MFRL on the twin mounts?
Yes as you can also see in game, they are MFRL’s.
Rail compatibility is already established, but weapon system compatibility has not been confirmed. In addition, the weight limits of the twin adapter are not publicly available. While ASRAAM is relatively heavy, AMRAAM is significantly heavier, and it is possible that the twin missile carrier cannot sustain high-G loads when fitted with AMRAAMs.
1 Like
That’s where you started being wrong - taking any specs of ru vehicles for granted.
1 Like
Frankly, it looks like a balanced solution at the level of “we wanted it that way”.
As with the Su-27SM. The only references to placing four missiles between the engines that I found relate to the Su-35 (Of course, on the Internet, I’m too lazy to go and “dig” deep in search of miniature parts for Russian technology. Even though I have an ideal command of the Russian language.). As for the Su-27SM, I only saw references to 6 missiles, not 8. The J-11A, which is roughly equivalent to the Su-27SM, does not have 4 missiles between the engines.
There is also a report (Community Bug Reporting System) that the pylon for the double R-77 missile holder should be wider than the one modeled in the game. I do not rule out that the pylon in the game is modeled exactly so that it physically fits into the space between the engines.
Now here is my IMHO without proof - if the LAU-115+LAU-127 can handle carrying two AIM-120 located at such an angle, then the TMС with MFRL should not have problems with this. Visually it is almost identical, does not look larger, for increased strength, and the angle is either identical or close to identical. Again IMHO - I think it is just a balance decision, because the snail considers it too strong, despite the fact that it is half-blind. Until now.
This is roughly my opinion.
P.S.It seems to me that it is easier to wait for ASRAAM. Then the question of installing two AMRAAM on the second pylon from the edge will disappear as unnecessary.
And what is ASRAAM heavy in comparison to? It is only 4 kg heavier than AIM-9L/M. Quite typical weight for an IR missile.
Although I do not exclude that ASRAAMs will appear on block 15+, and the current block 10 will remain with 9M, although if I am not mistaken, 9M were only on early machines before block 5
3 Likes
i mean it’s official information, you’re gonna say that they just lied? that’s so dumb. and it literally still points towards captor m being much better for its size (600ish kg n011 vs 200 kg captor m) and the flanker radar barely exceeded it. just because of raw power flanker radar is better
it is su-35S/su-35 only. not even su-30 can have it. it’s fanfiction of how any flanker other than the su-35s having dual racks. (the engines were literally placed slightly further apart to accommodate the new dual racks) if su-27sm can have it then i dont see why not eurofighter can get similar things as well.
2 Likes
8 Likes
Marketing lie. This is not possible with the Typhoon. It’s a different story with the Rafale…
3 Likes
Same with the KH38, no proof that it has weapon system compatibility but the SU30 has rail compatibility so it gets it no questions asked
Again, power isn’t the issue with the Flanker radars.
It’s the processing capabilities. It’s the gubbins behind the radar that process the information where the Soviets lagged behind, particularly towards the latter Cold War where Western Electronics were not easy for them to access. Less an issue now, but a Russian fighter still tends towards the ‘flood the sky with radar waves and hope that something gets picked out’ approach - the trade-off being that everyone with an RWR knows where you are in the sky and what aircraft you are in from twice the distance that you can see them.
Looking at you, ZASLON.
A way to illustrate it is like thermals. Thermal sights of Gen 1, Gen 2, Gen 3 have equal sized lenses in many cases, the amount of external light allowed into the unit is the same, often similar energy requirements, etc. However the progressively better computing power enables the sensor to ‘see’ better, to discriminate changes more sharply and generally work better. Signal Processing is what makes the latest Thermals scarily good - rather than pure size or power.
The same applies (in different ways) to radars. It is one area where the Russians were (and still are) not quite on a par with the Western equivalents - even by the admissions of Russian sources themselves.
2 Likes
I feel like we could use Martlet for this role instead but i’m guessing APKWS is much cheaper?
Whats average/peak power for captor m?
Martlet is not suitable for fast jets
4 Likes
id love to see the a2a APKWS implemented to mop up those AI planes without wasting any decent missiles
1 Like
Wait until we get actually correct striker 1 in game first. The HMD lacks half its functionality currently
1 Like