dundun92 Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 (edited) So a quick overview of the testing ive done with the R-27/77s. Feel free to comment with testing of your own. So for straight line flyout, the R-27s are unchanged, while the R-77 is about 10-15% better than before. Also, the R-77 motor burn time was reduced by 1 second to 5.1 sec, but thrust was increased from 22kN to 27kN Lift has been increased for both, but moreso on the 27 and it is quite impressive close in compared to before. Heres a vid with the current R-77 (the first launched) and the current ET. Shots are roughly at 2nm vs a MiG-29 crossing right to left at mach 1.2: For comparison heres one with the AIM-120(both B and C): And heres one comparing the R-77 to the R-73: I havent yet tested bleed rate but id expect it to be reduced by quite a bit. Edited August 19, 2020 by dundun92 Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when? HP Z400 Workstation Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxAlfa Posted August 19, 2020 Share Posted August 19, 2020 I redid my test for the R-27r... before it was missing and had speed of 1780kmh when it missed, now it is hitting with speed of 2240kmh.... so major difference... now the speed loss is in 6-10% range like on other missiles I tested. ------- 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 More sharing options...
OnNom Posted August 20, 2020 Share Posted August 20, 2020 I'm real excited to try out the changes to the R-27 today. Glad it got a realism pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fri13 Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 I redid my test for the R-27r... before it was missing and had speed of 1780kmh when it missed, now it is hitting with speed of 2240kmh.... so major difference... now the speed loss is in 6-10% range like on other missiles I tested. Are you have expectations for better performance after CFD modeling and finally when the new seekers etc could be done? i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S. i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxAlfa Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 (edited) Are you have expectations for better performance after CFD modeling and finally when the new seekers etc could be done? Hard to tell, for sure missiles are now performing more 'inline' with other missiles modeling and the charts that are available. The drag and maneuvering is in the 'ball park' with others. CFD might show that the range limiting factor on those charts isn't the drag or aerodynamics but that is something else, for now missiles are closer what one would expect based on other missiles. Of course guidance, electronics and chaff susceptibility are open for discussion, but less concrete data is available there. About chaff susceptibility (this is for all SARHs), I think a short delay of 1 sec or 2 sec is needed before missile decides to switch from a notching target and pick up off bore chaff since now a millisecond of notch is enough for a missile to go for chaff (talking about implementation of a fix, attribute it to antenna scan time, not RL). The missile should have narrow gate, and if target is lost, it should continue ballistic and try to requite target in that arc, if it pick up chaff in that gate, that is ok... but currently even after a millisecond of notch the missiles chooses a chaff that is quite off bore-sight and are lost Edited August 21, 2020 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 More sharing options...
BlackPixxel Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 When the target notches the radar the missile should keep its current path, but in DCS the R-27 turns instantly towards the last known targets position. I expect this to change when they apply the new autopilot logic to R-27. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaxDollarsAtWork Posted August 21, 2020 Share Posted August 21, 2020 Seems the R-73 needs tweaks too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain_dalan Posted August 22, 2020 Share Posted August 22, 2020 When the target notches the radar the missile should keep its current path, but in DCS the R-27 turns instantly towards the last known targets position. I expect this to change when they apply the new autopilot logic to R-27. The Sparrows as well. I guess all the SARHs too. BTW, glad to see ED finally taking action here. And thanks to all of you guys for your time tasting these changes :thumbup: Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts