Vympel R-27 'ALAMO' - History, Design, Performance & Discussion

R-27P - with passive radar GPS 9B-1102. It is designed to defeat AWACS aircraft and other radio-emitting aerial targets at any time of the day, in simple and difficult weather conditions, in the front hemisphere, including against the background of various underlying surfaces, ensuring the defeat of aircraft that put active radar interference to cover their aircraft. The explosive device is a radio fuse and a contact sensor of the target. The warhead is a rod-bearing type. The capture range of a typical PRGSN 9B-1102 target is more than 200 km, which exceeds the ballistic range of the missile. The minimum firing range is 2-3km, the overload of the affected targets is 5.5g. PRGSN 9B-1102 is produced by JSC Omsk Plant Automation.

R-27P, R-27EP1 - export versions of the R-27P and R-27EP missiles. The maximum launch range in PPS is 72 and 110 km for the R-27P and R-27P1, respectively. The height of hitting targets is 0.02-20km.

R-27EM is part of the Su-33 armament and is used against Tomahawk cruise missiles and Harpoon-type anti-ship missiles at a minimum height of 3m above the water surface. It is equipped with an ARGSN with a two-stage guidance system - inertial with radio correction with the transition to active radar homing at the end of the flight. The firing range in the ZPS is 170km, in the PPS - 110km.
Su-34 with R-27EP missiles…

Spoiler



1 Like

Anyone know any sources on lock ranges of the early (36T) IR seeker of the R-27T/R-27ET?
I found these two.

Spoiler

IsjL3tHXJTdjHaOSKr51vRxC5qZDwBt6zRf7jxpA

401404_original

Both mention higher lock-on ranges than what we currently have in-game (to get a 15 km lock you would have to be at least side aspect for an afterburning target, but usually closer to rear aspect). One of them mentions that the lock ranges are for an F-15, but doesn’t mention the throttle position of the target (Soviets usually use 100% throttle, i.e. max throttle with no AF)

2 Likes

I’ve already got an open report on the issue. Do you know where the top image came from? I can add it to the sources.

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/KxpZP6pVerJi

1 Like

Not only does the new MiG-29SMT have a 90 degree gimbal (I think should be 85 degrees? Will report if so)… but the MFD allows you to zoom in on what the HUD is looking at. You can identify targets a bit further out using this zoom.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1151252147116199976/shot_2023.09.12_14.22.54.jpg

Guessing that’s a bug.

It’s just a view of the HUD, I can’t imagine it’s a bug.

I think its just supposed to be a HUD repeater mode for the MFD, like on the old MiG-29. But its still displaying the feed from the Kh-29T’s/KAB-500Kr’s.

There’s no camera for the MFD to display otherwise.

There is a separate thing for the Kh-29s
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1151253524433358998/shot_2023.09.12_14.30.06.jpg

Also, currently (from some limited testing) the R-27R and R-27ER will trigger a launch warning on RWR even when not in SARH guidance stage, which is about 25 km for fighter-sized targets. Meaning, if launched from sufficiently far away, the RWR of the target should not warn about an incoming missile until it is close enough, assuming that the radio commands are not detectable by the RWR.

I know, but it shouldn’t show with the hud.

That’s because the radar signal changes between simple track and guidance methods.

Also

Should be a bug. SMT doesn’t have anything to provide image to MFD except TV guided munitions. It still uses old IRST.

Maybe they’re considering one of the external pods it could carry.

Think its more likely just the Kh-29T feed not turning off properly.

Probably, hopefully it does get one of its three pods though.

1 Like

Hope so too

i think gaijin make this mod. but he must be a Black-White and without zoom

1 Like

True, but the behavior is still incorrect

Ok, well that’s an interesting find. Is the device in front of the HUD a HUD recorder then? And the feed can be seen on the MFD?

Don’t think that part was modelled on the dev server yet though.