R-27EA (AE) on Su-27

[Dudikoff]

You are demonstrating that you don’t.

You are guessing wrong.

 

OMG, always loved good rhetorics. It's what's keeping this retro thread going nowhere but at a steady pace. "You are wrong. -No, you are. -No, you are, times two. -No, I most certainly am not, you are. -Stop acting like a kid. -Me? I'm not acting like a kid. You are! -No, you are.."

 

Pilotasso clearly stated (post 235) that he has “several books mentioning” R-27EA in service. Let Pilotasso tell us which books are those.

 

No, he said that they listed it as "when it enters service". Which means, it was a logical follow-up to the R-27 family and was expected to enter service before it was cancelled (they developed a better missile - the R-77 which probably had better maneuvering capabilities so they ditched the R-27 version).

 

I fully believe Eagle Dynamics and their knowledge about R-27EA.

 

Oxymoron-ama. If it's so, why do we have to read the same thing over and over through 30 pages? They removed it, it's dead, just like The King. Case closed. I hope.

[Kula66]

Mig-25, Mig-23, Mig-29 and Su-27S have failed miserably in combat after being often described by aviation fans as ultimate fighters.

 

Unlike LO, the question is would 1 x F-15 been able to handle 4 x Mig-23/29/Sus again and again and again ... remember the old joke about the 2 x Russian tank commanders sitting in Paris "I hear we lost the air war ...". They only had to keep the NATO airforces off there backs for a short while and they had a load of AD with them too!

 

Unfortunately, that doesn't make a very good sim for people who like to fly Russian a/c!

[Pilotasso]

What I meant was that the equipment reports about east airforces frequently list weapons systems in the present when they are not yet confirmed, photographed in service or even left development phase. Some of wich never did afterwords.

 

The Novotor AWACS Killer, the R-27EA (ofren described as "R-27 family of passive and active seeker" missiles), The Su-35 and Su-37, rearward firing missiles and radar radomes are commonly listed as operational for many years when they had never been so or have been proposed but never found custumers.

 

Its funny to watch that the SU-35 as it existed in the 90's is no longer and to be replaced with an aircraft with the same designation but very differend config (canards out and different avionics). I bet it will be described as an operational fighter even before it enters service, if ever.

 

Just last sunday I went to the local shopping center to buy some clothing and passed by a book store. I went trhugh some pages, and sure enough I saw once again a SU-37 detailed description with comparisons to the F-22. Edited in late 90's the F-22 would only reach IOC several years later while the 37 never did.

[nscode]

No, they have never "failed miserably in combat", they were never used in combat the way they were supposed to, nor with at least equal standard of maintenance, nor number as their opponents.

 

Just remember the story of the Soviet pilots going to Vietnam, shooting down a bunch of aircraft in MiG-21 and saying "see, it DOES work".

[tflash]

However Historicaly Russian aircraft have consistently disapointed under the skin after much hype surrounding them.

Mig-25, Mig-23, Mig-29 and Su-27S have failed miserably in combat after being often described by aviation fans as ultimate fighters.

 

It depends how you define performing in combat. This is not the same as succesful A2A engagements.

 

To one account, In the Kargil war, India was very happy with the performance of their Mig-29 because they were able to establish air superiority and disrupted Pakistan air operations.

 

Recently I read that in Eritrea-Ethiopia war, we wrongly focus only on the Mig-29/Su-27 engagements whereas in fact the Su-27 performed extremely well as an all-rounder, providing escort, but also participating in A2G operations. Its availability was deemed very good.

 

Judging the Tomcat on ist combat performance would also give a rather limited view on a fighter that effectively offered undisputed fleet protection for decades.

 

The Mig-25, by its mere presence and speed has had a strategic impact both in the Middle East and in the India/Pakistan region for many years.

 

It think what counts is first of all how many aircraft you can keep in the air, how much it costs, what the effect is on th enemy operations and freedom of action. Actual engagements are influenced by so many casual factors that interpreting them is difficult.

 

No one knows how a Mig-31 would perform in actual combat. Yet this aircraft is effectively limiting US reconnaissance flights over a very large airspace. And that is why it is there in the first place.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

No, he said that they listed it as "when it enters service".

He said, quote: “… they also say between the lines "when it enters service",…” meaning that Pilotasso read between the lines (something that was not in that book) that the missiles did not enter service. The key words are “BETWEEN THE LINES”. Meaning that Pilotasso has books that lists R-27EA in service, however, he reads BETWEEN THE LINES, that those were not factual information. BETWEEN THE LINES is Pilotasso opinion, not what is written in those books.

 

Јел си ти чуо када код нас кажу, „пише између редова“? То је оно што је Пилотасо рекао.

 

Oxymoron-ama. If it's so, why do we have to read the same thing over and over through 30 pages? They removed it, it's dead, just like The King. Case closed. I hope.

It is not about EA in the game any more. It is out of the game and that’s it. It is about aviation history and the fate of that missile program.

[Pilotasso]

No, read my last post for clarification.

 

The EA was once listed as compatible weapon in the R-27 family of weapons for the Su-27 but the R-77 apears to have been selected over it, I think thats officialy known. The seeker could have been sold to china in small numbers as upgrades when they were searching for their first ARH missile, but that country quickly found alternatives based on the RVVAE. While there is no proof that china ever had it, theres even less proof that they might still have it at the same time the R-77 and SD-10 are in service. They are redundat and the newer missiles probably offer better seekers.

