R-24 wasn’t exported. Germans and any other Warsaw pact country had only R-23.
Because that table comes from a different document before the collapse of the Soviet Union, so the data is estimated. The report on the R-73 comes from a trial after German reunification when the UK had access to the real missile.
1 Like
Will you bug report it?
Been a report in for awhile, but considering its current performance its pretty much bang on. As long is its not being decoyed by single flares and is taking a quick burst its all good.
That why the missile has FOV AND IFOV not only IFOV. Before the missile acquire anything, it uses it’s fov (more or less 2.5°) to look for the target. When the target is locked the smaller IFOV (currently 0.75° for the R73) is used which make flaring harder since the missile is focussed on a smaller part and don’t see the flare if the missile is close enough.
IIRC ,if the missile is shot at long distance and catch a flare, the missile after passing the flare will normaly use it’s FOV and not IFOV to try to pick up its target.
And the R-73 has a 4.5° FOV compared to the 5° on the R60M and the 3.6° on the 9L. So it shouldn’t lack so mutch in reacquiring a target.
Are you sure the “flare filtering” is not about a dual band seeker (UV+IR or SWIR+ MWIR …) which makes single spectral useless?
If so, then only R-74M and R-74M2 has a dual band seeker, the base R-73 with the MK-80 seeker doesn’t.
If it’s something else then i’m eager to lean about it since i’ve never heard/read anything about it.
It was Published 1993, but amended in 1995, with an additional memo issued in 1996:
Dual band seeker isn’t only IRCCM technique that exist.
1 Like
There is also a logic block that filters out traps
The R-73 is less sensitive to flares than it is to jet engines in-game while the 9M is as sensitive to flares as it is to engines, so its not like that hasnt been modelled either.
Yeah i know but what other method did they uses as IRCCM (if open source)?
If it’s IFOV we know it’s a dual band seeker and it’s IFOV ig is pretty close to IRL.
If it’s suspended tracking sutch as the 9M then i never seen anything reporting the AA-11 family had sutch kind of IRCCM.
If it’s about electronic signal processing then i guess every missile has it and none of them are modelled. I don’t even know how you could model it in WT.
If it’s something else then i’m waiting for your answer.
Edit: Just saw BBCRF answer, so it’s logic gate.
Which is interesting to say the least but how are you supposed to implement them into the game (if it’s true and gaijin acept the source)
Well it is known that in 1991 the US captured an AA-7D missile (and who knows if they managed to capture one before that):
And in 1992 there was a joint trial conducted between the UK, US, and Germany to evaluate the effectiveness of IR decoy flares against Soviet missiles. So it seems entirely possible that there was indeed an AA-7D available for testing during that trial.
3 flares at 0.25 sec intervals ≠ 1 flare decoys the missile at 0.7-8 Km range at direct 90* rear aspect.
While the 9M is very consistent in doing what it does. İt works predictably and reliably. Yes it can be dodged methodically but the R-73 is just too easy to spoof relative to 9M.
2 Likes
This may help people learn how to avoid
2 Likes
That is what I do , I use BVM to spawn in SMT with full A2A missiles loadout. But gaijin hates SMT so much that pure A2A loadout Costs 110 spawn points. Yet F-16C can spawn with 2 GBUs 6 AGM-65s and 4 9Ms only for 300 extra Sp. So 600 SP for A2A SMT and 800 for F-16C
Wow thanks I had no idea how to avoid 9M , I thought I stated I know how both İRCCMs work yet you keep trying to make me look like some noob to justify R-73 IRCCM being trash and 9Ms being great, trying to imply it is a skill issue , when you lack the experience completely of 1 side of the coin.
I am so grateful to British ace player that basically hasn’t touched any other nation for blessing me with his knowledge.
The ace that has at most gotten 30 kills with the R-73 only in the SU-39 since he has around 32 kills in SU-39 and nothing but Harrier GR-7 and F-16C unlocked in high tier (both 9M slingers).
Thank you the benevolent GOD of AİR combat. Thank you for such helpful sources and for blessing me with your divine knowledge my lord 🙏
1 Like
That’s what I do not understand, at the extremely close range I fired (rear aspect as well) how can it even see flares anymore with FOV tightening. I bet it is because gaijin makes missile lock onto the middle of the plane , instead of the nozzles. Yet 9Ms IRCCM works flawlessly, probably too good compared to reality.
2 Likes
Weird how you keep talking about how amazing the 9M and F-16 are and how terrible the R-73 and MiG-29 SMT are, yet you perform better in your SMT than you have in any other top tier jet. You dont seem to actually have any issues performing well with the things you say are awful.
Almost like you’re… biased
3 Likes
Because i play SMT in ground where idiots in F-16Cs eat missiles to their face, i do not have ground top tier for USA so i do not take the F-16 to ground. If you think the SMT is better than F-16C i have no words for you, you are either coping or trolling or trying to bait people. Even in the ground mode if they use their eyes and radar they have literally invisible missiles that will kill anything.
3 Likes
I never said the SMT is better than the F-16C, I just pointed out that your performance does not match your claims.
This is an INCREDIBLY common thing when looking at Russian mains stats when they cry about their stuff being underpowered and everyone else being OP.
There are some obvious concerns with the R-73, and the MiG-29SMT is obviously somewhat less maneuverable than its peers, but the claims russian mains make pretending the R-73 and SMT are borderline unusable does not match reality.
2 Likes