New move in favor Aim-120? No R-27ER LA while they have it?

ED doesn't have much of a choice other than to make Russian equipment obsolete. Most sources on semi-modern Russian equipment are heavily censored, making it near impossible to simulate missiles and planes at their true capabilities. It is not speculation. Its real and nobody but Russia can do anything about it.

A good proof how the Third Parties manage to increase capabilities on their own without Nobody control. Giving the performance of Aim-120 (the missile we are commenting here) to all three different versions missiles together.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4444426&postcount=7

A good proof how the Third Parties manage to increase capabilities on their own without Nobody control.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4444426&postcount=7

Pepil, you need to stop this whining and conspiracy thing... it looks ridicoulous.

You will be able to find 1000 examples of things that favour blue force over red force, that is true, but you will be able to find other cases where red force is actually overmodelled (For example, the R27ET detecting planes further away than a 9X is ridicoulous, as far as i know it does not have a data link so you should not be able to shoot further than maybe 8 nm ish away). So I don't think the reason is a conspiracy from ED to downgrade russian equipment.

Most of the time, its just lack of resources to improve all legacy planes and content, and the fact that right now there are lots of american fighters under development is not actually helping either, cause money prioritisation obviously favors content for those fighters. But i'm sure ED would love to develop a SU35 if they got the chance, heck, most of programmers and management are russian and participate actively in the russian forum.

I really want that ED start working on the R27 and R77 improvements, but you need to stop acting like a child talking about conspiracies.

MEH wait for R-24 from Razbam will be better than most R family from ED :megalol:

MEH wait for R-24 from Razbam will be better than most R family from ED :megalol:

hahahaha so true, they can't do worse :megalol:

Pepil, you need to stop this whining and conspiracy thing... it looks ridicoulous..

Is obvious you don’t support any improvement on the Russian side fighter. Because you fight against them having fun how they get struggled trying to do something.

As you disrespectfully ask me to stop use my freedom of comment the true and unfair situation in this particular case. I respectfully ask you move on and let the people ask for fair things. You are free to comment in the F-18 forum. Nobody stop you... I will not go there to wish bad things for your enjoyment. You are free, let the people be as well. Otherwise you are trying to behave in a dictatorship environment.

You should read and understand the whole post hb made.

Yes, they improved chaff resistance for all aim-54 but declared in the same post, that it is a interim solution until Ed figured out the new msl model to be then toned down again. Did you read also that the aim 54 isn't worth anything in the moment due to the F-14 radar being bent and this not being fixed in the next patch. Oh, there are some aim 54 guiding problems too.

Guess not, otherwise you wouldn't wine about your conspiracy.

Maybe I should claim that the Russian developers sabotage the western planes. Yeap, as silly as your claim.

Said that I would be more than happy to get my hands on some decent eastern planes. Got the Fishbed and will for sure will get the Flogger. Would love a Fencer and Fitter as well......

Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk

Is obvious you don’t support any improvement on the Russian side fighter. Because you fight against them having fun how they get struggled trying to do something.

Please, dont do the you are not with me so you are against me thing. Still ridiculous.

Not only I want r27 and r77 to be improved, I said in this same forum (you can search my posts) that i think its time for ED to introduce other more modern variants like the R77-1. And one of my favourite all time planes, i would buy on day one is the Su30 in any of its variants (A su30MKI would be amazing and could be done by a third party)

As you disrespectfully ask me to stop use my freedom of comment the true and unfair situation in this particular case. I respectfully ask you move on and let the people ask for fair things. You are free to comment in the F-18 forum. Nobody stop you... I will not go there to wish bad things for your enjoyment. You are free, let the people be as well. Otherwise you are trying to behave in a dictatorship environment.

Fair enough. You are free to speak up about whatever you like, it is not my intention to tell you otherwise. If anything, my reply was concerning "how" you present your disconfort and how you talk about conspiracies. Which i still believe is not the reasons for what is happening.

