Jump to content

R-27ER question


Recommended Posts

There is quite substantial thread about the R-27s here, you might want to check it.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=229050&page=28

 

I am hoping the promised R-27s family update comes soon.

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure SARH missiles on Russian aircraft is just for others to underestimate them. Pretty sure they have switched to using active radar missiles.

 

 

 

SARH missiles in this day and age is VERY USELESS. One has to keep the enemy painted with their own radar for the missile to even get guided to it. If the enemy fires the missile, You'll be forced to evade and break lock and an expensive missile going waste.

 

 

Yeah...we'd love to see R27 active radar versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't see any R-27 active radar versions. They don't exist.

 

 

As for 'SARH being there to make others underestimate them' that's just ridiculous.

[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

Thank you all for the replies I think I got the answer to my questions and learned a bit from the other thread as for the R-27EA I've looked around a lot but it seems very much like a dead end project that didn't go anywhere like rewards facing radars on Sukhois

 

For a new Missile I would love to see an RMD-2 Archer or R-73M if possible not sure if the current Redfor roster can use them though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't see any R-27 active radar versions. They don't exist.

 

https://iz.ru/882783/aleksei-kozachenko-aleksei-ramm/v-boi-idut-stariki-istrebiteli-vooruzhat-raketami-dlia-duelei

 

I do not speak Russian and the article may not be accurate, but it is about new/upgraded R-27 missiles that where already carried by Su-30s in Syria.

 

For some reason the R-27P1 is refered to as an active fire and forget missile. While the 'old' R-27P is fire and forget, it is not active. But here it is described as a missile with an active radar and the possibility of having targets assigned by ground radar.

 

Maybe this is one of the new R-27. Picture is from Syria, notice the green proximity sensors:

3838cd9af585fbebea0b526b86a5b370.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These articles mean nothing. The only thing that means anything at all are actual, used-in-deployment armament tables.

We dealt with 'Yefim Gordon' articles before describing R-27EA etc ... in the end it was always a paper project.

ED had asked the Russian forces about such things directly - they just don't exist. There's also no reason to hide their existence given the export market.

And this article - it basically says things about the R-27 that we know are not correct. R-27P - hasn't been seen in anyone's inventory to date. R-27R1 isn't an R-27R upgrade, it's an export variant with a different ECCM circuit. The R-27ER flight performance is inferior to the 120C. Even the 120A had slightly superior flight performance - and this information comes from the Russian's own range tables.

 

 

 

 

 

Why upgrade the 27 anyway, when they're flat out getting a better missile in the R-77-1?


Edited by GGTharos

[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

I am sure that an upgraded R-27 has longer legs than the small R-77, especially with a new guidance logic to use a lofted trajectory at long range engagements and with an improved rocket motor.

 

Also, why would so many years after the missile was created suddenly a variant with green proximity fuze antennas/covers appear? Right in Syria, where the new variants are tested according to the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im no expert but the EP in Syria makes me think it might be a small testing batch to see how well it works against probably more reasonable targets like legacy SAMs and the like I don't think it would work too well vs fighters especially LPI+MAWS equipped birds my reasoning is if it doesn't have any reasonable chance of hitting the missile is a non factor and it won't turn around or kill a bandit so why waste money on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure that an upgraded R-27 has longer legs than the small R-77, especially with a new guidance logic to use a lofted trajectory at long range engagements and with an improved rocket motor.

 

Also, why would so many years after the missile was created suddenly a variant with green proximity fuze antennas/covers appear? Right in Syria, where the new variants are tested according to the article.

Not anymore the R-77-1 has a much better motor and is probably dual pulse motor and the R-77PD is said to have a Ramjet the Alamos hayday is very much over and it's no longer top of the heap for warpact BVRAAMS the R-77 has grown much since the RVV AE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure that an upgraded R-27 has longer legs than the small R-77, especially with a new guidance logic to use a lofted trajectory at long range engagements and with an improved rocket motor.

 

Also, why would so many years after the missile was created suddenly a variant with green proximity fuze antennas/covers appear? Right in Syria, where the new variants are tested according to the article.

 

I am getting more more confused by the R-27П, both ARTEM and Vympel do advertise it in their product portfolio, unlike R-27EA. Which means there is production knowledge both in UKR and RUS (and its not like they are sharing weapon blueprints in recent times), highly unlikely if it was left only prototype level or as project requiring funding. Also now the armament tables are starting to show up referencing it https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3956079&postcount=6868

 

http://vympelmkb.com/products/upravl...1-r-27ep1/183/

 

http://www.artem.ua/en/produktsiya/aviation-means-of-attack-and-defense/air-to-air-missiles-r-27ep1

 

With that said I didn't find any flight manuals that give information on its use or anything.


Edited by FoxAlfa

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with GGTharos on this one, evidence vise. However, they might test new R-27 versions in Syria.

Why do that? My reasoning is simple.

 

They probably have a gazillion old R-27's that can be modified. Export customers also have these laying around. It would probably be easier to interface with older aircraft that already carry the

R-27. Since several seekerheads and bodies already exists on the R-27 family I don't see why they would not keep modifying them. Export customers still order factory fresh R-27's. Finally It would also be a viable choice and upgrade for russian fighters that cannot carry R-77-1 as it is probably cheaper to integrate.

