Remove R-27ER

They didnt remove aim7s until Russia had a counter. They had to wait like 1.8 years

2 Likes

The Su-27 isn’t going to dominate unless you’re actively trying to die to an R-27. Just skim low and shoot AIM-9M’s at all the slow people doing the Cobra.

The F-15 is actually quite fitting to the meta, being able to zoom in and shoot AIM-9M’s at people while maintaining its’ speed. All these dogfighters are good in 1v1s… not so much in actual furballs.

I agree the Su-27 is the strongest thing in the patch due to the missile loadout of 6x R-73 (and also 4x R-27ER)… but the fact of the matter is the F-16 has been overperforming for over a year and you’ve now been promised fox-3s in just a couple months… please be patient. Gaijin has gone ahead and implemented the Su-27 with its’ full instability (and used instability bricking mouse aim as an excuse not to fix the F-16 this whole time)…

8 Likes

" just let nato fight nato & dominate " how about no, as if they don’t have enough missile trucks and the most OP fighters in the game already

4 Likes

wdym instability? as in its loses control easily in mouse aim, or that the airframe was designed to be unstable to allow for faster maneuverability?

You really notice theres something wrong with some when you just see one thread asking to remove R27ER and a thread requesting AIM-9X.

lol…

5 Likes

the f-15 doesnt fit the meta because the f16 already fills the same role 10x better. 4 9ms is simply not enough when facing the flanker which beats the eagle doing that anyway. frankly i think if the aim 7m was changed to not be just a reskin of the 7f or the 7p were added the f15 would be fine as long as the radar wasnt as shit as it is now. but thats just not where we are right now.

4 Likes

The instructor was allegedly bricked by modeling the instability (nose wants to pitch up without negative trim at low speeds)… and there is some quirky stuff going on with the Su-27 and Gripen… but not to the point that it actually bricks mouse aim.

Statically unstable fighters don’t need to hold the nose up in level flight, rather need to push it down… the elevators or canards are then able to assist in producing positive lift. This improves the sustained turn rates, energy maneuverability of unstable fighters. In the case of the F-16, it has severe AoA restrictions in the FLCS to avoid departure or stalls (if you did a Cobra, it would not be easily recovered). The Su-27 has ease of post-departure conditions built into the basic design so is not so limited.

The F-16 in-game can do well beyond what would cause it to depart or stall in real life with no issues.

9 Likes

9x would be ridiculous lol no reason to add it for a long time

3 Likes

I know man, kinda same goes for IRIS-T, which has been requested a lot here and on russian forum only just for F4F ICE.

You see people struggling to fight R-73 and AIm-9M since their introduction and then people request even better AAMs.

I’m sorry but the Aim-9M isn’t the cracked missile people keeping claiming it is. If Gaijin removed the little red indicator on missiles, it would be a completely different story. Air SB turn War Thunder into a horror game and I actually wish they’d remove the indicator in Air RB. But the 9M has been here just long enough for people to learn how to defeat. There’s more than enough YouTube videos from WT content creators showing how to beat it.

But someone seemed overjoyed that this update will knock the US out of the top meta for a few months and I don’t think they’re playing the same game. US is good but not the top dog.

At this point, I’d much rather see Gaijin go ahead and implement whatever they have planned for the Su-27, J-11, M4K, and JAS39s. Let them be the better dog fighters because they have the better maneuverability clearly. And for the F-15A, give it a better load out than what is planned and let it be the BVR specialty of this air superiority. It’s more in line with the whole stand-off principle in their doctrine. Can be the Aim-7Ps, but ideally Aim-120As/maybe Bs. Since the 9X is this game’s “he who shall not be name” Voldemort.

4 Likes
  1. The beginning of operation of the MiG-29 (9-12) in the USSR-July 1983 …
  2. The beginning of operation of the MiG-29SMT (9-19) in Russia-2008…MiG-29SMT(9-19) with R-27ER missiles…
Spoiler

3.From 1991 to 2009, 36 Su-27SK and 40 Su-27UBK were delivered to China…RLE Su-27SK (1996)…

Spoiler

4.Export versions of R-27ER/ET missiles have been supplied since 1994…
5. It can be removed from the armament…9-12/9-13-technically installation is possible, but the Sighting and radar complex does not provide disclosure of the full capabilities of the Energy versions …
6.It can be removed from the armament…9-12A and MiG-29G-were not exported to Germany…

3 Likes

I got an idea 2x R-60M stock and R-73 replacement R-60 but remove R-27ER/R-27ET from MiG-29 9(9-13), on MiG-29 (9-12A) gajin omitted R-27ER1/R-27ET1 and R-73E instead R-60

MIG- 29G never had even access to 27 ET/ER in its life. Germany never ever received any. If you want actual loadouts remove ET/ER from any and every german vehicle. Make the R-73E actually worse compared to R-73 since it is a downgraded export version.

1 Like

R-73E is actually an upgraded model

Fake. It’s same or worse.

2 Likes

su27 has a 120° cone, not 180

3 Likes

So I guess R-23R and R-24R don’t exist?
Oh no wait, just checked. I can still equip them on my Mig-23’s.

Okay? That doesnt disprove what i said.

That just points out your strawman. Not to mention R24R > AIM-7M.

1 Like

Not to mention but r27r=aim7e2

1 Like