tbd R-27P/R-27EP/R-27EA/R-27EM

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

For those who are more well versed with Fulcrums and those involved with development:

Would it possible for us to get the anti-radiation R-27s? Is there enough information in the hands of developers to model these? I can't find much information on these variants of the missile with a quick search.

[GGTharos]

No, it wouldn't be.  This is an old topic and there's a lot of misunderstanding and misinterpretation involved with these seekers.

Edited January 20, 2024 by GGTharos

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

22 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

No, it wouldn't be.  This is an old topic and there's a lot of misunderstanding and misinterpretation involved with these seekers.

 

I'd imagine; as I understand, they weren't SEAD weapons but, rather, air to air focused.

[okopanja]

3 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

I'd imagine; as I understand, they weren't SEAD weapons but, rather, air to air focused.

Fired against fast moving target the only way this could be precise is if:

1. target STTs, (meaning SARH era). So ARHs bade these obsolete.

2. or the targets is flying straight. (e.g. AWACS), reason: scan periods likely not sufficient to guide with enough accuracy, until the missile gets close enough to pick up side lobs.

Add on top the need to correlate  possible multiple signals and identify the one that comes from the target I am wondering if this was ever completed with soviet tech from 80s.

[GGTharos]

12 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

I'd imagine; as I understand, they weren't SEAD weapons but, rather, air to air focused.

While this is a possible application, it is not reliable for a whole bunch of reasons.  One of the things a SARH or ARH missile will do is force the radar return to follow certain parameters.  You do not have this with an ARM, and targeting with an ARM may not be quite as precise.  Either way as far as longer ranges go, SARH/ARH provide more information for guidance algorithms to fly a more efficient path.

Any time you see something  you believe is cool, but somehow it's not the primary thing being used (far from it in fact), take a moment and consider that there might be reasons for that

[okopanja]

4 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

While this is a possible application, it is not reliable for a whole bunch of reasons.  One of the things a SARH or ARH missile will do is force the radar return to follow certain parameters.  You do not have this with an ARM, and targeting with an ARM may not be quite as precise.  Either way as far as longer ranges go, SARH/ARH provide more information for guidance algorithms to fly a more efficient path.

Any time you see something  you believe is cool, but somehow it's not the primary thing being used (far from it in fact), take a moment and consider that there might be reasons for that

Recently mig-29A 9.12 manual page showed the R-27P (Р-27П) and R-27EP (Р-27ЕП) missile in the loadout. It got removed due to uncertainty of legal status. So this thing did exist.

[WinterH]

As far as I can recall, things like R-27EP were the hot topic in late 90s to mid 2000s ish, and were touted almost exclusively as anti AWACS weapons. Designers probably didn't expect them to be precise enough to home on fighter radars and hit them? So intended more like a suppression of enemy air surveillance kinda deal probably.

But then, during that same period other things like R-27EM and EA were also thrown around and AFAIK they ended up being mostly just marketing fancies didn't they?

[okopanja]

Just now, WinterH said:

As far as I can recall, things like R-27EP were the hot topic in late 90s to mid 2000s ish, and were touted almost exclusively as anti AWACS weapons. Designers probably didn't expect them to be precise enough to home on fighter radars and hit them? So intended more like a suppression of enemy air surveillance kinda deal probably.

But then, during that same period other things like R-27EM and EA were also thrown around and AFAIK they ended up being mostly just marketing fancies didn't they?

I do not know what is the date of the manual page, but it should be noted that printing style points to 80s printing technology.

The weapon probably made sense and was the most effective against SARH (by far this is easiest to implement).

90s/2000s probably they tried to sell it as AWACS killer.

[pepin1234]

The R-27P was recently in the Tactical Missiles Corporation web site. It’s an official site from Russian defense. They removed from the web site after the Ukraine war started. It’s Is a fact that missile exist and the removed action for export after war started is a proof that missile is a lethal weapon and probably they decided to stop offering to export. 
 

https://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/upravlyaemoe_aviatsionnoe_vooruzhenie/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/

 

Edited January 22, 2024 by pepin1234

[draconus]

15 minutes ago, pepin1234 said:

...the removed action for export after war started is a proof that missile is a lethal weapon...

Only with your own definition of proof.

[pepin1234]

13 minutes ago, draconus said:

Only with your own definition of proof.

Well if an official website is not a proof then what is for you? Your negation to have the missile in DCS maybe is a proof of fear to not be shoot down by something different that what you know until now.

Edited January 22, 2024 by pepin1234

[draconus]

2 minutes ago, pepin1234 said:

Well if an official website is not a proof then what is for you?

Any proof that the weapon was successfully tested (live fire in flight) is fine by me.

