No worries.
Just posted a user manual for the Su-27SK.
The radar is incapable of capturing targets in the radar if maneuvering over 5Gs or excelling over 50 degrees roll anyway.
This is a limitation of the radar, not the missile. The ET does not have a limitation on roll and its G limit is up to 7G.
Just saw that, thanks.
Make sense considering ET is a IR platform that doesnt need Radar Lock.
As i said before do you have any plans to report this?
I think China should get a Korean MiG-29 (9-12B)
The R-27E (Extended range series) introduced in service 1990 came in two variants the R-27RE (Alamo-C) Semi-Active Radar & R-27TE (Alamo-D) "with a more advanced version of the infrared finder, capable with helmet sight of pilot. "
The R-27ET is distinguished of the two as the only one capable of interacting with the helmet sight. The R-27ER is not.
I am not sure, yet. I have the English professional translated version of the Su-27 manual as well that says some very unflattering things… They would need to fix some major issues of the Mig-29 first beforehand. Because my goal is not to unjustifiably nerf these aircraft even though they are grossly overperforming in radar capability.
The reason is because they are suffering in-game historically too. They are my favorite & there is no guarantee they will ever get resolved if they had realistic radars modelled. However, my position is they will never get resolved ever if they are left overperforming in these subjects.
I think GJ put themselves in a dilemma & why we have not received the Soviet 9-12
GJ thinks the Mig-29 is doing well, so well in fact they believe they do not even need their historical missiles, the R-73. That is an issue don’t you think?
How is it that a Soviet aircraft is doing so well it does not need its historical Soviet missiles? But is ok with one missile it never carried or used ever under the Soviet Flag?
Because the R-27ER, a missile it never carried defines the Soviet Mig-29’s entire identity & existence in WT. There is no room for improvement in the Fulcrum with such a missile in its loadout.
Yes i know very well. The point is to illustrate though that the missile does not need to actually initially have an adequate lock on target at the moment of launch. Specifically, as it relates to closer range shots, once ejected off the rail the missiles as they clear the fuselage would have a much clearer view of the radar emissions to then track towards the target - no different than at longer ranges. If they were limited by the need to actually attain a direct track of the target before launch, then the rearward or undercarriage stations on many aircraft would not be useable in the first place as some even have the missiles recessed into the fuselage which directly obscures the seekers’ view.
In so far as the HMD is concerned, the main question needs to be on the ability of the radar to acquire targets above the nose. Which as indicated by the standard radar search angles would allow it to do so. As for whether or not it’s the EO system or the radar doing the initial lock of the target as directed by the HMS is a question i have also wondered. Though it is partially irrelevant since the radar will align itself in real time to any target captured by the IRST, and as such can activate for a lock immediately when a radar missile is selected for launch (creating a report for that functionality is next on my to do list after i finish my mig29 FM stuff). So even if the radar itself was not directly locking targets with HMS, at most its capability to instantly acquire radar locks while using HMD feature in game would be limited to the gimbal limits of the OEPS.
However, previously i had searched around the HMS functionality and haven’t come across any documents or information which actually outright disproved the radar is capable of being slewed to capture targets itself without interaction with the OE system. So its really just an interesting talking point but not much more at this stage. But obviously the HMS cannot be used to sling radar missiles around the same way as one could with IR missiles - especially since the IR missile seekers directly interface with HMS itself, whereas radar missiles are subject to the abilities of the onboard targeting systems.
Fair enough.
Thanks for the explanation.
gaijin made me hate that missile
Its been such a massive problem for the balance of both the game and the early mig29’s. Bringing it so early and at such low br’s before fox3’s was such a massively stupid decision.
The truth is that the game wasn’t ready for both mig29 and the f16 in december 2022, they released both planes and the r73 with poor design and then when the fulcrum was sucking ass they didn’t know what to do, so, they introduced the magical r27er to make russia mains stop complaining.
To this day they still weren’t able to model FLCS for the f16 and the mig has a poor instructor and questionable fm while being stuck with the 27er, it seems they are comfortable with that as they keep adding new toys and these old planes remain untouched.
Ok, well only IR missiles produce audible infrared frequency tone in the pilot’s ear & flash in the eye rings of the HMS.
