We can continue the conversation here.
Missile is underperforming at high altitude because all missiles in-game are configured for 1-5km altitude performance metrics for the most part. In this case, missiles such as AIM-7F which have much longer burn times are at a significant advantage in war thunder.
No source? Seemed you were adamant about this opinion.
You have your answer, was I not clear enough? (I’m referring to in-game btw, not sure if that was clear or not).
Did I say anything about a game, son? I asked you a simple yes or no question. Does a missile perform the same at all altitudes. Yes or no.
You’re a very smart dude. You know the answer to that question as much as I do. In the context of the game, the R-27ER is underperforming at higher altitudes because it was configured for the charts at altitudes of 1-5km instead of 20km. This was done intentionally, and it favors missiles with longer burn times such as AIM-7F.
You can’t shuck responsibility for your statements by asking dishonest questions and pretending not to understand the honest answers.
A rocket cannot fly the same way at different altitudes. The rocket opens at altitudes of more than 12 km
It’s been affecting all missiles?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/dnR2P4I9b0Ai
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/dx4FKVHJgNpZ
He knows, he’s been baiting/ derailing this thread enough. You can quote him and then copy / paste it into the correct threads and it will post a convenient link under his comment for him to click and carry on the conversation over here.
The thing is, the information claiming low accuracy and target overloads stemmed from the same period of information as when people thought R-27 was a 24G missile… you can see where I’m going.
It was later shown R-27R/ER is capable of 35G, etc. I would not be surprised if the R-27P/EP have pretty good effectiveness against certain radars.
the whole R-27P/EP is mysterious in its own right, the manual goes into great detail on the effectiveness of R-27ER/ET even giving PKs in various scenarios but the R-27P/EP are simply mentioned that “hey these exist, this is how you shoot them btw”
@BBCRF I understand its a passive missile but the manual explicitly describes one method of operation is to use phi-0 mode to prevent missile capture of the fighters own radar, but also mentions use with RLPK-29 lock which contradicts the fact it can capture its own fighters radar, its reasonable to assume this is because there are 2 ways to guide the R-27P/EP:
There are two methods. Target detection and capture.Capturing a target offline
I pressume this refers to using the radar
And this refers to phi-0
I just find it odd it mentions its possible for the missile to acquire its own radar emissions and then says you can use the radar for R-27P/EP operations
do you mean, lock target with radar and then switch to phi-0 for a pure IRST lock then fire?
Fi-0 mode it is possible to shoot somewhere there in the direction of the target
Sure I’m just not seeing how tracking a search style wave form will give you accurate enough targeting for a fighter style target. I’m picturing it as a TWS style tracking. It might be enough to get it in the right ball park for a hit but even with DL TWS you need a hard lock for terminal.
Could the sidelobe emissions be strong enough for accurate guidance once the missile gets close to the target?
But more info, what i found, R-27P/EP create like counter AWACS missile.
That is how ALARM functions, helps massively with tracking emissions passively. As the main beam isn’t likely to be tracking the missile.
See that makes sense to me as it won’t need as much precision to hit a target like fighter.
It is also induced via RWR
Doesn’t AWACS radar also pulse? I suppose it’s easier to hit but wouldn’t something like an ET be more reliable since it actually has terminal guidance ability?
Or did it have like a basic IR seeker for terminal?