real engine startup in Black-Shark??

[GGTharos]

Eh, there's no point I think - I mean, the missiles are so spoofable that we do effectively have old sparrows.

 

I've been led to believe that before they were phased out, you could pretty much treat'em like AMRAAMs in the seeker department, save for the lack of active illumination on the missile's part. In other words ... very deadly.

[MBot]

When talking about the AIM-7E I am more thinking about failing motors ( Sparrow dumb bombs ), premature explosions, low g launch tolerances and low maneuverability:)

On the other hand I don't know if later -4 versions have actualy sorted out these problems. When reading about the IRIAF using the E-4 Sparrow it is often written about low pk ( overall about 20% I think ), but not specialy about those parade problems of the early Sparrows.

[GGTharos]

They did sort them when they added the 'dogfight capability'. The premature explosions were typically (IIRC) a consequence of a missile being launched out of parameters and fuzing as a safety measure. In BVR, this thing was a monster.

But I wouldn't expect the post-vietnam Sparrow to be that bad to you ... I mean, do you have data on R-27 issues in the same time-frame? ;)

 

In any case, the current sparrow in the game does have a 25-30% Pk. So, there ya go. :)

[MBot]

But I wouldn't expect the post-vietnam Sparrow to be that bad to you ... I mean, do you have data on R-27 issues in the same time-frame? ;)

 

That's why I like that timeframe so much. There is some BVR involved, but still pretty good chances to duke it out in a dogfight :)

[GGTharos]

SO, the missiles we have -right now- should do fine as far as SARH are concerned, IMHO, and rear-aspect heater missile goodness for everyone! :)

 

You realize though this means no flankers ... flankers were sporting 73's from the get-go IIRC. It would be a very typical european scenario though, with USAF eagles and Eastern European 29's :)

[nscode]

I don't think it would be a problem fitting R-60M on 27... if there was any reason to do that :D

 

 

I am also hoping for the MiG-21 and R-13 also! :)

 

You mean the K-13/R-3S/AA-2 'Atoll'? R-13 is the engine :)

 

But yes... who isn't :)

[GGTharos]

My bad :D

[golfsierra2]

It takes time to spool up the engines.

 

Not only that - it requires time to get the navigational systems run up. An INS usually needs up to 4 minutes to align properly.

[GGTharos]

Not only that - it requires time to get the navigational systems run up. An INS usually needs up to 4 minutes to align properly.

 

Unless you correct it with GPS ;)

[MBot]

You realize though this means no flankers ... flankers were sporting 73's from the get-go IIRC. It would be a very typical european scenario though, with USAF eagles and Eastern European 29's :)

 

 

Ah that is no problem, F-15 vs. MiG-29A is fine, as long as the ratio is historical correct :) I think that F-15 and soviet Su-27 would have never met in combat anyway, as the Sue was a PVO interceptor. If at all, then over the bering strait or in the soviet far east.

Now a flyable MiG-23 would be even better fitting... ;)

 

While we are on the subject on older SARH missiles, what do we know about the pk of the R-23 compared to the early R-27 ? Since some people have suggested that the MiG-23MLD is actualy the better BVR aircraft than the MiG-29A in terms of radar performance, might this also be true for the primary missile ( or have an effect on the pk of the employed missile ) ? While the pk of the R-27 in combat is about zero I think, the R-23 has at least scored some kills against iranian F-4 and F-5 ( perhaps even against the israelis, but I guess we will never now That ).

[nscode]

The R-27 combat record is: there is no reliable combat record about a R-27 in reliable state being fired :)

[RvETito]

AFAIK, the deadliest missile(with most kills) of the MiG-23 is the IR R-23T and the further improved R-24T. I wonder why the 24T isn't available for the first MiG-29s at least for export. Maybe because they've planned to introduce the R-27T by this time.

