No I rather have my plane not waste half my CMs to flare a missile in an aspect where it won’t be properly flared
And I also don’t want my jet to waste CMs on a missile that isnt even shot at me
No I rather have my plane not waste half my CMs to flare a missile in an aspect where it won’t be properly flared
And I also don’t want my jet to waste CMs on a missile that isnt even shot at me
The player hasn’t seen it though the MAWS coverage as the system is classified we cannot disprove the standard 45 degree detection window for DASS.
Had the DASS system functioned and the missile was detected the player could have easilly flared the missile as it doesnt function correctly in game we have this.
I run with them both on auto for air and ground battles
Nobody talked about the coverage of the maw
Stop moving the goalpost and stop coping
More so as alternative to not having the cms slaved the MAW simply didnt see the missile.
It probably has less to do with losing energy, and more to do with being more difficult to defeat it’s seeker.
Any ARH thrown long-range is trivially easily to notch, by that time they all have massive gaps in between when their seekers light up RWRs and impact.
The ER meanwhile has no real indication on how close it is, and has a narrower window within which it must be notched. It also benefits from IOG, being able to better maintain a target through a notch.
I think you mean datalink reconnect not iog, all arh missiles have iog, but r27er has true datalink reconnect while arh missiles can only use datalink reconnect in lookdown and only if the launcher maintains a lock on the air craft.
R27er also has 5x worse iog than arh missiles.
And for some reason the r-27r series has 2x worse iog than r-24r?
maybe it was fired in his deadzone ?
Russian bias outbiased Russian bias, love to see that.
i went back and looked at the replay, the missile showed up on the maws system when it entered its visible zone and flares was deployed, but the pilot made no attempt to cut afterburner from a IRCCM missile approaching from rear aspect so it just ingnored all CMs and killed him.
As to why he didnt cut afterburner? Probably didnt notice it even since he was busy doing a 1v3 against a different su-30, F-15I and a MiG-23ML for some reason.
The Change to the Su-30sm are nice. The new control for radar are good. But i still have problem with the Radar on Su-30sm. Hope that when the Su-35s come IRBIS it improve on what Bars lack.
Poor Eurofighter.
Su-30 on Su-30
https://youtu.be/2my6XAVOr2Y?si=sZB8Ph7I17wz31h_
With the change to limited max speed of missile. R-27ER has more Terminal velocity.
That’s some proxy fuse activation 8m+? I do think Gaijin need to model the warhead detonations better, the majority of that detonation is in an orb fashion not jetted forward like a HEAT projectile and with the speed of the Typhoon and the missile losing energy like it was you would have to surmise Typhoon would have some damage but probably could still fly.
Why does it have more terminal velocity, after the motor has burned out the missiles is big and draggy look at those control surfaces?
Su30 is way more consistent at getting to speed now, especially considering almost every map has an airspawn.
180° radar roll is pretty nice too.
Would you be surprised if I told you r-27er is actually very slightly underperforming in high alt long distance shots?
The r-27er was simply that great in kinematics, also it had its arbitrary 1500 m/s speed limit removed
Test video of 25 km shot
It is over performing at low alt though
Also r-27et is underperforming even more than r-27er
i have this graph for the r-73 and r-27r
y-axis is the altitude in km and the x-axis is the range in km
right side of the graph is headon, left side is rear aspect
conditions:
gib A3-10 seeker for the 27ET
make the ET great again
R-27r is slightly overperforming anyways
there are no Ukrainian planes in game…
Compatibility is what matters for gaijin