R-27ET right after R-27ER

[SgtPappy]

And R-27 had huge edge to AIM-7 because you could launch R-27 from further distance by using aircraft altitude and speed to extend the flight. Why you couldn't do the same with the AIM-7? No datalink. AIM-7 was severely limited by its seeker lock-on range.

 

I think the R-27 entered full series production in 1987, not 1983:

 

"In 1983 conducted another 39 launches of K-27 and 66 K-27E. In addition, according to a special program on MiG-29 No. 921, the stability of engine operation during missile launches was investigated. State tests were completed in 1984. Both variants of the K-27 rocket were adopted in 1987. under the designation R-27R and R-27T." - source: https://en.missilery.info/missile/p27 (not sure how good this source is, but it's the most detailed one I've found)

 

By this time the AIM-7M H-build and AIM-7P with with their own datalink was in service as well which also helped launch the missile beyond seeker detection range.

 

At any rate, it's hard to find sources on the R-27 and the fly-off envelopes we saw in the other huge R-27 thread seemed to underestimate the R-27 kinetic ranges. I've been trying to find a better one to no avail. I trust ED has better sources available than me, and we'll see that when the R-27's are updated soon.

[GGTharos]

If you manage to find some videos which show the sparrow DSR cue on the eagle radar, and you check the R-27R (not E) range diagrams, you quickly realize that the datalink wasn't an advantage there, at least not in most cases. The R-27 had a higher peak speed which made some difference.

 

The extended versions of the missile though changed things.

[Fri13]

Although, I prefer to stay away from non-argument discussion... but can a REAL person considered Lt. Col. Fred "Spanky" Clifton?

 

Same as anyone else personal opinions.... Just a evidence.

 

The results, however, are classified."

 

What is the problem again here, evidence that would be required is unavailable.

 

Current implementation of AA-10A has is limits in old modeling and will be improved hopefully soon, until then, I find discussing the missile a bit fruitless till we see how it changes.

 

I wouldn't hold up hopes to see R-27 to be improved, as it can very well get worse even.

The important part here is that ED has promised to release all the data and sources and everything to back their simulation, so we should get data about flight modeling, guidance systems and all so it can be used to evaluate all the data if needed and if someone has some other evidence then check it against it.

[Fri13]

If you manage to find some videos which show the sparrow DSR cue on the eagle radar,

 

You can provide them if you want.

 

and you check the R-27R (not E) range diagrams, you quickly realize that the datalink wasn't an advantage there, at least not in most cases. The R-27 had a higher peak speed which made some difference.

 

The extended versions of the missile though changed things.

 

And you quickly would realize that AIM-7 capabilities as you have said is limited by its seeker detection range, was its limitation to be launched from further distance, and why R-27 has the advantage because it is Lock-On-After-Launch so you can launch it from far further distance than AIM-7 as the seeker detection range is not the limitation same way like with AIM-7. The extended variant just extended this advantage further. When ever you are not limited to missile seeker alone to launch it at the enemy, you have advantage over such other missile that can't be launched because seeker can't lock-on or maintain the lock.

[GGTharos]

And you quickly would realize that AIM-7 capabilities as you have said is limited by its seeker detection range

 

 

AIM-7 seeker range is beyond 20nm at least when used with the APG-63. R-27R range at 10km altitude is 35km.

[dundun92]

Just to back up what GG said:

[pepin1234]

'Stealthy attack' with reasons why the system exists, which is to back-up the radar in a heavy ECM environment.

 

There's going to be very little stealth in a real environment with AWACS and other things looking at you - stealthy attacks are opportunistic and have more to do with tactics and untargetted entries where radar on/off probably isn't going to matter quite that much.

 

 

I think the question you were answer is more related with been less situation awareness when a passive missile as R-27ET is on his way to you. Instead of mention the AWACS action for enemy positions. Awacs have nothing to do about R-27ET launches in a frontline action. Runaway from Migs probably the best solution or hold it until run out of flares.

