Su-39: R77,R27,R73

@ARK_BOI @Morvran @Thodin In Air Realistic Battles (ARB), you can earn more experience points (XP) and in-game currency (lions) compared to Ground Realistic Battles (GRB). This is primarily because, in most cases, you cannot respawn in an aircraft in GRB unless you have accumulated enough points. Even if you do manage to spawn in an aircraft, there is a 60% chance that you will spend most of your time trying to destroy a Anti-Aircraft (SPAA) or Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) unit. Have you ever wondered why, in real life, all A-10 or Su-25 aircraft have at least a few effective Infrared (IR) missiles?

As a main of (US,DE,RU) to explain why the Su-39 struggles in aerial combat:

  • The Su-25K has a lower battle rating of 1.3 compared to the Su-39, even though they have the same air-to-air missile loadout.

A-10 In my personal opinion its much better then Su-39:

  • Slower but more maneuverable
  • Equipped with x2 AIM-9L missiles
  • Possesses a 30mm minigun with 1,100 rounds of ammunition
  • Carries more flares
  • Has a lower battle rating than the Su-39 by 1.3.

Su-39 (Su-25):

  • Equipped with x2 R-60M missiles, which, in my experience, are inferior to AIM-9L missiles.
  • Carries x16 Vikhr missiles, which leave me wondering if I should submit those shots of air-air kill to the Thunder Show.
  • Can deploy IRCCIM, which is amusing to witness when there is a barrage of IR missiles, until the enemy starts using guns and radar-guided missiles.
2 Likes

Smin already reported back that early data shows it is performing well in its main mode.

"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

But it’s a fact that the Su-39 is designed for CAS missions, not to be a fighter. Not every aircraft can be the best in every mode. The Su-39 is meant to be good for GRB missions. It isn’t meant to be used as a pure fighter for team deathmatch scenarios.

Entirely for self defense. They aren’t meant to be used as fighters, but instead in moments where allied air cover fails and allows hostile aircraft/helis into the area the CAS is operating.

The Su-39 has a higher BR because it carries Vikhrs for ground battles. Planes should always be balanced around their best mode, even if it means they suffer in the others (Fighters for ARB unless they’re too strong in GRB, strike aircraft for GRB/NRB unless they’re too strong in ARB). The self defense missiles haven’t increased in quantity and type because I assume Gaijin wants to test the waters and slowly increase their self defense capabilities instead of repeating of the times Su-25s and A-10s were absolutely dominant in 9.7 lobbies.

By all means give it an extra pair of R-60Ms if it can carry them, but complaining that a strike aircraft can’t compete against dedicated front line fighters, so we should jump straight to giving it the best SARH missile in game/best IR missile that would be in game is a terrible argument.

BR is determined by BOTH ARB and GRB performance. It has an extremely good compliment of GRB weapons and thus sits at a higher BR. Its A2A performance might be the same as the Su25, but it sure as hell differs in ground attack. This is also why we see a 1.0 BR difference between the Sea Harrier FRS1 and the Harrier Gr7

The same is true of the A-10. The A-10 actually has quite a limited ground attack loadout in comparison, with older, shorter range TV guided weapons and no targeting pod. In this regard, I do agree the Su-39 is missing its targetting pod and should be added. Though to be honest, this sounds to me more like they ran out of time to finish it, and it will be coming when its ready regardless of “balance”.

This entire comparison has a flawed premise as the A-10 isn’t even the closest counterpart that the US tree has access to. That would be the A-7D/E/K and you will find is much more comparable to the Su-25 family and even then has a number of points of difference though are pretty fairly balanced even though both Airframes are missing important stores that would help them significantly.

The A-10 doesn’t have a direct counterpart as it tends to handle missions that need longer loiter time(and is basically an evolution of the A-1 / A-37 / OV-10 requirement), any actual strike missions would be handed off to other airframes (A-6 / A-7 / F-15 / F-16 / F-111, etc. ) that are better suited to actually dealing with unexpected threats similar to those you would find in ARB.

The current situation is unfavorable for attackers, who cannot perform their role effectively. If an attacker wants to destroy a bunker, it has to deal with enemy fighters. A quick solution would be to equip the Su-39 with R27 missiles, but Gaijin should also consider developing or introducing a mode that is more suitable for attackers.

