My (unfounded) opinion is that the original R-77 and R-77-1 share the same motor. The improvement in guidance technology (new seeker) as well as the possibly improvement in battery life yielded the improved 110km range. As shown in Karpenkos estimate, the 100km range abruptly ends. This is likely a guidance time limitation.
To me, the grid-fins suggests these missiles do not loft. That would likely hamper their performance as wave drag would drastically harm their final approach at max range. I don’t think the R-77-1 will loft either due to this, the change to the conventional tailfins on the new mysterious R-77M indicates a change in methodology for the Russians. Anyhow, the R-77-1’s 110km stated range indicates again (imo) that it may only be the matured R-77 that finally saw serious production. No longer limited by guidance time, it has the proper “maximum” launch range of the earlier premature R-77 that never really saw service.
We will see in time I suppose, but for now we have nothing but the information already stated and sourced. The initial izdeliye 170 (R-77) is almost always stated as 100km and the later izdeliye 190 (RVV-AE) stated as 80km.
Not a great opinion to have, the R-77 is 3.6m long and 175kg vs the R-77-1’s 3.71m long and 190Kg. Both have the same warhead, and its unlikely the extra 15kg of weight and 0.11m length are avionics related or due to the streamlined nose.
All evidence points to the R-77-1 having a new motor with more fuel to acheive the longer range.
As you’ve previously stated, the R-77 was already filled with battery space, making it unlikely the missile was limited by guidance time.
Your assumption also makes literally no sense at all, as your stated source (which, yet again, predates the R-77’s entry into service in 1994 by a year) states a HIGHER range than the most up to date publicly available sources (from 2015, submitted in my initial reply) which indicates the earlier chart was either a raw assumption, or a propaganda number that has since been revised.
As for the R-77-1, it entered service in 2015 following an arms embargo from Ukraine (the original manufacturing country of the R-77) due to Russias invasion of Crimea.
There is no good reason to assume both Rosobornexport and KTRV both underclaim the performance of the missile despite some questionnable past sources stating a range upwards of 100km for the baseline R-77/RVV-AE, nor is there any reason to assume they ALSO underclaim the R-77-1/RVV-SD performance.
There is also no good reason to assume the the R-77-1, with its improved motor, aerodynamic refinements, and more modern electronics, would only offers a 10% increase in range over the baseline R-77
Also! To counter the asumption that the RVV-AE somehow has reduced range over the R-77, both have the same dimensions and weight, and russian export missile variants have always been modified in things such as proximity fuze and avionics, not in rocket motors. They also both are claimed to have midcourse update with inertial guidance alongside terminal active radar homing, indicating range would not be a lock on issue.
There is no reason to believe the R-77 and RVV-AE have any significant flight performance differences at all.
The assumption that izdeliye 170 and izdeliye 190 are the same weight stems from confusion of R-77 and RVV-AE I think.
Also, the fact that in Karpenko’s chart the range is capped at 100km with a vertical line suggests a guidance time issue, nothing more. The missile has more room for more batteries than the AIM-120, this also adds to the reason that the AIM-120A likely has significantly less range than than the R-77.
Anything saying the RVV-AE has similar weight and size to the original R-77 fails to also explain the change from a radar to a laser based proximity fuse and I see no public sources outside of forums and twitter stating the differences but there are plenty of photos in both clearly showing that there are changes in the R-77 vs RVV-AE. Even within different models of RVV-AE we see either laser or radar based proximity fuse window options. There are also changes made to the grid fins in later models of the RVV-AE which are later seen on RVV-SD. There just isn’t enough solid information on the missiles.
Its actually farcical how much you absolutely categorically refuse to believe that the R-77 is not a match to the AIM-120-C5 like you claim and is more likely a match to the AIM-120A, as the R-77-1 is more likely a match for the AIM-120-C5 and beyond variants.
Desperately denying the best publicly available sources on the missile because it doesnt match your view of reality while begging for someone to pull an official (likely classified) primary source that would totally 100% prove you right.
Some takes from video:
RVV-AE completed trials in 1991 and was allowed for export. In 98 first missiles were delivered. After Vympel having established serial production of RVV-AE for export, Vympel started creation of missile for RuAF. RVV-SD was created in 2002-2006 and put into RuAF service, recently (regarding the date of the video release) was allowed for export.
How is it farcical? Aside from Fantom I saw you were doing nothing but being dramatic as you were with this comment. You’ve yet to show how the AIM-120 performs in comparison anyhow.
I understand that I have out-of-the-box opinions at times, but when real evidence shows things to be true/untrue I’ve always shifted my position however uncomfortable. As we can see, my theory that they did not loft is false, models with the grid fins do in fact loft as shown. Based on what Fantom has shared, it seems I was wrong about the range of the R-77 (Izdeliye 170), and it may have reduced maximum launch range of 80km rather than 100km.
My argument that R-77 outperforms AIM-120A/B still stands, it has greater range than both (imo).
Time shall tell.
Looks like a pretty steep lofting trajectory initially. Do we know if the initial R-77 (or RVV-AE) has had any updates (even software) to allow for lofting at all?
I’m going to have to update the OP later today with the new information on RVV-AE and RVV-SD.
Your opinion is so obviously a result of motivated reasoning. That is what makes it farcical.
Also, even if Izdeliye 170 had greater range, for which there’s no reason to believe and plenty to refute, it wouldn’t matter. It was an extremely limited-production missile and most Russian aircraft have never been seen using it. Export Izdeliye 190 is probably more common on Russian aircraft using foreign stocks.
Also, note that we can see a DLZ for R-77-1 in the video screenshots @_Fantom2451 posted, and it doesn’t bode too well, ~65km for a hot target in a high to low shot.
There’s no emotional want or need for the R-77 to be superior to the AMRAAM. I’m a die-hard pro-American. I just don’t accept that everything we build is the best thing in the world.
Again, regardless of how many were built the R-77 (izdeliye 170) was built in small numbers and likely used in service or testing somewhere. The MiG-29 in the Russian tech tree saw fewer than 100 examples built iirc, this didn’t stop Gaijin from putting it in the game. The Yak-141 as well… lol.
Do note that the R-77’s apparently overstated graph from Karpenko shows a reasonable 20km at very low altitudes. The 65km hot target isn’t surprising, and I doubt early AMRAAMs would compete with that.
In the first video I think I understand this… it looks like the following:
Launch parameters
Spoiler
Both target and launch aircraft at similar airspeeds of ~1200 km/h?
Both target and launch aircraft at similar altitude of 10.6km?
I do not understand the hud of that aircraft well enough to understand what is going on… need more context for each launch and a closer look.
Missile guidance time
Spoiler
It seems the bottom right circle is missile time to target at any given time should it be launched? If that is the case it blinks to a maximum of 120s between launches and he launched at approx. 80s to target at 60km. This is interesting, I think we can ascertain the missiles average velocity from this.
This is unexpected, I wonder what the reasoning for this is? I can’t imagine that is an efficient loft trajectory unless there is something we do not understand about the gridfins?
In regards to gridfins, I think that the Russians understand most R-77 launches will be at high speed so there isn’t much to be worried about when it comes to wave drag. Having high T/W aircrafts that can accelerate past Mach 1 easily might mean you do not have to worry about the cons of gridfins much.
