War Thunder - R-77-1 is in the FILES! BUT should it be ADDED? Is it too OP? On par with the MICA?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 чер 2024
- Talking about the future addition of the R-77-1 that is in the files!
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @matawg
Patreon: / matawg
Ajude o canal com o PIX de qualquer valor: matawg@hotmail.com
Donate with Paypal: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted... My Secondary GTA Channel: / @thatmatt-kq9uu - Ігри
You forgot about the MICA IR. It's also in the files with the IRIS-T (None of these missiles have any code to them it's just models.)
They are peobably holding off till they add for aim 9x and the asraam, which will probably come in alongside the 4.5th gen jets
yeah but the r77-1 actully have a code, thats the difference
@@bencurran3204 most likely after the next 2 updates. we aren't far from being introduced to new IR missiles and Next Gen Jets. i think by next year we will see the F18 in game and such.
@@Casual7646 the code is has is the exact same as the current R77. it hasn't been touched or changed.
@@TazOnYt actually it got changed in the devs update
They’re probably saving the C-5 and the 77-1 for the next update. Hopefully those will release with the F/A18 and the Su-30.
and Typhoon, i fucking want Typhoon
F/A-18A and Su-33 gets no Fox 3s
@@sooryan_1018 fair
They would most likely add an A+@@sooryan_1018
@@sooryan_1018the f/a-18a gets AIM-120A
Just bring out the update
It'll be next week. Most likely Tuesday or Wednesday. Maybe Thursday.
R27EA would be cool to see, fox 3 seeker on an R27 goes hard
If only it existed
You are judging missile range by Delta V
Delta = change
V = Speed
Delta V measures the speed difference between launch and the moment the engine runs out of fuel.
Example : A missile with 20% less Delta V that burns for 60% longer will have more range because it will sustain its speed.
Do not use Delta V to compare missile ranges. It is stupid
not necessarily, it also depends on aerodynamic friction. delta v is a very close estimate. please give a better way to describe missile range, and ill tell you why you're wrong
@@kierano8390 Burn time impacts the outcome more than friction because : 1) Every missile is made to be aerodynamic 2) Generally these missiles are fired at medium to high altitudes.
You seam to think there is a single characteristic that measures missile range. There is no suck measurement.
Delta V is not a close estimate. A missile that has a Delta V of 1100m/s with a burn time of 2 secons will have much worse range than a missile with a Delta V of 1000m/s and 5 seconds of burntime.
Delta V is in fact irelevant because it only measures how much faster the missile can go after being launched at an initial speed of 0m/s. (In flight the Delta V decreaces althoe the missile gets more energy and range)
To get an ideea of the lethal range range you need the Initial speed , Average acceleration and Burn Time + about 4-7km (High probability of kill range)
To calculate how much further the missile will be able to fly and hit the target you need a lot more information , most of wich is guessworck to us :
Mass , Aerodynamic characteristics at different speeds (the friction graph can do very strange thing when transitioning from supersonic to transsonic)(Also requiring a flight stability study), Manouvrability characteristics at different speeds and many more factors you wouldnt think about althoe they impact the performance quite a bit : Air composition , humidity and what might actually apply in the game : Temperature at different altitudes.
Delta V has no value by its self in determining missile range.
Exatcly ! Delta-V is only a change in speed.
It's only relevant up to the point the motor stops burning.
After that battery, weight, drag and guidance is what determines the max range.
For instance the current iteration of MICA, despite having the highest delta-V, has the shortest range of all ARHs due to insane drag (in part due to wobbling), light weight after burn, and shorter battery time.
If it stays like this you should expect it to be by far the worst ARH missile for BVR.
this is what kerbal space program taught me
@@MessInMines It is not relevent even to the point that the engine stops burning
Theoretical siotuation : 2 identical missiles with different motors
1) 1 second burn time and Delta V of 1000m/s
2) 10 second burn time and Delta V of 900m/s
the second one will fly further.
Anything that makes a specific aircraft variant of a specific operator distinct from others adds to variety.
I say add it and also add the aim-120c 5 or 7 whichever balances it out
so we should add a 1996 US missile and a 2015 USSR missile and just see nothing wrong with that, fuck it i say do it, not even the worst thing gaijin has done to keep the ussr on top, can't stand this bullshit anymore
C variants don’t differ in range much just seeker technology
@@dontworry2379incorrect, that is the AIM-120B difference not the AIM-120C-5
@@aflyingcowboy31 bro what? The B variant is just an A with a better seeker and the C5 to the C7 are essentially the same missile as well just with seeker head improvements. What is your point here?
