Jump to content

K-74M (izdeliye 750) - to match up AIM-9X


D4n

Recommended Posts

Please add "K-74M" (izdeliye 750) to DCS once F-18 JHMCS gets into open beta (just modified version of R-73, which is an "Improved model with ±75° off-boresight". So that multiplayer server owners can decide whether to make R-73 vs. AIM-9M or K-74M vs AIM-9X server multiplayer PvP missions.

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the codename "Archer" kept? And here you can see that in 2006 Vympel already started improving the R-73... and now we have late 2018, = 12 years later https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=283.0

 

 

one would assume at least the R-74 (izdeliye 740) - "Improved model with ±60° off-boresight." would be in service, as they even have an export name already/have been exported already.

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the codename "Archer" kept? And here you can see that in 2006 Vympel already started improving the R-73... and now we have late 2018, = 12 years later https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=283.0

 

 

one would assume at least the R-74 (izdeliye 740) - "Improved model with ±60° off-boresight." would be in service, as they even have an export name already/have been exported already.

 

 

 

 

It's still in development. I don't think its been in use in actual flights outside of testing, but again the Russians are much more secretive, so even it is in use today, ED has zero data on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"zero data", it's just a tiny variation of basic R-73...

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"zero data", it's just a tiny variation of basic R-73...

 

 

 

 

A little more than tiny variation.

Potentially almost a 50% improvement on range, using digital, re-programmable system that is going to be used solely on latest gen fighters. It is certainly going to have its own pylon as well. (this is the only info you can find online about it anywhere)

 

 

 

There is no available fact sheets on specification on this missile available anywhere.

 

 

 

ED being a russian company wouldn't dare release a russian weapon system without express permission and data on it.

 

Not saying it won't ever come to DCS but at this point nothing is known about it.


Edited by Dagger71
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I promote a guesswork R-73 upgrade missile for as an option to use in the sim.

If ED team not will to improve the balance this way,

please let us run DCS with custom payloads: to carry AIM-9X in the place of an R-73,

or to carry R-73 in the place of dumber Sidewinders.

In my last payload modding test: integrity check in the most time prevented DCS to load,

the intended IC function is to paint the shield to red when modding found, not preventing the sim to run.

GTX 1070 8GB, 16GB DDR3, W8.1 on SSD, DCS on another SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can fight Hornets on a Hornet, both with Aim9-X.

 

No mods or unreal weapons needed.

" You must think in russian.."

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´

 

Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little more than tiny variation.

Potentially almost a 50% improvement on range, using digital, re-programmable system that is going to be used solely on latest gen fighters. It is certainly going to have its own pylon as well. (this is the only info you can find online about it anywhere)

 

There is no available fact sheets on specification on this missile available anywhere.

 

ED being a russian company wouldn't dare release a russian weapon system without express permission and data on it.

 

Not saying it won't ever come to DCS but at this point nothing is known about it.

 

Well it sounds like the missile DanielNL calls "R-74" is the same missile as the RVV-MD - if so there is this:

 

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/503/566/

 

...basically the R-73 with increased range and a new seeker with increased FOV. It uses the same launcher as the R-73.

 

I don't know if its operational yet, but at least its in the export catalogue.


Edited by Alfa

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly!

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please add "K-74M" (izdeliye 750) to DCS once F-18 JHMCS gets into open beta (just modified version of R-73, which is an "Improved model with ±75° off-boresight". So that multiplayer server owners can decide whether to make R-73 vs. AIM-9M or K-74M vs AIM-9X server multiplayer PvP missions.

 

Red already has off boresite capability...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Primary Computer

ASUS Z390-P, i7-9700K CPU @ 5.0Ghz, 32GB Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 @ 3200Mhz, ZOTAC GeForce 1070 Ti AMP Extreme, Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe drives (1Tb & 500 Gb), Windows 10 Professional, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Thrustmaster Warthog Stick, Thrustmaster Cougar Throttle, Cougar MFDs x3, Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals and TrackIR 5.

 

-={TAC}=-DCS Server

Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3, i7-3770K CPU @ 3.90GHz, 32GB G.SKILL Ripjaws DDR3 @ 1600Mhz, ZOTAC GeForce® GTX 970.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"has" =/= fair, compared to the angle the AIM-9X allows for...

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How was it fair with 73 vs 9M?

 

Fair isn't the goal. It's just your wish. If you want fair, play over the sea with the exact same aircraft, loadouts, targets and distances from base.

 

"has" =/= fair, compared to the angle the AIM-9X allows for...

