New move in favor Aim-120? No R-27ER LA while they have it?

[pepin1234]

About the Aim-9X example I mentioned. I was quoting @Airhunter. So was a specific answer for him. You all guys answer automatic on his name. There are too much stress or you are scared to lose the air superiority in the F-18??:D:D:megalol: Relax a bit please don’t take everything soo personal. Have fun or take a refreshing drink. God

Edited August 7, 2020 by pepin1234

[Airhunter]

About the Aim-9X example I mentioned. I was quoting @Airhunter. So was a specific answer for him. You all guy answer automatic on his name. There are too much stress or you are scared to lose the air superiority in the F-18??:D:D:megalol: Relax a bit please don’t take everything so personal. Have fun or take a refreshing drink. God

 

I am not taking anything personal, clearly some people on here are trying to always be right and make up their own reality as it fits them.

[Airhunter]

I notice they designate the R-27 family with number 1 at the end, that should be because this line is not build with Ukrainian hardware for export only as before and have been improved.

 

If you spoke even the slightest bit of russian you'd quickly realize that the 1 designation is for the export variants.

[pepin1234]

About the R-27P it was confirmed by Russian high military statement this missile exist for long time without given any specific date. Now if we need picture of the head seeker as the fanboys want, then that’s a different animal. I am pretty sure you can find the information that was public. I just don’t care if you are willing to add this new no so new missile. I just telling you what is in internet and sound very interesting for everyone that love military technology as we do :thumbup:

[Fri13]

So both the RuAF and UAF pilots I talked to are lying, eh?

 

It is amazing how you always know the specific people who know everything in the industry and are authority to speak behalf of every single other person in the service...

And then you make claims that someone is calling them liars while not even talking about them ("and make up their own reality as it fits them.").

 

What's the seeker called then if we know everything about it and how does it work in terms of RF-bands and target accquisition?

 

So as you now agree that we know everything about it, then you have just answered to your own question.

 

But of course you know what a Avtomatika 9B-1032 (PRGS-27) is. It is irrelevant what frequency it exactly operates (or even what seeker name it really has) as it is enough to know that it works in X-band too. DCS does not simulate, nor even need to simulate, different frequencies or any codes etc. It is a game. Go to read the manufacturer statements and information, everything needed is answered right in their pages, museum, press statements etc.

[Fri13]

 

Let's example take this.

 

Explain exactly what you see in that. What it is and how you are interpreting it.

[Airhunter]

It is amazing how you always know the specific people who know everything in the industry and are authority to speak behalf of every single other person in the service...

And then you make claims that someone is calling them liars while not even talking about them ("and make up their own reality as it fits them.").

 

 

 

So as you now agree that we know everything about it, then you have just answered to your own question.

 

But of course you know what a Avtomatika 9B-1032 (PRGS-27) is. It is irrelevant what frequency it exactly operates (or even what seeker name it really has) as it is enough to know that it works in X-band too. DCS does not simulate, nor even need to simulate, different frequencies or any codes etc. It is a game. Go to read the manufacturer statements and information, everything needed is answered right in their pages, museum, press statements etc.

 

I never claim anything in that regard, but if there's an area I know quite a bit about I'll try and correct people who make false statements about said things.

 

And I too know about ausairpower. :thumbup:

 

About the R-27P it was confirmed by Russian high military statement this missile exist for long time without given any specific date. Now if we need picture of the head seeker as the fanboys want, then that’s a different animal. I am pretty sure you can find the information that was public. I just don’t care if you are willing to add this new no so new missile. I just telling you what is in internet and sound very interesting for everyone that love military technology as we do :thumbup:

 

Can you show me said statement? The "P" (as in russian P) would be an anti-radiation variant, which is kinda made obsoltele by the various Kh-X anti-rad missiles with superiour performance in all aspects. Hence why you see modern Flankers and strikers carrying those primarily. And you do realize how anti-rad missiles work and why they aren't used for the air to air role, right? I surely hope you do.

