nobody is bothering on bug reporting the AIM-54 anymore because gaijin devs openly disagree with primary and secondary information. No point wasting our time trying to change their mind, the AIM-54 is never getting fixed.
4 Likes
What do you mean aim-45?
Typo must be
Not logical. Aim-54 is not lighter than the ER.
This is the wrong mentality to have @malucobeleza171
Do not be discouraged. Continue to provide feedback as new jets and capabilities are added to the game.
Devs do not implement a lot of things yet because the game is simply because they feel it’s not ready for it. Can they overlook things? Sure. It happens. But providing feedback at a regular rate each update as a player works and what they look for.
Not telling them how to do their job and model long parameters. Nor is accusing them of a personal bias.
Your post and vote on the subject are good.
3 Likes
My apologies. It heavier you are correct. but the aim54 is underperforming in acceleration.
The R27ER did not gain a substantial or really any relevant gain in thrust. It’s just longer burning for extended range. It got much heavier. It’s not logical that it takes off the rail quicker than the regular R27
Especially in the dense lower atmosphere.
1 Like
How is it not modeled?
If anything, if it were truly modeled, especially the spo15. You’d truly end up hating soviet equipment.
5 Likes
Radar modes. Not precision.
The flankers radar is said to be very good. But of course. Blown out of the water by the tomcat and f14
You right.
1 Like
Like which modes?
So just modes but not perfomance?
Yeah just modes. Specifically fovs. It had a tws last time I checked. No?
It’s currently exactly like the mig29 in modes, range and performance.
Which I think we can agree should not be. But of course, it should not be modeled while the tomcats radar remains as is, and the F-15 radar be as is either.
1 Like
While dcs is not a valid source for bug reports, i think we as players can trust their data studies to be correct enough to point out differences between different weapons.
Their new performance studies show the difference between ER and R pretty well.
Only take into account the new study (green).
1 Like
DCS may be correct. But the R27ER is greatly superior to the R27R of War Thunder in acceleration. Some would say its even better than the R in manueverability too.
These differences are not that great in the graph you posted if I am reading it correctly.
Additionally, the R27ER reaches its top speed almost immediately at sea level just as it does up at high altitude in WT.
Lastly. The R27ER is heavier than the R, yes? Therefore, a desire that it also become more maneuverable than it is now does not make sense from a physics pov.
What do you think? Is the R27ER overperforming in ANY degree whatsoever in WT? You sound reasonable.
I think you have to agree it’s either performing perfectly in acceleration, but then that means its overperforming in maneuverability, or its underperforming in maneuverability but then that means its overperforming in acceleration.
It cannot have both and be better than the R in every way. The missile was designed to have extended range. Not replace the R. Extending the range has drawbacks.
Radar OR RWR, good luck tovarich
lmao, what garbage xD
1 Like
I understand you have frustrations with the lack of modelling in US radars and radar guided weaponry. I do too.
But when you make comments like this, it makes devs take you less seriously and defeats the overall objective. Getting the proper performances out of the Tomcat and Eagle while satisfying the developer’s biggest concern.
Balance.
Seems to be accurate to the chart
R-27ER having higher thrust to weight ratio means it can accelerate faster into max G pull speeds and sustain that speed through the pull, resulting in better maneuverability.
I don’t have any aircraft with the r-27er which means i can’t evaluate anything by myself.
R-27R and R-27ER having same minimum launch distance. if the R-27ER’s minimum launch distance was longer, we would be able to assume that it can not maneuver as fast as R-27R at close ranges. This is not the case though.
yes, and the ER in WT is by far way faster than the R.
Are you going to sit there and say the ER is not insanely faster than the R at all altitudes and ranges in War thunder?
Or you going to say it’s the R that is the one actually underperforming?
You keep defeating your own argument and showing me that the ER and R have similar acceleration performances in DCS. But that is not how they perform in WT.
So which is it? Is the ER overperforming in acceleration? Or is it the R who is underperforming in acceleration? Because they are drastically different one from another in acceleration and immediate top speed.
The charts already show er being faster by some margin. The increased thrust to weight ratio of r-27er means it should accelerate way better through maneuvering and therefore be even increasingly faster in situations where both missiles are pulling 35G.
The chart showed the superiority of R-27ER without maneuvering. With higher thrust to weight ratio, when both missiles have to accelerate through a 35G maneuver the R-27ER will be even increasingly faster.
Bro! lol I didnt see this. Get it!
Since the R-27ER greatly outperforms the R-27R in situations where any maneuvering is happening then it should be like that in game too. Again, it should be recognized that in combat situations where the missile has to maneuver, the R-27ER will accelerate way more stronger compared to R-27R than what is shown in the charts.
If the straight line acceleration is somehow highly unrealistic you can make a bug report about it. Attach some sources and results of your testing and you’re good.
You still have not showed why there is a disproportionate amount of performance in both missiles in WT.
You are arguing over two missiles performances you do not have in a video game with a graph from an entirely different video game.
Lets take a break. Get the missiles and we can discuss in appropriate, topic, yes?