[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

  • ED Team
Please add "K-74M" (izdeliye 750) to DCS once F-18 JHMCS gets into open beta (just modified version of R-73, which is an "Improved model with ±75° off-boresight". So that multiplayer server owners can decide whether to make R-73 vs. AIM-9M or K-74M vs AIM-9X server multiplayer PvP missions.

Such a missile is not in reality. There is a R-73 and in the future RVV-MD will appear.

R-73 is a good enough missile that inferior to 9X only with the value of spoofing by countermeasures (I do not take LOAL into account)


Edited by Chizh

Единственный урок, который можно извлечь из истории, состоит в том, что люди не извлекают из истории никаких уроков. (С) Джордж Бернард Шоу

Link to comment
Share on other sites

«God forbid one side of my pre-set coalitions ever get the upper hand! Unless of course it's the side I want to win.»

 

Sorry if that's too mean. I also apologise for putting this right here, because it isn't perfectly deserved, but rather I feel I need to make a comment on a series of somewhat similar threads I'm seeing as of late:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting a new thread to make a point, discuss a detail or even wish for a certain feature. Everyone does and it's great.

But why is it that lately so many people keep replying back over and over again without any further input as if they were more 'right' just because they managed to inflate the discussion to ten pages?

 

 

Again, not meant personally towards the OP here, the concept just really starts grinding my gears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is that ED doesn’t care about balance (nor should they) cause this is a sim- not really a game. If you want balance then get the server to make a mission that doesn’t allow aim-9x or, like someone else said just have everyone flying the same aircraft with the same load out. Instead of creating fictional missiles just limit the ones available in the mission.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such a missile is not in reality. There is a R-73 and in the future RVV-MD will appear.

R-73 is a good enough missile that inferior to 9X only with the value of spoofing by countermeasures (I do not take LOAL into account)

 

Are you very sure? Because I read basic R-73 "only" has +-45°, while AIM-9X has 90° to both sides? Or is wrong interpretation, do both 73 and 9X have in total 90° , and not 90° per side?

 

 

«God forbid one side of my pre-set coalitions ever get the upper hand! Unless of course it's the side I want to win.»

 

megalol.gifmegalol.gif

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he's very sure - they have sources we can't access.

 

The interpretation is correct, and in any case, IIRC 45 is the lock/launch limit on the 73, the gimbal is actually 60.

 

Are you very sure? Because I read basic R-73 "only" has +-45°, while AIM-9X has 90° to both sides? Or is wrong interpretation, do both 73 and 9X have in total 90° , and not 90° per side?

[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

And Chizh, AIM-9X also has 45° lock/launch, 60° gimbal?

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he's very sure - they have sources we can't access.

 

The interpretation is correct, and in any case, IIRC 45 is the lock/launch limit on the 73, the gimbal is actually 60.

 

That sounds plausible - in the specs for the RVV-MD they make the distinction between target designation angle(+/- 60 deg) and seeker gimbal limits(+/- 75 deg), while for the R-73 they only list target designation angle as being +/- 45 deg.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Aim9x is now what R73 was before, off boresight advancement that came after R73 was fat in service life. If Aim9X is moddeled correctly it should stick to new countermeasures as seen i RL case (Su22 in Syria), also if Aim9X is modddeled correctly that means DCS has all data available which is hard to believe cos that would open doors to reverse engineering of some sides that shoudnt have that tech at all. I hope that is not the case, so claiming that ED has all data available for 9X is not viable. Same for R-74. None knows actual tricks uder the hud and shouldn't at all. All that is needed for good game emulation is sensor cone angle and engine power data, rest is a geometry and G limitation. Not mutch magic about that.

 

 

 

If Vympel had upgraded R73 to R74 variant, who would even know that cos there shouldnt be any major change in external geometry as there's only declared change is in missile sensor range an engine power. Change in code should be a minor, title change, cone angle change, thrust time/intensity variables, 3 spots to intervene. Priciple is the same for booth missiles, no viable data is available and shouldnt be at all. Its all on developers choice weather to implement that version or not.

 

 

 

Seems like that F18 is filling the gap that was there since introduction of Flanker, but that is not code related but rather military industry related issue. ED is balancing history by its own ways, looks like post event negotiations. Thing is that Aim9x artificially balances sides as was done before with F15 DM and FM. What should be really simulated is that Aim9X flaw of sticcking to new russian flares. that should be simulated if we're gonna stick to reality, right?


Edited by jackmckay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What SHOULD be simulated is 9X not caring about flares. It certainly didn't care in Syria - that Su-22 did not use flares against the 9X at all, according to the pilot who launched the missile. The 9X most likely suffered a fin failure.

 

What should be really simulated is that Aim9X flaw of sticcking to new russian flares. that should be simulated if we're gonna stick to reality, right?

[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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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