[sylkhan]

@CHIZ,

 

I have 2 questions for you about R-27T/ET

 

These missiles are not radio correct during the first phase of their flight (i mean in DCS Game, not in RL) and the R-27T/ET Infrared homing head need to lock on the target by it's heat emission before launch.

 

The max launch distance is then limited by the 36T infrared Homing head (15 to 50 km, depending of the heating source)

 

- Why in the Game, the Lock on distance of T/ET is different ?

it must be the same since the 36T is the limiting and determinig factor to lock on the target by it's heat emission.

 

- If in Real life the missile flight is not radio corrected, why Vympel has done a R-27ET, with a two mode engine, since the single mode engine of R-27T was more than enough ?

[pepin1234]

@Airhunter make your own research buddy. Don’t be so pissy broo... You are not the king here to ask everyone certification for every single new hair you find on the body...!

[Fri13]

is happening to me enemy launch in very high altitude +9000m and from 60-70km and I still don't get LA with R-27ER while Aim-120 is already on me active with huge speed.

 

Quick tests R-27ER:

 

Default weather/map.

14 000 m altitude - Head-On.

Both speed: Mach 1.2

 

LA appears at 80 km (launch at 78.9 km).

Intercept speed: 2170 km/h (Mach 2.08)

Air Distance Traveled: 58 km.

Intercept time: 60 seconds

 

The limitation would be the battery, with good capability to fly further (if not limited by the battery, only by kinematics).

 

Default weather/map.

18 500 m altitude - Head-On.

Both speed: Mach 2.2

 

LA appears at 100 km (launch at 97,9 km)

Intercept speed: 3900 km/h (Mach 3.68)

Air Distance traveled: 68 km.

Intercept time: 48 seconds.

 

The limitation would be the radar lock capability (100 km), with huge capability to fly further (if by limited by the battery, extra 12 seconds, but kinetically far further.)

 

For me the Launch Authorization works properly, even at the Max Su-27 altitude (18500 m) the missile DLZ seems to be about 1.7-1.8x longer but the FCS just doesn't lock on target outside 100 km and LA override doesn't help in that.

[Fri13]

I never claim anything in that regard, but if there's an area I know quite a bit about I'll try and correct people who make false statements about said things.

 

Oh you did....

 

And I too know about ausairpower. :thumbup:

 

Good, except it wasn't from there.... But it as well reports it as from official source (the manufacturer).

 

And you do realize how anti-rad missiles work and why they aren't used for the air to air role, right? I surely hope you do.

 

You do know that you can use all IR missiles against ground targets too? But you surely know that they ain't really used for that role, right?

The MiG-23 manual mentions about using R-23/24T missiles against ground targets with enough heat signature.

Do you think that will be possible in the DCS?

 

And you know why the manufacturers still insist that R-27P/EP is available, and some say it is in service?

 

If you prepare for war, you better do it before the war. But regardless if you have prepared for war, doesn't mean you are at war.

[Fri13]

- Why in the Game, the Lock on distance of T/ET is different ?

it must be the same since the 36T is the limiting and determinig factor to lock on the target by it's heat emission.

 

DCS models the aircrafts directions, and there are factors like do you have afterburner On or Off. And then are you coming toward or away. These systems offers different detection/lock-on capabilities based those. It is not too complex/accurate but still there. And up coming new weather system hopefully will help to solve these things too.

 

- If in Real life the missile flight is not radio corrected, why Vympel has done a R-27ET, with a two mode engine, since the single mode engine of R-27T was more than enough ?

 

Just to chase the targets further? Just to be able launch missile from further distance when a more modern IRST and IR seeker came available to launch them further distance or give more performance at the distance?

 

Main problem still is that once the counter-measurement pop-up in the R-27 seekers vision, they are big suckers for everything that there is, regardless is the chaff/flare well outside their seeker FOV. So it comes to lack of guidance, tracking etc simulations in the game. (There is/was nice thread with the videos of testing R-27 against counter measurements and how it was real "sucker" for everything really).