 

So I wouldn't rule out that development versions of R-27 are being tested (along with a sleeve of other new weapons) in Syria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im no expert but the EP in Syria makes me think it might be a small testing batch to see how well it works against probably more reasonable targets like legacy SAMs and the like I don't think it would work too well vs fighters especially LPI+MAWS equipped birds my reasoning is if it doesn't have any reasonable chance of hitting the missile is a non factor and it won't turn around or kill a bandit so why waste money on it?

 

It also has home-on-jam ability making a whole different ball game.

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also has home-on-jam ability making a whole different ball game.

But that's great vs noise jammers what about DRFM jammers how do you HOJ onto that?

In an RF denied environment I don't see what this adds over the more orthodox approach taken everywhere else with longer range FPA IR missiles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly, alternative guidance packages may be tested. There's no testing to be done in Syria since air to air combat is pretty incidental and one-sided.

 

But having considered all of that, tell me why:

 

1) You want to upgrade R-27R when you are getting new production R-77-1s. I get that upgrade might be cheaper, so that's a reasonable argument, but then why

2) None of the manufacturers is officially talking about their upgrades and giving new designation to upgraded missiles, like they do for everything else? ie. You have R-73E/M, R-74, RVV-MD/SD, R-77-1, etc. Even the R-27 comes as R/R1/ER/ER1.

 

As for home-on-jam, people usually don't realize that this implies trying to sort out good data for an initial launch and subsequent calculations, and fallback guidance that can easily cut down the range when such data is not available. That's what HoJ is - the ability to still fire and guide when target data is degraded or bad.

 

The R-27P hasn't been fielded by anyone, nor is the idea of a passive radar guided missile new in any way shape or form in the A2A arena. No one's fielding such an idea. Why?

 

Because it is unreliable. We talk about HARMs missing the big SAM antennas here, and those things are just sitting still. You need to launch it against an STT indication to have any reasonable Pk, and even then your bandit is likely to easily see the launch. In any case, your 'R' variant doesn't require your bandit to cooperate in that way, so you may as well not bother with the 'P' version.

 

And yep, a HARM hit a B-52 once. So what? :)

[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

Certainly, alternative guidance packages may be tested. There's no testing to be done in Syria since air to air combat is pretty incidental and one-sided.

 

But having considered all of that, tell me why:

 

1) You want to upgrade R-27R when you are getting new production R-77-1s. I get that upgrade might be cheaper, so that's a reasonable argument, but then why

2) None of the manufacturers is officially talking about their upgrades and giving new designation to upgraded missiles, like they do for everything else? ie. You have R-73E/M, R-74, RVV-MD/SD, R-77-1, etc. Even the R-27 comes as R/R1/ER/ER1.

 

As for home-on-jam, people usually don't realize that this implies trying to sort out good data for an initial launch and subsequent calculations, and fallback guidance that can easily cut down the range when such data is not available. That's what HoJ is - the ability to still fire and guide when target data is degraded or bad.

 

The R-27P hasn't been fielded by anyone, nor is the idea of a passive radar guided missile new in any way shape or form in the A2A arena. No one's fielding such an idea. Why?

 

Because it is unreliable. We talk about HARMs missing the big SAM antennas here, and those things are just sitting still. You need to launch it against an STT indication to have any reasonable Pk, and even then your bandit is likely to easily see the launch. In any case, your 'R' variant doesn't require your bandit to cooperate in that way, so you may as well not bother with the 'P' version.

 

And yep, a HARM hit a B-52 once. So what? :)

 

This is just my theory, but R-77-1 might be more difficult to integrate, it's probably more expensive and if you don't have an upgraded radar you might not get all the benefits of going with such advanced missile.

 

I don't suggest that a modified R-27 is better than R-77-1. It is a life extension. Look, recently the Polish Air Force placed an order for a number of R-27's to use with their remaining

MiG-29's. They simply cannot carry the R-77/RVV. There are a lot of other export customers who would want more punch or versatility without making a major upgrade to the aircraft inventory. Technicians and crew are also familiar with the missile. It is a cheaper alternative.

And the russians has been known for mixing and matching and trying different combination of seekerhead/warheads/missile bodies for years. So it is in their blood =)

 

As for naming. If these are development versions they might not even be official yet.

Again, this is just me thinking loud :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, lets see what we know and what can we just speculate on R-27P.

 

Known:

-Advertise both by ARTEM and Vympel as product since the mid-2000's

-Looks almost the same as R-27R

-Shown on some armament charts (taking only same stations as ETs, seeker limitation?)

-Probably deployed to Syria (Test if it can lock on NATO Jammers and Radars?)

 

Speculate:

-How it works

-What is it on homing (STT, Radar, Radar Side-Lobes, Jammer and Jammer Types)

 

Benefits it gives:

- Fire and Forget

- Passive attack

 

Disadvantages:

- Lower Pk and range due much less target data

- Easy to defeat by turning off jammer and radar (but forcing enemy to do that has some benefits)

 

For what I can tell it does bring something as tool in the toolbox but it ain't no Swiss army knife AMRAAM.


