That plane was flying completely straight what do you mean semi evading lmao
As in the fact that it was flying 90 degrees to me making it so the missile which ways around 600kg has to adjust to make up for this offset, that is why I said semi-evading since it technically isn’t but for the missiles case you could consider it effectively evading by being in the notch minus chaff.
My point however still stands, the Fakour-90 obviously can still hit moving targets unlike what some people have been claiming, no?
I mean the missile might be 600kg but the target is flying in a straight line 7km away, the missile has plenty of time to pull and lead. I doubt the missile even pulled more than 4Gs there.
I’ve tested the capabilities of the Fakour-90 in test drive and I’ll post a visual demonstration on how well it can turn whist holding a hard lock, it still far exceeds most peoples claims but there will indeed be situations were missiles act incredibly stupid and this is a overall game issue rather than a Fakour-90 issue.
Oh yeah, and in the clip I’ve sent it was indeed more than 4Gs as you’ve claimed, closer to 10
My point still stands, people either haven’t tested it properly or are straight up lying about the performance of the Fakour-90 compared to the AIM-54 bus.
Fair enough
I do wanna note that, that test is not really representative of an actual match. You’re going like 380kmh, the turn radius of the F-90 is gonna be reduced obviously.
This is a better test, going closer to mach:
This video just reinforces the Fakour-90s ability, my main point was in all scenarios besides maybe one in a hundreds matches the Fakour-90 should be more than capable of hitting a static target flying hot towards you.
The plane itself going Mach also doesn’t reflect the missiles manoeuvrability itself, it would be more subject to real matches yes but going Mach at a hard side angle is also something you generally wouldn’t do (I was only doing it to show it can far exceed 10Gs).
My biggest issue however mainly is the Sedjil, it’s god awful and I never take anything but R-27Rs on the wing pylons.
I already agreed
It does. The faster the missile the larger the turning radius. Obviously if the missile is too slow then theres not enough airspeed to pull AoA.
It does. The faster the missile the larger the turning radius. Obviously if the missile is too slow then theres not enough airspeed to pull AoA
I’m talking about the missile itself without the aircraft in equation, like a AIM-9M on a helicopter. Just the raw performance of the missile and it will get enough airspeed anyways, this uses a Hawk motor designed for surface to air launch.
But yes, the aircraft speed will also impact the performance of the missile, that’s why the R-60MK on the German Hind-P is god awful compared to the SU-22M3s R-60MKs.
What I’m saying is that going 380kmh to test the missile’s maneuverability is not representative of an actual match since you’re decreasing the missile’s turn radius by going slow.
A realistic scenario would be going closer to mach because thats a realistic launch conditions.
Also yes the F-90 can probably hit targets flying in a straight line but I think it can easily be avoided close range if you know how to maneuver.
Yes whatever you say chief… " the 27 only has 3/5 the range of the 7F " lmfao… so for balancc reasons the ER was brought up that has double the range (more than double actually) of the 7F…
Idk why I feel the need to explain a the concept of “balance” to a Russian main in a Russian game but here is the reality.
Can the 7F/M out range the 27R? -Yes
Can it happen in in-game conditions? Pretty much, no…
Why? Because not only it is extremely easy to notch the 7F/M (regardless if you notch the aircraft’s radar) You can, as you very well know but dont want to admit, out maneuver them…
So not only can you can close the gap to fire your 27R without any risk whatsoever, but you can also force a merge whenever you feel like.
Do I also need to mention how many times the 7F/M just goes stupid because “reasons”?
Again, im pointing out things that you already know very well. So yea “That’s some BS”
1 Like
The R27R is a worse missile than the R24. Soviets already got the disadvantage in IR missile, flight model and electronics. The ER was the only advantage they had.
And as seen in the current top tier meta, AIM120 slingers completely dominate the game, because giving the long range advantage to the nation that already outperform the soviets on every other area was a terrible idea.
If you died to a R27 during the multipath meta, it was entirely your fault. Every SARH were utterly neutered by flying low.
4 Likes
This Is flat out wrong lol
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1SsOpw9LAKOs0V5FBnv1VqAlu3OssmX7DJaaVAUREw78/htmlview#
Check out their Total ΔV: [m/s]
Yep, people who have never used R-60 don’t know how useless it is.
I’d take 9G over it
1 Like
Horrible missile, 9G has more range because of the drag issues 27T has, and it has less Total ΔV than 24T
Im not so sure.
Currently spading Mig-29G and R27’s feels really good in 10-12km range, pulls harder and its quite succesful when it comes to tracking enemy planes.
My money is on R27R in that case.
1 Like
Yea yea whatever you say chief. ΔV is only part of the story and you should know it very well… Otherwise I have wasted enough time already with you.
If you honestly believe that ΔV is all that matters then you have your head stuck so far in the sand that I couldnt get it out even If I had these:
2 Likes
Delta V isn’t everything. By that logic the R-3R would be better than the Aim-7E-2/Skyflash. Also the R-27T is all aspect, has much better flare resistance than the 9G, and much better track rate.
Honestly the R-27s are getting too much disrespect. Its a good missile, close to equal to the 7Fs. It doesn’t have the range of the 7Fs but the R-27s are more reliable, has IOG+DL, CW seeker, undodgable within 6km, and (T) version has IRCCM.
3 Likes
I suspect the point is lost on you - A Phoenix didn’t need to kill someone to be useful. All it did was ensured that basically you couldn’t fly much above treetop level, and you certainly couldn’t fly at 20,000ft or so where ordinarily you’re be able to indulge in a bit of missile jousting. You couldn’t. The worst bit about that was that an F-14 could turn around and run away, and its missile would still be able to kill you, whereas most aircraft still had to be nose in, or they had to trash their missile shot and defend.
Throw in the fact that the F-14 was a pretty good turnfighter as is, then throw in the F-16, an even better low altitude dogfighter, and that basically means unless the team with the most F-14s had a massive case of skill issue, basically won every match.
That is, until the Gripen came along and screwed up half of that plan, and then everyone else got ARHs. Hence why every American under the sun whined so hard, because they could be multipathed into oblivion and the Gripen could dunk on an F-16 all day long.
3 Likes
This. This is the problem.
Right now, the new F14A is spammed to oblivion at 12.3. I’m currently grinding britain with the FGR2 and the 21Bison. Bison has 40° radar gimbal on both side, which makes SARH jousting extremely agressive and honestly, suicidal. The FGR2 has Skyflashes.
Without F14, I can actually take some altitude and get a good, offensive positioning. With the F14, I have to keep a low profile all game until I can sneak in and get 1 or 2 kills. Basically the F14 are neutering ANY offensive gameplay unless you are bringing a 13.3 Su7 with enough R27ER to kill half them at range.
27R has horrible range. Considering everything else as well. Yes delta V isn’t everything. But the 27R has bad range.