J-11A is a Chinese modernization based on the Su-27SMK project…the exact composition of the equipment is unknown…
Spoiler
First of all, we are talking about simulated air-to-air missile weapons, the tactical and technical parameters of which were introduced into the software of the fighter aircraft weapons control system (SUV), which is responsible for modeling virtual air combat in general and “electronic launches” in particular. So, if the parameters of far from the most promising PL-12 medium-range guided air combat missiles equipped with active radar GOS of type 9B-1348E and having an effective range of only 70-85 km were introduced into the SUV of the Chinese J-11A, then the parameters of long-range guided missiles were introduced into the simulation software of the Thai Gripen weapons control systems. AIM-120C-5/7 air-to-air missiles with a forward hemisphere interception range of 105 and 120 km, respectively.
And even if the PS-05A low-energy radars installed on the JAS-39C/D did not allow the Gripen crews to fully realize the range potential of AMRAAMs, their early launch from a distance of more than 110 km could be possible thanks to the implementation of the “HOJ” mode (interference guidance; in the case of J-11A pilots using L005 container electronic warfare systems-With “Sorption”), or by targeting from an on-board radiation warning system capable of locating and calculating the angular coordinates of the radiation source (in our case, the Chinese radar N001VE) at a distance of about 200-250 km. As for the Chinese J-11A, the PL-12 suspensions placed on their nodes, which have not so “long-playing” single-mode engines (in comparison with the AIM-120C-5/7), would not allow to intercept Thai Gripens at a distance of 90-100 km, even if direct participation in the process of target designation, on-board radiation warning systems SPO-15 “Birch” or KJ-2000 long-range radar detection and control aircraft were used.
I’d like to remind everyone not to indulge in any political discourse or discussion of ongoing world events. This is a video game forum.
It’s simply not feasible that the R-77 is outranged by the earliest AMRAAMS and the Gripens used in the exercise previously mentioned against the PLAAF were using the AIM-120C-5/7 as mentioned.
With this knowledge, we must also consider that the Gripen has a relatively small RCS … The Su-27 is 3-5x larger at almost 20m2. The disproportionate detection ranges, uncertainty as to which AMRAAM variant the Gripens used… and the lack of launch parameters for stated ranges leaves us with little to work with. It’s not a very good source.
16-18km range from public sources against unknown size target. Seems to be comparable, and China used it in their PL-12 initially. In-game it will likely be similar.
Would there be any difference between the R-77 and early 120? From what I am reading throughout the thread and on other topics, the 120a is really not that great of a missile compared to the R-77 and even the R-27ER.
The AIM-120A will be very potent, in the same manner as the R-27R/ER due to the datalink and inertial guidance. The added active radar component will make it extremely deadly at medium and close ranges. The maneuverability (35G) is also a huge factor. Consider it a superior AIM-9M for close quarters in most cases aside from the additional weight.
It might very well potent but how does it stack up to the R-77? Does the R-77’s seeker have any advantages than the 120A? I have heard but not researched about how the 120’s seeker is better but I was hoping maybe someone has some insight to that?
It depends highly on the specific R-77 variants, as posted above the ranges vary from 13km to >40km for the seeker types although I think some of those are for R-37 and such. The RVV-AE is the variant we think they may add first which is limited by battery life and has a maximum range for 5m2 target of 16km. This matches well against the AIM-120’s active seeker based on public sources.
The kinematic performances of the R-77 will be better, but to my knowledge it does not loft and if wave drag is modeled you can bleed it’s speed faster. Should be a similar performance to the AIM-120A in-game and coupled with the fact that the aircraft in-game cannot carry as many R-77 as others can the AIM-120… should be a bit more fair than R-27ER vs AIM-7F imo.
R-77 should be particularly trash in WT due to the speeds and altitudes air combat is performed at ingame (usually transonic or subsonic and low alt).
Take it with a grain of salt cuz I cant find much info on it, but the R-77 was stated to have had tested in surface launch as a potential SAM, but ended up getting abandonned due to having an abysmal 12km range. By compairison, the RIM-7M (surface launched designation for an AIM-7M) has a range of about 19-26km depending on sources, more than double the R-77’s range if the 26km sources are to be believed (i see mostly US sources claiming 26km and Russian ones claiming 19km). Both missiles are otherwise very similar in dimensions.
http://old.missiles.ru/arhiv/19.htm
Loking just at “range” is useless. It’s engagement zone and you should take into account also altitude and course parameter of engagement zone and against what target and with what probability is hit guaranteed. Also range can be limited due to seeker lock range, as most likely this SAM was planned without using radar for giving radio corrections to misisle.
