Video evidence of long range launches with no immediate upwards pitch maneuver exist but Gaijin does not count this as sufficient.
You lied about 1-2s difference in time to target, I didn’t point this out because I knew it was an exaggeration. Your claim has been anything but consistent.
Discussing a specific closer ranged scenario than what was pointed out originally when you made the claim is not moving the goalpost?
I highly disagree
I just fly around with the IRST and laugh when the R-27ET smokes people at near-BVR ranges from side aspect.
I have not had such issues utilizing the radar on the Su-27, I haven’t purchased the Su-27SM which has an upgraded radar… so I really don’t foresee this being an issue. What I do see as an issue is the F-15 having no good long range IR missile and radar combat is effectively useless except to keep people flying low. Anyone flying high or trying to BVR gets smoked by my R-27ET or an R-27ER. Hilariously, it seems more effective at going past chaff than the R-77.
The time to impact gap is 1.5 seconds at 60km. And this is the scenario that you initially made a point to highlight on the first very outdated chart that you posted.
You can disagree.
But everything you have brought up in your disagreement has been nonsense.
The R-27ET is the saving grace of the plane.
If MiG-29 SMT chose to carry R-27EA…then it would be giving up pylon that can be used for R-27ET.
You have a whole whopping 1 game in the Su-27 in Sim.
Also the Su-27SM radar is no different than the Su-27S radar for all intents and purposes.
You said 1-2 seconds difference, it is actually ~5s. I said 10, in the charts scenario it is ~6.5
You don’t see Irony in calling me a liar for that?
Not initially.
Would you share an in-game test to corroborate this?
Based on the evidence I’m forced to.
No, because it should be able to carry four.
Looking at stats are we? :)
If it is no different, then it is not bad by any means. I have not had any complaints about it besides the gimbal which is a problem on the US offerings as well.
Thanks, and this was all you ever needed to prove the point. In the past prior to changes to the AMRAAM this certainly wasn’t the case. Additionally - the AMRAAM has been corrected but the R-27ER hasn’t. The latter missing nearly 25% of it’s range performance in these conditions.
Now what is the maximum intercept range in head-on for similar conditions between both missiles currently?
Yes, hence why I posted it. His first comment sums it up well. Though I’ve had no issues playing strengths and I think the asymmetrical combat is good.
The primary issue is that the NATO side has considerably better CAS and most often wins matches due to that
Pretty sure that 77-1 are not 120A equivalent
Most of players gonna demand for something new which I don’t know what can it be (maybe C-5 or C-7)
especially US main they will not let that happen
NATO doesn’t win sim matches due to CAS. They typically win because they have more players and a lot of sim maps have bugged objectives anyways.
I don’t have a problem playing the plane to its strengths…but the number of strengths that it has are severely limited and those limitations become very apparent when you fight against decent blue side players. The only thing that really saves the plane is the fact that multipath is more workable in Air SB due to how flat most of the maps are.
Not according to data mines, they said the stats are similar if not better than 120C, plus I do hope there are new ARH seekers that are unique added to the game.
R-27ER was not AIM-120 equivalent and since people say the flight models for the RU stuff are so awful it needs some kind of balancing factor, no? If they are forced to fly low and that is some big disadvantage like everyone says all the time it would be mitigated by a better A2A missile.
Almost every sim match I’ve joined recently and lost - it was because they had plenty of players doing A2A and prevented me from intercepting their endless horde of CAS players.
Lofting generally increases velocity at ranges like 50-60km and may increase maximum range slightly but does not generally change the time to target much based on what others who did such testing claim.
so AIM-120 is not correctly configured, the difference in speed and time of collision with the target is minimal.Although they should differ significantly
