There are multiple new YouTube videos on how R27T performs right now, in fact those videos are the reason why i decided to try them on my Yak-141.
When i bought 141 last week i was constantly using R60M’s alongside with 27ER’s but as soon as i saw those videos i tested myself and confirmed it.
27T basically ignores the flares when its fired from rear aspect but you need be careful before firing those missiles cause even from rear aspect if there is any flare sits in the air between you and your target missile will just simply go for flare first.
The thing is,… in game Magic-II doesn’t behave as intended by values we have found in datamining.
The current IRCCM feature of Magic-II is set to be better than most missile in game, while the reality in game is that the missile is worse than most missile in game (comparing it to AIM-9L/Python-3/R-60M and any R-27/24/23 with IR abilities)
In such the current Magic-1 is worse IRCCM wise than R.530E (earlier french IR missile), while the Magic-2 is shortly better than the R.530E.
The current feeling is based on In-game experience, and use of most missiles quoted (mostly R.530E; Magics-I and -II ; AIM-9L)
The Magic 2 in-game is underperforming from how it should in real life, there is no IRCCM in the datamine. The datamine (and in-game testing) still shows it is better than the AIM-9L in flare resistance. This is because the Magic 2 has a lower field of view.
Current test results show… real repeatable advantage in favor of Magic 2 over AIM-9L in flare resistance. The gap should be much larger, Magic 2 should perform on the same level as the TY-90.
Chute is now available but only after you’ve used all of your chaffs and flares, otherwise it still says payload blocks the chute (at least in test flight)
What i’m telling you is the opposite, and it’s all i see in game,…
I tell you that in game i have far more trouble having with Magic-II against every opponents than while i’m using AIM-9L.
The problem ain’t the firing solutions, as i tested that myself using both Speed/altitude/distance to target.
the problem ain’t that pilots are more or less good → the target pilot was the same.
The problem is that somehow:
Magic-II resist to 1 flares/2flares while target is afterburning (80% times)
AIM-9L resist up to 5 to 10 flares while target is afterburning (about 90% times)
That’s what i see in-game, in tests, in battle.
Meanwhile, you have to remember that French aircrafts only have 2 of those IR missiles(Magic-II), while anyone have 4 to 6 of theirs (AIM-9L/Python-3/R-60M + R-27variants).
Now i get it that YOU WON’T READ what i’m telling you of my OWN in game experience, YET many people still gives you the finger about YOUR fact of Magic-II being better at Flare resist, which is - TO ME - obviously not.
İ dont think Aim-9L does have better flare resistance.
Real problem comes from the range of Magic-2 and its amount. Currently Mirage2k and Yak-141 are the only 2 planes that can carry only 4 missiles, however in return Yak-141 gets much better Fox-1 missiles and probably better İr missiles as well.
That’s not true, the seeker properties match the AIM-9L with the exception of a higher track rate, lower field of view. The Magic 2 has better countermeasure resistance. The other exceptions are guidance duration, PID changes (affects the wobble as it travels towards target slightly improving wobble as compared to AIM-9L it seems).
The datamined information on magic 2 suggests it should have higher flare resistance, in-game testing will confirm this. The R-60M actually has worse for the same reasons, though it also has shorter lock-on ranges than both of the formerly mentioned missiles.
Just another reminder that the Magic 2 FOV is much higher than it should be still, and lacks IRCCM in-game. It should have seeker performance at least on par with the TY-90.