On the other hand many of your points are valid and need attention by ED. We need better ECM implementation, reworked r27/r77 and in general, more modern russian fighters.

A good proof how the Third Parties manage to increase capabilities on their own without Nobody control. Giving the performance of Aim-120 (the missile we are commenting here) to all three different versions missiles together.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4444426&postcount=7

That's a well known fact, confirmed by ED. They can't do anything even if I-16 gets R-37 with range of 3000 km because that's a 3rd party module

As you all have plagued of Off-topic my last post. I am not talking about nothing different than Aim-120. So thanks you also want to be defensive on a different weapon we are not talking about Here again:

We are commenting a particular weapon (AIM-120) that have some clear overpowered added. Examples: poor intercept curve trajectory to increase range, no ECM/aspect ratio/maneuvers affect the guidance. Landmarks and notching together at very low altitude doesn’t affect guidance. All that is shown in the pictures I uploaded before. Please if you don’t understand what I want to show in those pictures I recommend download Tacview app and get familiar with. Sorry about the pictures bad quality.

In Addition third party developers can add the values of the Aim-120 to older different weapons. I ask to producers and owners of this simulator to stop this uncontrolled behavior on name of the simulation, proof:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4444426&postcount=7

The so called "poor intercept curve trajectory to increase range" its actually a feature we have all asked for many times, and it should be added in almost all missiles as far as i know. Before the upgrade, the missile would make crazy stupid 9g turns event when the target was 50 KM away, which it did not make a lot of sense. This should make (once implemented) the R27 and R77 conserve better energy inside its Maximum range.

As you all have plagued of Off-topic my last post. I am not talking about nothing different than Aim-120. So thanks you also want to be defensive on a different weapon we are not talking about Here again:

 

....

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4444426&postcount=7

How comes you quote again the HB AIM-54 statement about the interim chaff resistance adjustment?

Thought you are only care about the 120.

Why is anybody on a crusade these days?

Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk

The so called "poor intercept curve trajectory to increase range" its actually a feature we have all asked for many times, and it should be added in almost all missiles as far as i know. Before the upgrade, the missile would make crazy stupid 9g turns event when the target was 50 KM away, which it did not make a lot of sense. This should make (once implemented) the R27 and R77 conserve better energy inside its Maximum range.

Chizh said that the R-27 series don't have this feature so they won't add it.

Chizh said that the R-27 series don't have this feature so they won't add it.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

About the overpowered interception of Aim-120. Take in mind that in an ECM fighter maneuvering this perfect guidance is not IRL possible depending of aspect ratio and heading, that should not be guided as perfect seem to be in the sim. ECM noise on that radar that guide should not be ignored when TWS is in use.

About the overpowered interception of Aim-120. Take in mind that in an ECM fighter maneuvering this perfect guidance is not IRL possible depending of aspect ratio and heading, that should not be guided as perfect seem to be in the sim. ECM noise on that radar that guide should not be ignored when TWS is in use.

You make it sound like that is a aim120 thing, but it happens to ALL MISSILES. Where is the conspiracy there?

Yes.

The R-27 is a quite stupid old analog missile without any on-board computers or processors.

 

 

But I want to please the Su and MiG pilots a little. We have revised the missiles aerodynamics and made some changes.

• R-27 missiles family. Reduced the value of the induced drag, increased lift. Lift to drag ratio now is more accurate and provides better performance against maneuvering targets, compared to AIM-7 performance level.
  
• R-77 missile. Reduced the value of the induced drag, reduced transonic zero-lift drag, increased the lift. Missile will better save energy, slightly increased range at low altitude.
  

It will be in the next update.

 

Nevertheless, in the future we will conduct CFD research of these missiles to set the record straight.

Sounds great!

In any case Chizh, maybe the 1980s R27s was a stupid analog missile. But we could at least get a newer 2000s R27 missile, which i'm sure is not analog anymore. Maybe they also loft.

I'm sure you guys have more info to update a bit russian weapons to the standards of year 2000s.

