Is closer to a mix between the F-106 and F-12A, for aircraft actually implemented in game its closer to the F-14A at least in terms of role and armament.
In short the Sapfir-25A (MiG-25PD) is absolute trash in comparison in comparison to the AWG-9 or APG-6x let alone the -7x series, the R-40s’ have issues, and a 4 x 1.5 = 6G loading limit is painfully low, making it practically a worse F-104; being forced to deal with much stronger airframes and missiles.
Most relevant fighter airframes have RCS values(X-Axis) between ~2 to 5m^2
The AWG-9 / ALR-32 in the same situation has almost twice the range in the same situation (values are in Nautical miles, not km with a conversion of 1Nmi to 1.85 km)
@k_stepanovich
Here another source for APG-63 not giving any change, thus warning. Tornado F3 1987 (using a considerably more advanced RWR than eastern designs and better than the F-18A’s RWR, according to an exchange F-18a pilot ) can’t detect F15 launching so a target lock IS CONSIDERED a missile launch ( parameters such as signal strength might be taken into account to just command a missile warning).
And as you can see, it there are specific known signals stored of CW illuminators for radar missiles of the F14, F4 phantom(J), Mirages, tornado F3, viggen (wartime signals could be differ) but not for the F15 and F18 which guide the sparrow with the main radar HPRF tracking signal. No sparrow warning with them. No time share which makes no sense knowing PRFs are high enough to not have velocity ambiguity
And detection range is still completely wrong despite considerable information Community Bug Reporting System
along with beamwidth, acquisition range from tracking (10% instead of 30% loss) etc
k_stepanovich,
also VERY VERY VERY lovely with the sparrow’s updated seeker range.
But you can’t reach proper ranges with them. They explode in mid air with 15-20 seconds of flight time remaining and lots of energy left in them. https://youtu.be/bo8mx2ooq-U
Probably is just a bug or a hard limit
Frankly I don’t see them taking the safety limit for it’s pre-multiplier value. That limit is for the risk of aileron reversals, which don’t exist in game, and is not for the structural limit. But being maneuverable is not a requirement to be in the game. It’s high altitude speed alone is what I want it for, too many zombers to intercept during air events.
The difference being, that F-16 depleted 3 missiles for those flares. If it were an R-73, they spend the same amount of flares, while all the missiles are sitting on the rails waiting until you are out of CMs or risk one being fired and never even having the chance of getting decoyed because you stopped preflaring.
Won’t that just cause issues with the R-73’s guidance, additionally since you are unlikely to win a drawn-out dogfight, why would you commit and risk that occurrence?
Had you kept flying straight and skated you wouldn’t have gotten into flat scissors in the first place. and getting slow is where the F-16 wants you, so you don’t want to be if you can avoid it.
İts much better then constantly pre flaring and getting into risk where your all countermeasures depleted.
İf someone sits at your six at those distance and you cant get away quickly then your best bet will be try to reverse them.
İf F-16 gets slow and forces you to dogfight then you can either run away or join to him, if you decided to stick in a fight where you use Mig-29 or Su-27 you will most likely loose unless you have massive advantage or F-16 pilots makes huge mistakes.
That’s entirely hoping the enemy pilot isn’t managing their closure properly, the MiG-29 and Su-27 are also just better at dumping speed than the F-16, so if an F-16 reverses one, its purely a skill issue on their part.
If anything, they should be worried the F-16 manages to outrate them and turn a defensive posture into an offensive one by doing so, but this is the exact situation where you’d be stuck pre-flaring a possible R-73 shot.
I don’t see anyone here underestimating the AIM-9M or overestimating the R-73 like you say, each missile has its pros and cons and should be used as such. The R-73’s only real issue is the inconsistency of its TVC control, which is a modeling issue which will likely take time to fix. Curse the soviets for coming up with the first widely used TVC missile.
As some have mentionned as well, due to how the flare resistance of the 9M works, its actually very consistent to flare if you know what you’re doing. The difficulty is more in detecting a launch with its smokeless motor, but thats not an issue in air RB because of the baby mode missile diamond no other game mode has, which btw, favours the R-73 by invalidating an advantage of the 9M.
This is actually really funny because you either misunderstand what I said, or have no idea what I’m talking about.
A reversal can only happen if the bandit in the offensive position fails to properly manage their closure rate and leaves the control zone. If you manage to fail managing your closure rate in a jet that dumps energy faster than the defensive jet, in this case a MiG-29/Su-27 offensive against an F-16, that is very much a skill issue. You made a mistake, the enemy punished you for it by reversing you.
Assuming the REDFOR pilot actually properly manages their closure rate and remains in the control zone, the only threat to them is the F-16 outrating them, which is what the F-16 is good at, but is also what the R-73 helps counter, and the exact scenario people are referencing when they say you can sit on the F-16’s tail and keep them in a preflaring situation.
Yes, that’s because the F-16 outrates them both… as I’ve already said…
The whole point of the HMD+R-73 in this scenario is to limit the ability of the F-16 to actually to outrate you by threatening a HOBS shot with the R-73 if they continue to sit on their AB and/or stop pre-flaring.
We’re literaly debating a scenario where the MiG-29/Su-27 starts offensive against a defending F-16 right now. If you seriously don’t think you can win a fight where you start offensive in a MiG-29/Su-27 vs an F-16, thats the very definition of a skill issue.
The counter to an R-73 is much less consistent than defeating the AIM-9M seeker, which is countered by flaring and abruptly changing directions to cause the seeker to lose you in the process of blinding itself and continuing inertial guidance for a short period to avoid “seeing” flares. The counter to an R-73 is predominantly positional and lots of flares, as the seeker does not shut itself off, it only shrinks its FoV.
F-16 has same agility that Su-27/Mig-29 has, has better energy retention, better acceleration and sustained turn capabilities. İts whole lot more then just sustained fight.
Yes assuming R73’s will work fine or will not go to single flare dependin on the aspect.
You mean by simply pre flaring one or two times and get into Side aspect? Doesnt sound too much issue tbh, also let me remind you that as long as single flare sits in R-73’s fov missile itself will instantly goes to decoy instead of actual target.
While i was having dogfight against Mig-29G (which is basically best Mig-29 for dogfight) i was easily able to hold myself together despite having 2 drop tanks and more weight, meanwhile first R-73 that was fired from Mig-29 failed miserably and second one fired from J-11 went for my flares despite bein really slow and keeping my AB on.
Now surely you can give me good explanation for this i believe.