 

Every time you runaway you lose Area so is a win win for R-27 users when have ECM/R-27

Edited August 12, 2020 by pepin1234

[Fri13]

but I can't imagine a laser beam (might be wrong here) getting a range at 30+ km.

 

Some say that the Su-27S IRST has max range for 15 km, but as any laser you don't always get accurate readings depending the returns.

Same challenge is on the ground, you get echoes and the ranging becomes difficult or unreliable, be it a MBT, IFV or even attack helicopter ranging the target at couple couple kilometer distance. Of course they are penetrating more hot air at ground level instead pointing something from above.

But then again some think that targeting pods like LITENING II should be able to use laser to measure ranges from tens of kilometer distances, or even use a laser guided weapons at those ranges or IR mavericks.

 

Like lets read an old article from 1983: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0383maverick/

 

Pentagon has not announced what the effective standoff range of the IR Maverick against a tank is, but published estimates of five to six miles sound reasonable. That would be a substantial improvement over what’s possible with the TV missile.

 

If we compare that to the public Sweden AGM-65B and G variants tests, the ranges where lock was possible was 1.5-3 km range. And laser maverick should be capable for somewhat longer distance.

 

There are very interesting differences between all kind laboratory + controlled tests, and actual performance. But then again we have a IRST system that would be at much better situation when aiming against clear sky that is black for the IR seeker, and a R-27T seeker should be having similar benefits and challenges (against a clouds, ground etc).

 

Of course different seekers, for different purposes and optimized for it.

[Fri13]

AIM-7 seeker range is beyond 20nm at least when used with the APG-63. R-27R range at 10km altitude is 35km.

 

And how about at 22 km altitude? How about when launched at Mach 1.8?

Against Mach 1.6 target?

[Fri13]

Just to back up what GG said:

 

No need to backup, it is well known that GG has said that AIM-7 seeker is the limitation for its performance.

[GGTharos]

I think the question you were answer is more related with been less situation awareness when a passive missile as R-27ET is on his way to you.

 

SA has everything to do with tactics and little to do with the missile being passive. SA is just fine if you know where the shooter is - it doesn't matter what he's shooting.

[GGTharos]

And how about at 22 km altitude? How about when launched at Mach 1.8?

Against Mach 1.6 target?

 

The MiG-21 is measured at 10m^2 RCS ... how do you believe a MiG-29 or a flanker will do?

 

So, suddenly that DSR cue moves up significantly, and we're also shooting a more modern missile with a better seeker (7F vs 7M), so what now?

[NineLine]

Guys, please if you have a disagreement with something someone has posted, share your opinion about the data, but no need to insult or trash someone else. I am seeing way too many reported posts here, and if you guys cant talk about the discussion without taking it personally or attacking someone personally I will just have to close this. Thanks.

[pepin1234]

The MiG-21 is measured at 10m^2 RCS ... how do you believe a MiG-29 or a flanker will do?

 

So, suddenly that DSR cue moves up significantly, and we're also shooting a more modern missile with a better seeker (7F vs 7M), so what now?

 

Stop talk about a weapon different than R-27. You are doing off topic keeping posting examples of a different weapon nothing have to do with this thread.

[pepin1234]

So as mention before. Even when you lost the heat signature with the result of lose lock on IRST. If you see the F fighter is turning and is about 35km. You better override and launch to the last reticle position and spect a splash on his face

[pepin1234]

Notice The modern Su-35 with the wonderful R-27 par versions on his wings. R internal pylons T middle pylons. So yes is deadly combination:

 

PS: video is from hours before. Not 1991 ex Warsaw Pact Migs weapons like GGTharos want to point here as old examples with old avionic.

 

[Ironhand]

...

 

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-to-win-in-a-dogfight-stories-from-a-pilot-who-flew-1682723379...

Entertaining read. Thanks for posting it.

[Airhunter]

We are not discussing here the R-27 first batch export version. If you want talk about those missiles you should request a new Forum about MiG-29A and talk there about all the information given to west and been shared by ex Warsaw Pact members.

