@@commandercody6937 the speed is and isn’t an advantage, the faster it is the more distance it it will travel to turn. A welll timed airbrake could allow you to dodge if you somehow managed to see the missile in the cockpit.
I love the concept of the Foxhound, the only problem is that it's less agile and if you push too hard, the Airframe will bend, melt and cause damage to the engines.
Technically the Meteor is an "Air Augmented Rocket". I heard that the initial burn of the solid fuel rocket opens up a chamber in which ram air from the intake can mix with the later burn stages of the rocket, which drastically increases the total impulse of the engine. Very clever propulsion system!
I love the fact you use the southern part of Chile/Argentina for all of these exercises. Greetings from a Chilean citizen, whom recently got 4 AWACs E3 Sentry from the UK 😚
Simba, the term you're looking for is throttleable "Rocket Eductor". The rocket engine has a very fuel-rich exhaust, but it exhausts into the chamber where the ramjet compresses the air. These mix and burn in a second combustion process that contributes a lot of extra energy by completing the combustion. The extra range comes from not having to carry 100% of the oxidizer because it is getting some of it from the ram air. Also, the chamber is designed so that the high speed rocket exhaust expels air out of the back of the missile, hence the "eductor". In a sense, the rocket engine functions as both the turbines and fuel injection in a jet engine. In another sense, rocket eductors are not like anything else, so go read about them, they're fascinating!
It should also be noted that the boron based fuel has an exponentially higher specific impulse, reportedly giving it a no escape zone more than 3 times greater than that of the Aim120C. So not only does it carry far more fuel because the oxidizer is not carried on board, but the fuel itself is exponentially more energy dense.
@@MoistGrundle A number of reasons, the stated one is to not become reliant on foreign arms, which is a pretty good reason in itself. Additionally the Meteor is incredibly expensive, more than twice the price of an AMRAAM, and that's just what the countries that developed the missile pay for it, not necessarily what the US would be charged. Next we have to look at information sharing. A big part of international acquisitions is what technology is shared in the process. A good example of this is India's initial bid to buy the Su57 that fell through primarily because they believed the fighter would be built in their country and the technology behind it would be shared with them when in fact Russia had no such plans to do so. If MDBA won't let the missiles be built in the US and won't share the tech behind it, that would be a huge reason to not adopt the missile. Finally we also have to take into consideration the fact that the US actually has two current programs to build long range air to air missiles. One will be the conventional Aim260, the other will be a "ramjet" powered missile (ramjet is in quotes because it likely will have a similar propulsion method to the Meteor which is not actually a ramjet). So despite it being a fantastic weapon, there's quite a number of reasons not to buy them.
@@92HazelMocha Thanks for the detailed reply. I knew about the AIM-260, but do you have more info about that domestic "ramjet" model? It's the first I'm hearing about it, other than the one they abandoned back in the 90s (80s?).
The Meteor does have a 2 stage motor. According to Bayern-Chemie, the maker of the Meteor's propulsion, it has a "solid propellant, variable thrust ramjet with integral rocket booster". it has to have a 2 stage system to get the Meteor up to speed initially. There were cases during testing where the Meteor didn't continue flying because the air intakes didnt open meaning that it has to have some sort of non air breathing component in it. The sustainer motor is actually just a gas generator which produces a gas that ignites when it comes in contact with air
Yes... a ramjet is air breathing. The sustainer/gas generator is practically a solid fuel rocket engine with a fuel mixture that has just very little oxidizer in it. The still fuel rich exhaust gasses are fed into the burn chamber of the ramjet and provides the fuel for the ramjet process. The gas generator has a highly negative temperature/pressure coefficient of burn speed, so that the burn rate can be adjusted by throttling the exhaust.
@@chuckfarley4130 Such a statement only proves that you lack sufficient understanding of the complex building of sciences around how such missiles work. Speed is not effectiveness...
I thought it was weird that Violet kept being reminded that her Meteors weren't being fired at the ideal range; I imagine that she was cognizant of that, and wasn't shooting the missiles to hit but to push and disrupt the red team, something that you'd probably want to do if the other side has missiles that massively outrange yours. And looking at Tac View, that's exactly what happened; half of the red team immediately went cold in response to Violet's Meteors (with the other half following quickly suit after launching their R-37's, as they likely assumed more missiles were coming their way), allowing the blue team to push to a range that put the MiGs at a serious disadvantage. Had she not fired those missiles, I'm pretty sure the red team would have lobbed far more missiles with impunity. All that said, great teamwork and tactics in the face of very dangerous missiles.
