to be fair it excludes another 44 recorded missile uses that were listed in logistics data but not confirmed as actual combat engagements. so its really 30/88
iam sorry that i made a mathematical mistake, that isnt even helpful for my point
maybe you should get your human decency checked
1 Like
Against what 👀
i mean afaik the r27 hit rates are for missiles launched in combat too, only fair to hold them to the same standard
1 Like
1 of 30 in Africa for the 27ER is the only one ive heard.
Not what I asked 😂
Edit: I meant against which targets and which combat conditions
he asked what the sparrows were launched against
1 Like
then MiG-29, MiG-23, MiG-21, some other stuff
idk the exact combat conditions for every engagement
Mig25 too.
f-15s vs mig-25s and mig-29bs isn’t exactly fair lol
it was Su-27 on MiG-29B in Africa too though no?
We then can’t draw conclusions in terms of combat effectiveness between missiles. It’d be a statistical fallacy
Too bad, IRL couldnt be fair at all…
1 Like
yeah. and the su-27 did not have a single loss, although I don’t remember if the r73 or r27 got more kills
yeah ik, but its still 4th gen air superiority vs. worse platforms. so in that aspect F-15’s w/ 7M in Iraq and Su-27 w/ 27ER in Africa is pretty comparable
1 Like
why not?
No real situational parallel, no control group. It’d be like flexing a K/D that you got by just killing bots
not really. what control group could there be, we’re going off of real world performance in a fairly similar situation which is about as good as it gets, unless you have your own fighter jets and your own airspace and your own missile stocks to test it with
1 Like
You sure you arent thinking about the non-monopulse 7F?