The testing process was similiar to the YAK-141 (which is ingame as a techtree vehicle)
The R27EA originally was intended for the MiG-29Ms with later thoughts of putting them on the Flankers too - the project was started and several test MiG-29M airframes did carry those missiles and did testfire them
While this might not be enough for a Techtree vehicle - it would definitly work for a cool Event version of the MiG-29M 9.15
No, it’s not
Does it? 🤔
All AIM-120’s will have the same motor as C-5 after that variant, there are no further motor improvements. None of them are comparable to R-37.
According to what? It is a heavier R-27ER with loft.
R-77-1 is fine, if not, R-77M is an option without sacrificing number of ordnance carried. There is also ability to carry mixed loads of R-37M and R-77-1. There are also missiles like KS-172.
So nothing modern at all. None of them tested this iirc.
So the entire conversation is a pointless banter about a fantasy you have.
How often do I need to say “MiG-29M” to you until you understand it?
The R27EA was tested on the MiG-29M prototypes - so if these prototypes come to the game at an appropiate time (idc if its a Techtree or event vehicle - but due to the YAK-141 being a techtree vehicle the MiG-29M doesnt seem too unlikely) they should recieve their proper weaponry.
No, its about an a cool airframe with a very unique option for weaponry.
I love the Fulcrum and the MiG-29M is the first model of them to fix the major issues of Avionics, Weaponry amount and Countermeasure count.
If it doesnt get the R27EA - im totally fine with that. But I still think it should get them to keep them seperate from the Flankers.
The Flankers rn have the same - or even better weaponry, while having more of it and getting a better flight model.
Id really just love a competetive Fulcrum in Warthunder, and a MiG-29M with R27EA seems to be a good way of implementing that.
Call it pointless - but you´re in a Fulcrum discussion complaining about someone discussing a Fulcrum.
Either talk about the Fulcrums that might possibly come to the game in the future or dont, but dont tell others to not talk about it - The purpose of this whole forum is to discuss the game
Id also like to see where you got that from.
irrc the R27EA prototype missiles where a similiar weight to the R27ET at around 350kg - which is lighter than the R27ER at 360kg
Also I feel like you make the R27EA seem more like a thing that never was - but the EA was testfired multiple times.
You treat it like the R27EM - which would be an entirely different story
Are you perhaps mixing the two missiles in terms of historical existence and performance?
this is simply a lie, lmao
(imma use Wikipedia as my source here - most trustworthy source that isnt classified and doesnt take hours to search up)
According to Wikipedia the R27EA has an approxiamte max range of 130km (exact same as the R27ER btw, but the ER cant achieve those ranges due to its battery running out at 70km) - The Aim-120C5 has 105km and the Aim-120D has 180km (the aim-120D funnily has the exact same range as the R27EM)
According to wikipedia have R-77-1 range 110 km. Not so different to C5. In game its different story.
Idk about others, but Italy can get AIM-120C-5 on their F-16ADF.
Plus they can get AIM-120C for F-2000A. Hungarian Gripen should also have access to it.
Also Romanian F-16AM can come with AIM-120C-7/8.
This isn’t true, the R-27ER has more than 70km range and runs out only in lower altitude conditions. Range is primarily limited by datalink range.
AIM-120D uses the same motor as C-5 unless you can prove otherwise. I think you’ll find it difficult to show any motor changes.
It also according to Rosoboronexport. So it more of the condition is being used… and Snail not modeling dynamic drag properly
Do you guys know if the MiG-29SMT can carry R-77-1s?
IIRC it should be able to do, but 29SMT have nothing to do on 14.0
I do not think the R-77-1 would drag the SMT up to 14.0. 13.7? maybe, since it’d be the same BR as the F-16C
Perhaps. It just was said on stream that devs consider R-77-1 as 14.0 level weapon
Perhaps they meant that the R-77-1 would be what was elevating the Su-30SM to 14.0? I really don’t think that the SMT getting 77-1s would bump it all the way to top tier, since it can carry at max 6 (assuming you drop the 27E’s) whereas the SM can carry like 12 and still have R-73s.
And advanced versions of the r73s If I’m not mistaken
It’s likely that it can carry alot of advanced weaponry, but I was mainly asking about the R-77-1 since it’s coming next patch
Maybe Gaijin will be giving more R-77-1 if Russia really needs variety in aircraft especially with the potential of Su-27SM being converted to the SM3 version.
AFAIK and little bit out of topic, J-8F also should’ve got PL-8B, but ICYDK, as of today only J-10A will receive PL-8B in the next update.
I’ll reckon these advanced missiles will be actually implemented to already exisitng platform when the BR Decompressed again.
I’m definitely for giving planes their historic armaments, unfortunately gaijin won’t decompress the BRs.
Back to the old mig29 912 and 913，
Why not have the 27er removed and add r73 to 913, while move 912 down?
For 9.13:
r27r+r73 at 12.7. Satisfying for useful r73, Satisfying for other sides for no worrying 27er
Trade performance and sensors for r73 compared to 16blk15
0.3 higher than 16blk10 for having 27r
0.3 lower than jas39a for same lvl armament worse performance and sensors
For 9.12
r27r and r60m at 12.3.
Trade performance and sensors for r27 compared to 16blk10
0.3 higher than 12.0s ofc
0.3 lower than m2kcs5 for not having flr resist
Doesn’t exist.