zare Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 Ok, noted. However, every time i discussed MRAAM's, it was "for granted" that mentioned G-limits were target ones. However, when discussing SRAAM's, mentioned G-limits refer to airframe itself. Habbits, habbits... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfa Posted September 12, 2007 Share Posted September 12, 2007 The 8G and 12G are respectable target limits for R-27 and R-77 series. No they aren't - the max target G-load stated for the RVV-AE is 9 - it is 12G for the thrust vectored R-73. Besides, what was the test platform for the R-77's.. MiG-29M(9-15), MiG-29K(9-31) and Su-35(T-10M) with NIIR-N010 and NIIP-N011 slotted arrays respectively? - those were the radars the R-77 was originally designed for in the late 1980ies. ...don't you think they needed to convert some of their aircraft for airborne missile tests? Apart from having seen early photos of a R-77 test launch from a MiG-29M, there is the MiG-29S(9-13S) with upgraded N019M from ~ 1993(IIRC), enough airframes to equip an air regiment were produced and have been in active service with the Russian airforce for many years now. JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted December 24, 2007 Author Share Posted December 24, 2007 Inert R27-EA missle on Su-27SK(M?). Image found at Sukhoi web page. Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 We have Inert AIM-120C5 missiles, doesnt mean we have the real deal. Im still trying to figure out wich model we do have... B or vanilla C. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted January 20, 2008 Author Share Posted January 20, 2008 Another picture of (inerrt) EA missile. http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1189794&size=L&TopOfYest=yes Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yar Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 if Su-27 gets R-27EA, the F-15 should get a aim-120-c4 (1999) or aim-120-c5 (2000) Im still trying to figure out wich model we do have... B or vanilla C.none .. A/B/C are faster, have a bigger range and so on.... a real aim-120a would be better than those "aim-120c" in lock on ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
192nd_Erdem Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Please, let this thread die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yar Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Please, let this thread die.i think close should be enough ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azrayen Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Please, let this thread die. Ahem, answering isn't the best way to do so, is it ? (sorry, didn't mean to be rude, as I know this dilemma, too) ;) Hajduk Veljko => Legend of the pic : "This flight is a part of making the movie "The Mirrored Wars" at the South of Russia." That's a movie, a fiction. I didn't see it, but remembered of the trailer : a sort of russian mix of James Bond and True Lies. I personnaly don't take Die Hard 4 as a reference on the specifications of the F-35 ;) Cheers, Az' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted January 21, 2008 Author Share Posted January 21, 2008 Hajduk Veljko => Legend of the pic ...Oh, well, I do know where the picture comes from. I can read englsih too! :thumbup: Cheers bro, Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yar Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 if Su-27 gets R-27EA, the F-15 should get a aim-120-c4 (1999) or aim-120-c5 (2000)short question to veljko: whats wrong with it?!? :blink: what problem do you have with this sentence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nscode Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Ahem, answering isn't the best way to do so, is it ? (sorry, didn't mean to be rude, as I know this dilemma, too) ;) Hajduk Veljko => Legend of the pic : "This flight is a part of making the movie "The Mirrored Wars" at the South of Russia." That's a movie, a fiction. I didn't see it, but remembered of the trailer : a sort of russian mix of James Bond and True Lies. I personnaly don't take Die Hard 4 as a reference on the specifications of the F-35 ;) Cheers, Az' So what if it's for a movie? It's a real plane with real inert missiles. Don't think anyone disputed the existence of either Su-35 or inert models anyway ;) Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Another picture of (inerrt) EA missile. http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1189794&size=L&TopOfYest=yes Why do you suppose this missile is EA and not simple ER? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Scythe Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Why do you suppose this missile is EA and not simple ER? Because anything not explicitly labelled as an R-27ER is automatically an EA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Because anything not explicitly labelled as an R-27ER is automatically an EA. LOL, interesting suggestion. Something like that old attorney's joke - You're not guilty till it'll be proved by the court:P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tflash Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Why do you suppose this missile is EA and not simple ER? Geier, your sentence summarizes, characterizes and exemplifies this classic thread in a most elegant and concise way. I guess you've won a prize or something. :smartass: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiGMadness Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Why do you suppose this missile is EA and not simple ER? Missile radome shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yar Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 :blink: right, there is realy a difference: R-27ER R-27EA please tell me, if im wrong, but: on the picture i can see a Su-35 but not a Su-27 (i know, the '35 is a improved '27). so you cant suggest - if the Flanker E can carry it, the Flanker B can it too on the other hand: if the su-27 is ready to use the 'EA, im not shure if this can realised (because of costs etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfa Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Missile radome shape. Why would the radome shape be any different for a SARH versus an ARH seeker? :) JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 It's more of a case of it being different for a different radio band, but then again, going to a cone from a bullet tip would probably just distort things more ... I thought the conical tips were dummy missiles ;) Besides. Only one person here doesn't seem to realize that the R-27EA was never and will never be fielded for reasons mentioned a long time ago ;) [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 More sharing options...
Alfa Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 It's more of a case of it being different for a different radio band, but then again, going to a cone from a bullet tip would probably just distort things more The R-77 has an ARH seeker very similar(same manufacturer) to that proposed for the R-27AE - yet the R-77 does not have a conical radome :) . The length of the radome may be altered for a particular radar seeker type in order for its antenna to have room to move inside it, but the shape is all down to aerodynamics. ... I thought the conical tips were dummy missiles ;) ......for which neither radar seekers nor doing ~ Mach 4 is much of a concern ;) . JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RvETito Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Hey Alfa, good to see you back mate ;) "See, to me that's a stupid instrument. It tells what your angle of attack is. If you don't know you shouldn't be flying." - Chuck Yeager, from the back seat of F-15D at age 89. =RvE= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted January 21, 2008 Author Share Posted January 21, 2008 Why do you suppose this missile is EA and not simple ER?Radome shape. It is documented that the EA missile is only 20-something millimeters longer (or shorter) then the ER missile. The only way to distinguish between the two is the radome shape. EA missile has conical and ER is ogival radome shape. I am on a business trip in Mongolia and don’t have my book with me. When I return, if needed, I can, tell what page in the book provides this info. Regards, Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azrayen Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 So what if it's for a movie? It's a real plane with real inert missiles. Don't think anyone disputed the existence of either Su-35 or inert models anyway ;) Yes, you're perfectly right. I just meant that, because it's from a movie, it doesn't mean that R-27EA has been / is / will be used on operationnal Su-27/35. And why speaking of operationnal planes ? Well, long time ago at the beginning of this thread, this was the subject ;) Cheers Az' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nscode Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 Does anyone know the story behind the photo? Was it done for the movie, or did it happen during practice/testing and then used on the big screen. And it is relevant for this topic :) Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts