Yeah I saw the random comments by the editor out of nowhere talking bad suddenly about the Su35. But its clearly his opinion. But the technicalities seemed on point and he didn’t take away from them. I am going through one of the Migs29 radar modes in the chart
I had no idea, yeah it does technically induce some drag.
But if they are going to model that hump that draggy, good lord.
Most airflow is already channeled down form the cockpit the hump is not go any higher or outward. I assumed it would be minimal.
1.F-15…AN/APG-63…Detection-16 targets\Escort on the passage-10 purpose\The use of missiles for 1 (one) target …
2. The detection range is 160 km. for a target with an EPR of 19 square meters (FB-111)…160 km. for purposes with an EPR of 3 square meters (F-5)…60 km.
Su-27…the first version of the H-001 radar was designed and tested with a Passive phased array antenna…it was not ready by 1982 (they decided to bring it to the Su-27M in 1985, it received the designation N-011 and was adopted as part of the Su-35 in 1995)
The second version of the N-001 radar was designed and tested in 1982-1985 with the help of the designers of the N-019 radar…It was adopted in 1985 as part of the Su-27…
The N-019 radar was ready on time…serial production of the MiG-29 began in the second half of 1982…
R-73 decreased drag coeff from 2.775 to 2.5 ballistic coefficient changed from 1127.2 kg/m^2 to 1251.2 kg/m^2 for reference AIM-9L (similarly long burn low acceleration SRAAM) is 1324.8 kg/m^2. AIM-9L still glides better but keep in mind the R-73 burns a little longer too so it enters its glide phase a little later in all they should be more similar range wise (AIM-9L should still have an edge) as long as the missile doesnt use its TVC in that shot
This comes from the soviet F-15 manual, which is wrong. Quite wrong in the range estimations.
This is the detection range chart using the 160km for 19m^2 values.
see how 3m^2 is 100km and not 80m^2 like the value given on the manual.
This also gives( IF it translated correctly) ±10° for elevation which is not the case.
The chart you provided gives the values for the original F16’s APG-66 and the APG-65 of the F18. But a “medium sized target”. Fortunately we have the APG66 values where we can reconstruct the data, where I did the F16s report but radar dev just decided to go with the soviet chart below for it instead of proper range lmao.
On War thunder the value on the F-16’s APG66 is 45km for a 3m^2 target, doing the ratio it should give 3.5. 157km for a 3m^2 target for the APG63 in RWS. VS range will naturally be slightly higher. APG66 should really be 22N.M for 2m^2.
I have no reason not to trust this forum…This is a graph of the manufacturer Hughes Aircraft…The range is indicated in nautical miles (nm)-including for the F-15…
I feel that when we start too get thaings like the F-15 and Su-27, the Mig-29’s are gonna take a back seat and it might be a bit before we see a new variant. Maybe a Mig-29K after the Yak too make a naval line…
There isn’t really a point in arguing, Gaijin will likely place them wherever they deem fit regardless of the community opinions on it. Doesn’t really matter after all.
