Both missiles are accurate. They match the performance data in the primary source materials. The R-27T just doesn’t out-range the R-24T by raw kinematic performance. It was designed as a more maneuverable missile with datalink and larger warhead. It was more modular and more easily maintained as well.
The R-77-1 is longer in the files and I am fairly certain length of the missile has an effect on drag even if raw CxK is the same. I need to test.
Yes.
This is just a much more long winded way of “lol skill issue git gud”.
The R-27ER does not outclass the Aim-120 by any significant margin or in a way that is actually meaningful to gameplay. It’s especially not a meaningful advantage in SB where there is no shared spotting markers and the poor quality of the radar means that attempting BVR tactics in the plane is not reliable.
It has nothing to do with skill issues. It’s just a marked limitation of the plane and the way it’s implemented in the game. The fact that the flight model is also underperforming in terms of bleed rate when other western planes are over-performing by the same metric is just icing on the cake.
Didn’t know this, all I know is that the R-27T at low altitude is pathetic in terms of range.
All I remember is how disappointed I was with R-27T when Mig-29 came and I changed from R-24T to R-27T
No it’s not. You can’t even partake in the discussion or argument without stuffing words in their mouth to base your ramblings. I’m not going to entertain this further because there is no end-goal to this discussion point. It’s just you pushing an opinion that isn’t widely shared.
R-27 is thicker and has smaller Length to diameter coefficient. So it has more drag.
R-27T is fantastic in dogfights, so is R-27R.
I mean, look at the wings.
Well, when MIG-29 first came out I tried using it as a R-24T. I thought this was the replacement for the role of R-24T. I didn’t know better back then. Long range shots.
R-27 was 30G back then as well. But yes, it’s great at close(ish) ranges for a missile this size. But only if it has any energy left after turning.
My opinion is pretty widely shared amongst the SB community. There are multiple topics and posts about the game balance that largely stems from “Red” side having aircraft that are worse overall. The only people defending the current state of the game are players who only play USA and will never deviate from it.
The discussion was of air RB meta and your perspective of a small community is also irrelevant. Sim isn’t run by who has better dogfight performance. It’s run by invisible IR AAM’s with IRCCM.
same for the aam-4
The plane has much of the same limitations in RB as it does in SB except they are mitigated by 3rd person view + shared marker spotting + mixed teams. That doesn’t mean the limitations are not there and are not relevant.
Which side has the invisible IR AAMs?
Which side has the better dogfight performance?
Which side has the better avionics?
Which side has the better BVR missiles?
It’s almost entirely concentrated into one side with the exception of minor nations that will play on both sides.
Also, which side has more countermeasures on their flagship planes?
Which side has ACM that can click on someone’s nametag from 19km instead of 10km?
WHICH SIDE IS ACTUALLY ENJOYING THE BIAS!?!?!
About the only things that I can think of that red team does well are long range sucker punches with the 27ET (IMO the 9M sucker punches things more reliably, albeit at shorter ranges), and crazy HOBs shots for gun range knife fights (if the missile doesn’t corkscrew out of control).
edit:
And also the IRCCM on the R-73 is very strong within gun ranges. But getting into a good launch position at gun range is a tall order.
Quit pushing off topic nonsense in the thread. You can’t complain about something and then actively derail the discussion oriented towards fixing the root issue.
Disagreeing with you is not derailing the topic.
I think gaijin should add SU-33 at 13.0/13.3 (13.0 please)
It’s a SU-27 that’s even more of a flying brick, but is carrier takeoff capable and it’s very cool
I love cool planes
@MiG_23M how would the forward canards affect the SU-33 compared to base SU-27? Any ideas?
@kitsune_qq, why are you arguing on here when you don’t even play top-tier air? I’m level 91, and you have fewer combined top-tier games than me. This is your rank 8 game.
No?
We’d be lucky if they make it 13.3 like the Su-27S because it has 12 pylons instead of 10.
The canards + larger wings give it more lift overall which helps offset the weight increase. The engines also feature an emergency boost mode, but I don’t know if/how this would implemented, perhaps in a similar fashion as how rocket boosters are activated in game.
As for the canards themselves, they were added on Sukhois whenever the centre of pressure needed to be moved forward for whatever reason. A side effect of that is better lift performance and less buffeting at high angles of attack (allowing the plane to pull G more safely) due to the vortices they create forward of and above the main wing.
It’s important to remember that Sukhoi canards do not control pitch like those seen on the Gripen; instead, they “follow the airflow” and point downwards towards the velocity vector of the plane when pitching up, similar to leading edge flaps/slats.
what is not? when they are in the nomenclature of weapons