Yes.

The R-27 is a quite stupid old analog missile without any on-board computers or processors.

Thank you for the response! I am just a little surprised because this type of feature was already in AIM-7E and later. E2 added 'dogfight mode' which had to be selected manually on the missile, on the ground - what it did was prevent the missile from having limitations that were used for long range - the limitations made rmin much longer. Later models made the profile/mode selection automatic based on information available at launch and during flight, but even before this the missile had altitude-based profile modes of some sort.

But I want to please the Su and MiG pilots a little. We have revised the missiles aerodynamics and made some changes.

• R-27 missiles family. Reduced the value of the induced drag, increased lift. Lift to drag ratio now is more accurate and provides better performance against maneuvering targets, compared to AIM-7 performance level.
  
• R-77 missile. Reduced the value of the induced drag, reduced transonic zero-lift drag, increased the lift. Missile will better save energy, slightly increased range at low altitude.
  

It will be in the next update.

 

Nevertheless, in the future we will conduct CFD research of these missiles to set the record straight.

That's great news :)

Thanks for the answers.

Common sense tells me that there has not to be a relation between that missiles still being made in ukraine with the fact that they have not been updated. Production lines change constantly in any manufacturing industry even if the location remains the same.

But if you guys have that info, it is the way it is, and i'm ok with that :).

There were no modifications to these missiles. The fact is that these missiles were never produced in Russia, they were all made in Kiev in Ukraine.

Therefore, the R-27 missile in 2000 was no different from the 1990 missile.

Vympel writes about modernized seeker heads and guidances and manufacturing in Russia.

All just lies, or something else as You talk in past tense?

Thanks for the answers.

 

Common sense tells me that there has not to be a relation between that missiles still being made in ukraine with the fact that they have not been updated. Production lines change constantly in any manufacturing industry even if the location remains the same.

 

But if you guys have that info, it is the way it is, and i'm ok with that :).

What I can find is that there is three production lines, in Russia, in Ukraine and in China. China bought license to manufacturing from Ukraine and not from Russia.

And to produce the same old missiles without any upgrades just sound.... Wrong. Considering that all aircrafts and their radars has been changed many times already, and all manufacturers talk about modernized seekers, computers and digital processing, as well that all of them still be building a missiles same as at 1983 or so.....

Meanwhile everyone else is upgrading and modifying their missiles, except Russia.

These are odd logics, upgrade heavily launching platforms, their firing computers and all, but run almost everything with a 40+ years old missiles, produce them with same designs and materials and all.

Either Russians engineers are stupid as falling leaf, or they made superior missile 40 years ago that doesn't require any upgrades or modifications as it is so amazing....

And meanwhile Russia keeps producing and selling those R-27 missiles to latest fighters for export and domestic.

But I want to please the Su and MiG pilots a little. We have revised the missiles aerodynamics and made some changes.

• R-27 missiles family. Reduced the value of the induced drag, increased lift. Lift to drag ratio now is more accurate and provides better performance against maneuvering targets, compared to AIM-7 performance level.
  
• R-77 missile. Reduced the value of the induced drag, reduced transonic zero-lift drag, increased the lift. Missile will better save energy, slightly increased range at low altitude.
  

It will be in the next update.

 

Nevertheless, in the future we will conduct CFD research of these missiles to set the record straight.

Our prayers have been heard! Thank you!

Yes.

But I want to please the Su and MiG pilots a little. We have revised the missiles aerodynamics and made some changes.

• R-27 missiles family. Reduced the value of the induced drag, increased lift. Lift to drag ratio now is more accurate and provides better performance against maneuvering targets, compared to AIM-7 performance level.
  
• R-77 missile. Reduced the value of the induced drag, reduced transonic zero-lift drag, increased the lift. Missile will better save energy, slightly increased range at low altitude.
  

It will be in the next update.

Nice of you guys at ED to do this as an interim measure while we await detailed CFD analysis. Great to hear!