Happens every update. People think it changed lmao
3 Likes
this game is making me crazy
If the dev Su-27SM can carry 12 missiles, does that mean the Su-27SM3 will be able to mount 14 missiles due to additional pylons on the wings? It would be extremely funny if this was the case.
1 Like
That is if Gaijin will give double racks for SM3 as well
That is if the SM3 will be a separate vehicle at all. An upgrade this small (2 more pylons, stronger engines) makes more sense to just be baked into the existing vehicle similar to how the MiG-29SMT was changed from the 9-17 to the 9-19 (better RWR, more fuel-efficient engines) shortly after release, especially considering its lackluster performance.
1 Like
It was changed from 9-19 to 9-19R, adding only better RWR and more cms
True, but again it runs into if Snail considers Su-27SM performance so bad that it would require such drastic change (of the existing vehicle). Not to mention it would create noticeable gap in performance between Su-27 and, hypothetical, SM3
A pair of pylons and slightly better engines is hardly a drastic change, and the gap between the MiG-29 (9-13) and MiG-29SMT is FAR bigger regardless. In that gap, the plane gets not only gets ARHs and a good RWR (which are the only things separating the Su-27 from the Su-27SM), but also R-73s (the Su-27 already has them so no upgrade there), twice the countermeasures and an actually good radar (neither the Su-27SM nor SM3 get one).
Yeah, I suppose its fair. Im just stopping more on engine parts since it will directly impact flight performance (even more so if Snail bother to fix/improve the FM)
The engines is precisely why I want it to happen, they can skip the pylons for all I care, it’s not like the plane’s issue is the number of missiles it can carry. If the FMs ever get fixed, the better engines would provide a substantial improvement to its flight performance compared to the base Su-27 (which itself would be no slouch once fixed).
2 Likes
This week is our last hope for any relevant fm changes, after that we can only cope till the next update…
1 Like
it has been a month since the report was made and nothing, the devs are just pretending it doesn’t exist lmao
4 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/RX6wHXSy2rtx
Decided to file in Russian this time. Quick summary of the bug:
Contacts are incorrectly displayed on the IRST screen. They are shown with relation to the elevation from the aircraft, irrespective of its pitch angle. The scan zone, however, is shown with relation to the vertical angle from the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. So, oftentimes, contacts will be displayed above or below the scan zone on your IRST screen.
6 Likes
What was changed in regards to Russian radars? Seems like scan times were increased? I can’t check right now
As far as I know only SU35S carries 14 missiles, SM3 still has 12 but I can’t find much information on Google.
Well, here are some that I remember (about the N001, N001VEP, unless otherwise specified):
- HMS ACM is now 20 km (the scale is now 20 km for IRST too). IRL, it should have no limit (I have spent countless hours looking for it, there is no explicit mention of either the presence or absence of it, but there are some other facts in the manuals that indirectly imply the latter).
- N001(VEP) now is back to having the full range of scan zone positions. ±60° in azimuth and -22° +52° in elevation. The bug report
- The small IRST scan zone now has proper behaviour when shifting horizontally. It now shifts half the azimuth, 10°, each step, instead of only having 3 positions: center, full left, full right.
- IRST scan speed is now much slower (this is realistic, refer to the report above). It is 5 seconds per full large (60°×10°) scan, instead of 1 second.
- IRST scan zone is now stabilized in both pitch and roll. I don’t think this is realistic, but after they removed roll stabilization (MiG-23s had them stabilized), the IRST would often miss targets due to small movements, so I guess they chose to have it stabilized now.
- IRST sidelobes are even smaller. Don’t think it will change that much (maybe help with above problem of missing targets), just a sharper cut between what falls in the “beam” and what does not.
- The IRST on the N010M now has +60° -15° elevation and ±60° azimuth with the same scan zone that can be shifted smoothly. Don’t know as much about the N010M, so can’t comment on authenticity of this.
There are, however, two very important things missing:
- IRST is still severely underperforming in range
- The radar scan does not restart from the top, once it finishes a cycles, but just goes backwards (from the bottom). This wastes time scanning the top and bottom bar twice. Also, the wait time between refreshing TWS contacts can be up to twice the scan period, instead of the fixed 1x period. So you can have like 7 seconds in between refreshes. (This bug applies to almost all airborne radars, but it affects the most those with slow scan times).
7 Likes
This badly needs to be fixed. @Smin1080p_WT is there any way we could see this fix this update?
1 Like
And they gave double racks for R-77 to 27SM that are reason for 14 missiles on Su-35 instead of 12 so SM3 would get 14 missiles unless something will kick gaijin
2 Likes
I’m talking about the changes that occurred today/this morning to Russian radars. You might want to give github a look
1 Like
Oh, not much. The N010M IRST scan zone getting bigger, that I included above. And the IRST designation locks (locking spotted target on your IRST display) now takes 1 second instead of 0.3 (for all N019, N010, N001)
That is it
1 Like