@@dontworry2379 "C variants don’t differ in range much just seeker technology"
The C7 would break the game, this is why the C5 is in the game files but the C7 isn't. The C7 was considered a major upgrade over the C5 by the Air force i.e.:
AIM-120C5: "Upgrade to control section; Longer Rocket Motor"
AIM-120C6: "Changes to Target Detection Device, Improved Software"
AIM-120C7: "Major Upgrade to Guidance Section Hardware/Software"
Furthermore for AIM-120C7 (Phase 3):
"The Phase 3 missile is largely a new missile with distinct capabilities from previous variants of the AIM-120. In particular, there are significant hardware and software changes in the guidance section of the missile"
This means the AIM-120C7 is not simply just a C5 with an improved seeker as that was the C6, the C7 is a big upgrade overall.
This doesn't even take into account the AIM-120C7 with the Nammo rocket engine and VCAS.
It’s weird though, the AMRAAM on the dev server, while having noticeably less delta-V than the R-77, performs better at range. I don’t know why, I thought the more delta-V you had, the more effective range your missile had
Because the amraam has a sustainer, once it boosts up to speed it maintains that speed for longer. As soon as the r77 motor cuts it's losing energy throughout the flight.
its caused by the fact that the amraam have the best autopilot, the same thing goes for all the other missiles, they should be better, but they are not
@@Casual7646 So is it just the most complete missile so far? I thought the R-77’s weakness was its mediocre seekerhead
@@christopherchartier3017IIRC the grid fins on the R-77 cause it to lose energy a lot faster than the traditional fins on the AMRAAM
@@christopherchartier3017yes the correct answer is the grid fins have increased drag the slower it goes as a trade off for better maneuverability
I hope they add both
They should give r77-1 to mig 29 SMT defffff
Meh, that things fine
No, if they add those, they have to also add bigger maps for air RB and Air SB
i feel the AIM-120C and R-77-1 could just be added since the AIM-120 although it will be amazing it wont be as dominate as the other missiles or keep everything as it is now and just add the AIM-120B at least since it is the same performance but better tracking
If they add the R-77-1, yeah we should get the AIM-120C-5
Is the MIG 29G better than the Sweden Gripen?
No
Mat can you do a brimstone anti tank missile hypothetical vid too?
R27EA when?
I love yours vidéo !!!!!! You are so gooood
interesting
R-77-1 I feel will be for the next ussr prem .. with the addition of the F-20 and the nerf to mig23's, I can see them added a new jet soon
MiG-21-93 or MiG-23-98 would make good premiums.
Both had R-77 / R-27 support.
@@esooGrM isn't the mig21-93 the Bison? and already going to Brits next patch
@@remrryn it’s a MiG-21UPG, based on the MiG-21-93 but modified for the Indian Air Force.
@@esooGrM ah gotcha
R77 already is meant to outrange the aim120 by 30km, it’s just either nerfed or heavily underperforming in game
thats the r-77-1. and the aim-120c5 is about on par with the r-77-1
The R-77-1 is superior to the modernized Aim-120C7 if it's seeker is the 9B-1103M, that is the one that russia currently uses
Thats VERY debatable
Short answer no, because the USA mains are going to cry
I think everyone would
you're right 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
who wouldn't, it entered service in 2015, while the missile they're gonna use to counter it entered service in 1996 (aim120c5) , i think a blind person can see it would be bullshit
@@zehi04 don't ask these people to use their brains lol
@@zehi04 I mean yeah it would be pretty bs, then again other than the R-37M, it’s russias best fox-3 irl. The R-77M isn’t in service yet. And assuming we’d get later AMRAAMs like the C-7, or God forbid the D-3, Russia’s pretty much SOL for future bvr battles after that missile. The R-37M, should they add it, would probably perform closer to a faster Phoenix than anything, and isn’t as scary as people think
can't wait for gayjin to artificially nerf the r-77 only to add the r-77-1 and then buff the r-77 so russia has the best missile again
Mat question why do you glaze the r77 so much it’s like the forth or third best missile😂
Maybe cause he likes the r77 and russian aircraft.
@@bibbles2 there’s a difference between liking and glazing he says it’s top two when one the seeker is ass two the range sucks
it's literally the worst fox 3 of the patch
Mat keeps deleting my brimstone anti tank missile comments, idk why man...