How is the pilot notified if he has target tracked & the missile can fire without ever looking down?
Well the wouldnt, they would need to look down to the hud to confirm targeting information along with all the other avionics information needed during a fight - unfortunately the HMS system was only simple in terms of its display. Though i do wonder the russians have upgraded their hms nowadays to provide to some more information visually akin to current western HMD’s.
Actually, now i remember the mig29’s did have a vastly more substantial audio feedback system then we have in game, giving callouts to the pilot regarding the accurate position & aspect of threats, launch warnings and a bunch of other stuff. Very similar to the more in-depth callouts we get from the US aircraft in game. So its likely they may have also received audio feedback on lock info from the same ‘Natasha’ system. Been a while since i looked it up in depth tho so cant remember for sure if they got any more weapons employment info then the stuff we get in game - rn its just launch authorisation feedback and thats all, but irl probs was more.
ПРИЦЕЛИВАНИЕ С ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЕМ НАШЛЕМНОИ СИСТЕМЫ ЦЕЛЕУКАЗАНИЯ
Использование нашлемной системы целеуказания (НСЦ) позволяет летчику осуществлять пуск ракет Р-27ЭТ, Р-27Т, Р-73 (Р-60М) с выполнением прицеливания «навскидку» при жестком дефиците времени. Целеуказание при этом выдается координаторам ТГС, РЛПК и КОЛС в телесном угле ±60° (по углу места вниз 14°). По желанию летчика или при необходимости пуска управляемых ракет Р-27Р (Р-27ЭР, Р-27ЭП, Р-27П) после захвата цели РЛПК выбрать к применению ракеты Р-27Р (Р-27ЭР, Р-27ЭП, Р-27П) и дальнейшее прицеливание осуществлять по информации РЛПК. Для обеспечения устойчивого захвата цели РЛПК целесообразно установить режим работы БЛ. БОИ.
В целях обеспечения надежной работы системы целеуказания в процессе маневрирования с Пу>6 необходимо производить тщательную индивидуальную подгонку защитного шлема с НВУ.
Пуск ракет с ТГС (Р-27ЭТ, Р-27Т, Р-73 или Р-60М) с прицеливанием только по НСЦ осуществляется глазомерным или по информации КП определением дальности до цели. Атаку можно выполнять под любым ракурсом во всем эксплуатационном диапазоне высот, скоростей и перегрузок истребителя. При этом основное преимущество системы НСЦ на этапе прицеливания заключается в том, что летчику нет необходимости выполнять маневр преследования противника для совмещения продольной оси оружия с направлением на цель, в связи с чем прицеливание осуществляется при полете истребителя с перегрузками, значительно меньшими, чем перегрузка маневрирующей цели (истребитель находится с внешней стороны ее маневра).
Для выполнения прицеливания с пуском управляемых ракет Р-27ЭТ, Р-27Т, Р-73 летчик должен поворотом головы в пределах углов целеуказания совместить малое прицельное кольцо коллиматорного визира НВУ с целью и нажать кнопку МРК. ЗАХВ. ПЗ. При нахождении цели под большим углом визирования необходимо выполнить доворот на цель для его уменьшения. Для уменьшения начальных ошибок пуска и исключения возможности выхода цели за время прицеливания на углы визирования, превышающие предельные углы целеуказания, следует одновременно с поворотом головы выполнять маневр в сторону цели.
People are reading what they want to see, not in search of the truth. They are conflating two key words, designation & aiming.
You have no ability to aim the radar. You can only aim the IR Seekers with the HMS sight.
You can however, designate the target for the radar to immediately capture it once it enters the FoV.
Only AFTER the target is captured by the radar complex, then can attack be carried out at any angle WITHIN the entire operational range of the radar & performance of the fighter etc.
If it is necessary to launch radar missiles… You can only do so after capturing the aircraft in the radar complex. That means you must point the nose at the target first.
Only aiming the R-27ET, R-27T, R-73 guided missiles is done by the pilot’s “turning of the head” to align the small sighting ring of the collimator sight at a target.
Not the R-27R or ER.
There is no such thing as a “PD HMD” mode in Soviet fighters neither is there an ability to Aim the radar with the collimator sight.