 

We are talking about the official information shown in the missile export corporation from Russian Federation the original manufacturer and only capable to manufacture such technologies in the Ex USSR members.

 

First, I'd like you to show me a real world tactics manual describing this technique. Russian, American or otherwise. I'm pretty sure real world pilots don't try to use these kind gimmicks during dogfight?

 

Second, Your assumption is flawed regarding the second missile finding a "Bigger Heat Source". Heat source is relative and subject to change.

 

A number of years ago I had the opportunity to handle several different Soviet and American MANPADS in a training environment. (Real weapons, no motors or warheads) I can tell you for fact what the seekers REGULARLY locked on to...was NOT the "bigger heat source (aircraft)."

 

Remember, Missiles don't just look for heat...they look for specific heat in a specific range on the IR spectrum.

 

Notice The modern Su-35 with the wonderful R-27 par versions on his wings. R internal pylons T middle pylons. So yes is deadly combination:

 

PS: video is from hours before. Not 1991 ex Warsaw Pact Migs weapons like GGTharos want to point here as old examples with old avionic.

 

 

Whabam! Proof they are sill using 80's missiles. :thumbup:

 

As for the ER's kinematic, straight line capabilities - there you go.

 

 

 

I would also love to see your claimed information from the missile's manufacturer regarding any upgrades or specific guidence methods, do you have a link, website, brochure or book you are basing this all off?

[pepin1234]

A really good detail about launch without LA. They will see the contrail... what they gonna do next is dispense some counter measures mixed or flare only. Don’t worry:thumbup: . As you are doing a long range launch those will not be follow by the IR Head Seeker. will be only decoyed about 10km from the bandit and at this point he is already closer after his turn and the missile will have more chance to splash on his face because he is hotter than his flare left some km behind.

Edited August 12, 2020 by pepin1234

[SgtPappy]

And you quickly would realize that AIM-7 capabilities as you have said is limited by its seeker detection range, was its limitation to be launched from further distance, and why R-27 has the advantage because it is Lock-On-After-Launch so you can launch it from far further distance than AIM-7 as the seeker detection range is not the limitation same way like with AIM-7. The extended variant just extended this advantage further. When ever you are not limited to missile seeker alone to launch it at the enemy, you have advantage over such other missile that can't be launched because seeker can't lock-on or maintain the lock.

 

The AIM-7M H-build which, to my knowledge, came into service in the same year as the R-27R (1987 also according to the FC3 Flanker manual) and had inertial guidance as well so it could be launched beyond seeker range. Don't know about LOAL capability though.

[pepin1234]

Another video show a combination with improved R-27T with propositional navigation updated as manufacturer described on his web site, but DCS doesn’t implement for our R-27T, At least not implemented for computing LA on our HUD and not implemented when missile leave the rail. For a track example see post number 32 and track 1 and see how missiles leave on pursuit.

 

Edited August 12, 2020 by pepin1234

[dundun92]

What was updated in this porportional navigation? Can you give us insight since you know what it is?

[SgtPappy]

Whabam! Proof they are sill using 80's missiles. :thumbup:

 

As for the ER's kinematic, straight line capabilities - there you go.

 

 

 

I would also love to see your claimed information from the missile's manufacturer regarding any upgrades or specific guidence methods, do you have a link, website, brochure or book you are basing this all off?

 

Nice graphs!

 

Do you also have the straight line flyout performance for the R-27R and T as well?

 

I have the curved plots but those are confusing because they say the T and R have the same range.

[pepin1234]

This video show a Su-27 In interception sortie. Notice in this case also with the configuration we commented on this thread. Two R-27T with Updated Proportional Navigation as the manufacturer describe in the official web site, but such description Is not implement 100% in our simulator. Also carrying Two R-27R but in this case on the belly pylons.

 

[dundun92]

Can you tell us what updated PN is? Or do you legit not know?