Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

AMAZING :D

HA HA,just had such kind exoirience on the server,had man at NEZ.

Because they have more modern fuzes.

From the documents we have, R-27 fuze range is 11m.

AIM-120 fuze range is 50' (about 15m).

AIM-7 fuze range is 40' (about 12m)

R-77 fuze range is guessed to be similar to AMRAAM (15m).

Unfortunately, explosives simulation right now has trouble keeping up with fuze simulation.

Why aim 120C/B or R-77 have biger kill distance than R 27ER or AIM7 when R 27ER and AIM 7 hase much more explosive in warheads?Almost double.

Because they have more modern fuzes.

 

From the documents we have, R-27 fuze range is 11m.

AIM-120 fuze range is 50' (about 15m).

AIM-7 fuze range is 40' (about 12m)

 

R-77 fuze range is guessed to be similar to AMRAAM (15m).

 

Unfortunately, explosives simulation right now has trouble keeping up with fuze simulation.

please, Show us this documents and all the guesses about the R-77.

Today I have lost a combat because this feature. my missile was Close enough and not detonate.

The only Thing I hear you is " more modern " Also the F-35 is more modern. The RPG-7 is not modern and can damage easyly the Striker armor so stop discredit the russian hardware.

Thats why this climax in our Sim

Now I understand Tharos. Now I understand.

0:26:32 talking about RCS from F-15/Su-27 (F-15 12m2!)

Please, find your own. When you stop going on your silly diatribes I might be inclined to help you.

please, Show us this documents and all the guesses about the R-77.

 

Today I have lost a combat because this feature. my missile was Close enough and not detonate.

 

The only Thing I hear you is " more modern " Also the F-35 is more modern. The RPG-7 is not modern and can damage easyly the Striker armor so stop discredit the russian hardware.

 

Thats why this climax in our Sim

Please, find your own. When you stop going on your silly diatribes I might be inclined to help you.

For sure you will not help the people for the real performance... we read you and we we copy you never will help us.

and you do silly diatribes, not me. So Keep the respect

0:26:32 talking about RCS from F-15/Su-27 (F-15 12m2!)

wow amaying Video!! thanks to share

For sure you will not help the people for the real performance... we read you and we we copy you never will help us.

People who are really interested have no problems finding this information. Although information for R-27 is not public, this information was given to ED by Russian VVS.

and you do silly diatribes, not me. So Keep the respect

You're the one who's not keeping any respect. You're the one who posts silly diatribes - what does RPG-7 and Stryker have to do with air to air missiles? Nothing - you just post silly stuff and pretend like it means something, but none of it is relevant.

That's about as reliable as every other internet source out there when it comes to RCS.

0:26:32 talking about RCS from F-15/Su-27 (F-15 12m2!)

What do you understand?

Now I understand Tharos. Now I understand.

You're the one who's not keeping any respect. You're the one who posts silly diatribes - what does RPG-7 and Stryker have to do with air to air missiles? Nothing - you just post silly stuff and pretend like it means something, but none of it is relevant.

The question have a Close relation with the phrase you use evertime to devaluate the russian hardware. " more modern "

So in some cases the old things still have a really good performance. Give us something serious and dont speak us like we are in creche.

So Keep the respect for everybody and dont be arrogant

The question have a Close relation with the phrase you use evertime to devaluate the russian hardware. " more modern "

How is a missile that's 10-20 years younger not more modern? Did you notice it's also more modern than an AIM-7?

So in some cases the old things still have a really good performance. Give us something serious and dont speak us like we are in creche.

 

So Keep the respect for everybody and dont be arrogant

I don't need to give you anything. Like I said, since you like making silly diatribes, do your own work and convince yourself. Until you do, I will not have respect for what you say regarding these subjects. You have not earned it.

How is a missile that's 10-20 years younger not more modern? Did you notice it's also more modern than an AIM-7?.

Here is your mistake. Not all the modern is better and here we speak about performance. you try convince us everything should be like you want, but is not like that. Do you copy me??

You have not earned it.

Do you take this forum like a combat against someone. What The...

By my side you can forget it. Reallly dont care the direction you like take it...

You stepped into this conversation and you have shown me nothing. Do you understand this ... you have no argument whatsoever. You have not shown a shred of proof except mentioning some fantasy where you think old equipment may be better than new equipment. Sure, it can happen. It is the exception, not the rule, and I do not see why you would want to apply such an absurd idea to this discussion.

Here is your mistake. Not all the modern is better and here we speak about performance. you try convince us everything should be like you want, but is not like that. Do you copy me??

 

Do you take this forum like a combat against someone. What The...

 

By my side you can forget it. Reallly dont care the direction you like take it...

You stepped into this conversation and you have shown me nothing. Do you understand this ... you have no argument whatsoever. You have not shown a shred of proof except mentioning some fantasy where you think old equipment may be better than new equipment. Sure, it can happen. It is the exception, not the rule, and I do not see why you would want to apply such an absurd idea to this discussion.

this is you better argument: " more modern " :D

This is fact. I told you exactly why things were done. Please tell me how you can argue against a more modern missile not being more modern. I also told you we have documents, and that you can find them. When you start finding documents, you can start telling me that my arguments are bad pepin. I am not professor GG, I am not here to do all that work for people, ok ... if you do not trust what I say, do your own research and prove me wrong - send your data to ED. I give everything I find to ED ... sadly I do not keep all those documents organized, so they are not easy to find just because someone wants them, and then we have different people asking at different times ... in addition to this, sometimes there is information that cannot be shared.

this is you better argument: " more modern " :D

dcs please fix speed R-27ER

dcs fix speed R-27ER, he is hitting a speed greater than Mach 4 at low altitude

Testing again with new patch 1.2.6.18651

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7su8ges5gefzpfu/phHxnCRMGs/1.2.6

Same procedure as before. Testing target tracking only (not pK). Target is chaffing. Lock maintained at all times. Always look up situation.

Track 1 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

Track 2 - 4 ERs fired. 4 go for chaff!!

Track 3 - 4 ERs fired. 2 track, 2 go for chaff

Track 4 - 2 ERs fired. 2 tracks, 2 go for chaff

Track 5 - 2 ERs fired. 2 track

16 missile launches.

ONLY 7 TRACK CORRECTLY WHEN THEY ALL SHOULD.

7 missguide for despite optimum conditions.

Ptrack, as before, still only 0.44. Abysmal performance still.

ED/Chizh, Any comment? Are you planning to improve on this?

ED/Chizh, Any comment? Are you planning to improve on this?

For sure they will not.

Thank you a lot for your time spent and all your tests.

My advice, take the Ka-50, the vihkr are still alive. I dont say you the Su-25A because all laser missiles are broken since long time.

Anyway good Job :thumbup:

I dont say you the Su-25A because all his IR missiles are broken since long time.

What's wrong with the R-60?

The point you make about all shots being look up really doesn't guarantee tracking. Missiles aren't perfect even in real life, why would you expect them to be in game. Back in FC2 I figured out a technique where I could evade an R-77 at 8nm head-on while supporting an AIM-7. The R-77 was fired looking up. AIM-7s and AIM-120s seem to miss sometimes where it would seem nonsensical, without the bandit going defensive. I don't believe the ERs are any more flawed than the rest because none of them are realistically perfect. "Optimum conditions" are still not perfection as it would unrealistic to expect such. I still get smacked by ERs from time to time, when trying my hardest to evade, while in advantageous position.

Testing again with new patch 1.2.6.18651

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7su8ges5gefzpfu/phHxnCRMGs/1.2.6

 

Same procedure as before. Testing target tracking only (not pK). Target is chaffing. Lock maintained at all times. Always look up situation.

 

Track 1 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

Track 2 - 4 ERs fired. 4 go for chaff!!

Track 3 - 4 ERs fired. 2 track, 2 go for chaff

Track 4 - 2 ERs fired. 2 tracks, 2 go for chaff

Track 5 - 2 ERs fired. 2 track

 

16 missile launches.

ONLY 7 TRACK CORRECTLY WHEN THEY ALL SHOULD.

7 missguide for despite optimum conditions.

 

Ptrack, as before, still only 0.44. Abysmal performance still.

 

ED/Chizh, Any comment? Are you planning to improve on this?

Testing again with new patch 1.2.6.18651

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/7su8ges5gefzpfu/phHxnCRMGs/1.2.6

 

Same procedure as before. Testing target tracking only (not pK). Target is chaffing. Lock maintained at all times. Always look up situation.

 

Track 1 - 2 ERs fired. 1 tracks, 1 goes for chaff

Track 2 - 4 ERs fired. 4 go for chaff!!

Track 3 - 4 ERs fired. 2 track, 2 go for chaff

Track 4 - 2 ERs fired. 2 tracks, 2 go for chaff

Track 5 - 2 ERs fired. 2 track

 

16 missile launches.

ONLY 7 TRACK CORRECTLY WHEN THEY ALL SHOULD.

7 missguide for despite optimum conditions.

 

Ptrack, as before, still only 0.44. Abysmal performance still.

 

ED/Chizh, Any comment? Are you planning to improve on this?

It is important that your plane was lower than the target during homing missile, the problem is ground to background.

This setting on chaff resistance need to some attention because if only one missile miss like ER-27 but not Aim-120C we get a problem that pilots start to exploit this instead making maneuver that are needed to avoid the missile.

Aim-120 already have the the edge because it is active, making it track better than ER will not make this simulator more realistic because only those who fight against Aim-120 will have to make proper maneuvers to avoid the missile by going 90° notch while those who fight ER-27 can avoid the missile more than often by just going 45°. That is not Acceptable and do not make this simulator more realistic at all. And if you believe so its only a bias assumption that can not be proven so why even go there and make more mess by giving to big differences on how good different missiles track the target. The difference should be minimal if ER have a lock against active Aim-120 because there is no prove that says anything else. Rather than that Aim-120 is a newer missile and it can be debatable by by how much Aim-120 should track better. If you ask me as a hard core simulator enthusiast I would make the difference minimal because Aim-120 have already a edge in being active. Putting to big differences on guiding will just make people stop use ER-27 as they did in FC2.

I don't want the community to start finding the settings Su-27 and F-15 could fly against eachother, It's better that ED make it right from the start so we don't get FC2 situation.

currently both missiles can be dodged just by barrel rolling toward it and spamming chaff.

(same with IR missiles only you use flares).

lets say all missiles can be dodged by using this stupid technique.

but i agree with you teknetinium.