Modern RuF fighters?? Absolutely. All the technology is there 100% & more than enough is available. The SMT actually has more of an ability to aim at targets with line of sight greater than the current lineup of existing Top Tier US fighters & those even coming to the game.
Correction, there is no 4th generation US aircraft that has an ability to aim with a pilot’s line of sight to the degree of the Mig-29 SMT, Modern Flankers & especially the Su-57. That is why the US is working really hard to implement HMD & IRST in the F-22 Raptor as we speak. They are paying a lot of money to add these capabilities.
We are jumping the gun on Soviet-Russo fighters. The technology was still in its infancy & Soviet Dissolution had just taken place.
Rome was not built in a day. Neither was full radar/IR helmet mounted sight integration in the Mig-29 & Su-27.
@Ziggy1989 , I don’t get WTF your problem is. You claim that there is no PD HDN that the real life MiG-29 can use, when there definitely is. Here is the excerpt from the MiG-29s avionics manual, from the section describing how the fire control system works when the Radar and IRST are set to interaction mode (baby sensor fusion) and Helmet mode is selected:
And here is a rough translation of the important part:
“When the LOCK button is pressed, the controlling algorithm sends out a signal to the Radar and the IRST to transition into tracking mode (see subsect. 4,5,12). The HUD displays information relevant to the Helmet mode until either the Radar or IRST have transitioned to tracking. After the LOCK button is depressed, the choice of the leading sensor is based on the tracking signals coming from the Radar and IRST”
As you can see, you don’t have to point your nose to lock a target, or first lock it with the IRST (given interaction mode is enabled), you can do it straight away.
Some extra:
Hell, I will tell you even more. I have not found a single mention of a 10 km limit when it comes to the Radar HMS on the 29. Not in the combat manual and not even in the 400+ pages avionics manual that talks about things like exact notch speeds for different closure rates and modes, binary codes, frequencies used, algorithm descriptions, etc. They all give the 10 km figure for the ACM, but none mention anything like that about the HMS, even though these are two separate modes.
Hell, the early APG-66 has 10 NM limit (~18 km), which was later raised on the APG-68 to whopping 40 NM.
If you now suddenly want to again argue that the Radar is too slow to swing its dish on target, listen.
The radar on the MiG-29 usually swings its dish at around 50^\circ/s. This restriction usually comes from the fact that the speed of light is finite, and you can’t just swing it willy-nilly. The servos are usually capable of a bit more than that. On the APG-68, for example, search happens at \sim 50^\circ/s, but it can go up to 82^\circ/s in ACM. So for the worst case scenario you will still have to wait only at most around 1s.
If you want to say that we have to implement that, I will call that stupid, because:
Next, why talk about IR seeker blind spots for the 29, if we don’t have that kind of thing implemented in game for any missile anyway? Similarly, why say that the R-27 has a 5 G launch limit, when that kind of thing was already removed from the game?
Lastly, I also don’t like how they have handled the MiG-29s balancing, but running around and saying that the 29 can’ do this or can’t do that with dubious evidence is fruitless.
Oh, and stop telling people that they only read what they want to see, when you are doing that and arguing about points without having read everything yourself.
Half of the threads I visit are filled with you arguing with other people on pointless things.
What don’t you understand here?
Do you see R-27R & ER
Yes or no?
Where does it say ANYWHERE that aiming of the R-27R & ER is down with collimator sight?
Where does it say the N019M & N001 is aimed with your collimator sight?
Can you copy and paste the section you quoted, I can’t see it?
You can’t do that in game, nor anybody claimed it’s possible, what are you even talking about.
wtf do I need to aim the R-27 if I have already locked a target with the radar?
Exactly. all the OEPS does is designates the target for the radar to pick up once its crosses the radars FoV.
It is nothing more than a slightly better ACM mode found in all radars. Have you used the Kfir before?
Just like that, but for radar missiles.
Do you understand what the word Designate means? Do you understand what the word aim means?
You use the collimator sight with IR missiles. Find me anywhere that says R-27R & ERs can be used with the collimator sight.
Can we just flag together his made up nonsense so he stop his spam?