Speaking about the comparison between the last 23MLD(23-18 with N008E radar) and earlier 29(9-12A with N019E) they have shown similar radar performance in terms if detection range, lock range and jam resistance, at least in Bulgarian Air Force. However, the N019E has some advantages- 10 simultaneously tracked targets in TWS vs 4 for the N008E, more computing power(a couple of C-100 computers) while the 23 has older element base. The strength of the 23 is the TP-23MLD EOS which is way better the KOLS-29 of the 29. It only lacks the laser rangefinder and uses the radar for that purpose at all ranges. Bulgarian pilots claimed detection range of 85km for afterburning target(in pursuit) and 60km for any other engine regime(again in tail-on). It is located under the nose and thus has better look-down shoot-down capabilities. At the last Warsaw pact exercises near Astrahan in 1991 bulgarian 23MLDs shot down five low flying(50m) small target-planes from 15km away with R-24T launched from 3000m altitude. AFAIK a small monument with the name of the squadron, regiment and pilots' names is still there at the Astrahan test range. I'll say ti again- it was a big mistake to retire the 23s and their pilots and keep the 21 in service in a moment when the 29 were not combat ready. Moreover the 23s had service life and spare parts to fly at least for 10 years more, and were capable of providing more adequate air-defence than the 21 untill a new fighter is chosen.

[MBot]

Very interesting AirTito, it seems the MiG-23 relied a lot on IR ( dedection and missiles ). Do you know what the stock ratio between R-23/24 R and T has been ? Perhaps by looking at the number of produced/aquired/stored missiles we can judge how much R or T's the MiG-23 would have carried into combat. I don't know WP doctrine regarding the use of BVR missiles over Europe.

 

Does the display of the TP-23MLD works any different than the KLOS-29 ? I think one big disadvantage of the MiG-29's EOS is that it wont indicate target range in "search mode", thus offer greatly reduced SA over a conventional radar display.

Perhaps the TP-23MLD is automaticaly ranging dedected contacts witout the need to lock them up ? That would certainly be usefull.

[RvETito]

Yes, from what I've heard the IR medium range missiles of the 23 have proven much more accurate than the SARH. It could be considered mainly as an IR platform.

There's more about the 23 that is not quiet known I think. It can carry either a couple of IR or SARH R-23/24 missiles, but not a mix of them e.g. one IR and one SARH. The use of each type requires different equipement adjustment on the ground before the flight. Bulgarian MLDs were doing GAI task with 2 R-24T and 4 R-60M, I can't recall ever seeing a SARH missile on them. During operation Allied Force in 1999 they switch from GAI to CAP on the west border with the same loadout.

As for the TP-23MLD indication- I have no clue. All I know is that the radar measures the range to target and can be slaved to the EOS like the 29. As I said it lacks the laser rangefinder which in the KOLS-29 works within 10km and even WVR it is still the radar that supplies with range information about the target.

[ericinexile]

That is correct - it is hardcoded in Su-25.

 

Why didn't ED hardcode the loadouts for all the flyables?! LOPED loadouts ruin Multiplayer.

 

Smokin' Hole

[GGTharos]

There's almost no way the R-23 can be better than an R-27. The R-27 has greater range, and a monopulse seeker - the R-23 uses conscan ... much easier to jam.

[GGTharos]

Why didn't ED hardcode the loadouts for all the flyables?! LOPED loadouts ruin Multiplayer.

 

Smokin' Hole

 

Because people like flexibility like - being able to put a GBU or CBU-97 on the A-10, for example.

[Pilotasso]

Why didn't ED hardcode the loadouts for all the flyables?! LOPED loadouts ruin Multiplayer.

 

Smokin' Hole

 

Me thinks the best and simpler solution would be to bring back loadout locking.

[GGTharos]

No, that is a pretty bad solution, in that it isn't a solution at all. Not everyone wants to lock payloads. That should be an option - security (allowable payloads) is a different matter.

[Kuky]

The host should definitely be able to lock loadouts so you can't have some freaks loading what ever they please on any aircraft they fly.... it's just ridiculous :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

I think you missed the point.

[Kuky]

ah, maybe :D... it doesn't matter, the Earth is still spinning :P

[Slaunyeh]

Payload restriction to what it could be (and not should) is good.

What was all this talk about older times , older missiles etc...

I am travelling to another galaxy or BS will throw us a little back in timeframe ?

 

Yeah i know i´m landing in the soup.

[tflash]

How come did I miss this valuable thread on R-23 and AIM-7? I really must start reading more about the Ka-50 ;)