R-77 for Sukhoi's

[Nick Bones]

I am a great fan of Russian planes, but there is something i do not understand, how is it possible that the su-27/33 cannot mount R-77 missiles, when IRL they obviously can?

I feel that the only reason this has been done is to make people use mig-29s in multiplayer, and maybe to give an handicap to the su-27/33 BVR capabilities agains the f-15, but this is IMO unacceptable because of the following reasons:

 

1. the f-15 is more capable of engaging su-27/33, they do not need any special favours.
   
2. the su-27/33 needs to be able to engage multiple targets simultaneously, like it can IRL taking advantage of its the more powerful radar compared to the mig-29.
   
3. mig-29 were designed as a lighter, cheap, shorter range version of the su-27, but still capable of carrying the same weapons. to me it makes no sense that they can use more advanced missiles than their big sukhoi's brothers while being inferior in all other aspects.
   

Does anyone have some good explanation? am i the only one bothered by this?

[sea2sky]

you answered your own questions :)

[razo+r]

Just so, only the MiG-29S can carry the R-77, the A and G can't.

 

Most modern Su-27s can too, our Su-27S is older version and can't carry the R-77.

 

And so far, it needs practice, but every DCS Flanker pilot can say, they can kill eagles.

[Sweep]

I'd be just fine with adding R-77s (and even multi-target engagement) to the Flanker-B. It'd be realistic where it counts.

 

I don't think MP balance is a very good argument (counterargument is always "GET GUD, buddy" and rightfully so), but the idea that Flankers w/ Adders is realistic on a macro level is very valid. Considering that we won't get a modern Flanker for various reasons (some of which are the same "micro realism" counterpoints to adding R-77s to the Su-27S) I think this would be an alright stand-in.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Sweep

[Frostie]

As said the Su27 Flanker in DCS is an Su27S it wasn't until the upgrade to Su27SM standard in 2003 that gave the 27 a radar that could utilise the R77, blame the USSR break up. I believe the 33 still hasn't received this upgrade, last I read they were replacing them with MiG29K.

[Sweep]

As said the Su27 Flanker in DCS is an Su27S it wasn't until the upgrade to Su27SM standard in 2003 that gave the 27 a radar that could utilise the R77. I believe the 33 still hasn't received this upgrade, last I read they were replacing them with MiG29K.

 

Yeah it looks like 33s still love those short burn R-27s. :lol:

 

(There's a video of that when they sailed past the UK not that long ago!)

[=Thrust=]

:thumbup:Su27sm3 and r27 Ea = others bye bye, jokingly

Edited June 7, 2017 by =THRUST=

[Frostie]

And so far, it needs practice, but every DCS Flanker pilot can say, they can kill eagles.

 

It's never been so hard to kill Eagles, in a multiship face off we practice 2 F15 vs 4 Su27 which usually comes out 50/50. Engagements usually end in close within 10km where there is little escape from a 120C other than notch and put yourself in a bad position. The best kill shots for Su27 is obviously an unseen IR very hard against experienced or a head on 7km R-27ER which will end as a mutual kill if the F-15 is surprised, otherwise he has time to launch and defeat it.

It's just a sad fact Russia makes the crappiest missiles known to man.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Frostie

[DarkFire]

As said the Su27 Flanker in DCS is an Su27S it wasn't until the upgrade to Su27SM standard in 2003 that gave the 27 a radar that could utilise the R77, blame the USSR break up. I believe the 33 still hasn't received this upgrade, last I read they were replacing them with MiG29K.

 

Moreover, there's no evidence that the Russian AF actually bought any baseline R-77's. The missiles currently deployed on Su-35's in Syria are likely the R-77-1 (Objekt 170) or the like. Hence, no R-77 on our Su-27S. For what it's worth I feel that it would be entirely appropriate for the DCS Su-27 to be upgraded to the Su-27SM variant.

[Esac_mirmidon]

RVV-AE. RVV-SD. RVV-MD

[Frostie]

For what it's worth I feel that it would be entirely appropriate for the DCS Su-27 to be upgraded to the Su-27SM variant.

 

That would require a new cockpit, might as well just start a fresh and go full fidelity.

[*Rage*]

One can, but dream.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Yes please, I'd happily pay 100 euro for a full fidelity Su-27SM. Especially with the upcoming F-14 and F/A-18, DCS could really use a 4 / 4+ -th generation full fidelity Russian/Soviet aircraft...

[Sweep]

One can, but dream.

 

:(

 

This whole discussion, every single time, goes to "well we'd need a modern Flanker and that's not happening." in some phrasing or another.

 

So perfection isn't happening, okay, fine, what about 'good enough'? That's what FC3 is about, after all!

 

#AddAdders

Edited June 7, 2017 by Sweep
edited wording for the 30th time or something.

