SU-27 and R-77

[Kenan]

Speaking on SU27SM third party addon, any updates on that? There's a short youtube video of it but it didn't look impressive at all. To say the least.

[Dudikoff]

OK got both mixed up :D

 

Maybe it's the names which might be confusing if you follow the logic for S and M in English.. SD (e.g. short) and MD (e.g. medium range).

 

I presume that those are in Russian (MD might be малой дальности = short range, SD = средний?).

 

OT, but the words for short and medium range are VERY similar to some Croatian ones so hence my initial guess (e.g. mala udaljenost = small distance, srednja = medium) although the actual expression in Croatian would use different words; e.g. range (domet) rather than distance and short (kratki) rather than small. Sorry for the rant, just wanted to show that I'm not trying to be a smart-ass as I guess anybody can search for what RVV-MD/SD stands for in Russian..

Edited July 21, 2013 by Dudikoff

[Chizh]

 

I presume that those are in Russian (MD might be малой дальности = short range, SD = средний?).

 

Yes, you are right.

[Flаnker]

Today there are no R-77s in operational service in the Russian air force as far as any reliable public information would indicate.

 

According to my sources, has already started buying missiles RVV-SD for Su35/Su30/Su27SM. These missiles have in Lipetsk and Akhtubinsk

[Shein]

Aircraft people wish were modeled: Su-27SM1/3, Su-33K. Good luck getting useful info on those, though at least the Su-27SM1/3 might be doable at FC level.

 

Then how is ED doing the Su-27SM at a DCS level? You're crushing my dreams here man! :cry:

[gunterlund21]

Speaking on SU27SM third party addon, any updates on that? There's a short youtube video of it but it didn't look impressive at all. To say the least.

 

I dont believe that youtube clip is the official DCS 27sm. I believe that was a user hacking into flaming cliffs and trying to make his own. I dont think there has been any official updates from the 3rd party that is doing this (let alone identifying who they are).

[GGTharos]

Right now there's only a plan for Su-27S.

[159th_Falcon]

Right now there's only a plan for Su-27SM.

Fixed that for ya.

As officially announced by Groove in the March 2013 newsletter.

See link;

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1791415&postcount=14

 

In the meantime there have been no announcements that would mean plans have changed.

[Kenan]

Then how is ED doing the Su-27SM at a DCS level? You're crushing my dreams here man! :cry:

 

I don't think it will be (if at all) at a DCS level, rather a third party addon that might (?) use DCS brand in the title.

[GGTharos]

I'll fix it again for you: There are only plans for Su-27S right now.

 

Fixed that for ya.

[159th_Falcon]

I'll fix it again for you: There are only plans for Su-27S right now.

And in which announcement can we read this new information?

[MaverickF22]

I don't think it will be (if at all) at a DCS level, rather a third party addon that might (?) use DCS brand in the title.

 

 

Well, the future would look very nice with a DCS level modeled Su-27..., and not if..., now as the western F-18E Super Hornet is rolling as a future DCS module. So i'd also appreciate if the Su-27 or any other future fighter will be developed specifically by ED (who i'd trust more rather than any third party members) for greater realism standards.;)

 

So, i'm willing not to sleep one day until that day comes!:pilotfly:

 

 

Cheers, good day!

[Pyroflash]

And in which announcement can we read this new information?

 

It can be read in the myriad of announcements about giving the Su-27S an EFM.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=105800&highlight=SU-27+AFM

 

While this does not specifically say that these will be made into full DCS modules, I have a hard time believing that they won't. This is particularly because a LOT of the systems stuff has to be accomplished before doing any sort of accurate EFM (Check me if I am wrong about this). In light of this, I don't think that ED would just "throw away" their hard work. It will, however, probably take a lot longer than a year, because ED has stated that the F/A-18C will be the next official DCS aircraft. Plus, the SU-27SM could be a 3rd party aircraft. I don't, however, think this is true as I believe that ED has said that they would personally be developing a few of these aircraft down the line, but I forget where this may have been said (could be pure speculation). It is my hope that ED will be doing both.

