just to make sure in dcs is it labeled R73 or R73E
That is not a good source of information
Never said it was, it’s just the fact War Thunder and DCS has it modeled the same way.
Though if it is, then the R-73 in WT pulled a dramatically tighter turn. Did an almost instant 180
45, this extends to 75 degrees in flight or something like that.
So still unlikely to be able to hit something behind the jet?
So if the target is going say from left to right and you fire as its flying past, then I can believe it tracking. But firing after its past and it doing a 180 turn? I seriously doubt it
I sincerely hope that the current IRCCM of the R-73 is retained.
I firther think that after the missile comes to live and people get accustomed to its performance a serious poll can be held to add R-73 to the Mig-29 in return for removing the R-27ER.
Save the ER and other last gen SARHs for later.
Though I’d hope at least if that were to happen, they’d consider Aim-9L/I (aim-9L with IRCCM) for a few aircraft in return. Things like the Tornado or harrier would probably benefit a lot of from it
From the documentation that I currently possess the R-73 in game is significantly less capable than what was tested by NATO after German reunification.
Now did early R-73s have excellent IRCCM? I really dont know, but IRCCM is something very uncomfortable for game balance. It creates genuine NEZ zones, something that wont be seen again until BVRAAMs are added.
So only giving it too one nation is going to cause problems especially when there are low powered options available and that are technically more historically accurate for many aircraft than the standard 9Ls would be the easy answer
The current conclusion i have is that RMB-1 early build R-73s have less potent con-scan seekers, with the RMB-2 early 90s production having Cross Array/Rosette scan.
Adding RMB-1 with current game balance would be perfectly fine. However RMB-2/AIM-9M would be a whole other issue.
you cant take the current in game R73 as a fact, it still is very bugged and propably will become stronger once fixed
Im not talking about Adding Aim-9Ms. Though I’d expect them sooner rather than later with jets like the Shar FA2 or as an upgrade for the F3 alongside AMRAAM. Im talking about taking the 9L we have in game (which by the way, should be significantly more resisitant to flares) and giving it an early IRCCM update. The Aim-9L/I, Even the most basic IRCCM missile would be a hugely unbalanceded addition if it was given to only 1 nation. Its tentative when given to only low performance ground attack aircraft. But start throwing it on air to air fighters, especially one as good as the Mig-29, with even 1/3 the power we currently see in game from the R-73 and top tier becomes a 1 horse race.
Without even something half as good on the other side. No one would play top tier and air combat would be the same as GRB is now
Apparently the model we have in game is R-73E because it has a 45° off-boresight instead of the standard 40° and 60°
Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
You seem to be mistaken, flare resistance/IRCCM is present in the seeker attenuation on missiles as early as the AIM-9J/R-60M. The sophistication gets dramatically more effective with these 4th gen IR missiles.
I am aware the 9L should be a lot stronger, so should the Magic 2, and PL-8/Python 3. However with current game balance IR AAMs having these functionally undodgable missiles with more sphisticated IRCCM (specifically the Magic 2 and R-73) is a bad joke with current player knowledge.
To be clear i completely agree with you, I want future forum readers to have a better grasp of what is being discussed. Gaijin needs to invest in explaining capabilites and in game functions at top tier. Someone without a serious passion for modern combat will be very confused.
1 Like
that explains a bit, of course they instantly get an upgraded R73 variant
@Smin1080p are you abel to tell us if the current R73 on the SU 25BM is supposed to be the R73 E variant or is it still subject to change. Or might it be a naming mistake that it didnt get changed to R73 E yet?
The R-73 never saw a rosette seeker to my knowledge. Even the earliest as well as export examples started with a crossed array seeker. They have two thermal elements, and a very small fov (1 degree?). In-game the IRCCM is ambiguous and seems it can be a balancing feature to play with.
R-73 and R-73E are same. Both share MK-80 seeker.
From what i found the first series R73 had a ±40° boresight . The second series which the R73 E was a part of has ± 45° boresight and other small differences, that is the same information kingtierz found.
Might be small upgrades that is why russia didnt bother yet to give them a while new designation for their own missle
1 Like