Unlikely. British reports put the maximum range of AMRAAM at 60 nm head on (that is likely with both aircraft at Mach 2 - going off the known performance of Skyflash SuperTEMP).
6 Likes
Interesting!
It’s indeed a good comparaison point for estimating early AMRAAM range.
If i get enought info about the ASF, i’m going to put it inside the main post!
It shares the same body and kinematics as the regular Skyflash SuperTEMP but has an active seeker rigth?
Do you also know if the missile loft ?
2 Likes
I believe “ballistic on pre-launch commands” suggests it does have a loft, but not an midcourse updating trajectory shaping. Sounds like it presets the optimal ballistic trajectory and then slings the missile according to said data with no post-launch update?
37D is either gonna stay at 11.3 and not get amraams or be completely murdered(again) by moving it to 12.0 or 12.3 with AMRAAMs aka DoA
1 Like
Based on those quotes i guess you take the 100km max range for the R-77 and not the 80km ?
From what i found online and what i managed to get out of it is:
- The RVV-AE (ie the Export Variant) is stated at 80km max range by the maneufactereurs
- The R-77 (ie the Russian/ national variant) is rumored to have 100km max range.
Indeed i never saw any good source saying that the RVV-AE and the R-77 were fondamentaly different to have this -20% in range.
On the other hand i saw multiple time that the RVV-AE/R-77 had a max range of 50km in more realistic conditions. I also saw that the max range of Russian missiles was calaculated for a 20km shot which is very probably more than what other missile maneufactereurs “measure” the max range of their missile.
IIRC the AIM-120A/B had a 75km range when fired from 12Km at MACH 0.9.
I also remember the Indian saying that their SU-30MKI equiped with R-77 were clearly outclassed range wise compared to the AIM-120C5 and they couldn’t close the gap to shoot the R-77 when facing F16 equiped with C5.
So the C5 which has a max range of 105km would be neccesary to face the R-77?
Not talking range wise the R-77 is better maneuvrabilty wise but you won’t evade a 35G missile anyways. 50g when talking dual plane(AIM-120).
And for the MICA EM,
While the MICA is a smaller missile with lower thurst, it also has lower drag and is able to loft making it longuer range.
In the end the MICA EM is classified has having a 80km, same as the R-77, and while at this range the missile is probably just falling on you and you can dodge it easelly, same goes for the R-77.
In the end kinematic wise the R-27ER/EA will still be better than the AIM-120A/B (and even the C5 in some area), the R-77 and the MICA EM.
In the end the AIM-120A/B is sufficient to face the R-77/ R-27ER and the AIM-120C5/C7 is more of a counter to the R-77-1.
The AIM-120 has in excess of 60nm range when fired from supersonic. The same can be said for the R-77. What is more relevant is comparison at equal conditions.
For the conditions that the AIM-120 achieves 74km range (12,000m… 0.9 mach co-speed/altitude for target and launch aircraft)…
Likewise, in those same conditions the R-77 achieves ~80-100km range depending on sources. I found that even with an absurdly drag coefficient the R-77 missile model I created in-game still achieves 80km maximum range in those conditions. This is assuming the R-77 has to overcome transonic wave drag issues associated with the tailfin design… it would have somewhat comparable performance to the AIM-120A when fired from subsonic… and significantly better performance when fired from supersonic speeds.
Both missiles have a guidance time of approximately 80 seconds. Both missiles are 35G+ in maneuverability (AIM-120 is actually 50G, R-77 is 40+G)… they will both be deadly missiles. It will certainly be more balanced than the current AIM-7F and R-27ER scenario.
The problem is, the R-27ER still exists. You can fire an R-27ER way before the AMRAAM comes within range… and then just keep guiding the ER. Once you’re closer you can fire an R-77 and go cold. Adding the R-77 to the game alongside just the AIM-120A/B would be somewhat unbalanced… seeing as all the Russian ordnance would enjoy a range and time to target advantage.
I’d like to remind people the R-77 achieves these range figures WITHOUT any lofting.
Thanks for taking the discussion to the correct thread.
so if you “loft” it like you can with the R-27ER by pulling the nose up before firing it’ll go much further?