 

This is, of course, simple speculation after all. I am not in any way, shape, or form, qualified to roadmap ED's work, and as such, my statements should be taken with a rather large grain of salt (i.e. don't hate me if it doesn't happen this way).

 

 

Also

 

Well, the future would look very nice with a DCS level modeled Su-27..., and not if..., now as the western F-18E Super Hornet is rolling as a future DCS module. So i'd also appreciate if the Su-27 or any other future fighter will be developed specifically by ED (who i'd trust more rather than any third party members) for greater realism standards.

 

So, i'm willing not to sleep one day until that day comes!

 

 

Cheers, good day!

 

This is not advisable, as you would probably die.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Pyroflash

[159th_Falcon]

Thank's for the link Pyroflash, may i point out though that Wags is talking about the SU-27 there.

Not mentioning a specific version.

 

Also, there he is referring to the existing SU-27 from FC3, and making it availeble whit an AFM as an module for DCS.

(so not an DCS SU-27)

 

If we read Groove's post again, we can deduct that the SU-27SM WILL be an DCS product somewhere later down the road.

 

So i guess where talking about different products here.

 

Still don't get why ED testers/moderators keep telling us there won't be an SU-27SM though.

[Kenan]

^^ED works on Su-27S not on SM..SM was supposed be a third party module.

Fully modlled Su-27S may not "rule the sky" but would certainly match other western birds..assuming R27R/ER performance gets improved.

[159th_Falcon]

^^ED works on Su-27S not on SM..SM was supposed be a third party module.

Fully modlled Su-27S may not "rule the sky" but would certainly match other western birds..assuming R27R/ER performance gets improved.

 

was supposed to be. IE, not anymore.

Got any links on the 3rd party and the announcements?

[Kenan]

^^No I don't but it (Su-27SM) was mentioned by Wags in one of his videos. It was definetelly mentioned and possibly in the works (by a third party) but whatever happened since, I know as much as you do. Perhaps it was cancelled/delayed or simply put on hold.

[Pyroflash]

Thank's for the link Pyroflash, may i point out though that Wags is talking about the SU-27 there.

Not mentioning a specific version.

 

Also, there he is referring to the existing SU-27 from FC3, and making it availeble whit an AFM as an module for DCS.

(so not an DCS SU-27)

 

If we read Groove's post again, we can deduct that the SU-27SM WILL be an DCS product somewhere later down the road.

 

So i guess where talking about different products here.

 

Still don't get why ED testers/moderators keep telling us there won't be an SU-27SM though.

 

As for Groove's post, what is really only tells us is that there will be, at some point, an Su-27SM. It does not tell us when we are getting it, or even for that matter, who is making it. All I am saying is that it is likely that ED will be making a DCS Su-27S at some point because of the extensive EFM work that they will be putting/have put into the project.

 

Or maybe they have made the executive decision to transition the current Su-27S in FC3 into an Su-27SM when the EFM gets released for it. By the way, I would not be opposed to this decision. I think it will greatly widen the scope of what that aircraft will be able to accomplish.

 

The alternative to these, however, is that they scrap (limit to an increased fidelity FC3 product) all the work they have/will have done on making an EFM for the Su-27S.

 

 

Of course, there is one option that we have been missing all along. In his 07 May update, Wags said:

 

"While DCS modules have focused on a very high level of detail, we also realize that there are many (often silent) users that wish for a shallower learning curve. In fact, the Lock On / Flaming Cliffs series has been our most successful. As such, the F-15C Eagle and Su-27 Flanker will be catered to them. Both of these aircraft will have the same detailed 3D models, cockpits and sounds of the Flaming Cliffs 3 versions, but we will be adding an Advanced Flight Model (AFM) for each."

 

What he really failed to mention is what exactly the "shallower learning curve" is. This does not necessarily mean that we will, at any time, get a DCS anything out of either the Su-27 or F-15C. It could, in fact, mean that we might be getting something somewhere in between DCS systems fidelity and FC3 systems fidelity (I made the exception of systems fidelity, because the assumption is that we will be seeing a DCS level FM). Additionally, for all I know, it might mean that we will be getting a full up DCS level aircraft, but there will be increased amounts of difficulty options to make them accessible to newer players. The bottom line is, really, until this is released, only the DCS developers know anything about what is going on.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Pyroflash

[159th_Viper]

Fully modlled Su-27S may not "rule the sky" but would certainly match other western birds..assuming R27R/ER performance gets improved.

