The R-77 'ADDER' - History, Design, Performance & Discussion

Thank you, restored your post.

1 Like

Would you be able to upload the document somewhere and share it with me so I may look over it?

2 Likes

It seems relatively recently they gave Mirage 2000s a new mechanism where it gets reduced drag when supersonic, so supposedly it’s possible for them to transport the same mechanisms over to R-77.

2 Likes

I can’t imagine it would be very difficult to code, at the same time it probably won’t happen. Not initially.


I’m trying to put the P-77 on the calculation, but the grid is too small there is not enough hardware capacity for calculation

We came to a conclusion on it’s drag coefficient previously and tested, and it sailed beyond 80km quite easily in every test.

1 Like

Made a report to hopefully fix the MiG-29s lack of AoA.
Community Bug Reporting System :)

image


image

image
image

source

I’m not gona translate all of this, so you can try web translate if you want

1 Like

MiG-29 in standard configuration is not allow to perform “cobra”, this is stable aircraft at any angle of attack with poor high AoA roll/yaw control. The Max AoA available for sharp and rapid pitching up were about 55-60deg, will be corrected to this previous values.

The estimations from ICA3112 is far away from practical aerodynamics description book. The source videos don’t show exact values of AoA and actually look like around 50-60deg AOA.

Cobra itself is not useful maneuver figure, and has no any positive effect battle performance.

What a joke…

1 Like

Source

Practical aerodynamics of the MiG-29 states that the aircraft is not stable during overloads in the AoA regimes beyond 14 degrees. Maybe I am misunderstanding this.

In any case, the aircraft in-game is incapable of performance shown at simple airshows let alone what it might have done in real combat. The Cobra may not be useful, but being able to do it will show the aircraft is properly modeled in the first place.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1066148362497306684/1153704025846448158/image.png
(Original)

4 Likes


IMG_20230923_211024

1 Like

100km launch, very nice.

Does this indicate the altitude and the range when the missile was fired ?
Since the MIG 35 is a high altitude,high speed interceptor,maybe the conditions of the 100km range are untaignable by other planes

The math doesn’t work out. 80 / 100km launch is for high altitude but not necessarily high launch speeds. If the aircraft were to launch the missile from 2.5+ mach to reach those distances, the missile would have to have a drag value 2-3x higher than anything else within it’s caliber. Then, we must also consider the grid fins which would have IMPROVED aerodynamic drag in comparison to conventional tailfins at those speeds.

The R-77’s 100km limitation I suspect has more to do with battery life than anything else. Sources likely claim 80km as a revised distance for nominal (average) launch and intercept speeds at lower altitudes.

The MiG-35 is not a high-altitude interceptor.This is a multi-purpose maneuverable fighter

I meant MIG 31, Ty for correcting me.

image

1 Like

I hope that clarifies something. During the discussion, I noticed the content about the battle between Su-27SK/J-11A and JAS-39 in the China-Thailand joint exercise.
First of all, that PPT cannot be used as evidence. It is based solely on public data and ignores many facts, such as NATO and China/Russia having different ways of calculating fighter RCS. As far as I know, that PPT came from a public lecture at a university in Beijing; after that, there was a chart of confrontation results showing that J-11A/Su-27 almost won most of the close air battles. This does not explain the problem, because it is based on a simple “effective attack” determination and does not represent the actual combat performance of these aircraft, let alone missiles.
Since the performance of R-77/PL-12s has not been fully decrypted, we can only speculate on their actual performance based on limited content. All things considered, I believe their overall capabilities should be equivalent to the AIM-120Bs and inferior to the AIM-120C, whether it is the AIM-120C5 or C7.

this is a r-77 topic, but i would like to comment, to current ARH missile mechanic MUST need to change, the tws have some boucing bugs, missiles that are not tracking and so long so long, lets support some propose changes until come fox 3 missiles without regards