[Fri13]

The so called "poor intercept curve trajectory to increase range" its actually a feature we have all asked for many times, and it should be added in almost all missiles as far as i know. Before the upgrade, the missile would make crazy stupid 9g turns event when the target was 50 KM away, which it did not make a lot of sense. This should make (once implemented) the R27 and R77 conserve better energy inside its Maximum range.

 

I have not tested it for a while, but maybe a year ago or so (so well before AIM-120 FM update etc) the Hornet had oddity that you had a standard practice target (steady speed, altitude, vector) and you did fly straight to the FCS informed steering dot, and after launching AIM-120, it took high G curve and started to intercept the target at lot different angle than what the steering dot was given to pilot.

 

Like if you have a computer to give you a steering dot, isn't its purpose to be that missile will fly at maximum performance (minimal energy wasted for steering) at least at begin of the flight?

 

So is it a common thing that all missiles just went for their own guidance without consultation for best?

[sylkhan]

DCS models the aircrafts directions, and there are factors like do you have afterburner On or Off. And then are you coming toward or away. These systems offers different detection/lock-on capabilities based those. It is not too complex/accurate but still there. And up coming new weather system hopefully will help to solve these things too. .

 

That doens't answer to my question, it doesn't explain why with the same 36T head, the lock on distance is differrent.

 

 

Just to chase the targets further? Just to be able launch missile from further distance when a more modern IRST and IR seeker came available to launch them further distance or give more performance at the distance?

 

Your speculations are not serious and that doesn't answer to my question.

Do you think that a company will do a new missile with the hope of better IR seeker.

and even with a better seeker the single mode engine of the R27 T is sufficient no need for a dual mode engine

 

And please my question is precise and for CHIZ.

Edited August 7, 2020 by sylkhan

[GGTharos]

- Why in the Game, the Lock on distance of T/ET is different ?

it must be the same since the 36T is the limiting and determinig factor to lock on the target by it's heat emission.

 

Agreed but how did you test this?

 

- If in Real life the missile flight is not radio corrected, why Vympel has done a R-27ET, with a two mode engine, since the single mode engine of R-27T was more than enough ?

 

Because it wasn't more than enough, or maybe because they simply could. The E version is useful against very high-fast flying targets that have a large heat signature (think SR-71 or any other aircraft in AB) and it also extends the range vs retreating aircraft like B-1 and B-52 which have significant ECM equipment and can make life hard for an R-27R.

In the end, it's a rocket module swap, so it's not like the R-27ET is all about Vympel - it's all about the user and how they decide to assemble the rocket.

[BlackPixxel]

And you do realize how anti-rad missiles work and why they aren't used for the air to air role, right? I surely hope you do.

 

The R-27P/EP can engage targets that maneuver with up to 5.5g. Looks more than good enough to track a non-suspecting fighter.

 

It is even advertised for such operation.

 

[Chizh]

If you make that question. Then you find that information irrelevant for any implementation in DCS? The information for guidance is very interesting compared with what we got in DCS, specially the T and ET version. Also the R-27P is something confirmed by the armament industry of Russia (I would need to make a research for that to send you the information already made public) and media as you can se the export company show them for export. I am wrong with that...? Or they are speculating with fake weapons? I guess not, do you? I guess if the Patriot system become a module for sale you will need to remove the Kh-58 anti-radar missiles cuz suddenly we can find a lack of proof and information for a passive anti-radar head seeker. they are my guesses. Not take me wrong.

What do you want to get?

[pepin1234]

What do you want to get?

 

At this point do you think me or we have hopes to get anything...? I will become Mi-24 pilots and will get ready with some stones in my pocket for A-A defense. Just kidding.

 

Sr. All we want have been mentioned in my first post.

[pepin1234]

It’s not what I want. It is the physics and technological limitations of air warfare that in some point are disbanded.