Edited by FoxAlfa

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, lets see what we know and what can we just speculate on R-27P.

 

-Probably deployed to Syria (Test if it can lock on NATO Jammers and Radars?)

 

This should be in 'speculate'

 

Disadvantages:

- Lower Pk and range due much less target data

- Easy to defeat by turning off jammer and radar (but forcing enemy to do that has some benefits)

 

The enemy isn't forced to do anything. Your radar can be on, it just needs not to be in STT OR not be applying any ECCM.

 

The jammer operates to defeat a threat signal ... your shooter in this case is either not providing one (fire-and-forget) OR he loses the fire-and-forget capability (must keep target locked). At the same time, there's no guarantee that you can actually lock onto the jammer's signal.

 

For what I can tell it does bring something as tool in the toolbox but it ain't no Swiss army knife AMRAAM.

 

I come back to the question of why you'd use it when 'R' is more reliable and 'T' provides more reliable passive attack.

[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

This should be in 'speculate'

 

Agreed

 

 

 

The enemy isn't forced to do anything. Your radar can be on, it just needs not to be in STT OR not be applying any ECCM.

 

The jammer operates to defeat a threat signal ... your shooter in this case is either not providing one (fire-and-forget) OR he loses the fire-and-forget capability (must keep target locked). At the same time, there's no guarantee that you can actually lock onto the jammer's signal.

 

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say here, English isn't my first language, sorry about it.

 

I can only speculate it guides on search/side-lobe/altitude return/back lobe and HOJ. STT would be too situational and deprecated.

If so I can see few application for stealth frontal attacks and also few dual launch tactics... on the other end could be just a AWACS/Slow Jammer killer. For sure it is a situational weapon... but so is the R-27T.

 

Also jammers do try to jam search radars. You turn on you search radar, get jammed, so you launch at the source in basically some type of quasi-TWS launch/HOJ launch.

 

In the end more things say it exist to some extent, what can't be said for the R-27AE.

 

 

I come back to the question of why you'd use it when 'R' is more reliable and 'T' provides more reliable passive attack.

 

Passive attack over 'R' and more reliable front attack then 'T'?


Edited by FoxAlfa

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only speculate it guides on search/side-lobe/altitude return/back lobe and HOJ.

 

 

That might be ok vs. an immobile, or slowly moving SAM or ship.

 

 

 

If so I can see few application for stealth frontal attacks and also few dual launch tactics... on the other end could be just a AWACS/Slow Jammer killer. For sure it is a situational weapon... but so is the R-27T.

 

 

There are zero frontal stealth attack applications. Think about it. For AWACS you have MiG-31s if you want long ranged shots. You'll be quite hard pressed to get an R-27 carrier in range.

 

 

Also jammers do try to jam search radars. You turn on you search radar, get jammed, so you launch at the source in basically some type of quasi-TWS launch/HOJ launch.

 

 

There is almost no reason to jam a radar in search mode. It just takes up your precious few ECM resources. You can only jam so many targets simultaneously, and it can interferere with your own capabilities as well.

 

 

 

In the end more things say it exist to some extent, what can't be said for the R-27AE.

 

 

Sure, Antey is advertising it. The question is, what is its actual purpose? Is it used as a sort of medium capability ARM? The AGM-45 was housed inside an AIM-7 airframe, it was certainly not used for air to air. And we have no examples of anyone using it anywhere.

 

 

Passive attack over 'R' and more reliable front attack then 'T'?

 

 

No, it isn't reliable. What it is, is more long ranged but then you may as well carry the R, which can be used without needing the enemy to cooperate.

[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

If only the Soviets/Russians would have asked GGTharos before developing all their useless weapons :)

 

I am sure that the R-27P has its application.

Antennas always transmit some power in all directions, HF does not care if it should only have certain lobes in theory. There will also be additional reflections from the plane itself behind the radar.

 

The R-27P may only see the radar during the periods where it directs its waves directly at the missile from far away, but that should be enough to get in closer range. Then it should be able to home in nicely. It is said to have a very sensitive seeker that has far more range than the missile itself.

And it receives mostly direct radiation which also has to travel only half the distance compared to very low power reflected radiation that has to travel to the target and back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could perhaps see a usecase behind the idea of the R-27P where your fighters are facing superior opponents so when you get locked, you'd launch a pair at the opponent which locked you up and then turn and run away hoping that the target will run into them while chasing you down.

 

In that case, it theoretically allows you a longer engagement range than both the R (where the opponent's better radar, ECM and missiles allows them to lock and shoot first) and especially the T (with its limited lock range in frontal hemisphere), but I doubt its PK ratio would be high. With the advent of active guidance (i.e. R-77), there's even less sense to experiment with these.

 

Regarding the R-27's in general, it's pretty much a given they're not using exactly the same sensors today as when they entered service. Like aircraft, the missiles have to be sent to depot for maintenance when such components are replaced and once you run out of the old stock, you're using the newer variants (e.g. with improved sensitivity and reliability).


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...