living on aircraft)

I doubt it. If you do, you would know that switching structural components is not as simple as you explained above.

If I cared about it the slightest I would probably find conical shape R-27's with R-27ER's labels on them.

You actually care much more that you want to admit about. Otherwise, you would not be showing up for on this thread.

 

And what about the EA missile on the picture above (post #363)?

[Kula66]

Ok Hajduk, this from Janes:

 

"R-27EA, had a multifunction monopulse Doppler seeker, AGAT's 9B-1103M, which has a lock on range of 20 km against fighter aircraft targets, and a weight of 14.5 kg excluding the radome. The radome itself had a distinctive conical shape, unlike that of any other R-27 version."

[Red Hammer]

R-77 and PL-12 have since become the primary BVR Active missiles wich are very likely to be much better.

 

That's true!

But Actually The PL-12 is for J-11B and J-10 only. The R-27EA is still the main ARGM on the Su-27SK and J-11.

I'll show you some updata after I finish my homework.

 

By the way, I always wanted to ask "How do you people put picture on the post like that, I have attach a picture. But the site only allow me to attach about 20MB."

[Red Hammer]

J-11B was design in 2002 I think.

Now this is the New RWR which is installed on the J-11B.

 

And this is Cockpit of J-11B.

It has 4 MFD.

 

 

This is J-11A, a Chinese upgrade Su-27 back in 1995. That is the date since Chinese PLA use the R-27EA.

Before that, there was no R-27EA in use on the J-11 and Su-27SK.

 

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Ok Hajduk, this from Janes:

 

"R-27EA, had a multifunction monopulse Doppler seeker, AGAT's 9B-1103M, which has a lock on range of 20 km against fighter aircraft targets, and a weight of 14.5 kg excluding the radome. The radome itself had a distinctive conical shape, unlike that of any other R-27 version."

Thanks Kula, this is very good info.

 

Now we have two indipendent conformations about R-27EA radome shape. And several pictures to support those claims. Nice.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

MAKS 2003, EA missile on Su-34:

 

http://maks.sukhoi.ru/media/photo/maks2003/maks2003d1029.jpg

 

[GGTharos]

Another mock-up?

[Groove]

Hajduk, isnt your own thread name asking for a Su-27 with this particular missile ?