R-77 was far cheaper, less complex, easier to maintain, and faster to produce. Any other reasons necessary?
Okay, in that case, you can carry more of them, they have higher precision due to the grid fins, more modern laser and radio based proximity fuses and warheads, as well as better off-boresight performance.
So basically the R-77 is an upgrade over the R-27 in everything besides range and speed?
There is also the history of the R-27, which was quickly becoming known as difficult to maintain, fickle in austere environments and for a while - in short supply. The export market deteriorated.
Similar issues hit the tank fleet, the T-90 was named to suggest that they made a new tank and to hide the fact that it was an upgraded T-72B (1989). The tank was losing its’ value in the export market and it surely lost a lot of reputation after 1991.
In 1991, the T-90 was not yet available, the name appeared in June 1992…
On September 30, 1992, the first “Object 188” of the installation batch left the factory workshops.
In October 1992, the T-90 was adopted by the Russian army.
Despite the CAATSA law, which forced Egypt to abandon the Su-35…Egypt does not intend to give up on the T-90MS!..
… В 2018 году в Северной Африке случилось… | Владимир Шимчик | ВКонтакте
Unfair competition in action…
Anyone want to work together on a bug report for Soviet/Rus HMS, so we can get proper circle that locks onto target when looking out of cockpit rather than a static circle?
It doesnt do that IRL
Its literally connected to head
Ah, okay wow, it’s quite literally just two static circles?
With option to flash/etc
But yes
The representation of it in DCS is inaccurate?
It just old and from FC2
Prob new MiG-29 will be with accurate one
Gotcha thanks so much for the info :D Good day, Kit!
no. The R-27EA was canceled in favor of the R-77. The R-27EA/ER is a very heavy 353kg missile against 175. The R-77 appeared as a response to the American AMRAAM. Potentially, the P-77 could accept more carriers and they could also be placed more, because the load on the supply point was less
Su-30SM would be 14.3
Su-27SM3, Su-30SM, Su-30SME, Su-30SM2, MiG-29K R (9-41), MiG-29SMT (9-19), Su-35S, MiG-35 and Su-57
Lack R-73M
Idk why, but the idea of that our 29SMT could get another ordinance “upgrade” is very funny for me
Isnt difference between R-73 and R-73M is literally R-73M have greater range?
Can’t the SU-30 technically mount the R-37?
Compared to Python 4 ?
I think lack R-73M and R-77-1, but after decompression to 14.0
Removed R-27R & R-27T only
Sorry. But i don’t know in what bases you can said that it will be 14.3. The plane use the same engine as other Vanilla Su-27 just with TVC, i don’t even think it can use the new engine that gaijin put on Su-33/Su-34 or Su-27sm. And if nothing its heavy; Canard, Two-seat, TVC. All of them add weight to the plane. Even with R-77-1 it will never be the first plane on the line doing BVR, that its not happening. Sure it will turn better, even better than the Su-33 or Su-27sm. And it will have a better radar too, but even that radar its not close to an AESA or the Captor-m when they finale fixed that thing. So it will be just a “rat fighter”.
Don’t even talk about other missile. Because if gaijin add a new missile for the Su-30sm other nations will cry for they stuff. Like aim9x or mica-ir. That conversation its out of the Windows. Even R-77-1 its pushing it.
Between each other (especially since we dont have Python 4 to compare with, sooo)
What I’ve found, the su-30sm uses the same engines as the 34 and the now updated su-27sm just with thrust vectoring. It doesn’t use the su-27s engines as they were never given the option of tvc. I would love to see the su-37 though as it uses different tvc engines producing more thrust than the engines on the su-35, it would be a cool aircraft to add and it would also fix the radar issue with most of the flankers in game as it uses a pesa radar
At present, no R-77-1 / RVV-SD model
MiG-29SMT (9-19), Su-27SM3, MiG-29KR, Su-30SM2, Su-35S and MiG-35
Because Su-30SM carries 10 R-77 & R-77-1 max and AL-31FP Engines with 3D Thrust-Vectoring great manoeuvrebility at low speed
Improved IRCCM and 60° off-boresight
I suppose close to R-74M