[probad]

eh, im against setting such a precedent, we already have that sort of standard for *ms

[DarkFire]

That would require a new cockpit, might as well just start a fresh and go full fidelity.

 

Agree 100%. If ED produced a DCS-standard Su-27SM they could name their price and I'd unhesitatingly pay on day 1 of the pre-order.

 

 

:(

This whole discussion, every single time, goes to "well we'd need a modern Flanker and that's not happening." in some phrasing or another.

 

So perfection isn't happening, okay, fine, what about 'good enough'? That's what FC3 is about, after all!

#AddAdders

 

I think ED's philosophy and approach has moved on since FC3 was released, and I doubt we'll ever see an FC4 as the current policy seems to be that going forwards all modules will now be produced to full DCS standard, at least the 1st and official 3rd party ones.

 

Who knows? Maybe if and when the Russian VKS has replaced all it's Su-27s with T-50's and Su-35's then maybe we might get an Su-27SM, but until then I think it's unfortunately not going to happen. Similarly with all Russian 4/4+ gen aircraft. I'd be pleased but amazed if either Sukhoi or MiG made an official agreement as happened with Kamov for the Ka-50.

 

Personally I don't subscribe to the argument that FC3 aircraft are some sort of 'easy mode' merely because they don't feature clicky cockpits - quite the opposite - but with increasingly modern NATO birds like the F/A-18 and (eventually) the Typhoon, the Su-27 and -33 are going to be increasingly difficult to match up against the competition, particularly when it comes to BVR performance and SA :(

[Oceandar]

:thumbup:Su27sm3 and r27 Ea = others bye bye, jokingly

 

I remember that Lomac day we had R27EA untill UBI forum nerds :D asked it to be removed because a matter of realism. 27EA really gave hard time for Eagle Pilot :D

 

Edited : I was wrong

Edited June 8, 2017 by Oceandar

[Domcho]

Why don't we have a Su-27SM or at least a clickable Su-27S/MiG-29A,G,S cockpit? I thought this whole game started with the Flanker, yet the Su-27 only has PFM and it's the old S version.

[Beagle One]

Why don't we have a Su-27SM or at least a clickable Su-27S/MiG-29A,G,S cockpit? I thought this whole game started with the Flanker, yet the Su-27 only has PFM and it's the old S version.

Right. it started with a Flanker an d it still the same Flanker like in Flanker 2.0. Nothing wrong with it so far. Considering the small maps in DCS:W we will have the MiG-29S & R-77 as a counter measure against the F-15 & AIM-120 combo. Range was never an Issie with the MiG-29 when you applied a lite bit of fuel discipline. It can take off and climb very well without AB.

Since it recived TWS and the ability to attack two targets at once it got much better.

 

Once the PFM fpr the MiG-29 is out it will be much better I guess.

[wilky510]

but with increasingly modern NATO birds like the F/A-18 and (eventually) the Typhoon, the Su-27 and -33 are going to be increasingly difficult to match up against the competition, particularly when it comes to BVR performance and SA :(

You Flanker fans like the challenge though, no?

[Nick Bones]

Thanks for the replies.

 

Sounds like there is not much hope to see this change anytime soon. It's a pitty that such a good game as FC3 is getting so little attention from their developers, but still, it's lightyears ahead of any other flight simulator out there (with a modern setting) and i'm still going to enjoy it for the forseeable future dispite its shortcomings.

[Frostie]

Thanks for the replies.

 

Sounds like there is not much hope to see this change anytime soon. It's a pitty that such a good game as FC3 is getting so little attention from their developers, but still, it's lightyears ahead of any other flight simulator out there (with a modern setting) and i'm still going to enjoy it for the forseeable future dispite its shortcomings.

 

I wouldn't call free PFM and additional features little attention, the 33 and 29 are going to be getting PFM soon to complete the set. Yes there are things that could be fixed in FC (Flanker client to client datalink i'm looking at you) but I think adding new aircraft would be a step backwards, we're all balls deep into full fidelity these days paying extra for FC again would grate.

[Dudikoff]

RVV-AE. RVV-SD. RVV-MD

 

Those are export variants' names, not RuAF ones (R-77, R-77-1, etc.).

Edited June 8, 2017 by Dudikoff

[Esac_mirmidon]

The missiles are the same. The names not

[Dudikoff]

The missiles are the same. The names not

 

Well, I'm not getting into whether or not they are (i.e. whether some features like ECCM are inferior or disabled to ensure superiority of the domestic forces like it was done in Soviet times IIRC).

 

I was just arguing against using these names as a standard when discussing Russian types (which I presume was the point behind your post) since they're not the names (or variants) used by RuAF (or former branches of Soviet Air Forces) which is the base user of the planes in question (e.g. MiG-29S, Su-27, Su-33).

Edited June 8, 2017 by Dudikoff