The R-27E was not designed to counter the AIM-120A
The R-27 program was intended to procure two missiles with common seeker and guidance sections, with a lighter and less energetic missile to fulfill the needs of the MiG-29 and a heavier and more energetic missile to fulfill the needs of the Su-27. Neither was designed to ‘counter’ a particular missile. The R-27 was to be a ‘standard’ missile competitive kinematically with others known to be in service, whereas the R-27E was to be a high performance missile with kinematics superior to those known to be in service, as the Su-27 was designed with the intention to fight and survive in contested airspace, to achieve air dominance rather than to maintain it, and thus needed superiority rather than parity over possible opponents.
You are seriously misrepresenting historical narrative to fit your own
So what happened in the video was R-27R lost the lock as it went behind the hill, then started following the IOG and because this game is stupid, the IOG somehow told the aircraft’s true location instead of the expected radar location which would be underground, so the R-27R got the kill. This was an extremely rare situation and something like this wouldn’t occur 99% of the time. Going near ground is effective way to make the r-27r/er go away.
So, if you low enough, a large majority of the time the r-27er will have hard time hitting you.
Even if you tried on purpose, you would probably not manage to replicate that shot, atleast not within your 20 first tries.
So what you’re saying is that staying low isn’t effective because an R-27R or R-27ER will still hit you, regardless of whether it’s supposed to. I mean at the altitudes they were at the R-27R shouldn’t have been able to track it, assuming the “just be low enough” strategy actually works.
Wrong. It still is effective because this situation is extremely rare and almost never happens. Its a rare glitch that happens with shit timing. On average, staying low is effective against r-27er.
In that video he dies because he choose the worst option to defeat the missile, and then further fumbles the execution.
By dipping below the crest and remaining to the left side, he would have caused the missile to slam into the crest.
Instead he chooses to cross over the crest to the side where the missile is, for no apparent reason, he’s putting himself in danger but still not a death sentence. In order to intercept the missile turns away from the crest instead of slamming into it, even more danger but still not the death sentence.
The cause of death is that as soon as he clears the crest, instead of following along the slope he maintains attitude while the ground is going down, increasing his relative altitude to the ground, thus clearing the threshold that triggers the multipath error, and causing the missile to regain a perfect track.
A 530D would have hit that.
I find the entire missile meta quite exhausting, to be completely honest.
I have both the F15A/F16A-C and the SU27 unlocked and spaded at this point.
The SU27 is far superior at longer ranges with the R27ER, and with the “relock” capability with an almost unlimited timespan it can just glide to its target.
Combine that with an HMD and an insane launch angle, and you have an excellent missile platform.
The F15A/F16C with the 9M and the sparrows, on the other hand, have to close the gap and fight closer to the enemy. The Range where the R73 is starting to get nasty.
I think it boils down to the range aspect of the top tier missiles, the 9M is a bit more flare resistant, especially against people who don’t know how to properly dodge missiles. The R73 has better range on the other side.
The 7M has a sustainer motor and might perform better with sharper turns after the initial launch because there is more energy left in the coast phase.
I, for myself, enjoy the Su27, aka the “Russian Play Stile,” more. You can play a little bit more aggressively and don’t need to save up missiles as much due to having so many of them.
Maybe it’s time to add the AMRAAM (A) or (B) to give the US teams some sort of counterpart to the 27ER. Maybe that’s too much, idk.
I’ll just wait out top-tier RB until the next patch or until they finally change up the mode itself. The entire furball clusterfuck meta is annoying.
It is coming, been confirmed by a dev in the dev stream to be the first half 2024, maybe March (based upon Sweden confirmed to be getting the Gripen C and the assumption that it will be their AMRAAM carrier and the reason for them only getting the Gripen A this last patch)
I agree with what you have said. But from the perspective of a Brit main that has spent the last year with nothing and now the the Gripen C. Both the F-15 and Su-27 are a pain to fight (at least in SB) with no decent BVRs available at all on the Gripen (and the last year has sucked fighting R-27ERs in the Tornado F3) and I would like to see the Aim-9M get some buffs (lock ranges are wrong, bug report is in) but I think this is the first time in a long time every nation (excluding italy) is on an equal footing.
I think they now just need to finish the update. Too many placeholders and unfinished things to say for certain what the balance actually is yet, but I think it is really close
Was there a bug report open about the aim 9Ms lacking abilities at ignoring flares in rear aspect instead of suspending tracking? Im not sure if i remember it correctly but iirc there was something about that earlier? Does anyone know how it went?
Thank you, i mean it would only make sense since i remember documents saying aim 9L can completely ignore flares vs a reheating targets even from the sides
Yep, that is potentially the same docs linked there. But yeah, for most part Aim-9Ls (and I assume by extension Aim-9Ms) should require you to throttle down out of reheat before using flares. I was chasing a Su-27 yesterday in the Gripen C and he was just spamming flares everytime I fired an Aim-9M in rear aspect ,and despite being on full reheat, they all just went for the flares instantly. Was very annoying.
Yeah it has went so far so i actually bring aim 9L aswell as aim 9M. So if im rear aspect i fire the aim 9L since they are harder to flare from a full rear shot
Im tempted to do the same but for front aspect. I only play SB and been finding that the IRCCM on the Aim-9Ms is a bit, over-enthusiastic in front aspect. If the target is dropping flares (or at least has been) , then it wont ever lock, even with SEAM. Meaning its useless in a front aspect. Aim-9ls will at least fire. Would mean I could run with 4x BOL. Currently taking the 2x Skyflash DF for that scenario, but that means 2 less BOL (Bug report in for that actually, as BOL should be fine with Skyflash) but also that SARH gives them more warning and is also completely outclassed by R-27ER
No, it’s correct. Inertial IRCCM has a lot of advantages, but it does also mean that the correct method to defeat a missile employing it is ambivalent to whether you cut your burner or not. Either way, when you flare, the missile detects it and goes to inertial tracking. You just have to keep flares in its FOV until you exit the FOV, it doesn’t matter if you’re on AB or not.