 

I know is hard. That’s why I choose this simulator because I like challenges. Just seem to me we are at the limit (the Russian pilots here) Something could change to get this challenge back again.

Edited August 7, 2020 by pepin1234

[sylkhan]

Agreed but how did you test this?.

I just do some test.

Mig29A vs M2K, 10000 ft, mach 0.7

R-27 T, HUD max launch 23 KM, LA (launch autorisation) 22 km

R-27 ET HUD max launch 32 km, LA 26 km

 

Not a big difference, seems correct.

 

 

.... The E version is useful against very high-fast flying targets that have a large heat signature (think SR-71 or any other aircraft in AB) and it also extends the range vs retreating aircraft like B-1 and B-52 which have significant ECM equipment and can make life hard for an R-27R....

 

Good answer, at least logic, it can explain the usefulness of a two mode engine.

 

Thx GGTharos

[Chizh]

The max launch distance is then limited by the 36T infrared Homing head (15 to 50 km, depending of the heating source)

 

- Why in the Game, the Lock on distance of T/ET is different ?

Not correct.

The lock range of 27T and 27ET is the same.

 

- If in Real life the missile flight is not radio corrected, why Vympel has done a R-27ET, with a two mode engine...?

So that the missile can intercept SR-71 and so.

[sylkhan]

Not correct.

The lock range of 27T and 27ET is the same.

 

The lock on range seems slightly different, i just do the test see my previous post, and tere is a bug in the HUD max launch range for r-27 ET

Edited August 7, 2020 by sylkhan

[Chizh]

The lock on range seems slightly different, i just do the test see my previous post, and tere is a bug in the HUD max launch range for r-27 ET

I just checked again.

Target - MiG-29. Altitude 10,000 meters, speed 800 km/h.

My aircraft Su-27, altitude same, speed 1000 km/h. Head on position.

The lock range (LA) for both missiles, 27T and 27ET, is the same = 7.5 km.

Edited August 7, 2020 by Chizh

[Fri13]

That doens't answer to my question, it doesn't explain why with the same 36T head, the lock on distance is differrent.

 

I haven't noticed that really, but are you use it is not about lock distance but just launch authorization? Sure a IR seeker problem is that as you don't get the range information, you can still launch the missile. But if you get the distance information (radar, data-link, laser) then the system doesn't give launch authorization as it knows you have R-27T and not R-27ET.

 

But sure if it is without range information and the ET model gets lock itself, then it is completely wrong as with assumed same seeker one should have identical lock ranges.

 

 

Your speculations are not serious and that doesn't answer to my question.

Do you think that a company will do a new missile with the hope of better IR seeker.

and even with a better seeker the single mode engine of the R27 T is sufficient no need for a dual mode engine

 

It is not speculation that it is meant for a chase-only purpose as here mentioned often.

The extended motor offers extended range and increased speed for longer range. All that is benefit when you are chasing someone as instead ie. 7 km launch range you get 12 km launch range. Instead a 60 seconds chase with X kilometres you get 60 seconds in X+n kilometres.

 

If your missile can chase faster and longer than previous one, while relative distance from launch to target is just couple kilometres, it will be huge benefit at high speed chases. The seeker in R-27T has exactly the same tracking capabilities to target with afterburners and couple kilometres ahead, but not the same flight performance as the R-27ET model.

 

Like try out, take a setup with R-27T and find out what is the range for a speed and altitude when it can't anymore intercept in tail-chase situation the target. And then try with the R-27ET that how far further or how much slower you can launch it and still intercept the target.

 

And please my question is precise and for CHIZ.

 

Yes, but if you do not want others to read and reply your post, post it as Private Message next time. And maybe it could save time from Chiz not to reply for all again that has previously discussed.

[BlackPixxel]

It is not speculation that it is meant for a chase-only purpose as here mentioned often.

 

MaxMPower, the russian Su-30SM/Su-35 pilot, wrote in this forum that the R-27ET is also used in offensive combat.