Remove R-27ER

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
692

Here is an updated comparison since the website was erroneous;

https://img-forum-wt-com.cdn.gaijin.net/original/3X/1/8/18fafeaee420447585a8580f9a100d2500b30dbb.jpeg
In the MAI (Moscow Aviation Institute) chart it shows from mach 2 (600 m/s) launch at 10km the missile accelerates to a peak of 1600 m/s.

In War Thunder, 2 mach launch (600 m/s) at 10km the missile accelerates to a peak of mach 5 (1,497 m/s) and is about 100 m/s shorter than expected. This was highlighted by my previous testing that I literally mentioned earlier… see here

Gaijin accepts that it underperforms at altitude because it was optimized for 5km and less performance to match the range and acceleration charts for this area and not for altitudes above 5km.

image
Finally, the DCS source. Currently it peaks at 1,400 m/s at 10km altitude when launched from 300 m/s.
This shows that had it been launched with an additional 300 m/s speed it would have a peak much closer to the datapoint in the MAI (Moscow Aviation Institute) chart… but likely still above.

In conclusion, the DCS source more closely follows the high altitude performance of the R-27ER than the War Thunder model for the reasons the devs listed in the aforementioned report proving that the R-27ER indeed underperformed at those altitudes.

Very well then.

You didn’t do anything but make a claim of +3.5 mach. It doesn’t go that fast in the conditions you listed.

Instead, you claimed that it was faster than the website indicated and I ran some tests. I proved the website was erroneous after you cast doubt on this. My tests actually still proved your claim wrong.

I didn’t state multiple times that I verified the websites performance in-game. The quotes you took from me didn’t claim this either. I have literally been saying that since I ran in-game tests the website was wrong. I did the due diligence (unlike you) and did appropriate testing.

You seem to have misread what I said once again. The overall deltaV is 1,075 m/s. It is impossible for the missile to go 1,000 m/s at 1km alt due to drag. No test is needed to verify this but feel free to prove yourself wrong.

There was no argument it was just a comparison of performance between two games. There is nothing to argue about.

Again, it was not an argument. The missile performs according to the chart as closely as Gaijin wants to and where it doesn’t - it underperforms.

You didn’t quote the MAI source, you quoted DCS and the erroneous website.

Can you provide any source or video showing the R-27 overperforms at all? I’m still waiting.

693

GAME OVER.

All launches above & below at 1km altitude = 3280ft.

All launches have easily & successfully exceeded (while maneuvering) beyond Mach 3.1 =1,027.03 Meters per second

Fastest recorded speed was Mach 3.4 =1,126.42 Meters per Second

All launches reached their top speed in 7 seconds or less.

Fastest recorded acceleration was 5.72 seconds

I just proven the impossible & proven that you actually have no idea how the game actually plays & anything about aerodynamics. What’s worst you are pathologically dishonest.

694

Same 1km altitude & lower the R2ER insane acceleration shown in actual game battles at top tier. (something you have no experience in).

Notice how far the opponent is and how fast they are travelling in the opposite direction.

The reminds me. You have zero experience in top tier battles the last 4 updates & why you rely on websites to tell you how the game performs.

@BBCRF you have zero experience in top tier at all and do not even own a single aircraft with R27s & you do not have any access to face them whatsoever. You have no idea how they perform in game but are here purely to cheerlead as a Soviet Main

I have more game experience in the Chinese Flanker alone than both of you in current Soviet Top Tier combined 10x over.

695

I’m pretty sure he meant 1000 m/s Δv for the missile itself? You were going M 1.25 (428m/s) at launch, missile reached 1,125m/s.

1,125 - 428 = 738m/s

I’m not sure how Gaijin has modelled the specific impulse though so idk about that exact 1075 m/s figure

696

He said quote:

DeltaV is his reasoning without playing the game. I can care less about his flawed logic.

I only care how the missile actually flies in WT battles.

The missile travels and maneuvers beyond his comprehension in WT.

I am playing at speeds in which the game is fought & won at low altitude.

So is the missile overperforming or the Su27 & Mig29? Pick one.

