Well, it works the same for our neighbors Flanker fans. You know, the new Flanker J-16 still has dozen of issues like MiG-35’s ones waiting to be fixed. They haven’t been working on fixing new toptier jets for three weeks.
Maybe Gaijin was just doing their jobs for NE mode, and our new vehicles for new patch up ahead.
Also consider that we are right in the update heavy season. End of the year the devs kinda hop between updates, and incorrect things are usually left to rot until at best middle of next year
If they are, then they’re doing just as poor a job there as with fixes to anything else.
If think optimistically they might be busy preparing our MiG-31bm.
Probably the Su-15TM they’re working on, that was slated for this year
Event vehicle like F-16xl this year. Maybe released at the time when we last had our MiG-25?
It would be nice, but I have my doubts
I hate how relatable this photo feels.
It’s a crime how we still don’t have those, and with the F-102A becoming official we should also see the Su-9 and Su-11 delta-winged interceptors but those are discussions for the other topics I made
I would hope they get more care than the f102 lol, the f102 is terrible, it has the wrong missiles(super falcons instead of falcons) it’s missing the aim26(it should obviously get aim26b in absence of aim26a as they’re pretty much identical minus the conventional warhead instead of nuclear), and it has awful flight perfomance
Lots of issues with it obviously but I actually found it to be fun. I have an ace in it. If it can work, then surely the Su-9 with 4 x R-55 missiles and potentially a gunpod can work as well.
2 x R-55. Su-9 used them in tandem with RS-2US.
How is R-55? Any data about it?
From the Coviet Aviation air to air missiles book.
Can be used on intercept courses (all-aspect seeker?) and hit targets with up to 3Gs of maneuverablity. Also said that it is significantly more maneuverable than R-3S so i guess something around 12-15Gs?
As far as I know, it could use them in the other two racks, though the standard mission profile included the RS-2US missiles.
I’ll answer this in a spoiler since it’s not related to the topic. If you want to continue discussing the Su-9 I did also make a dedicated thread long ago:
It’s an IR missile based on the RS-2US but with redesigned wings and rudders with better wingspans and more powerful steering drives. The seeker was the nitrogen-cooled TGS-59 and the PRD-45 motor burned from 4.5 to 7 seconds.
The MiG-21PFM “3532” testbed as well as a MiG-21bis “24 Red” tested it and they found out that it was significantly better than the R-3S (almost twice as effective) and had better range. Since it was based on the RS-2US, it likely retained the 18G structural overload if not improved on it and the recommended target maneuvering limit was 3G.
All Russian sources say that Su-9 FCS was designed to use only 2+2 configuration or 4 RS-2US.
Because it was a dedicated Soviet bomber interceptor, not because there was a technical limitation.
Fine, find what other launcher R-55 used. You do know that Su-9 has 2 different pair of launchers? RS-2US uses APU-19 for 2 innner pylons and APU-20 for outer ones
Of course I do, I researched it a lot back in the day. The R-55 could be loaded on both.