Then for it to come into DCS it needs data and proof that it was actually tested on aircraft in version that is simulated in DCS (not needed to be modified in hardware or software).

[Flаnker]

R-27P (R-27EP) were used by Ukraine on Mig-29 in the current conflict. There is a photo of the rocket under the wings and an indication of the name of the rocket on the IPV

[pepin1234]

2 minutes ago, Flаnker said:

R-27P (R-27EP) were used by Ukraine on Mig-29 in the current conflict. There is a photo of the rocket under the wings and an indication of the name of the rocket on the IPV

Please Do you have the photo to share?

[okopanja]

4 minutes ago, draconus said:

Any proof that the weapon was successfully tested (live fire in flight) is fine by me.

Then for it to come into DCS it needs data and proof that it was actually tested on aircraft in version that is simulated in DCS (not needed to be modified in hardware or software).

A page from 9-12 manual showing R-27(E)T, R-27(E)R and R-27(E)P was submitted recently in one of the 9-12 topics and promptly removed.

I personally considered the P mythical before that, but I still believe that it's use case is rather limited.

[pepin1234]

10 minutes ago, draconus said:

Any proof that the weapon was successfully tested (live fire in flight) is fine by me.

Then for it to come into DCS it needs data and proof that it was actually tested on aircraft in version that is simulated in DCS (not needed to be modified in hardware or software).

Your statement need to be approved by the UN I guess. Things doesn’t work like that or should not. 

[Flаnker]

6 минут назад, pepin1234 сказал:

Please Do you have the photo to share?

The R-27P is easily identified by its bright yellow homing head.

I couldn’t quickly find the photo with IPV now (I saw this video quite a long time ago)

[Ironhand]

2 hours ago, pepin1234 said:

The R-27P was recently in the Tactical Missiles Corporation web site. It’s an official site from Russian defense. They removed from the web site after the Ukraine war started. It’s Is a fact that missile exist and the removed action for export after war started is a proof that missile is a lethal weapon and probably they decided to stop offering to export. 
 

https://ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/upravlyaemoe_aviatsionnoe_vooruzhenie/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/

 

 

Don’t recall if you were a part of the discussion about 1,5 years ago. But Artem, prior to the current war in Ukraine, listed the P1 and EP1 as part of their product line:

I’m sure their production facilities would have taken out early in the war, though.

[BIGNEWY]

folks I suggest you keep it DCS related here

thanks

[Ironhand]

Apologies.

[AvgeekJoe]

I'm sure some modder can handle that.  Please do.

[Wyvern]

On 3/25/2024 at 2:02 AM, AvgeekJoe said:

I'm sure some modder can handle that.  Please do.

null

Give me a day...

[zerO_crash]

There is absolutely no chance that P-series of R-27 (ГСН 9Б-1102) will be simulated at any capacity. The whole thing is so hush-hush, that Vympel claims that they've never tested them, yet pictures and expositions (export) of them exist.

 

 

 

Let me put it this way; be happy that we are getting a MiG-29 9.12A at all Many Russian forums and websites talking about these things have already been wiped btw...

[Irisz]

SVP-24 "Gefest & T" complex comprises some sub-systems and one of that is Glonass/GPS receiver/navigation. Besides, all of Russian new/upgraded aircrafts were equipped L-150 Pastel RWR/passive radar that can coordinate radiation targets, feed and guide both air-2-air missiles like R-27P/R-27PE and anti radiation missiles like Kh-31P/Kh-31PE and Kh-58. Upgrading front OLS IRST will add more ability to launch laser-guided missiles like Kh-25L and Kh-29L. Installing a MFD in the cockpit to use optronic guided bombs/missiles like Kab-500KR bomb and Kh-29T missile is very cheap and simple too. Finally replacing new WCS computer to add more new weapons is also very basic thing for all upgraded aircraft.

Therefore suppose that upgraded Su-33s with SVP-24 "Gefest & T", new OLS IRST, L-150 Pastel RWR/Passive radar, new MFD in cockpit and new WCS computer at least can use Glonass/GPS guided bombs (but why they need these expensive bombs while they can send dumd bombs to target very accurately?), anti radiation missiles, laser guided missiles, optronic guided bombs/missiles and new air-2-air R-27P/EP missile. Those are so enough for Su-33 in new role of surface attake.

[Dragon1-1]

Honestly, it's not like this particular weapon looks like something that MiG-29A will be able to carry, anyway. This thing looks like it has a widebody motor, a much larger seeker and overall only the fins resemble the R-27ER. It's not like the Shrike, if it was just an ER tuned into AWACS radars instead of MiG's own, it would've been a simple matter. This is obviously a new weapon, and thus, probably only compatible with new versions of the MiG-29. We don't even know how exactly is it cued onto a specific radar signal.