It does not matter how fast I was flying, it was low altitude, and the rocket motors accelerated the missile under 7 seconds to speeds beyond its technical capability while maneuvering.

This is beyond his limitation of what he thinks the game

697

Well, he explained exactly this in one of the quotes you used, you just cut out that part

Screenshot 2024-05-12 at 02.59.37
Screenshot 2024-05-12 at 02.59.372040×640 111 KB

698

His explanations to why it cannot fly beyond 1,000 are irrelevant.

He declared outright, is not possible that R27ER fly beyond 1,000 meters a second at 1km altitude.

Yes or no?

699

His explanation where he literally explains the variables are not irrelevant

In the first quote, he literally explains what I was telling you

In the second quote, he says:

This was worded a bit weird sure, but it’s not hard to work out that in “the missile to go 1,000 m/s” the ‘to go’ was meant as in accelerate (Δv), especially since he explained the whole “from a stand-still” and calculated it for you some messages previous, In the paragraph you quoted:

700

You are splitting hairs.

He declared multiple limitations of why the missile cannot exceed 1000 meters a second at 1km as follow.

His interpretation of Delta V in-game is proven false.

He then claims the missile is limited by of the speed of sound at 1km altitude alone. Not accounting for dag.
That is proven false in-game.

He then claims it is impossible to exceed 1,000 meters a second due to drag at 1km
That is proven false in-game.

He gave multiple reasons across varying subjects as to why the R27ER cannot exceed 1,000 meters a second @ 1km altitude.

However, the missile exceeds his expectations in WT and was just PROVEN here:

He has inadvertently deadlocked himself in his claims that are in direct contradiction to the ER performance at 1km altitude.

Either he is right in everything he just claimed, & the R27ER is overperforming

Or

the R27ER is performing correctly, & it is his claims that are wrong.

Which is it?

703

You cannot answer the question.

Does the R27ER exceed every limitation he just claimed?
He named multiple limitations: DeltaV, drag at 1km & his idea of what the speed of sound is at 1km.

Yes, or no?

It’s a simple question.

Not just basic questions.

Basic knowledge.

704

This question?

I have not read your your whole conversation, I don’t know about all of his claims. I just logged on today and saw this ‘proof’ of him lying, I looked at the quotes and to me it seemed like a big misunderstanding, of acceleration vs top-speed. I pointed out that he explained this to you in the post you quoted, there is no need to attack me for it.

705

You only listed one limitation of his claim why the missile cannot exceed 1000 meters a second at 1km. A basic observation.

You are right actually. People defending the model are hung up on top speed.

The R27ER is not just overperforming in top speed, its overperforming in acceleration.

It can exceed over 1,000 meters a second @ Mach 3.1- Mach 3.4 in little as 5-7 seconds. That already outperforms the DCS model

Let me know if you have any more questions

1 Like
706

This is because thrust is static and does not change with altitude or air pressure in the game. To match 0-5km performance (which gaijin does for all missiles with the AIM-54 being a special exception).

At lower altitudes the thrust would be less in real life, but burn time longer. The in-game performance was to meet the 5km data from the chart. It underperforms above and to prevent overperformance they adjusted the drag model. This is why it is important to look at the specific datapoints and reasoning I put before you. The devs explanation was clear and you haven’t touched on that.

@CorporalApollo there was no misunderstanding, he just can’t let go of the past and wishes to heckle me. Unfortunately for him it doesn’t make any of his points valid. He’s dying on a non-existent hill because he has supported his position with nothing.

I know you won’t want to be dragged into the kerfuffle but I didn’t feel the need to respond earlier and really didn’t need to now as you saw… What I said speaks for itself. You yourself understood my position quite well.

707

On this particular point I’d like to re-establish the fact that you were wrong about top speed.

You were also wrong about AoA, range, acceleration, fins producing lift, etc.

You were quite literally wrong about every claim you’ve made in regards to the missile. Perhaps you’d like to look at the range charts and see if it has the correct range? We have the Su-27 manual data on frontal and rear hemisphere launch range from sea level to high altitude.

708

Its over, just stop.

