they basically hit the same amount of avaiable g-pull within 0.2 seconds of each other
It’s the code of the missiles.
r60 series have 0.35s delay, 21.84 Thrust to Weight, 0.18 fin AOA, 29.1Fin lat angle, 1.25 wing area mult
9l series have 0.4s delay, 12.79 Thrust to Weight, 0.25 fin AOA, 37.5 Fin lat angle, 1.4 wing area mult
There are more stats code-wise I can’t type all of them in, but combine all these there shows that r60m is not turning better/ 9L is not turning worse
From ron_2303’s chart, maybe 9L has a even smaller radius for it’s low speed ))
1 Like
I don’t have an issue with having a lower BR MiG-29, what I have an issue is with the fact that they mishandled the plane this badly. It’s ridiculous that the nation that invented the R-73 and the MiG-29 doesn’t get a version of the Fulcrum with it’s intended weapons at a BR where the R-73 can actually be somewhat utilized in the way it was intended.
I know this is largely a product of compression as well, but the fact that we don’t even have a variant of the plane with that sort of weapon loadout is ridicilous. The SMT doesn’t count, because it gets the R-77 as well.
They give Germany one, but not Russia, the nation that invented the missile and plane? That’s like if the USA only got the F-16 early and F-16C, no ADF. It’s so dumb.
America gets multiple variants of the F-16. Why can’t Russia get 3 as well?
It just confuses me why this is the way it is. It honestly should be something like this (based on current matchmaker logic)
- An early Soviet 9.12 that doesn’t get the R-73, and no ER either that could sit at 12.7 or 12.3
- A later Soviet 9.13 variant that gets the R-73, and perhaps gets the ER that would sit at 13.0
- A initial post-Soviet upgrade with access to R-77s (MiG-29SMT) sitting at 13.3 or 13.7
It’s so dumb, and it just makes me feel like this was downright intentional, with how foolish the decisions taken have been. The mishandling of this plane in the game has been one of the worst in this entire game’s history. That’s what annoys me, and I think a large majority of people as well.
All they would have to do is just take the 9-12 and put in the Soviet tree, remove the ER from it and put it a suitable BR. Then take the current 9-13, and give it the R-73s and bump up to 13.0 – and that’s practically it. But they choose not to.
3 Likes
why would anyone not carry 2x R-27R anyway? taking 6x R-73 would just make them unable to engage head-on targets and targets between 3km and 10km away.
There is a difference between can and will.
Most probably would run 2x R-27R, but because you could run 6x R-73 it should be balanced much like the F-16/Gripen A with 6x Aim-9M.
Like Buc S2B, few probably will run the 9Ls, but it still needs to be 10.3/10.7 because it could run 9Ls
I know about the code, I was under the impression that you were suggesting that the current code/missile data should be changed.
As I said before, Shatshark is useless for simulating missile turns.
From what I understand of that chart, that’s a theoretical max G overload the missile can pull after launch, but that doesn’t mean anything valuable in practice.
Each missile can pull max G after a certain speed is reached, but at launch, it will be much slower. And the fins take time to react (just like aircraft ailerons don’t instantly go up and down to their max values), its not an instant reaction, and in the case of the r60m/aim9L, the former reacts sooner off the rail and is able to pull harder mainly because of that faster reaction and stronger acceleration.
I’m unsure if the r60m can pull a tighter circle than the aim9L. But those kinds of maneuvers only matter at very short ranges, where the aim9L wouldn’t react in time to begin with.
there is a very simple explenation to the r-60 turning better:
- r-60m weighs 44kg
- AIM-9L weighs ~84kg
i know that dosent tell the whole story but it is enough to get an idea
and aim9l is also alot longer range than the r-60m while only turning slightly worse at really close ranges, which is a pretty good trade-off imo
Magics are heavier than both and turn better. Just like aircraft, the body and wings (fins for missiles) matter a lot too. Weight is important but don’t tell the whole picture.
Yes, the main advantage of the r60 is that faster reaction time and faster acceleration.
i know thats why i said:
as it stands the r-60 was designed as a “gunnery missile” and the aim-9 as a longer range missile
the US started using/ actively developing close range dogfighting missiles only after they learned about the r-73 after the german reunification
That’s exactly where they work well. Within gun range.
to get back to the topic:
thats all good on the mig-21 and mig-23
but not so well on the mig-29 against 4th gens
a aim-54 would never make that turn
It’s the exact same, and sometimes easier to get kills because you face more “hot targets”.
I’m not saying the r60m is a better choice than aim9L in most situations, but when someone is aware of you, the r60m is better, since the only chance you can hit anyone is if they don’t flare in time.
12.7 Mig-29s are not in a bad position when compared to the other 12.7s, only the yak141 is considerably better, since it has a better FM and a better loadout with 4 very reliable radar missiles (for 12.7)
1 Like
lol
Netz is on 12.7 without irccm missiles or radar missiles
Never thought I’d see the day these terms become mainstream outside of the incel forum.
1 Like
Everyone has been saying this. The current loadout config sucks for everyone. If you’re a MiG player you have to contend with having only 2 AAMs and 4 APS projectiles. If you’re facing a MiG you have to face R-27ERs with AIM-7Ms. We need to ditch the R-27ERs for R-73s.
(Knowing Gaijin the Soviet Rank 8 premium fighter is going to be a 9.13 that conveniently happens to have exclusive access to R-73s)
6 Likes
and somehow 13.0 in SB
1 Like