Just add the AIM9X. They’ll figure it out 😂😂😂
R-77-1 should be added bc almost all other missiles outrange or time the R-77. Also don't forget the fox 3 is rather a BVR than a dogfight missile
Brainrot opinion ngl
Why not add the AMRAAM C-5, then? Since the R-77-1 out ranges the AMRAAM A, and I think it is close to the Aim-54.
@@adyenmurry7027 ok mr f4s user that only bombs your way to toptier
@@ViperPilot16 what the difference with aim120a and b?
@@yuanfurbax I don’t use the f4s, grinding 5 country’s to top tier without using ur weird tactics stay mad 🤷🏽♂️
We dont need another 27ER situation where a select few nations would have a significantly better arsenal.
@@ValadarishUR r3r has actually always been a better missile than the early aim7 sparrows. because it did not have the guidance delay. the 5 g less is not the issue if the missile cant pull in time or have too little energy to be usefull.
@ValadarishUR yes and no the sapphire is surprisingly good at locking. Chaff is not the biggest issue if you know how to engage id say the aim 7 and phantom combo has far fewer options in terms of engagement. If you use any missile wrong it will miss. If you however use them correctly, they will become death they never expect.
@ValadarishUR to add from straight above the sapphire radar can lock targets flying at 400 meters and you can even fire a missile at them, it also has the benefit of not activating their rwr because it's outside their sensor azimuth.
@ValadarishUR not at the br r3r fly, people aren't used to radar missiles yet. And it's still a disadvantage to fly flow at those br so the r3r is plenty useful
@@ValadarishURI also remember when the F4C with aim 9E’s had to fight the MiG 21 SMT and MiG 21 MF with R-60’s. Or when the MLD was added and clapped everything until the tomcat. Game meta changes it happens.
c5 could be added first as a nasams missile
C would be too OP the aim120 is already the best fox 3 in game, they would have to add many other advanced fox3s and just break the game
@@dannycage8672the C-7 would be too OP without the R-77-1, the C-5 or lower would be fine
@@dannycage8672NASAAMS is an AMRAAM SPAA
@@Iden_in_the_RainC5 and C7 aren’t that different it’s just harder to dodge the C7
@@dontworry2379 the C-5 has a 16km seeker, the C-7 (assumedly) has a 25km seeker. If the R-77-1 is added (with its 25km seeker), the C-7 needs to be added
Leave it to Russia to give it a weird naming scheme... R-77>R-77-1>R-77M. Instead of R-77A>R-77B>R-77C... simple and straight forward.
The good thing about russian designations is you can somewhat know what the thing is without having much context.
For example, if there is an R77 and an R77M, i know the M stands for "modernized"
If there is an R27T and R27R, i know the T stands for IR and the R for radar
But yeah, knowing which one was made first is difficult
Oh yeah, that is definitely much worse than AIM-120A>B>C-4(yes, there’re no C-1,2 and 3)>C-5>C-6>C-7>D or AIM-9M>AIM-9M-1>…..>AIM-9M-10>….>AIM-9X>AIM-9X block II>AIM-9X block III
Lmao
@@user-jy6cn3jy8g the american naming scheme is way easier to understand come on now
give it to the new MIG 21 for UK xD
It has like double the range of Aim120A..
no it should not be added
From my understanding the R-77 is the Ukrainian built version of the missile while the -1 is the Russian built version that actually entered service with the Russian Air Force after some upgrades over the original version. By that logic, technically speaking, the 29SMT and probably the 27SM should get the -1. Maybe down the line but starting out I'd be surprised to see that right out the gate.
16 seconds no view, no comments, 1 like. Bro fell off 😢
Delete wt next patch for being unplayable anymore
They’re probably saving the C-5 and the 77-1 for the next update. Hopefully those will release with the F/A18 and the Su-30.
Hopefully they add the C-7, the C-5 is still stuck with a 16km range iirc.
@@Iden_in_the_Rainthe problem with that is the C7 is cracked. The AIM-120C-7 development began in 1998 and included improvements in homing and greater range, while getting a much improved seekerhead chaff and ground resistance wise, _while_ have the HOB capabilities of the C5. It would be unmatched by anything ingame, except maybe the Derby ER, which was a massive upgrade over the original Derby missile. I think the C5 woild be plenty, but it’s up to Gaijin so I guess we wait and see
@@batlax18 except gaijin cares 0% about improvements to homing, they barely care about IRCCM, the R-77-1 and R-77 also have HOB, the range on the C-7 is comparable to the range on the R-77-1 (120km vs 110km), and the R-77-1 has ~55% more seeker range than the C-5. The C-7 is definitely what is needed.