This, along with a few other sources I cannot post I believe (no sekret dokuments)
… do confirm 2007-2008 to be the initial delivery / contract date.
I do see what you posted, but the few military and non military posts about SEP v2 all claim 2007-2008
For there to be a large scale contract given in 2007, there had to have been more than one fully functional SEPv2 before then
Might’ve just been a test bed, to work out kinks etc. didn’t it get a new FCU? Among a few other things?
So I’ll just my opinion in here… as someone who has every vehicle in Russia…
Aim-9ms are vastly better than R-73s
I recently got my F-15E and really the only thing that was able to semi reliably kill me was the Rafael or EF-2000, anytime a Su-27, 34 or MiG showed up, I would launch an aim-120 within range, usually score a kill, and once they launched an r-77 I just notched, didn’t even have to chaff.
But using the Aim-9m… oh my god… it is the easiest aam to use by far. Being smokeless the enemies don’t know it’s coming, WHICH is a MASSIVE advantage.
The flare resistance is insane too, unless you’re staring directly into the enemy flares.
So no, Aim-9m is already way ahead of the game.
In Simulator especially… it’s just free kills.
Aim9M is insanely good especially when NOT radar slaving them because it will still trigger RWR for your radar and launch detection (obviously no RWR for missile itself) Most jets with them have HMD anyway
Depends on the specific scenario, it’s much easier to “jam the WEZ” or lock the gimbal on an AIM-9L/M so they aren’t useful in a dogfight. Pre-Merge or third partying people the AIM-9M has an easier time (still has issues and could be improved further should a number of issues be fixed, and additional SEAM mechanics be implemented).
It’s also underperforming, due to the seeker not being forward biased as seen in the linked report #3 above, and evidently suffers from a similar flare tolerance as the AIM-9L should have.
???
That was what I was saying, the AIM-9M advanced things too far and isn’t fair. The Agile would fill out the counterpart to the R-73 more fairly, since the kinematics and airframes it’s found on match pretty well.
So far I’ve only not seen it mounted to the F-16 & A-10 in terms of relevant high BR airframes.
Maybe, I’m not really familiar with all the upgrades on the v2
I’d really like to see the R-73 be fixed, as its gate width parameters are still too wide, I’m sure it’s been bug reported already months ago.
But If I remember correctly, in game it locks to 0.75 AFTER launch, where as if I remember correctly, it should be able to lock to 0.75 on the rail, then launch and close all the way down to 0.60 or 0.50 pretty much meaning sub 1.0 mile launches should pretty much be a guaranteed kill, unless mass pre flaring occurs.
Just as a reminder. The FIM-92 series still has only 13G. When virtually all documents state 20-22G. Making them incredibly easy to dodge and pretty terrible.
While the 9M311 on the Tunguska has 32G.
Both of these are used on comparable weapon systems which can meet each other/compete. The difference in capability between the Tunguska versus Ozelot/Gepard is absolutely ridiculous.
Will be fixed whenever they decide to action the following reports;
It’s been 7 months since the report(s) were accepted at this point.
Implementing accurate limits for FIM-92 maneuverability
The POST seeker (FIM-92B & later + MIM-72G)should also have the Optical contrast mechanic
Genuinely having used both.
Aim9ms are far better for the longer rank 2.5km.3km shots againts people.
That off bore in dogfight capability of an r73 is unmatched.
But you put that r73 in any form of reasonable engagement rhe 9m will.do better.
In my experience both are excellent missiles and the smokeless motor of the 9m.is a boon and a half.
But the r73 is not by any means far behind it.
Situationally the r73 is only out performed in range.
But now adays an amraam or r77 is better.
Oh I’m all for having it in game. War Thunder is a playground so I won’t say no to more toys. In my opinion IRCCM missiles are in a pretty balanced spot right now for RB (in sim and AB the 9M is a menace). If I had to guess, they’ll buff it in increments by giving it the stuff it’s missing. We have a lot of missiles in game that are like that right now such as the AAM-3/4, PL-12, and MICAs.
You act like I’ve played 6 matches of top tier lmao. Since we’re going off of “trust me bro” evidence, most content creators say Russia and the U.S. get paired together too, and I’ve had multiple times where I had to swap to my Russia lineup to play with friends using U.S. I’m also gonna give you a couple of hints on how that’ll probably sail over your head: Missiles perform better at higher altitudes, and you don’t have to fly in a straight line after firing your missile.
Have you played sim…?
The R-73 is great sub .5 miles if they aren’t pre flaring, if they are preflaring it’s game over.
I have played sim… but not much st all id rather a hotas, i should state i mean ARB.
Check my stats for sim man its horrific xD
I cannot speak for any of these missiles in sim just to clarify
After I started playing sims I couldn’t go back. The names that pop up make it annoying.
I wish I had Hotas, but I play on controller for ground, air, and naval
I was using mouse an keyboard for sim n it was difficult bit yeah, in sime the 9M.has the advantage due to thr smokeless motor.
Tbh im tempted to use my grip to get th3 ef2000 in sim …
Arb is closer to arcade than it is it realistic
Oh in sim the aim 9m carrying aircraft all should be higher br, you have no idea your being launched at, and when any enemy plane approaches and your flying anything you should just preflare.
Otherwise, you’re dead.
And it seems people have forgotten aim-9ms exist due to ARH spam.
And I love sneaking up, firing an aim-9m and fly away, a few moments later, a kill. No big smoke trail to give me away either.
The problem is that, the way Gaijin implemented “SEPv2”, it’s actually the exact same vehicle as the M1A2 from 1992 that we got ingame since 2019.
Except for the better thermals (which the 1999 SEP already had) and the for-some-reason non-removable dead weight of the TUSK package.
Leaving aside the hull armor controversy (it’s basically confirmed that it should have it, but because we don’t have primary sources giving out specific values, Gaijin won’t consider to make well-educated guesstimations based on secondary sources as they would do with any other tank), the turret front and sides are severely underperforming as well- and we DO have numbers for those. Bug reports that have been “acknowledged” the moment the vehicle was unveiled on the Dev Server, still nothing done about it.
That’s leaving aside the whole turret ring and fuel tank bulkheads fiasco, and how Gaijin said that M829A3 would not make any difference compared to M829A2 and yet still won’t add it even for SEPv2 so that it would feel historically correct and like an upgrade in at very least just ONE way…
must at least help with stuff like T-80U, a bit, but still
