Ty ty
Conventional fins won’t give it 50G maneuverability off the rail most likely, so grid fin R-77-1 would probably be much better at closer distance. Another thing is that if similar configuration would be used in combat it also could mean that they are just trying to use the stockpile of R-77-1 missiles.
If it’s possible. R-77M is longer, hard to say if there is enough clearance between belly mounts to fit R-77M
Love the Yak-141😭
(landing included)
3 Likes
Do the Chinese su-35s get the double rack r-77s?
G load is a function of acceleration and turn radius, itself limited by the missile AoA.
The grid fin missile has a tighter turn radius but has insufficient acceleration for 50G off the rail.
The fin model will have much worse turn radius and AoA, limited to maybe 19-20 degrees as opposed to the 40 degrees of the grid fin models.
But none of that matters because the R-77’s only have grid fins in the 3D model, they fly like missiles with planar fins in the game.
its just as long as R-37M , you can fit 2 r37m under the belly , its diameter is the same as R-77-1 , planar fins are shorter than grid fins , its physically possible imo.
1 Like
Even if they dont - Snail can always give them on the basis of “If this vehicle can use them” (see A2G stuff for Swiss jets) and if they need it
Well they didn’t do that for the J-11A MLU.
That is true, however I got the feeling it was one huge afterthought (that is without accounting on how bad Flankers FM was to begin with)
considering how they’re slightly off set, I think the length shouldn’t impede the rocket, as they’re dropped downwards.
improved R-27T/ET seekers
3 Likes
bunch of bug reports i made on the Su-27 and Mig-29 HUD after finding an east geman document on that:
7 Likes
Why not just make one big bug report…?-
you’re only allowed to do one issue per report
4 Likes
“ILS-31 Incorrectly modeled.”
ez
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.