Python 3 doesn’t have IRCCM, so it should see flares rather easily, especially as flares only get hotter from here.
Unfortunately not yet
Bug reports for both were submitted at the same time, looks like they are starting with SRAAM. Hopefully Red Tops after. Though we can expect both to eventually recieve double their current range, limited all-aspect abilities and far better accuracy
SRAAM:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uMO3VGJ8IjBf
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/OOgvguUxCHJF
Red top
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/wi1YHANSfsrs
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/oLy6ADzDpBO4
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/OmqlkwTnBH9p
The Red Top is really badly modelled at the moment.
"Off the top of my head here’s what Gaijin got right about the Red Top:
- The 3D model
- The mass is correct
- The warhead explosive mass / type
- The post launch gimbal limit
- The track rate
And what they got wrong:
- The front aspect lock range
- The rear / side aspect lock range against afterburner
- The aerodynamic range (way too much drag)
- The seeker FoV
- The seeker pre-launch gimbal limits
- The maximum overload
- Maximum flight time"
Not too mention other guidance problems, they were nerfed in the aerodynamic update a while ago and are buggy still
1 Like
Agreed to the rest of it
It utilizes a dual infrared seeker head so it shouldn’t just go for single flares the way it currently does, and even so, from a gameplay balance perspective it’s not great to have the strongest weapon of a type in the game be completely ineffective against a single tap on a key.
Also, Python 3 has a no-flare range of 2.4km against F-16s.
Flares are currently performing as they probably should, and we don’t even have the hotter flares of the 1990s yet.
Gotta disagree, just have a look at the DCS R-73E and compare it to the War Thunder R-73E.
Flares resistance in DCS compared to War Thunder is massively different so one must be wrong yeah?
7 months ago, that data isn’t valid.
Currently, IR tracking when flares are involved is not correctly implemented
Based upon the information found on tests involving 9Ls against flares. That 100% should have ignored that flare and hit that Mig-23. The fact that it didn’t does suggest they dont currently have a handle on IR seekers. Throw IRCCM into the mix, and we have a recipe for disaster
(also that flight path is another issue altogether)
Target was on full reheat:
No data mines on the R-73E confirming any changes so I’d expect it to function similarly to what we saw at the very end of Apex Predators (I’d like to be disproven wrong though).
There have been countless changes to R-73s in WT, and we likely have the A not the E.
The R-73E is the export variant and as it’s being used on a Belarusian-Kazakhs SU-25BM, and so that would probably be the variant we’ll be seeing.
There have been countless changes to R-73s in WT
Yeah 99.99% of them being at the very end of Apex Predators.
No, 99% of them being after Apex Predators went live, and before today, with more major changes a day or so ago.
I don’t remember 9L characteristics a month ago, let alone against 23’s flares.
TLDR:
If its on reheat, flares should do bugger all in most cases. Currently whether or not they track (even when no flares involved) can be hit and miss. When you throw flares into the mix. Its a total roll of the dice what they will do.
My main concern with ANY IRCCM missiles, R-73 or 9M is that they could be incorrectly modelled and impossible to evade, no matter what you do
Yeah, I don’t believe we have any aircraft that have advanced spectral flares.
There was actually one, remember when IR missiles got nerfed in terms of their flare resistance shortly after Apex Predators dropped?
R-73 was included in missiles affected, and I believe it was also included in the drag nerfs as well, but that one I’m not concrete on, I would suspect it will also be a 1-tap away missile like all the other current missiles, though if not I would be pleasantly surprised.
Even though flare resistance has been nerfed I’d like to see the IRCCM actually work in-game, I hope Gaijin can implement the missile properly (I highly doubt).
Not sure if they model IRCCM guidance any diffently than single band IR guidance, and I definitely know dual band IR guidance isn’t modelled properly. from what I can tell flare resistance is a slider they move on the missile with a numbered value.
I wouldn’t mind that workaround as much if every number wasn’t > 1.
1 Like
DCS is not a source, it never stops being funny how people think DCS is a standard for air combat gaming. They are notoriously lacking in many areas.
Gajin might plan add R-73 on Su-39 in future major update, but I think can’t add R-77 & R-27ER1 because battle rating exceed 11.7 at rank VII limit
Yeah DCS may not be a source but it can be used as a comparison and especially when it’s the most realistic when it comes to combat simulators. DCS when it comes to air combat gaming may not be the standard overall but without a doubt is indeed the standard in air combat simulators.