The 9L and 9M, both of which I use on my current F-15J.
Removal of features is always negative.
You don’t even get lower RP, as the RP just gets redistributed among the remaining mods.
@TheArcticFoxxo
That’s an Su-35 you showed, not Su-27SM.
But… you would get AAM-3 in exchange, which is outstandingly superior in each and every aspect?
It’s an objective, straight and direct upgrade…
3 Likes
PVP Random Battles is not the only game mode, Spanish.
Every single one of these presets I use. 1v1s, roleplay, goof-off, assault arcade, etc.
Having only one missile is not an upgrade. The amount of required RP needed to get to the AAM-3 does not change whether or not there are other missiles.
1 Like
I do not understand, in which scenario could anyone possibly pick AIM-9L over AAM-3…?
Besides you are not acknowledging people getting the plane for the first time. Not many people, reasonably, want to have to grind with AIM-9L at 13.0.
4 Likes
In assault arcade, having a smoke trail is sometimes nice to have as well.
Simulator 9Ls are nice as well, as in simulator the differences between the three missiles is negligible at this time.
I’d support 9Ls as modless, but definitely retained.
1 Like
The R-77 is inferior to the Aim-120.
However, the R-77ER is on par with the Aim-120C surpassing it by 5 seconds. So more or less depends on the model, of AIM-120 & R-77’s. Now in game shrugs.
Both the Su-27SM and Su-35 make use of the APU-170 launcher.
Same aircraft here, I can’t find a definitive registration number but it’s s Nº21 of the 790th.
You can see those same pylons on the bottom.
1 Like
The R-77 has higher delta-v, higher explosive mass, longer guidance duration, lower integral PID, higher fin AoA, and apart from all that the stats are about equal.
The hell is an R-77ER? Are you having a stroke? How does a missile “surpass” another by “5 seconds”?
3 Likes
That’s probably from 1 patch of the year tests comparing all the arh on dev arh event
Are you willing to argue that it could fit there in it’s current state, because yes you would be arguing that the top quarter of the missile is stuck inside the airframe.
Hey look, someone here actually went and spent more than 20 seconds in dev, how cute that you went back and found the issue.
I find it funny that people are willingly arguing that grid fins sticking into the airframe is somehow realistic, I guess Russian engineers figured out how to have the airframe fold into itself when needed.
stock AIM-7M when
2 Likes
I’m willing to argue that you’re cherry picking a visual discrepancy that is caused by an oversight in modelling. To be this early in the dev server and expect the Su-27SM to have R-77-specific pylons on exact hardpoints is absurd, and to look at that lack of pylon and say “b-but it’s impossible to fire it now!” is idiotic.
The Su-27SM has the undeniable ability to fire R-77s off of these hardpoints. Its visual glitches do not detract from this.
What?
Nobody is arguing that it isn’t realistic, don’t misconstrue peoples arguments to make them seem absurd. You claimed very clearly that the Su-27SM cannot carry R-77s on these hardpoints.
It can.
You simply cherry picking a screenshot in an early-on development phase of the aircraft’s VM does not refute its ability to carry R-77s on this pylon.
4 Likes
Thank you for answering my question with a yes.
The R-77 has much higher drag coefficient and is larger(203mm) relative to it’s mass.
"caliber": 0.1778,
"length": 3.66,
"CxK": 1.4,
"wingAreaMult": 1.3,
"finsAoaHor": 0.369392,
"finsAoaVer": 0.369392,
"finsLatAccel": 46.8191,
"distFromCmToStab": 0.25,
"mass": 147.87,
"massEnd": 131.75,
"massEnd1": 101.33,
"caliber": 0.2,
"length": 3.6,
"CxK": 1.85,
"wingAreaMult": 1.3,
"finsAoaHor": 0.402151,
"finsAoaVer": 0.402151,
"finsLatAccel": 54.7619,
"distFromCmToStab": 0.15,
"mass": 177.0,
"massEnd": 117.0,
So R-77 has a 30% higher CxK and a 9% lower mass at burnout relative to it’s cross-sectional area.
By this logic having to stock grind through AIM-9B copies on 11.0 aircraft (F-104S, JA37C, J-7E, etc) is a good thing? I dont understand any of this.
4 Likes
I do think a lot of these BVR trucks should get SARH stock. Maybe not Aim-7M level, but certainly no reason why they couldn’t get 1 stop below. I’ve advocated for the F3 Late getting Skyflash DFs stock
1 Like
Yes; And as I said, you can have 9B be modless, but it should still remain.
I’ll take MiG-21bis-SAU as an example here
At BR of 11.0, this jet has access to both R-3S and R-3R but as stock option you get two R-60MKs
Also at same BR missiles like R-3S and R-3R are dead weight
I personally never bothered R-3S or R-3R, instead sticking with R-60MK until I got to R-13M1, which despite being rear aspect, I find better suited for my playstyle
So what’s the point of R-3S and R-3R at 11.0 again?
EDIT: At least the way I see it, nothing of value would be lost if R-3S and R-3R were removed from Bis-SAU