R-27EA in LOFC2?

[DarkFire]

It may be worth gently pointing out to the assembled multitude that there is a mod available on the DCS website that allows carriage of the R-77 on the Su-27. It also allows carriage of a load of other stuff that doesn't really work (but try loading up with a Kh-31a and turn on the radar - some legacy code there possibly?)

 

For those who want to fly with the R-77, you can. If you don't want to... There's also that option.

 

Just saying... ;)

[Alfa]

Thanks Soviet, Still the Su-27SK presented by Knaapo is the export version of the Su-27S which we are talking about in FC.

 

So far so good.. :)

 

 

So if the SK version can carry R77's according to Knaapo, the S will surely have the same capability since it's for RuAF.

 

The Su-27S/SK is not compatible with the R-77/RVV-AE - that is in fact one of the very reasons why an upgraded version called Su-27SM has been developed.

[Boberro]

When Kuz goes for refit soon, she'll loose the ASM. But gain more AAM.

 

Next refit?

They might have built new one not only using almost 30 yearly ship.

[RIPTIDE]

Next refit?

They might have built new one not only using almost 30 yearly ship.

30 years? The USS Enterprise is 50 years on the high seas and she's going strong. ;)

[Falcon_S]

...

The Su-27S/SK is not compatible with the R-77/RVV-AE - that is in fact one of the very reasons why an upgraded version called Su-27SM has been developed.

 

We can make compatibile version very simple.

[Boberro]

Didn't mean her age that she's going to sink:P

USNavies have many carriers, Russians only 1, if she goes to docks fleet doesn't have the second one. During 30 years they didn't build new Kuznetzov or better ship for navy...

[FLANKERATOR]

The Su-27S/SK is not compatible with the R-77/RVV-AE - that is in fact one of the very reasons why an upgraded version called Su-27SM has been developed.

 

please, check KNAAPO's link again, according to them S/SK's do carry RVV-AE AKA R77.

 

In term of Air to Air, the SM/SKM is way more capable and have more options in term of air to surface weapons. Both still carry the adder.

Edited April 27, 2011 by FLANKERATOR

[RIPTIDE]

Didn't mean her age that she's going to sink:P

USNavies have many carriers, Russians only 1, if she goes to docks fleet doesn't have the second one. During 30 years they didn't build new Kuznetzov or better ship for navy...

meh... she's been in dock before. And the RU world didn't end. The Kuz is, for all discussion purposes, a guided missile boat of battleship weight... , that also has some jets for defence.

[EtherealN]

No Flanker, they are basically saying that they can be made capable. That kind of site is a PR resource, and it is not uncommon to advertise things that are indeed not fact. Someone could contact them and say "hey, I want 23 Su-27SK and I want RVV-AE with them" and then they'd create some of that. But here's the thing: that doesn't mean the Russian Su-27S can use it! Like has been mentioned: there are MiG-29A's that can use active missiles. Doesn't mean russian ones can - it just means that a specific customer asked for a specific modification that the supplier was able to make.

 

If Russia asks for it's Su-27S feel to be so modified, then they could do it. But it appears Russia is more interested in Su-27SM and such programs.

 

Another more close-to-home example: which weapons can an A-10C use? If you give me a list it will automatially be wrong. There is no such list. There are of course some weapons that all C's can use, but there's more that are particular to specific parts of the upgrade programme and individual airframes will be restricted from their use either by software or missing wiring or both just because that specific upgrade wasn't applied to them. They are still A-10C's though.

 

Same thing happens with the Saab 39: they routinely offer it with weapon combinations that no Gripen has ever even flown with - because the system is expensive enough that the expense of modification to a customer's weapon preferrences is relatively cheap.

 

A website is not evidence. Not even if it's KNAAPO.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

When introduced, back in 1984, there were two Flanker versions, Su-27 and Su-27P. Su-27SK is an export version of the Su-27. The letter S (serial production) in SK was used to distinguish between K (komercial - export) version and K (korabelnyy - shipborne). BTW, the Su-33 original designation was Su-27K (K for korabelnyy - shipborne).

 

I think that some people confuse the designation of T-10S to add an S to original Su-27. T-10S was the final production design that went for serial production. Original design had a designation of T-10.

 

Anyway, neither of the Su-27, Su-27P in 1984 nor the Su-27SK in 1992 was capable of carrying R-77 because the R-77 was the second generation of ARH missiles specifically designed for the M series of Fulcrums and Flankers.

 

MiG-29S (product 9-13S) was able to carry R-77 because it incorporated the RLPK-29M targeting system. That was sometime in 1993 or 1994. Sixteen MiG-29S (9-13S) were delivered to RAF.

 

It is quite possible that now SK can carry R-77. But not back in 1992.

[FLANKERATOR]

No Flanker, they are basically saying that they can be made capable. That kind of site is a PR resource, and it is not uncommon to advertise things that are indeed not fact. Someone could contact them and say "hey, I want 23 Su-27SK and I want RVV-AE with them" and then they'd create some of that. But here's the thing: that doesn't mean the Russian Su-27S can use it! Like has been mentioned: there are MiG-29A's that can use active missiles. Doesn't mean russian ones can - it just means that a specific customer asked for a specific modification that the supplier was able to make.