From the sources i’ve found the R-77 range of 100km is only obtained when fired from 20km altitude and not subsonic at 12km.
This make a big difference in the max range figures we’ve got.
Either you got better source than me or just missile you’ve modeled is wrong.
If you’ve got better source you’re willing/authorised to share don’t hesitate to post them.! (Since mine are only a mix of sources i’ve found online and on forums)
1 Like
I guess ppl are back to overestimating the R-77 because of the propaganda spread by MiG_23M lmao
There is no relevant difference between the RVV-AE and the R-77 regarding range, the manufacturer themselves and the organization which export the missile both claim 80km max range.
The whole “it has over 100km+ range, trust me bro!” is just pro-russians fantasizing about how amazing the R-77 is. Particularly about the grid fins, which are pretty universally considered not good for air to air missiles, but remains the holy grail of missile designs according to vatniks.
1 Like
The only sources MiG_23M shares about the R-77’s range are fakes or assumptions, hes been caught 3 or 4 times in the past trying to pass off lies to justify his position and assumptions about the missile
1 Like
This is correct.
Manually lofting is an option in real life, even for the AIM-7M on the F-15. There is a special mode for it.
This doesn’t match any testing I’ve done with public data on the missile. Either it has far more drag than feasible or the thrust is absurdly low with terrible specific impulse (worse than anything else Russia has made). My estimates are assuming a specific impulse similar to the R-27 series of missiles which of course… pre-date it. Assuming no advancement in solid rocket propulsion and a boost-only motor with a burn time of 6 seconds (least ideal conditions)… the missile still has in excess of 100km range but is limited by the 80s battery life.
I’d also like to remind y’all that Mythic claims he blocked me (but still can see all my threads and comments in them). He’s going to try and derail this one now, but my estimates for the AIM-120 turned out to be factual when they were confirmed by later data provided. The ~75km range was what showed in my test missile model and I have all the same public data necessary to model the R-77… which I’ve gone ahead and done. Mythic also heavily over-estimated the F-15’s performance and when it came to the game we saw that I was right about that, too.
Regarding Mythic, his only claim about the R-77 being 80km maximum range is the Rosoboronexport page which states 80km maximum range. They likewise state 100km maximum range for the R-27ER;
https://roe.ru/esp/catalog/las-fuerzas-aeroespaciales/misiles-de-aviones/r-27er1/
The fact of the matter is, we know the maximum range (lofted) of the R-27ER is 170km. The maximum straight-line range is 130km. The 100km estimate is given for certain conditions. These are approximately 0.9 mach, 10-12,000m if I recall correctly. If we assume the same can be said for the R-77 (which doesn’t loft)… the 80km estimate puts it rather close to the R-27ER. The AIM-120 on the other hand, is not. It requires lofting for just 74km maximum range in these conditions.
how much of a gap was there between your R-77 and AIM-120A/B because the gap should be pretty narrow. It shouldnt be possible to reach 100km at 12km from a subsonic launch either, and range graphs show that its not a battery limited missile at that alt
1 Like
It was approximately 80km in my recent tests when launched in the same conditions the AIM-120 achieved 74km. The issue is that the AIM-120 lofts… the R-77 does not. The time to target is similar at this range, but becomes increasingly favorable to the R-77 as the distance closes. The only time it becomes favorable again for the AIM-120 is the point-blank shots (<8s time to target) where the AIM-120 has an initial acceleration advantage.
Both the R-27ER and the R-77 are battery limited against non-maneuvering type targets. The “maximum range” figure is useless. That’s why (as I said in my last post) the Rosoboronexport site generally seems to indicate the 10-12km subsonic launch range for missiles.
how does that work does it shut of or something else
In war thunder this means the missile will simply self-destruct at the guidance time limit of 80s for both the AIM-120 and R-77.
oh ok still waiting for meteor in few years or when ever it comes i hope in a functional state
1 Like
what conditions for this?
hopefully this isnt “max range”
IIRC that’s for a MACH 0.9 shoot against a MACH 0.9 target at 12KM alt.
That’s was from an Harrier manual