[Pilotasso]

 

Recently I read that in Eritrea-Ethiopia war, we wrongly focus only on the Mig-29/Su-27 engagements whereas in fact the Su-27 performed extremely well as an all-rounder, providing escort, but also participating in A2G operations. Its availability was deemed very good.

 

I have a detailed report about those engagements. The Su-27 scored with R-73's after missing more than a dozen R-27's. There is an unconfirmed R-27 hit that left one Mig-29 damaged but it managed to land at base and was written off from service.

 

Among other AA victories, an Su-22 score on another Mig-29 (what a humiliation!) with R-73 yet again.

 

According to the article the Su-27 gained the fame in the conflict but the most successfull (and least recognized credits) missions were flown by Aermarchi MB-339's (Im not at home to confirm the exact model), Mig-27's and the Su-22's.

[RvETito]

Among other AA victories, an Su-22 score on another Mig-29 (what a humiliation!) with R-73 yet again.

 

The R-73 never made it to the Su-22. It uses a couple of R-60s for selfdefense. That just illustartes the fairy-tales you've been reading.

[D-Scythe]

Just remember the story of the Soviet pilots going to Vietnam, shooting down a bunch of aircraft in MiG-21 and saying "see, it DOES work".

 

Pretty sure the Soviets didn't fight against the Americans in Vietnam.

[TucksonSonny]

What I meant was that the equipment reports about east airforces frequently list weapons systems in the present when they are not yet confirmed, photographed in service or even left development phase. Some of wich never did afterwords.

 

The Novotor AWACS Killer, the R-27EA (ofren described as "R-27 family of passive and active seeker" missiles), The Su-35 and Su-37, rearward firing missiles and radar radomes are commonly listed as operational for many years when they had never been so or have been proposed but never found custumers.

 

Its funny to watch that the SU-35 as it existed in the 90's is no longer and to be replaced with an aircraft with the same designation but very differend config (canards out and different avionics). I bet it will be described as an operational fighter even before it enters service, if ever.

 

Just last sunday I went to the local shopping center to buy some clothing and passed by a book store. I went trhugh some pages, and sure enough I saw once again a SU-37 detailed description with comparisons to the F-22. Edited in late 90's the F-22 would only reach IOC several years later while the 37 never did.

 

Su-37 was just a prototype for the later Su-30 (like su-30MKK and Indian su-30MKI and the actual su-35 without canards indeed)

The Su-30MKI with his downgraded export engines and downgraded R-77’s kicked the F-15 his ass in cope India.

The F-22 is operational but not yet combat ready…(testing 120d / radar datalink is still not completed)

[D-Scythe]

The Su-30MKI with his downgraded export engines and downgraded R-77’s kicked the F-15 his ass in cope India.

 

Too bad the F-15s were simulating Pakistani F-16As and F-7s.

 

The F-22 is operational but not yet combat ready…(testing 120d / radar datalink is still not completed)

 

Since when did the F-22 need the AIM-120D to be operational? That's like saying the Eurofighter isn't operational until the Meteor comes into service.

 

Come on Tuckson. Bring your A-game.

[nscode]

Pretty sure the Soviets didn't fight against the Americans in Vietnam.

 

No... not officially. I'll try to find the video... It was posted here a few weeks ago..

[Pilotasso]

The R-73 never made it to the Su-22. It uses a couple of R-60s for selfdefense. That just illustartes the fairy-tales you've been reading.

 

 

The source is AIRFORCESMONTHLY, issue August 2000 page 69.

Su-22 victory over Mig-29. Want a photo of the paragraph?

[nscode]

MiG-29 shot down 20 F-15's over Serbia, and it was MiG-21 that shot down the F-117. Want a photo of the paragraph? ;)

 

edit: Uh Uh... and there's the J-22 Orao shooting down a MiG-21 over Croatia :D

[Pilotasso]

LOL not exactly the same fidelity, isnt it?

[Force_Feedback]

'Engine failure' ;) Damn planes were unreliable in 1999.

[RvETito]

The source is AIRFORCESMONTHLY, issue August 2000 page 69.

Su-22 victory over Mig-29. Want a photo of the paragraph?

 

No need, I'm pretty sure you could also show me a paragraph which says how MiG-29 have been shot down by a Cessna somewhere in the world. My point was that Su-22 is not able to use the R-73.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The EA was once listed as compatible weapon in the R-27 family of weapons for the Su-27 but the R-77 apears to have been selected over it, I think thats officialy known.

So, officially, somewhere, somebody test fired R-27EA, made sure it works and is compatible. Good information. What is your source?

 

…found alternatives based on the RVVAE.

R-27EA is RVVAE missile. RVVAE is Russian abbreviation Missile Ait to Air Active E(something) (Raketa Vazduh Vazduh Aktivnaja E(something)).

[EvilBivol-1]

RVV-AE is the export name for the R-77, the missile that WAS going to be in domestic Soviet service. The R-77 seeker was produced in Ukraine. After the Soviet Union broke apart, the Russian AF had no access or desire to use the R-77, because it was partially produced in another country (Ukraine). Instead, they adopted the RVV-AE, the export version of the missile, into domestic service.

 

So goes the story. What has happened since, who knows...

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Need help with Russian translation. What is the meaning of the last column title? A year it entered service?

 

[Force_Feedback]

Year when the missile was created.

[Geier]

Need help with Russian translation. What is the meaning of the last column title? A year it entered service?

 

I suppose that it means the first year of serial production

[nscode]

It translates as year of the launch... and could mean anything

[Geier]

It translates as year of the launch... and could mean anything

Yes

 

2Hajduk - can you wrote a link to this source?