Yeah, and it has -6° depression in that mode, relative to the nose of the plane
And that leaves enough room to see things at sea level at 1000m more than 10km+
The point they were making was about the things below that scan zone
That’s what the R-60 and SA are for.
The point was about the radar and its scan zone
You should be tilting the radar down at the start of the match if you want to maximize MTI usage while flying low.
This allows you to have a little bit of nose up attitude with MTI. So you dont have to nosedive into every target but can fly relatively straight for it
Think we’ll ever see the MiG-23-98 ever come in to game? Or any other variants they could add I guess.
with how 23-98 was made in a single airframe and it isn’t known if it even had all the avionics installed, i’d say as an even at best (considering that we got F-16XL with mock-up AMRAAMs as an actual weapon)
there is a better chance that gaijin adds the Mig-21-93
prob MLDG with HMS and R-73,s/24RM smh
1 Like
R-24RM dont change anything, its just R-24 that works a tiny bit better against helicopters
1 Like
Source?
Also from what I read so it have increased countermeasure resistance. Also according to scheme it have also other fins so maybe little bit increased agility?
Source is, go look at the R-24RM thread and you will see what I have said there. All the claim’s of it being a completely different missile are nonsense
It’s wrong, the schematic is false and all the documents I’ve read only speak about increased protection against helicopter, if you look in the R-24RM thread you will see
Schematic is from Markovskij book Советские авиацнонные ракеты вовздух вовздух. Do you have better source?
It’s just a schematic, no other sources mention anything about redesigned fins or increased G load, so the logical conclusion is that it was a mistake in the schematic.
We also have never seen an actual missile that looks like that, because again the R-24RM, by all sources is just a R-24 with a changed seeker head for better anti helicopter attacks
Why, then, would the author go to the trouble of creating a separate schematic for the R-24MR, if they are visually identical?
Mistakes happen
I dont use schematics in a simple book like that as definitive proof that a redesign happened when not a single source mentions it. If the missile truly did receive a redesigned fin design we would have other mentions or even pictures of it
Its not definitive proof but also probably not mistake. Like nobody would add separate schematic and even redesign its fins if it was absolutely same missile without changes. You wont do that even by mistake as its unnecessary extra work.