What about it? Did you not understand what I said?
No medium range missile in-game has correct performance at high altitude, and the R-77 is affected the most because of its’ design and how the developers introduced it without properly modeling the dynamic drag of the grid fins.
I can put in a report covering dynamic drag, but I don’t think they care enough to overhaul the entire atmospheric drag model for missiles and the like just to accommodate one piece of ordnance.
yes, there is no dynamic drag, but as far as I know from the developer, the average value tried to be chosen loyally so that the rocket would be closer to real performance.
If you have collected data that the R-77 is lagging far behind what it should be, you can try to pass it on to the developer
Yes, it was chosen as an average to let it match medium altitude performances as they have done with all ordnance. The R-27ER is missing 100 m/s of its’ top speed and is underperforming by as much as 25% in maximum range scenarios. The only missiles so far that have been modeled for a high alt and high speed scenario is the Phoenix.
The information has already been passed on, the R-77 has been configured like any other missile. The unique grid fins are not currently modeled as I said earlier - it is too much work for one single piece of ordnance. We already spoke with Stepanovich about this specific issue.
I wanted to know if someone that actually does threads on in-development vehicles could create a topic on the Su-33 UB or the Su-27KUB which is a twin-seater version of the Sukhoi 33. This version of the flanker was tested on the Admiral Kuznetsov in the late 1990s and was accepted into service in 1999.
I think it would be a very neat addition to the game right after or right before the Su-33 (which isnt in the game yet) and a new baby to the flanker family.
I really hope someone will have the same enthusiasm as me regarding this beautiful machine and that they will create a topic on whether or not should we implement it into the game.
Thank you for your time reading this and I wish you a great day & / or night!
yeah sure but in life it would be the same and there are more players that are going to play realistic battles rather than simulator… that’s just far-fetched.
Even though if you look at the last picture we can see the canopy’s visibility is kind of okay to be honest, the glass goes all the way down at knees-level.
@Gunjob decided to not forward the report because, after all the not correctly made previous bug reports (all made with incorrect weights and at too high speeds), the devs decided that, after likely testing the Su-27 at those higher speeds, that performance is “correct enough”. I’ve tried to explain in DMs that in my report I exactly followed what where the previous instructions from the devs (used the 20200kg weight the devs said to use before )
and that 0.5 and 0.3G at such low speeds makes a massive difference (especially because low speed and high AoA sustained turns are directly related to energy retention).
Please do not tag staff to demand them to do something. This report has been answered as to why it cannot be forwarded as its already received a developer response with these sources.