Jump to content

Please add R-60 aswell (currently only R-60M)


Recommended Posts

Posted

R-60M is all-aspect in DCS, please also add R-60 which is tail-aspect only, for early cold war missions. (DCS MiG-21 already can carry basic R-60)

  • Like 3
DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 4060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Posted (edited)

I agree with this…. But with one caveat…..

 

The r-60 you see in game, is made by Magnitude 3 for MiG-21bis. It is not ED missile. 
 

In addition, if we look at its specs, it is superior to even M! 

R-60M has a seeker sensitive of 10 km on Su-27, and a flat rejection factor of 1.0.

However, the OLDER R-60, with  worse seeker, while it does have only 7500m seeker sensitivity, 75%, it has 0.66 flare rejection. Giving it a 33% advantage when it comes to flares. 
 

Its seeker that should be worse, is also listed as cooled, even though R-60 uses uncooked seeker. This means that like the M, it also has limited all aspects ability. 

In addition, the R-60 has a 6 kg warhead explosive. The R-60M, which should have a slightly bigger warhead, only has 3 kg warhead. I would guess Magnitude 3 made the warhead more powerful so it could reliably take down larger fighters. 
 

The R-60 is given a 40 G limit, the R-60M has a 30 G limit (to likely help conserve energy.) this means the older R-60 is even more maneuverable 

 

Basically, if ED added the R-60 in game as it is now, compared to R-60M, using the base R-60 from MiG-21bis would actually be an UPGRADE. The upper 25% of sealer detection range is only loss, and with helicopter speeds and launch ranges of this short range missile that is a very negligible loss. 

And for what it’s worth, Magntitude 3 gave the R-3S the SAME EXACT flare rejection figure…… Magnitude 3s missiles just need overhaul or taking over by ED to be similar and comparable to the rest we have. So we don’t have things where the old R-60 is actually better then the M….both even have a 3m proximity fuse! 

Source https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/blob/master/_G/rockets/R-60.lua

Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

  • 1 year later...
Posted

+1 to this.

The missiles are all on ED's modeling now, and the absence of the R60 is a little odd.

I know the FC3 Frogfoot recently got the option to start loading it.

Posted

Definitely, ED should have the R-60 (non-M) modrlled with updated algorythms, and implemented for the Mi-24P. There is a solid chance R-60 could be updated along with the making of DCS Mig-29.

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

I still have never seen a single photo of it. I’m sure it’s technically possible, but toes that line of simulation “is it possible or should we avoid it because it was never done in service? 
 

Even the joke photo on 24D phalanga rails is a M 

IMG_5182.jpeg

IMG_8664.JPG

IMG_2312.JPG

IMG_2456.JPG

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Posted

Yeah, I'll have to look for it. It might very well be that R-60M was already in common use when Mi-24 got that ability, in which case it'd be unrealistic.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...