The Su-39 can utilize missiles such as the R27, R73, and R77 for self-defense or to provide support to other friendly aircraft.

YES.If the Su-39 were equipped with the R27 missile on the same hardpoint as the Vikhir, it would indeed greatly enhance its effectiveness in aerial combat. This configuration would significantly improve its performance and make it more proficient within the air battle rating (BR) system.

R77 waiting…

SB. It has its flaws, but SB allows for exactly that. and in a premium, you’d make a killing in SLs. Easy couple 100k per game

R-73 and R-77 would be big no no for now. They are too advanced for the game as explained in posts above. especially on a premium CAS jet.

R-27Rs as explained above “might” be okay, but would still be unprecedented on a CAS jet in game. That addition would need to be carefully considered and monitored closely. I’d expect to see a BR rise though, as it could be facing off against BR 10s in GRB or even in ARB and that match up would be very one-sided.

R-27ERs… it would have to move to BR12. It is vastly superior to any other BVR missile in game currently and it would break GRB, there is no doubt in my mind about that

I think the A10 is way cooler than the Su-39. I mean, I’ve flown the A10 a lot and it’s awesome at shooting down other planes.

They will probably never give the USSR thermal imaging because of bias, where other nations had thermal imaging on aircraft for a long time…
Well, double standards

2 Likes

And the A-10 will never get a chance to shoot to if the aircraft it faces play into its glaring deficiencies, it really isn’t hard to beat and is carried by its missiles. If it didn’t have them the airframe itself would probably come in at 7.x or so.

Normally dev bias is for USSR. Im guessing that if it wasnt due to it simply not being ready on release OR that it was balancing concerns. The Vikhrs are very good AGMs and prehaps it was an attempt to curve their power as you do have 16 of them

And how many other aircraft have a functional A2G radar? Only a single event aircraft that can’t even use it properly?

Let alone something like the AN/AAQ-8 for the F-4C (and a number of others) to finally fix the countermeasure issue and get it moved up BR’s.

This radar is useless.
They better replace it with Khod

The Su-39/Su-25T, when faced with aircraft like the F16 or F4, can employ the same approach by utilizing missiles such as the R27, R73, and R77 for self-defense or to provide support to other friendly aircraft in combat.

And speaking of a double standard.

I guess there is no point implementing new mechanics at all if it doesn’t absolutely break everything. I guess I can’t wait for Cluster Bombs and Anti-Radiation missiles to turn up.

Also first ever jet to IRCM, still missing on a number of jets

you don’t have to explain this to me i already knew it. Even Harrier GR7 struggles in aerial combat but most of the Harrier pilot knew what their plane can/can’t do so they do playing around its strength as ground attack role never try to go toe to toe with fighter but what is this case? Su-39 can’t go toe to toe with fighter and it need new missile? want R-73 Su-39? sure but other need batter missile too mostly 9M will you gonna accept that?
German Tornado for example it also suck in air RB if apply same logic to this it should get IRIS-T

You do understand that an Su-39 armed with even the R-27ER would be completely untouchable by anything short of an AMRAAM / AIM-54 (of which many threat aircraft would not have access to anyway) due to having to respect the acceleration of the missile, and even the basic R-27 variant(s) aren’t lacking to badly and may well force the interceptor to go defensive or die anyway, due to being within the NEZ. and so be forced to respect the Nose and work up needing to have the Su-39 to waste the missiles before proceeding inside its sphere of protection, which can be thwarted by simply letting the range close sufficiently before shooting.

And that is simply in a 1v1 environment, if it ever actually got access to any of its more advanced A2A them things would break badly since now there would be no reason to actually use it in the Attacker role but abuse it to go after others (don’t forget the resultant increase in BR compression and likely raise in BR so it faces off against higher performing adversaries where its characteristics are only going to make it even more of a white elephant).

Don’t forget that AAB also exists and has in air reloading enabled meaning that the missile load can regenerate in as little as 40 seconds, which really isn’t long.

Missiles like the R27R require guidance from a radar system, such as the Kopyo-25, which has limited tracking capabilities.

The AMRAAM is a highly advanced air-to-air missile that has no real rival in its class. The only weapon that can be compared to the AMRAAM is the R77, a Russian missile that has similar capabilities but lower performance.

I have not played AAB since I tried war thunder for the first time. I do not know much about this mode.