 

If Russia asks for it's Su-27S feel to be so modified, then they could do it. But it appears Russia is more interested in Su-27SM and such programs.

 

Another more close-to-home example: which weapons can an A-10C use? If you give me a list it will automatially be wrong. There is no such list. There are of course some weapons that all C's can use, but there's more that are particular to specific parts of the upgrade programme and individual airframes will be restricted from their use either by software or missing wiring or both just because that specific upgrade wasn't applied to them. They are still A-10C's though.

 

Same thing happens with the Saab 39: they routinely offer it with weapon combinations that no Gripen has ever even flown with - because the system is expensive enough that the expense of modification to a customer's weapon preferrences is relatively cheap.

 

A website is not evidence. Not even if it's KNAAPO.

 

No, they say it can carry RVV-AE, that means it can do it without lifting a finger, period. no essay is needed for that, and I trust Knaapo on that one.

 

The last thing a customer wanna hear when asking for Su-27SK's with adders is :"Ok but..." this company does what it advertises on the website.

 

Plus, only limited number of Russian Su-27's were upgraded to SM version, it makes sense to fit the adder on the S version, hence, the SM version offers way more than just adding the RVV-AE...

 

So Knaapo's CURRENT statement is a much more accurate data than a 30 year old aircraft manual or anything else.

[GGTharos]

Wow, you really don't get it, do you?

 

What you're looking at there is not the SK. It's SKM. The SK does not carry adders or precision A2G munitions, period, end of story, case closed shut.

 

And frankly ED trusts the RuAF and certain air forces who have actually received the SK, as WELL as the SK manual a little more than some advertising website.

 

No, they say it can carry RVV-AE, that means it can do it without lifting a finger, period. no essay is needed for that, and I trust Knaapo on that one.

 

The last thing a customer wanna hear when asking for Su-27SK's with adders is :"Ok but..." this company does what it advertises on the website.

 

Plus, only limited number of Russian Su-27's were upgraded to SM version, it makes sense to fit the adder on the S version, hence, the SM version offers way more than just adding the RVV-AE...

 

So Knaapo's CURRENT statement is a much more accurate data than a 30 year old aircraft manual or anything else.

[Gupyzer0]

Its easy, the version we have in LOMAC is like one of the "olders" not an upgraded one ;)

 

Just learn to fly the flanker properly and you can own the world with onlt semi-active missiles and a little help of the R27ET ... I do and what you have to learn is better deffensive tactics and how to go offensive really fast and very agressively ...

 

If you cant deal with the challenge i suggest you to get in a MIG-29S (not a bad comment for thee 29 drivers ;)) so you can have R-77s ...

[Falcon_S]

"From the outset, the Su-27 had considerable export potential. Still, for various reasons - mainly political ones - exports of new Flankers were limited to India, China and Vietnam. The export version of the Su-27 (T10-S) for China and Vietnam was designated Su-27SK."

 

S means sereeynyy (production, used attributively) while

K stands for kommehrcheskiy (commercial, ie, downgraded customer version). ... =4c=Hajduk is explain that.

 

"The first Chinese-assembled aircraft was flight tested in December 1998. It differed from Soviet Air Force Flanker-Bs in having a reinforced landing gear, a MTOW increased to 33,000 kg (72,751 lbs.) and slightly downgraded avionics, with foreign avionics as a customer option.

A more capable version, designated Su-27SMK, was developed as a cheaper alternative to the SU-35/Su37, the M standing for modernizeerovannyy (upgraded). Changes as compared to the Su-27SK include two extra hardpoints and an improved targeting, navigation, communications and ECM suite. Two of the pylons are wet, permitting the carriage of 2,000litre (440 Imperial gallon) drop tanks, and a retractable IFR probe is provided.

The Su-27SMK features an improved version of the N-OO1M pulseDoppler fire control radar with better air-to-air and air-to-ground capability and can carry up to six KAB-500KR TV-guided smart bombs. Western avionics and/or weapons may be integrated at customer request.

 

Another upgrade to the FlankerB was developed by Sukhoi and KnAAPO for the Indonesian Air Force. In the popular press this aircraft has also been referred to as the Su-30KI (despite being single-seat), the Su-27KI (the I obviously standing for Indonesia), and simply as a modified Su-27SK. The uncoded prototype made its first flight on 28th June 1998 at the hands of KnAAPO test pilot Yevgeniy Revoonov. Outwardly the Su27KI differs from the standard Su-27 Flanker-B only in having a retractable refueling probe on the port side of the nose. Other changes to the equipment included an upgraded N-OO1M radar capable of working with R-77 (RW-AE) missiles, the addition of a global positioning system (GPS), a Western standard automatic approach and instrument landing system(ILS/VOR) took part in the LIMA '99 airshow held at Langkawi AB, Kuala Lumpur. A few months later it was on show at the DSA'2000 industry-only defense fair held in Kuala Lumpur on 11th-14th April 2000. Negotiations with Indonesia on the purchase dragged on for years - and came to nothing. This was probably just as well - the deal would have been politically damaging for Russia, since Indonesia was then subjected to international ostracism because of the hostilities in East Timor.

