What is not fine is that R77-1 got first shown in 2009 and probably entered service in 2010 or later so technically at this point we could allegedly tell gaijin to add AIM120D and METEOR if we only look at a timeframe of introduction perspective like that Pz_Kpfw_VII guy. But reasoning like that would just be stupid.
Also SM-6/Aim-174
(well contract wise)
AIM 174 despite being derived from a missile that exist since long is qualified since 2023-2024 dude. It’s closer to MICA NG and METEOR MLU than original METEOR. Think for a second.
I edited my message to include contract wise. Which ik isn’t that important but still.
Sure buff the range and lose the extra MICAs you have.
perfomance > Date of intruction. i want a fun game not a historically accurate game.
1 Like
But gaijin said
1 Like
And this is without taking into account one important thing.
The R-77-1 is only carried by one of the worst performing aircraft at this BR, engine wise, Su-30SM.
So comparing MICA-EM, R-77-1 with same launch speed isn’t relevant as the Rafale has way more powerful engines and will be able to launch its missiles with significantly more energy.
(Omitting the fact that 12 R-77-1+ 2 R-73 add more weight and drag than 6 MICA + 2 Magic)
Here we can see that in 30 seconds at 3000m starting from 200km/h Su-30SM end up at 879km/h while Rafale already supersonic at 1200km/h which is a 26,75% difference speed.
While R-77-1 take 22.5s for a 25km shot at same height (3000m launched at 879km/h)
Here Mica take ~1sec less launched at 1200km/h
I have tested at other altitude and its about the same thing.
And here, I’m omitting evasive maneuvers scenario.
6 Likes
i know but anyone who played this game for a bit knows that is bs
4 Likes
Yeah, that is often times overlooked.
You need basically perfect scenario in order to make R-77-1 look good.
I think there is no competetor for the R-77-1. It’s almost like a new generation of missles. Gajin should add the AIM-120C to give all nations chances in BVR and WVR
R-77-1 is handicapped by the current plane able to use it making it so that it can’t at all reach the maximum range of the statcard.
Aim 120A/B will still keep up against it in bvr.
4 Likes
It’s quite on par with the AIM-120. Worse at notching targets though
1 Like
“Someone got even close to achieving our efficacy in BVR, so we need something with effectively twice the range”
8 Likes
It’s still worse than 120 at BVR and worse than MICA at closer ranges, so it basically introduced nothing new.
1 Like
“No competitor” when the AIM-120 exists and is fired from an F-15E or Eurofighter is insane. Also, USA has the best long range missile in the Fakour-90 aaaaaand they had the first Fox-3 missile in AIM-54 long before anyone else did - because that’s what the F-14 carried. This is the same deal with the Su-30SM - it’s only ever carried the R-77-1.
The R-77-1 is just the normal R-77 with slightly stronger rocket motor. It’s artificially nerfed and doesn’t have a sustainer where it really should and it probably won’t come anywhere near its statcard max range of ~80 km but have no fear (or do fear, in your case) the missile burns for a lot longer because why not.
Just wait a little longer and you too shall one-up the Russians (temporarily anyway, R-37/M supremacy 🔥) with your desired AIM-120C.
1 Like
good luck against Eurofighter Rafale and Gripen with Meteor
1 Like
Isn’t the R-37 basically a SAM sized A2A? Do you think it’ll be successful in engaging defensive targets when it was made to engage tankers and awacs?
1s longer than R-77. Very long burn time of 7s