 

Current range parameters for the ER accords with RL charts/parameters so if you're holding on for a range improvement then don't: It's modelled accurately according to missile manufacturers charts/documentation at present.

[Kenan]

Current range parameters for the ER accords with RL charts/parameters so if you're holding on for a range improvement then don't: It's modelled accurately according to missile manufacturers charts/documentation at present.

 

Range is fine, I was refering to tracking of the missile against manouvering targets which is far from stellar. Not sure if this is the case IRL but as someone else pointed out, if it was, why would RUAF use such an unreliable missile?

[159th_Viper]

Range is fine, I was refering to tracking of the missile against manouvering targets which is far from stellar...

 

From a Rtr launch?

 

...but as someone else pointed out, if it was, why would RUAF use such an unreliable missile?

 

They are not - the RVV family is being used/introduced to front-line fighters IIRC. In any event, the ER is what, 30-odd years old?

[159th_Falcon]

Talking about launch range. And then mainly the Rmax and Rtr indicators.

 

Are those bugged? WIP? (flying an SU33 btw)

 

Cause last night on an MP session i had a fighter flying away from me at about 1300 km/h

 

Was in pursuit at just a bit more then that. lets say 1350 km/h

 

Anyway, i noticed that the Rmax and Rtr indicators were very close to each other, overlapping each other actually.

 

So i fired an 27 ET, target did not manouvre or use flares, but the missile never reached it target.

 

Not sure how to go about making a track of this cause i have no idea how i can prevent the AI from maneuvering.

 

***EDIT***

Ok, managed to get the AI to play stupid, see bug report here;

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=110310

Edited July 22, 2013 by 159th_Falcon

[Pilotasso]

Current range parameters for the ER accords with RL charts/parameters so if you're holding on for a range improvement then don't: It's modelled accurately according to missile manufacturers charts/documentation at present.

 

The missiles have low tolerance to ECM and clutter right now. Next patch should help. :)

[Dudikoff]

They are not - the RVV family is being used/introduced to front-line fighters IIRC. In any event, the ER is what, 30-odd years old?

 

RE/TE were introduced later so more like 20-odd years old, although I don't think that the relevant parts are much different from R/T variants.. Or?

 

Regarding the RVV introduction, are there any reliable information? I mean, even if it started recently, it might take years for the weapon to be operationally carried/used by the squadrons, no? Even when it gets there, only the latest fighters can use it which are available in somewhat limited numbers so far..

Edited July 22, 2013 by Dudikoff

[Pilotasso]

From a Rtr launch?

 

 

 

They are not - the RVV family is being used/introduced to front-line fighters IIRC. In any event, the ER is what, 30-odd years old?

 

Doctrine, economical, political and technical issues are likely to be behind the continuation of use of R-27ER.

 

The Russians always believed that air combat will eventually lead to close combat. Their front line fighters reflect this by having extremely tuned up aerodynamics and lethal IR missiles.

 

After breakup of USSR, further development of R-77 only saw the RVV-AE export model with commercially available components.

 

it retained some technical solutions to problems the engineers faced with R-77 development. Those lattice fins would have been long gone with any other manufacturer that had more experience with high power actuators or long duration batteries. That's what lattice fins are good for: good aerodynamic authority for the lowest power possible.

but it has a major drawback: Excess drag, hence lower range. Missiles with lattice fins decelerate faster.

 

There's a graph somewhere showing R-77 range: 30KM, and you can see the AMRAAM going twice that, twice to triple the range of a 77 for R-27ER (depending on the sources)

 

 

Which means both the AMRAAM and R-27ER have a range advantage over R-77 or RVV-AE.

Russian planes are doomed to be carrying the R-27 side by side with RVV-AE. In the absence of better missiles, having only R-27's as the BVR stick barely makes any difference in most situations.

 

Hence the development for RVV-SD, Astra and SD-10.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Pilotasso