 

Russian Air Forces upgrade. First conversion of Su-27S for Russian Air Forces flew at Komsomolsk on 27 December 2002; upgrade adds two MFI-9 178 x 127 mm (7 x 5 in.) LCDs, satellite navigation and new radar computer. Second stage upgrade planned for 2005, adding 1175 Khibiny EW system, quiet radar and electro-optic targeting pod. First stage upgrades were completed with 12 aircraft now in service. The multi-Role Export Fighter Su-27SKM export version of Su27SM." Source: "Warbird Tech vol.42"

 

Su27SK flight manual is 21.11.1996 (print date of my copy) and so many things are happend in modernisation Su27 to the present. And yes, if KNAAPO said SK can cary RVV-EA - it can, but then his name is Su27SKM (M-modernised) or Su27KI (I- Indonesia) or Su27SM... :book:

 

So let`s make some upgrades. :joystick:

Edited April 28, 2011 by Falcon_S

[Gupyzer0]

It would be great to have the 77s in servers and all that but we dont so lets deal with it ;)

[combatace]

Its a shame to fight for mere R-77 in FC2 where had Su-35 capabilities in Flanker 2.5.

[Cali]

The problem here is some people believe everything they read on the internet. Tons o of stuff get put on there to make other countries think hmm maybe they have better stuff then we thought

[FLANKERATOR]

Wow, you really don't get it, do you?

 

What you're looking at there is not the SK. It's SKM. The SK does not carry adders or precision A2G munitions, period, end of story, case closed shut.

 

And frankly ED trusts the RuAF and certain air forces who have actually received the SK, as WELL as the SK manual a little more than some advertising website.

 

 

Seems more like you are not able to understand even though it's quite simple.

 

Knaapo's website has 1 page for Su-27SK and another one for Su-27SKM, and I can confirm I was referring to the Su-27SK page.

 

ED has the right to trust anything, just like anyone else. And again, I do trust the manufacturer's website, period.

 

It's quite funny how some people think they are owning the world with ER's with a K/D ratio under 1.5 :D

[Frostie]

Just learn to fly the flanker properly and you can own the world with onlt semi-active missiles and a little help of the R27ET ... I do and what you have to learn is better deffensive tactics and how to go offensive really fast and very agressively ...

 

If you cant deal with the challenge i suggest you to get in a MIG-29S (not a bad comment for thee 29 drivers ;)) so you can have R-77s ...

Im sure there is plenty more you could learn from Flankerator. ;)

[MoGas]

Its easy, the version we have in LOMAC is like one of the "olders" not an upgraded one ;)

 

Just learn to fly the flanker properly and you can own the world with onlt semi-active missiles and a little help of the R27ET ... I do and what you have to learn is better deffensive tactics and how to go offensive really fast and very agressively ...

 

If you cant deal with the challenge i suggest you to get in a MIG-29S (not a bad comment for thee 29 drivers ;)) so you can have R-77s ...

 

No offensive Gupyzer, but, to tell someone, who flys very good, in FC2.0 over YEARS, with such a post, is not gona work. And as I know what enemy you are on the server (104th), sorry to say, but you are far off from FLANKENERATOR...

 

And youre tactic, is not that fancy either....

Edited April 28, 2011 by MoGas

[RIPTIDE]

Proletariats of the World Unite!

[tflash]

It is of cousre ED's choice how the implement it. I personally would have no problem at all with R-77 of R-27EA in Lomac. It might be not fully realistic, but it is not totally of the mark either. Extreme realism would be to fly with the actual available aircraft on a particular base at a particular moment. Something complete impossible with Lomac, since not all aircraft models have the same timeframe in the first place.

 

So that kind of realism is a myth. The idea to face an R-77 (or export version) equipped Flanker on the contrary is no fantasy, but just a possible scenario.

 

I find that the sound simulation basics of ED's products is such that, whatever they model the details, it is perfectly possible to mimic very realistic scenarios. It depends mostly on who is playing.

[104th_Crunch]

Well said. Remember, in Blackshark we are flying Ka-50s for USA, UK etc. Realism for me is about avionics and flight modeling. Hypothetical scenarios are no biggie.

 

It is of cousre ED's choice how the implement it. I personally would have no problem at all with R-77 of R-27EA in Lomac. It might be not fully realistic, but it is not totally of the mark either. Extreme realism would be to fly with the actual available aircraft on a particular base at a particular moment. Something complete impossible with Lomac, since not all aircraft models have the same timeframe in the first place.

 

So that kind of realism is a myth. The idea to face an R-77 (or export version) equipped Flanker on the contrary is no fantasy, but just a possible scenario.

 

I find that the sound simulation basics of ED's products is such that, whatever they model the details, it is perfectly possible to mimic very realistic scenarios. It depends mostly on who is playing.

[Vekkinho]

There's also a Game/Simulator option in FC2...

[104th_Crunch]

There's also a Game/Simulator option in FC2...

 

That is not rally my point. I personally want simulation realism, not some game mode. I just don't mind hypothetical scenarios.