He might’ve been confusing it with the 23 98 that was essentially just paper and never was actually built.
Ik there’s bort 36 but that’s just been shown with weapons and not actually tested or anything
Nah, like… for very technical subjects my english is still a bit complicated to type so I need double check it lol, this is the reason why I sent it here :D (still having a lot of good things to share)
how would bad english affect posting wrong info?
I would argue it’s more so doctrine and tactics that made the su-27 dominate the 29s.
For example, they usually used a mig -21 flying high as bait and then flew their su-27s close to the deck.
Mig-29s were usually sent solo, and one of their valuable pilots even got jailed for speaking up on working conditions or something similar to that.
Overall, the su-27 proved capable, and the r-27 series proved to be horrendous
I fixed it, didnt I? I pointed out myself what actually happened in georgia, and as someone who’s on the forum you know as well as I do how hard it is to handle a ton of data and not make a few mistakes every now and then, and even if they happen, this is a forum, that’s exactly what this place is for. What do you want me to do after all? give you a cookie, a cake? attention? anything else Im missing?
the russian mercs seemed to have a bit more skill in that situation, I even read about them coming out on top in a 2v4 where they still managed to shoot down a mig 29, but like you said too, they used a bit more strategy to make it all work out and sadly I cant read other languages where there’s more data on this, but it’s probably safe to assume the migs got caught in an ambush anyways
what I meant is that the concept of the missile wasnt actually that bad, the idea was to deliver a lot of performance and be a relatively smarter missile, bringing that revolutionary vibe, but then the project got too advanced for the reality of the country that made it and for the people who operated it, thats why I brought up some of the challenges the ground crews faced to keep it running… in the end we see this kind of disaster, and thats something thats happened and still happens with a lot of weapons that look excellent on paper but end up giving us terrible results in practice
No clue. But the devs should have access to an R-27 book by the Moscow Aviation Institute (it is only available in a few libraries in Russia, no online copy).
They have to at some point, a rework to airframes drag models in general even. Modeling drag for stores would definitely negatively hit many jets.
First that comes to mind for me is the already shitty F18, that thing is on life support already and modeling drag for the loadout would be the last nail on the coffin.
Probably if R-27R/ER got nerfed we will MiG-29 sits with R-73?
what’s likely su-34me with 2 tone camo
here a better one
off topic but love your vids bro
Yeah he’s one of the best su27sm players I’ve seen
@DirectSupport
Currently, the su-27sm in game is an amalgamation of seemingly all the su-27sm variants, su-27sm, su-27sm2 and su-27sm3. su-27sm2 from what I can tell was supposed to be basically su-35 but domestic (su-35s). It carries the same number of missiles as su-27sm3, but doing it with the double racks of su-27sm2. su-27sm3 gets extra pylons that the normal sm doesn’t get on the wings, which is why it gets 8 r-77s, but the way the su-27sm gets 8 r-77s (in game) is through the double racks. irl it doesnt get these extra pylons and is stuck with 6 r-77s.
su-27sm, notice how it doesn’t get an extra pylon inside on the wings (2 pylons under wings)
but, su-27sm3 does get an extra innerwing pylon (3 pylons under the wings)
Spoiler
su-27sm3 does
from World air shows №5, 2006. published on NIIPs website, they refer to the su-27sm2 and the su-35 interchangeably.
Spoiler
mention of twin suspension underneath su-35
su-35 with real dual r-77s
Essentially, su-27sm2 is supposed to be = su-35, and that’s where gaijin may have gotten that su-27sm can carry the double racks, because the su-27sm2 can, because it’s literally su-35.
I wouldn’t mind if the SM lost the double racks but gained the extra wing pylons, thus becoming the SM3
I don’t get where are the additional pylons on the Su-27SM3
Ah nvm I got it
Well I was today years old when I found out that early flankers didn’t have inner wing pylons
also didnt the SM3 get a upgrade to its FCS to integrate the R-77-1?
The double racks of R-77 are also cited on one of the oldest versions of Su-30 [not MKI] by someone else’s evidence posted somewhere.
It’s entirely likely that they’d be compatible with MKI as well, but that’s if India wanted to continue using R-77s with their MKIs to begin with.
Also the year for MKI is 2000 for manufacture, which includes the final avionics and store positions.