There was changes like a 9Li, so, yes.
9M have similar range as Brittish modified 9L
If you want a simulator go make your own. War Thunder is a game which is made to mke money. Balancing with buffing and nerfing is a part of it. Or do you want that a su 27 is at 12.7 because of it weapon limitations?
SU-27 we have in game is the Crimea addition deployed in 2014 to Crimea. It should be 13.7 with the others. The fact that it cannot fire missiles when banked more than 50 degrees and loses radar lock when banked more than 90 degrees is a limitation that should be in game. They didn’t give the P51 Hollywood style dog fighting because its unrealistic. Why give the Su-27 we have in game which is less than 10 years old some fictional performance? They claim “realistic” models. Are they lying?
You do know that they only make changes to vehicles and weaponry based on historical documents right?
And that there is a SIM mode in war thunder right?
The only thing i know of that is used as a nerf/buff (in the way you describe it) is reload times (and more recently adding munitions to top tier to even things out).
This is an instruction manual, not rocket technical data. So the pilot can fire the missiles one after another, it is entirely in his hands
DCS is a simulator not WT
dcs is yes. but that has nothing to do with it.
WT has a Simulator mode, and the fact still remain that Gaijin only make changes based on historical documents (exception being the most modern vehicles that they don’t have a manual for and must estimate).
That is a fact whether you like it or not. You are absolutely free to think it shouldn’t be this way, but currently it is.
If you read my post. I said, they should be allowed to. But if you do it, then the second missiles should follow the first and not the target. As it states in the manual that is what will happen.
The RWR system of the SU-27 is not able to determine the direction of the threat if it is more than 15 degrees above you. So the SU-27 should not give a directional warning in the case of being targeted top down.
This is the case in game for all jets as far as i know. (don’t know the angle)
For accuracy you also need to turn off the weapons radar to use the RWR in the SU-27 correctly. Page 183 and 184:
or
These time limits exist on F-16 and Mirage 2000 as well.
It doesn’t matter because those safety features can be changed in all aircraft.
“Prohibited” is a language term for preventing pilots from doing something they shouldn’t, and not necessarily a hard limitation.
“Does not clearly indicate the direction”, and…
…is not the same.
Well.
Historical accurate details like this will make asymmetrical balance, and make game more interesting, giving the different nations (which don’t use clones) different W/L.
But in that case, u need to find details like this for almost all aircraft - not buff/nerf only a bunch of them, which you like/dislike.
And Gaijin need in this case, implement a lot of mechanics, simulating real battlefield (radar stations, SAM sites (on bases?), AWACS link, etc.).
It is exactly the same… It doesn’t indicate it, because the system can’t process it. The manual goes on to further illustrate that it gives you a set of light codes. Two lights on which indicates above, and one light on along with another pilot operated condition which gives you information its below. So no, it doesn’t determine direction when outside that 15 degree window.
I am quite familiar with why prohibited exists. In many cases you are more likely than not to cause considerable harm, or fail conditions. Which either should be conditioned in game, or locked out. Since they don’t have the coding in place to properly handle the damage or system failures this might cause, its easier to lock it out. But if they do have the skills (doubt) to implement them I would love to see fail conditions happen that gimp an aircraft.
Once more - it doesn’t said
it said, that info can be wrong - not “doesn’t indicate” at all.
About…
… it’s too, not meaning, that you can’t use radar with RWR - it’s just a recommendation, because if use both simultaneously - RWR can (not must) provide false info.
Or it will be just pointless - be forced to drop the lock, and go defensive, if you been attacked while you guiding missile that in air.
It says “It is necessary” to turn the RADAR off. Necessary. For 5 - 10 seconds. That seems pretty intelligible as “must be done”.
Necessary - means “Without this nothing will work. At all.”
Recommendation - means “It will work. Maybe not so good/comfy as can, but still do the thing”.
So...
You know the manual says “Necessary” right?
Look buddy.
As radio/electrical engineer (not best maybe, but still do my work properly) i make a bunch of things, which restricted by manuals, due to lack of tools/consumables/time, and so on.
But it works.
So i know, that when in manual written “necessary” (if it’s not a nuclear device manual - in this case better use all literally) it means “if the situation is urgent, you can violate it within reasonable limits”.
For weapon systems it works same.
Mostly.
When we put “necessary” in a manual it isn’t “lightly recommended” It means you will very likely influence a fail condition. I field phone calls everyday from one of the systems we designed because someone either didn’t RTFM or because they didn’t head the warnings.
What I do for a day job is in more than 4 dozen currently active systems. I actually know first hand many of the limitations and problems of Russian systems.
I am extremely careful to Google search before I say anything on this forum, and to never share anything that would cause us harm. But I know for a fact those limitations exist in the Russian systems, which is why I shared the most recent publicly known manual I could.
It doesn’t work. They know it doesn’t work, but they rely on gate keeping and users lack of access to information to play dumb. Someone needs to call them out. We have first hand accounts from Mig pilots saying exactly that as well. The RWR, ECM, and RADAR all conflict heavily with each other in the Migs and SU-27s.