@DirectSupport The ET maxes out at Mach 3.1 as the ER will exceed it catch up and still accelerate to speed of almost Mach 3.4 & will maintain energy much longer to cover ranges almost double of the ET.
Both ER & ET launched in quick succession. ET first ER second. ER will always catch up & beat the ET & out range it.
I’ll have to test it again according to the launch charts and see if range is correct soon. If the speed is incorrect then that would be because of burntime
It should that’s the thing.
It’s much lighter with smaller control fins & wings. As you know modern ARH missiles have very small wings & fins for optimal energy retention. None of them utilize huge surfaces anymore.
The controls on the R-27ER is already half the weight of an aim-120 & the warhead alone is 39kg. The R-27ER is a heavy missile
To my understanding, heavier missiles retain energy better due to inertia. This is true for R-27ER, AIM-54, PL-15, and R-37.
The other thing is that the complete design purpose of the R-27ER is that it was purpose made for competing against fox 3s while keeping in mind that the seeker technology was inferior (obviously) to western fox 3s such as AIM-120.
They packed a shit ton of fuel into the R-27ER and forced it to be expended in a matter of seconds, all in order to compensate for the missile lacking an active seeker.
It would negate the design and purpose of the R-27ER completely useless if AIM-120 dominated it every way.
Is this not realistic btw? The seeker head of the ER should allow it to reach higher topspeed and better energy retention.
True, but in non maneuverings. The ER cannot perform as it does at low altitude especially under manuevers as shown in game here too.
Even sources state that the R-27ER is a Mach 2.5 missile at low altitude. Just like every large older generation missile in its class. The ERs larger Rocket Rudders will always induce drag as well.
Then tbh, if it’s overperforming in topspeed, then it needs even longer burntime to decrease the acceleration and topspeed while retaining the ranges shown on the launch charts. I haven’t come across anything regarding burntime.
How so? Because its more pointed? Or because of lofting? Yes lofting at high altitude yes.
But the complaint is low altitude performance @ ranges under 10km where lofting does not take place.
The ET is performing correctly & maxing out at Mach 3.1 in every map @ 3km altitude & when its motor burns out at this altitude its drastically loses energy as it should & just like every other missile in game does.
The ER does not after its motor goes out it continues with very little reduction of speed while its maneuvering to target.
Sources put both the R-2R & ER state that acceleration is Mach 2.5 at low altitude (does not say exact).
ER & ET burn for 8 seconds.
Yes because the nose is more aerodynamic compared to the IR seeker.
The Su-27SK manual shows the launch charts for R-27R and R-27T. It shows R-27R having longer ranges.
I have both the Russian & English tanslated.
Which page?
Enough to allow the ER to cover almost twice the range & maneuver with better energy over the ET?
Sounds a little much no?
I’m at work atm, but I’ll see if I can’t still take a look, if I can, I’ll upload the pages here
have a good one! catch you later.
Btw keep in mind that the ER/R is guided by a fire control computer, so it leads more thus flying a more optimal trajectories and achieving better ranges.
The IRs guide & fly line of sight.
As my videos above show the ET & ER flown in a straight-line always results in the ER out accelerating & out ranging the ET. Even if the ET is launched first.
I tested them both at straight line targets to minimize any advantage one seeker might have over the other.
Here @MiG_23M is actually correct the DeltaV & drag in game would not allow the missile to reach 1,000 meters a second or around Mach 3.1.
The R-27ET is performing correctly & cannot exceed that speed at 1km altitude. (No other missile in-game can).
The ER however… violates this barrier & can exceed Mach 3.1 & can continue accelerating up to Mach 3.4, maintain its energy while maneuvering & its motor has gone out to cover a distance of almost double that of the ET.
The ER is simply overperforming.
I was mistaken in thinking Su27 manuals contained R-27T charts, but the Mig-29 combat manual was what I remembered. Seems that Mig29 manuals contain all the interesting tidbits.
I’ll keep looking for the 2nd chart.
Interestingly on an unrelated note, I’m not sure if anyone tested the R-60Ms against its launch charts. I remember there was some controversy surrounding its ranges at one point.
ok cool.
Oh & the R & ER cannot be launched over 5Gs & cannot exceed 50 degrees of roll rate either. Only the T & ET can be launched 7G & can be launched at full roll rate. (Su-27 manual page 91 English & page 129 Russian )
Gaijin commented on this in a blog. Certain US manuals would say that missiles had a certain G limit it could be fired under. But in actual practice, there was no actual overload limitations. That was the same patch that they removed overload limitations for all missiles.
Yeah, it sucks the game was much better with it.
However, the R & ER cannot be launched in those conditions because seeker cannot sync with the radar & track the target under those conditions as the T & ET can therefore it has a higher permissible launch parameter.
It’s not because of a physical limitation of rail separation or actual missile, but the radar receiver on the R-23R & ER cannot function properly.
As for actual launch overload limits, when missiles get heavy & large enough overload are definitely a real thing & can quite literally jam, ignite & fail to separate causing misfire. That is why launch overload limits do actually exist in practice.
You are not launching a rail mounted R-27ER or rail mounted Aim-54 when pulling 9Gs, I guarantee it.
Can you imagine what the weight of an ER or Aim-54 will do to a rail at these G if you try to launch? How much the weight each missile is under these conditions? Poor rail…
The missile weighs many times under these conditions & is pressed firmly against the rail. Try to imagine it as if its welded. Its rocket motor will not get it to slide & allow a launch. It will cause a misfire.
GJ just got lazy. Makes modelling missiles an easier job.