Gazehound Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 Also Manny; at least with R-73 and R-77 they have been in service since, wheras the AE never has been. Alright there was no actual combat at the time of the LockOn theatre with those missiles but they are missiles that exist. VVS504 Red Hammers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 R-73 has several airkills on it's record ( Ethiopia-Eritrea and possible a iraqi fractide during Desert Storm ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfa Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 I am aware of the objections, the issues, toward the use of the R-27EA and R-27EM AA-10D Alamo missile and chose ot relight this thread. BTW, the missile is in production, not currently used. However, would not this objection also extend toward nearly all remaining Soviet-built Air to Air missile technology after the AA-8 (R-60) Aphid? Technically speaking, there was limited to no oppotunity for Soviet Air to Air missile technology to be employed. :confused: . Listen - the R-73, R-27R, R-27T and their "long burn" versions R-27RE and R-27TE were designed for use with the MiG-29 and Su-27 weapons systems and are currently in widespread service with these fighters. The R-77 design was designed for use with later multirole variants of MiG-29 and Su-27 and integrated with the weapons systems of these in the same way as was the case with the R-27 for the "basic" MIG-29 and Su-27 versions. The R-27AE was a proposal for an active radar homing variant of the R-27 to equip upgraded baseline MiG-29 and Su-27 versions but was rejected and never put into production. The later R-77 design was favoured and has so far been equipping a few upgraded MiG-29S´s in Russian service. Bottom line is that the R-27AE never made it past the concept stage. Cheers, - JJ. JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manny Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 I see no objections to the R-27EM on this thread, although this missile is the same as the ER but for use against low flying cruise missiles. I don't even know if the different seeker head is modeled in lock-on. The R-27AE, however is not in production, politics killed this missile off while in development. Are you certain the R-27EA is not a production missile? I have read at Janes of the active radar seeker assembly 9B-1103M used in the AA-10 'Alamo' R-27AE (Duncan Lennox) You are correct to state the missile is not in service but incorrect to state it was not produced. Data for the missile was compiled but it was replaced by the AMRAAM equivalent R-77. Nonetheless, I defer. It should never have been placed into Lock-On. However, Lock-On is a simulation, a game, and I think lightening up a bit is in order since an AR missile already exists for the Flanker and Fulcrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 Okay, well, I guess this bears repeating: The R-27EA was a prototype at best. Not a production model (do you know what production means? It doesn't mean 'produced 1-2-3-4-10 examples. It means serial, sell to the airforce production). It has never been operationally used and likely never will be. The Su-27S in LOMAC is not capable of using the R-77, either. If you want to 'lighten up' the game on your server by using these weapons, you're welcome to. As you may have noticed, you don't have a huge following in putting unrealistic weapons on the various aircraft though. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Posted November 2, 2005 Author Share Posted November 2, 2005 For the risk of Repeating myself.. Manny you miss the point. Even if the AE is a real weapon. If the consensus is that it should not be used then a player disregarding these rules is giving himself an unfair advantage against his opponents. If the F1 Racing Committee says slicks are not allowed this season. What do you think they will do to a team that ignores this ruling and starts to qualify with them anyway ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Posted November 2, 2005 Author Share Posted November 2, 2005 For those hard of hearing.... Manny you miss the point. Even if the AE is a real weapon. If the consensus is that it should not be used then a player disregarding these rules is giving himself an unfair advantage against his opponents. If the F1 Racing Committee says slicks are not allowed this season. What do you think they will do to a team that ignores this ruling and starts to qualify with them anyway ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manny Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 GG I defered, but however I have already agreed, after I researched this for myself, it was not put into service, sold, active, etc. I agree to prototype only... meaning it was produced but not for sale or use actively. I work for an Automotive Supplier that produces many things not sold or distributed externally. Anyway, does the R-27AE have an advantage over the use of the R-77 in Lock-On? If so what is it else I still don't understand, beside the fact the missile was never used, what the big deal is? Is this a sacred cow thing to users of Lock-On? A candles and Star of David event? The R-77 is employable if you fly Russian and an AR missile like the R-27AE. So what is the big deal? Well nevermind I understand in part why people hissy-fit over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick-90 Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 it's not important wether he gives himself an unfair advantage, it's just one thing: he uses sth., the neither the game nor the Server allows you to use, and THAT is the thing.... if you have a gun, and it's forbidden, you can get arrested for it even if you have never used it.... it's the same thing, it's the problem that he uses sth. you are not allowed to use. even if somebody uses a totally senseless thing, like LAU-61WP instead of the B-8 Smoke version, you might call it cheating, cuz it's not allowed as standard in the game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 If the F1 Racing Committee says slicks are not allowed this season. What do you think they will do to a team that ignores this ruling and starts to qualify with them anyway ? They would give'em a reality check ... think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 GG I defered, but however I have already agreed, after I researched this for myself, it was not put into service, sold, active, etc. I agree to prototype only... meaning it was produced but not for sale or use actively. I work for an Automotive Supplier that produces many things not sold or distributed externally. Anyway, does the R-27AE have an advantage over the use of the R-77 in Lock-On? If so what is it else I still don't understand, beside the fact the missile was never used, what the big deal is? Is this a sacred cow thing to users of Lock-On? A candles and Star of David event? The R-77 is employable if you fly Russian and an AR missile like the R-27AE. So what is the big deal? Well nevermind I understand in part why people hissy-fit over it. Because most people don't like seeing aircraft using missiles they don't use in reality. The same reason that someone equipping a flanker with a 77 will be called a cheat in a server that doesn't allow it. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 How about those LAU-61s on the hog then? ;) J/K...not that big a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 IguanaKing is also classified as an illegal comedian payload ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 ...and not a very good comedian at that. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixer Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 i would have to say like other have said its a game take a brake. you say it like he needs you. like we have to have the 169th server out there. like you are the only one and thats y you post this on the game makers web-site. :( do not run fly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 I guess no one saw Alfa's post? IT'S OVER! If you have anything OTHER 'wise' to say about someone's server, keep it to your selves. People pay big bucks to maintain those servers and keep'em running. If you are NOT one of them, quit yapping or put yout money where your mouth is already. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixer Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 i have and you do not know me. you may have payed for some of my space. do not run fly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellonet Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 I guess no one saw Alfa's post? IT'S OVER! If you have anything OTHER 'wise' to say about someone's server, keep it to your selves. People pay big bucks to maintain those servers and keep'em running. If you are NOT one of them, quit yapping or put yout money where your mouth is already.Sorry, but isn't it time to lock this thread? Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to step on your toes ;) i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfa Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 thread closed.. Sorry, but isn't it time to lock this thread? Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to step on your toes ;) Yes I think it is - this thread is going nowhere fast. If anyone would like to continiue the *constructive* side of this discussion about what can be done to avoid online cheating, I suggest starting a new thread on this topic :) . Cheers, - JJ. JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts