Hi, I’m here to inquire about the source Gaijin used to Model the R-27ER and R-27ET Alamo. I have found sources contradicting the current in-game statistic of the missile and I would simply like to look at what the devs are using and trying to find what is and isn’t true. I find the top speed for every R-27 is Mach 4.5 whilst in-game the R-27T and R-27R have Mach 3.5 whereas the R-27ET and R-27ER have Mach 5.8. I see the missile can pull 8g maneuvers according to online sources whereas in-game they can pull 35g. Also to add, the R-27s (Notably the ER and ET) have probably the highest launch-per-kill ratio in the game (Meaning to hit an aircraft, how many missiles must I launch) (I am not a gaijin dev so I don’t have enough information on if that is true but from a few top tier games it seems quite obvious which missiles are dominating), Whereas in real life the reported success ratio of the Alamo is 9%. I’m simply asking for the source Gaijin used to get the information about the missile so I can cross-reference and see which is correct. If the missiles are over-buffed then I’m inclined to think that Gaijin is taking clear Bias and that they have fabricated a fake missile. For what reason, I wouldn’t know. I’m not implying there is a Bias, like I said I want to see their information and figure out what is going on.
It is widely known knowledge that any information that challenges the superb handling, damage, tracking, and maneuverability of any Russian missile is untrustworthy information. Russia must remain on the highest possible pedestal.
sorry if i was not clear.
i was explaining to the OP that the launch aircraft can be manouvering at max of 8G while Launching an Alamo.
i was not talking about the target aircraft.
rather i agree with the way gaijin has modelled the Alamo
Whereas in real life the reported success ratio of the Alamo is 9%
What do you mean by this? As a concerned and very genuine, not at all dishonest person I’d love to hear you elaborate on how you think this is indicative of bad sourcing on Gaijin’s part.
That’s why I would like to see a reliable source. I know well enough wikipedia isnt an amazing source however it’s not like I have much else that contradicts wikipedia.
I’ve heard somewhere that the r-27’s are unreliable and have a low success rate. The 9% being a number I remember. I was simply saying that if in real life this missile wasn’t the best missile of all time why is it so the tracking head for it so extremely effective in-game. This seems like the missile isn’t modeled historical at all.
Because it wasn’t the best missile of all time, it was the best missile of 1985. It has a monopulse seeker of similar effectiveness to other monopulse seekers of the time; its seeker was not unusually good or unusually bad, and it is of average effectiveness in game as well]. It scored a low success rate in the E-E war for a variety of reasons, but none of them apply to the game. The missile is historical as best it can be.
If you want a good source on the R-27, missilery.info is generally good for an overview. Just use an auto-translator for the page.
That’s not entirely true, the AIM-7F is also larger and re-arranges things compared to the AIM-7E-2 yet has better maneuverability. The R-27 series was designed to be modular and allow for changes in seeker / propulsion unit with similar CoG and not much of an increase in empty weight. The overload limit is meant to protect the structural integrity / improve guidance more so than the actual upper limit.
It’s currently performing exactly as outlined by the documentation available.
I found this document by eagle dynamics and thought it was fitting to put here. The CFD they undertook shows that at a altitude of 10km, the r-27er peaks at about 1400m/s or mach 4.08. of course this is a calculation so there is always going to be uncertainty however it’s still something to look at. If someone can find me the thrust of the motor and the burn time of the motor in real life this would make my life much easier. Thank you and happy holidays
