I can understand why there is a significant amount of interest in the F-22 aircraft due to its advanced technology and capabilities. It is a stealthy, fifth-generation fighter jet, known for its impressive speed, agility, and superior avionics.
On the other hand, the Su-39, while reliable and robust, might be perceived as a flying truck compared to the cutting-edge F-22. It is true that the Su-39 is an older generation aircraft, and its armaments might be considered less advanced when compared to the state-of-the-art weaponry of the F-22
It does matter the mig 29 isnt the problem, it is the R27ER, the fewest people will keep a lock to guide the missle most kills will be done by the missle itself
The MiG-29 9-12s overperformance compared to other jets isn’t because of the plane itself? Just think about it, a jet that can clean the floor on the F-16 let alone a poor F-14B or Tornado F.3 and you think the reason it’s good is the missiles?
You have identified exactly why the the R-27ER is the problem. The Mig-29 with R-27R would still have been an extremely potent and capable fighter, easily able to go toe to toe with both the F-14B and F-16. But the addition of the R-27ER has guaranteed that its the best within BVR. Which means jets like the Tornado F3 that are reliant upon BVR to fight, are at a large disadvantage.
R-27ER has such an overwhelming performance advantage in most, if not all respects, that the airframe its fired from doesnt really matter. It could be WW1 era bi-plane doing 100kts and it would still be a threat to many aircraft. Whilst the Su-39 is sub-sonic, it doesnt mitigate the potential issues that could and would result from the R-27ER. Im expecting the Sea Harrier FA2 armed with AMRAAMs to be 12.3 ish, despite being sub-sonic, purely because of the effectiveness of AMRAAM.
Smin on the other Su-39 thread has confirmed not too expect any new weapons on the Su-39 at the moment:
Spoiler
"Weaponry loadout choices have and will always be a balance consideration. We were very clear before the aircraft was introduced, R-27 would not be there from the start and was generally not planned at the time. So this is not a new development.
Its not a mistake that the aircraft is called the Su-39. As I said, the possibility of further expansion of its arsenal is not closed off for the future. But there are many vehicles in game that do not have every piece of equipment that they could carry."
“The aircraft is intended to be a premium ground strike aircraft. Again, it was never sold, advertised or promised to receive any of the things you mentioned above.”
"Future additions to its loadouts remain possible, but are not guaranteed. But the aircraft will remain, as intended the Su-39. I understand you wish to see more loadouts for the Su-39 to give it further unique equipment, but there are plans for other variants with other weaponry and capabilities that are also taken into consideration.
Reiterating over and over that the Su-39 is missing some of its possible loadouts is not going to change the facts of the matter. These were intentional balance decisions. Subject to change."
You already have your answer from Smin. See spoiler posts attached.
I may not have flown the Su-39, but I do main one of the worse performing nations in the game, and been at the mercy of soviet dominance for the past few years. I seriously challenge you take the Tornado F3 and try to 1v1 a Mig-29. It won’t end well. The Su-39 with the same A2A power of the Mig-29 would be insane. Being Sub-Sonic doesnt matter.
On 12.0 there is the F-14B and the Mirage, which get many more opportunities to destroy aircraft and tanks at the same time due to the thermal imager and convenient containers.
In the current balance, as long as they are at 12.0 and not at 13.0, the Su-39 is not strong against them with the R-27R
I also suggest that you open the Su-25T and defeat at least a helicopter that has stingers
Good job the Su-39 is only at 11.3 then and not 12. We have already seen aircraft given a higher BR because of strong performance in ARB. Just pray that doesnt happen to the Su-39, I could see it at 11.7 because of GRB.
2 BR steps for improving flight performance by 3 times, getting an aiming container with a 2nd generation thermal imager and medium-range missiles - is this a balance?
remind you that the su-25 differs from the su-25t by 4 BR steps and gets the worst aiming system in the game and 2 TV missiles. Well, yes, also the IRSM, which works very poorly at a level where everyone has all-aspect missiles and missiles guided through the radar.
This is a BR compression issue. In a2a the Su-39 is on par with most 11.3 strike aircraft. In ground attack, I still believe the Su-39 has several key strengths over most 11.3s. With the exception of a very few specific aircraft.
"Right now its too soon to provide any meaningful statement on its performance. The aircraft is indeed doing satisfactory in ground RB. Naturally attackers are going to be weaker in some cases in Aviation modes.
If / when we have some more news on the topic, we will for sure share it." - Smin
By that I’d say its performance in GRB is neither amazing nor bad. As time goes on, and more data is gathered, then changes may come. I dont think it should go up to 11.7, but simply saying it could have been at 11.7, and with any major buff, the chance of it going up, increases
Not surprising to be honest, SPAA isnt very rewarding at the moment (both gameplay and economically) so I doubt many play it. Those that are good, are just too few.
This is a stupid argument. You can understand only approximately and almost always there will be a principle “grass is greener behind the fence” (I don’t know the exact translation of this expression)
People tend to assume that OP is everything that they don’t have, regardless of the truth.
I gave exhaustive arguments that say that the new Su-25s have nothing besides the number of missiles. There are missiles, but there is no thermal imager to direct them and sight angles, no maneuverability to dodge anti-aircraft missiles.
there are no weapons even against a helicopter with a stinger.
No, Vikhrs will not defeat a stinger. As long as you let it go and hold the sight, you are forced to approach the helicopter.
The Vikhrs will not have time to hit the target until you yourself fly into the 6 km zone (because you have to look at the target you are shooting at). At this moment, the helicopter launches a fire-and-forget missile at you and begins to move sharply.
Weakened Whirlwinds now maneuver very poorly and are not suitable for destroying actively maneuvering vehicles.
Even if you shoot down the helicopter, the stinger will also kill you, because after the death of the helicopter, it will continue to fly at you.
So literally, at best, you will take it with you if the helicopter does not dodge badly or you are incredibly pointing Vikhrs.