Your source for that is?
Seeker architecture, it has no way to differentiate or perhaps it can be explained why Russia didn’t need to go to an inverse mono pulse seeker but the rest of the world did to use SARHMs at targets flying low. Russian aircraft at the time the 29 would have had a PD Radar.
The ET definitely the but the R-27R how did it do it?
If it can fair enough, but we all know what it can do in the real world and what it does in game is false.
It is far too resistant to CMs and near impossible to notch
I thought the R-27 was monopulse, the image posted above certainly looks characteristic of a monopulse antenna.
Anyway a monopulse antenna is not a requirement in order to hit low level targets. Hell the AIM-7E could even track and be used against small boats if needed.
Here are the results of RAF trials with the AIM-7E-2 (very much not a monopulse missile)
| Trial ID | Target height | Hits | Reason for fail |
|---|---|---|---|
| X4267 AP1 G3 | 500 ft / 152 m | 4 / 6 (67%) | Combined with row below. Guidance failure (3), locked onto clutter (1) |
| X4267 AP1 J3 | 2,000 ft / 610 m | 0 / 2 (0%) | See row above |
| X4267 AP2 K3 | 3,000 ft / 918 m | 1 / 1 (100%) | N/A |
| X2737 AP1 I12 | 1,000 ft / 305 m | 2 / 3 (67%) | Probable seeker fault - it never saw the target or any clutter (1) |
| X6119 AP1 J4 | 2,000 ft / 610 m | 1 / 1 (100%) | N/A |
| X6119 AP1 B3 | 100 ft / 30 m | 1 / 1 (100%) | N/A |
| X6119 AP4 I4 | 1,000 ft / 305 m | 0 / 1 (0%) | Missile power supply failure (1) |
| Total | 9 / 15 (60%) |
They fired 15 missiles against low level targets and 9 of them hit with 6 missing (60% hit rate). And of those 6 misses at least 2 are attributed to missile hardware failures. So you can clearly see that non monopulse missiles can in fact hit low flying targets.
Spoiler
5 Likes
I think it was introduced as a fix in the spearhead update, only to completely break ESAs so Gaijin had to revert it.
So this update it seems they released a version of the same thing again, only for it to break ESAs again and thus it seems to be getting reverted again.
1 Like
Possible lol
I think I have been given incorrect information from the DCS forum! So inverse pulse is more accurate
At determining ground clutter?
Should the R-27 seeker be far more resistant to Chaff or Notching than the 7M?
Inverse monopulse seekers are much more reliable against low flying targets, but that doesn’t mean it is impossible for con-scan seekers to hit such targets, they are just not as good at it. One of the main improvement offered by inverse monopulse seekers is the elimination of glint (a phenomenon causing con-scan seekers to become confused when they get close to the target and miss).
1 Like
so the aesaphoon grind is going great
11 Likes
That is sad, hell my F-5AG gets 30k RP with less effort hvad helvede are those rewards
These RP boosters are a scam
i mean it adds up to a multi game 150% rp booster
So are we gonna get a decent radar model like all (yes, all) the other new jets did?
Spoiler
every single other new toptier airframe this update for scale
It’s not like we don’t know what ECRS Mk.2 looks like.
so whats your source for it not being a monopulse seeker?
tbf the gripen radar also looks kinda sad compared to the others, especially the super hornet
True but at least they made it vaguely the correct shape lol
Stepanovich once posted about R-27R’s test results against low flying aircraft.
Which aren’t real, lol
explain this