You are the only person that is proving its overperforming …

Your only datapoint & only source The Moscow Aviation Institute places it at 10 seconds to reach shy of 800 m/s as you explain below.

You name the source by name when comparing it to the DCS model.

I said the R27ER far exceeds that at 1km.

You then explain in detail why it is impossible to exceed 1,000 meters a second (Mach 3.1) at 1km altitude.

You list 3 reasons

You are proven incorrect good sir!
He’s freaking out because the missile exceeds his impossible limitations!

710

No it doesn’t.
https://img-forum-wt-com.cdn.gaijin.net/original/3X/1/8/18fafeaee420447585a8580f9a100d2500b30dbb.jpeg
For this scenario, the launch speed is ~500 m/s (1.56 mach).

The acceleration is adjusted to match the 5km altitude figures from the chart the devs explained this already (see screenshot of their response below and click here for the original report).

Screenshot 2024-05-11 120506
Screenshot 2024-05-11 1205061742×932 261 KB

However I must point out that it underperforms in top speed here by nearly 100 m/s as well. The top speed comes out to mach 4.06 (1,301 m/s). The chart shows 1400 m/s. This is not a big deal as the range and performance charts are still met otherwise…

And as you can see here, the acceleration is approximately 8 seconds and matches the chart above.

The error in your particular testing was not following the specified parameters. Higher drag conditions or higher launch speeds will cause the missile to reach the top speed sooner rather than later. The launch at lower altitudes and from different speeds than the chart will of course skew the results. In this case, there is no datapoint specified below 5km but we do see a trend. In-game missiles thrust does not change based on altitude so nothing in-game follows this trend. Thrust does not increase or decrease and burn time does not either… so in order for Gaijin to properly model range based on various altitudes they must adjust their atmospheric or drag models until such a time that they can work on dynamic thrust plots for missiles.

This goes for all missiles and especially the AIM-7F/M which are legitimately overperforming currently and need correction.

From a standstill, yes. The missile doesn’t exceed 1,075 m/s in any conditions because that is the overall deltaV output of the missile. We can calculate this easily from the datamined engine parameters and start / end weight.

I wouldn’t classify honestly debunking absurd claims as “freaking out”. Your mannerisms in this discussion are degenerating over time. I suggest you police yourself up a little bit and behave more professionally if you insist on continuing this one sided debate.

I don’t even need to debunk this nonsense. @BBCRF I think you will find this rather humorous. @MaMoran20 @CorporalApollo @FeetPics

711

lol I was just goofing around to see if you would freak out like you have been every time your been proven wrong.

Now you are arguing from a stand still. No one cares.

712

I always was

Apollo and anyone else reading saw and understood what was said. I am going to die of old age before you come up with a source for your absurd claims that the R-27ER is overperforming.

Every test and condition that I can check or has been reported has shown it is either underperforming justifiably or meets the conditions.

713

Only you would argue from a stand still magical zero drag environment, right?

No, you weren’t because you even factored in drag after the fact.

You concluded it is impossible in game.

It’s proven in game regardless of drag to exceed 1000 meters in under 7 seconds in actual gameplay and maneuver to kill opponents.

For the missile to achieve this a maximum overload of 35Gs is required. The missile over performs.

714

You stated that it would be double the 800 m/s figure given (1600 m/s) and later corrected yourself claiming it was a mistake. The point I was making is that this is impossible because the missile only has 1,075 m/s deltaV.

For it to go 1600 m/s it would need to be launched from 600 m/s which isn’t feasible at those altitudes for the launch aircraft.

Therefore, impossible… yes. Impossible for the missile to exceed the deltaV + launch speed conditions. No test necessary.

Though you think it is overperforming because it can exceed 1000 m/s when launched from 300+ m/s… this is rather silly. The missile has over 1km/s deltaV of course it can go 1km/s + launch speed before drag is considered.

Now please, if you’d just provide a source for your ramblings. Where on that chart does it indicate that the missile is going too fast at low altitude? Currently it underperforms from the other datapoints and you think that a higher drag coefficient is going to suddenly improve the performance in relation to this?