My assumption is that the Russians would not abandon the R-27ER so quickly rather than putting a better seeker on it if the R-77 did not offer sufficient range. They at the time thought the AMRAAM had a range of nearly 120km. There is no possible way they’d wait until 2015 to produce a missile with still less range if they already had better, knowing full well the enemy did too.
Range >80km for the R-77 makes sense when looking at the size of the missile, the aerodynamics… it makes sense when we know how Russia tends to state missile range. It makes sense when we look at what else they have available.
Hostile? You accuse me of making assumptions and useing bad sources, meanwhile th majority of stated performance for the R-77 from those of you currently arguing is purely based on assumptions and you call my source “secondary at best” while supporting your argument with what is a low effort grpah with no actual proper sourcing on an enthusiast blog?
You 3 having been accusing me of stating erroneous facts when im the only one who actually provided a source with a decent bit of actual official publicly available performance data.
If our presumptions on the range of the R-77 wont change its performance in-game, why are you even wasting our time with this argument? You’re just moving the goalpost at this point
Yet again, everything you provide is based on assumptions. Yet you accuse me of making assumptions and provide no actual source to back yourself up besides napkin math and logic skewed to your view, and dispute the only actual source any of us has provided.
Your source is wrong though, lol. Rosboronexport has stated erroneous things in the past and isn’t considered a primary source by Gaijin. Likewise, the US Airforce and NAVAIR both intentionally misquoted the weight of the early AIM-120s. It’s just propaganda or what have you.
The information is generally assumed, but backed with good reason. You fail to see the reason and you want desperately to be right. You’re not going to be able to prove it and the best we got is the napkin math which points to my conclusions.
And Russia didn’t. Until R-77-1 came in active service (R-77 never even was in active service) and R-27 anyway is still often carried in patrol mission. And R-77-1 (RVV-SD) advertising range is 110 km.
if there’s anyone trying desperately to be right, its you Mr. I modify my assumption of rocket motor sizes to fit my argument and refuse state sources in favor of enthusiast blogs because doing so proves me right.
The burden of proof via official sources is on you, not me.
Math that so far has yet to be shown false, aligns with performances of other missiles per the testing done in-game. Information from enthusiast blogs that aligns better with what the math shows and against state media that has been wrong many times in the past.
Rosoboronexport claims a range of 75km for the R-27R1. It states nearly the same information of +/- 10km separation and hitting a target traveling some ~3500 km/h. Yet, in-game has a stated launch range of approx. 55km.
I suspect the 80km stated range is nowhere near the real practical range, and certainly not the max. The same goes for everything else Rosoboronexport has stated and that’s when it’s accurate to begin with. We need the context of the launch parameters as everyone else has said. While we wait for such data to be come public, the napkin math is the best we got.
And there you can see the launch range of 50-60km stated for a fighter sized target. This does not match the actual performance envelope shown from the manuals. It is propaganda, without context.
The manual assumes much lower speeds than the theoretical max from the supplier, and this argument actually hurts your case rather than helps it, as you claim they are overclaiming on the R-27R1 but underclaiming on the R-77 for whatever weird propaganda reason you’re making up to assure yourself you’re right xD
I don’t see how it harms my argument, it shows how the max range is not even all that relevant. I’m going to admit as much right now. This doesn’t change the fact that it could very well exceed 80km and Rosoboronexport has not always been an accurate source.
That leaves us with what we’ve stated already… you call it napkin math… okay? Does that make it any less relevant to the conversation? I’d rather try to make real comparisons with better known and visible data than just believe something arbitrary stated like “20+ miles” or “80km”.
@MythicPi So someone has shared with me a book, inside it are some graphs for missile ranges. I compared them and found that all of the graphs match the stated ranges in diagrams or manuals (first hand sources). Since I lack one for the R-77 I cannot directly compare but the accuracy for the rest is on par, I can only presume the R-77 is also accurate.
The maximum stated range on the chart is 80km, but the range exceeds that and hits a wall of what I assume to be the battery life limit. To me this suggests a practical maximum range of 80km due to battery life, but kinematic range of closer to 100km at those altitudes.