R-27ER question - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-24-2019, 05:40 PM   #11
TaxDollarsAtWork
Member
 
TaxDollarsAtWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 122
Default

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?
TaxDollarsAtWork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 05:47 PM   #12
TaxDollarsAtWork
Member
 
TaxDollarsAtWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 122
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackPixxel View Post
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.
https://youtu.be/mJ2qD6e5w9g?t=37
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
TaxDollarsAtWork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 05:47 PM   #13
FoxAlfa
Member
 
FoxAlfa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 216
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackPixxel View Post
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.
https://youtu.be/mJ2qD6e5w9g?t=37
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...postcount=6868

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

http://www.artem.ua/en/produktsiya/a...ssiles-r-27ep1

With that said I didn't find any flight manuals that give information on its use or anything.
__________________
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

Last edited by FoxAlfa; 06-24-2019 at 08:20 PM.
FoxAlfa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 08:00 PM   #14
Schmidtfire
Senior Member
 
Schmidtfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,232
Default

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.
Schmidtfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 08:22 PM   #15
FoxAlfa
Member
 
FoxAlfa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 216
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxDollarsAtWork View Post
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.
__________________
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.
FoxAlfa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 09:12 PM   #16
TaxDollarsAtWork
Member
 
TaxDollarsAtWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 122
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxAlfa View Post
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
TaxDollarsAtWork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 09:22 PM   #17
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,265
Default

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?
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 09:51 PM   #18
Schmidtfire
Senior Member
 
Schmidtfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,232
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
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
Schmidtfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 09:58 PM   #19
FoxAlfa
Member
 
FoxAlfa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 216
Default

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

Last edited by FoxAlfa; 06-24-2019 at 10:07 PM.
FoxAlfa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2019, 09:58 PM   #20
TaxDollarsAtWork
Member
 
TaxDollarsAtWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 122
Default

I get that Schmidt it's a bit like the Israeli Derby line but the guidance sounds like it's a hail Mary every time you pull the trigger so why bother?
TaxDollarsAtWork is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:44 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.