I think it could be interesting to do JAS-39 Gripen (with Meteors) vs MiG-31. Basically I saw some videos of people saying the Gripen would be perfect for Ukraine to operate, so this could simulate that scenario
The AIM-260 is also dual-pulse motored so it's likely it'll loft up for lower drag and cruise at Mach 4 with a little bit of fuel to help with maneuvering high up until it gets closer to terminal range. Also Cap I'm not sure if you could get one working in game but Raytheon's developing a Peregrine missile about half the size of an AMRAAM but with a AMRAAM-C's range, a Sidewinder's maneuverability, and a tri-mode seeker of active radar, IR, and millimeter wavelength receiving. It's meant to be fielded on NGAD and the F-35 to make more use out of its internal bays, would be awesome to see in game
Doesnt matter. The R-37M can fly over 200km at hypersonic speeds on a rope. Super maneuverable in its terminal phase. Growling Sidewinder showed this to be true.
yeah, but.... that combo kind of resembles the tactics of the two sides (as demo'd by the Mig-31's country recently) It's probably a fairly reasonable 'conflict' to test.
The Mig 31 and its missles are easy to defeat if you stay low. The Migs radar is powerfull but looking down it really struggles. Ive run many scenarios in the F16 coming in low and pulling up under the Mig for a shot. Both the Mig radar and its missles struggle looking down onto the terrain.
Perhaps GR might try the following scenario. After watching some current real world combat missions showing SU25s from both Ukraine and Russia perform low level strikes (under 100 feet) in heavily contested urban area airspace..... the unique portion of this scenario would be multiple MANPADS for both sides, as well as SAMs.... involving alternating bomb runs in short proximity in space and time to each other. One video shows a Ukraine SU25 hit a Russian target and no later than 20-30s later a Russian SU25 hit a Ukrainian target within 100Ms of each other. It was chaos.
Had an idea that would maybe make an interesting video. Do a warbirds vs. first gen jets match, first gen jets vs. second, second gen vs. third, etc. Just to examine how big a difference each generation was.
@@grimreapers Understood. I can get that elsewhere, but I also enjoy the mission setups & details of how the mods work as a former IT geek. I appreciate all the work you guys put in!
The X-15 had reaction control thrusters for the very reasons. Which can make talking about RCS a bit confusing. Of course i didn't stop at a flimsy 140.000 ft :)
I think the Meteor has longer range than officially released. If the Ramjet part is just using the solid propellant only to ignite and so use atmospheric Oxygen as propellant, there should be a very long range attainable.
Why not modify missiles that are already more similar to the missile you want to simulate? For example, instead of using the AIM-120C as a basis for the R-37M, why not use the AIM-54 Phoenix? It should mostly fix the lofting issue.
Hey Cap, just FYI the Meteor does loft and can reasonably fly at 85,000ft. Think like the SR-71. The throttleable ramrocket motor of the Meteor can throttle back enough to maintain about 3.5M at 85,000ft. I made a missile performance model some years ago and I have been able to alter it to allow the Meteor to climb towards 85,000ft, cruise at 3.5M, then dive on the target. This was all much more complex than my AIM-120D model so if you are stuck in the bounds of AIM-120C then I see how this limitation prevents you from making a better meteor. Also of note, the AIM-120D has the same motor as the AIM-120C5 core game missile, all range improvements come from higher loft into thinner air which also means that these shots are best done in TWS or against low maneuverability targets.
i used to live in virginia near the NAS Oceana navy base and i would love to see some type of war games involving that base. By looking online there seems so be about 250 F/A-18 super hornets and i was lucky enough to get a tour of the base and hangers from my friend an F-18 pilot. Also with the navy ships stationed in that area and the Langley air force have with 5th gen, it would be cool to see THE BLOB of F/A-18s all scrambled.
I'm not sure your air breathing engine explanation for the meteor is exactly right. Ramjets work better in thinner air at high speeds. Think SR-71 bypass function. 80k feet + at mach 2.5 should be a sweet spot for the meteor engine, the thin air will mean that the engine doesn't have to produce much power to keep it going. The throttling is about adjusting thrust to the altitude.
The Russians are not gonna see the rafale at that range. The rafale has got the spectra ecm suite that I heard reduces the effective rcs of the rafale to 0.5 m2. There is some very advanced jamming mechanism in there.
0.5 is probably *before* the ECM, Rafale is made mostly of composites just like the F35, which significantly reduce the strength of the radar returns. Also, albeit anecdotally, the Rafale has flown *over* active sam sites undetected with its ECM on. While obviously there is no public information on the Rafale's ECM, it likely reduces its detection range by an order of magnitude greater than a .5 m2 rcs would imply.
For the meteor is fired from an aircraft in supersonic speed, hence things in motion stay in motion, that adds to the meteor max velocity making it more lethal... Is that not right?
“F-you Ricky Bobby!” I almost chocked on my coffee from laughing so hard. 😂😂 Love your videos, keep them Coming! Easily one of my favorite channels now. 🤙🏻
Good question, I don't think so with the crazy new stealth and "experimental" stealth paint makes its cross section (speculation) smaller then the raptors and F35s. Again, no one really knows for sure. It's got my peak interest now you mentioned it!
The Russians would have to find the B-2 / B-21 first & then get a lock on it. They won’t be able to find these stealth aircraft until they get within 25-35 km.
@@commandercody6937 - B-21 would also be maneuvering quite a bit, as would the B-2. Remember the R-37M IRL has a hard time hitting planes that are maneuvering.
The best current countermeasure is to use L-band radar to vector fighters to stealths general location and fighters use radar/irst to find exact location. I’ve heard the long lines of the B-21 are meant to make it less visible in L-band; no way to know how much.
RUSI reports that the R37M is being used successfully against Mig29s and helicopters in Ukraine. So perhaps it can be fired on flatter trajectories, can turn better at altitude in real life than in the game, or is simply more effective at shorter ranges than at max range. The GCI player in this did a great job I think, lots of useful talk but not drowning out the frequency.
@@chuckfarley4130 here is actually an interview on those newer articles if you prefer rather than reading them. ruclips.net/video/Lot6i8bqvpw/видео.html
"Explaining missile realism": What a great explanation. Just saying 160 miles! in most publication is not the complete picture. The video after is a good bonus. (Wink wink!)
I always like the inverted turns low to the terrain to limit sky-lining... First time I saw that by an F-4E at Red Flag, it looked like he slithered over the ridge and looked pretty ballsy, then learned it's actually the safest way to do it as pulling positive Gs close to the ground isn't a good idea. I always got a chuckle out of the published missile stats: They are all based on a target coming straight at them doing the "speed of heat", non-maneuvering, and no ECM. Is a G rating of missiles modeled in? The number of cumulative G's a missile Guidance Unit can handle before it goes stupid? Driving one or two high while others run low trying to stay undetected... The time honored "rope-a-dope" Very enjoyable video, the standard good stuff.
Dear Simba: The Meteor strictly speaking has a solid fuel jet engine, not a rocket engine. Rockets are defined by having both fuel and oxidizer in their supply on board. All the mass of the oxidizer the Meteor uses is taken from the environment. This in turn means that in effect about half of the mass of its fuel is the atmosphere. This again means it very roughly has he total energy of a rocket twice the size of this air breathing solid fuel jet available. It is in a class of its own with the concept of propulsion among air-to-air missiles. Maybe that is why you lot ignore what actual research data made it to the public from TU Delft? For me, someone who studied natural science, it is painful to see such research being ignored while the banter of "Military experts", all too often people who studied history or politics or other subject that end with a master of arts degree (As opposed to a master of science) and are challenged in their technical understanding when they have to change a tire without breaking anything, is quoted. Me, I watch the Grim Reapers as there is an aspect of simulation to what you do that really is interesting. I may be putting wrong expectations into things and maybe just should stop watching for good. It's not what I'm looking for.
It’s so enjoyable to see the difference between ultra long range missiles fired by bad pilots and lower range missiles fired by good pilots. Thank you reapers for bringing logical sense to this world of missile range debates!
Love how you assume Russian pilots are bad pilots when USA hasn’t engaged in air to air conflict since Hussein and failed to gain air superiority over Serbia after 3 months.
MIG31BN has way bigger radar IRL. As well as way more pulse power. You are not allowed to turn it on on the ground and at oow alritude just cause of how powerfull it is it can fry everything
Except that the aim-57 was so useful for the Iranian Air Force that they micgivered hawk missiles onto there f-14 inroder to keep the firepower when they started to run out. And the fact that the r-37m and mig-31 combo has been the only part of the Russian airfoce to have had any success in this Ukraine war. It’s almost like energy is maneuverability when it comes to missiles.
I have been watching these videos for a few months now. I am starting to wonder why nobody puts missiles that are fired backwards. There must be reasons.
The Mig-31 sends magical super maneuverable hypersonic missiles from an airframe the size of a Greyhound bus. Can't be detected from ranges less than 20 miles away by western technology in DCS. Seems legit.
In this "real life" russians have any AWACS left after Ukraine and NATO forgot theirs? Even then Rafale has better radar and like one tenth the RCS of Mig-31 :)
Silly video - R37M has no chance of shooting down an evading fighter. And still people are managing to out-manoeuvre Meteor while it's still burning - no piloted aircraft could do so without shedding its wings or killing/blacking out the pilot. Electronic jamming would be the only way out in open airspace.
First of all NOBODY knows how these missiles perform IRL but the pilots and crew because they are both CLASSIFIED to the public so all we can do is guess. Too many RUclipss aviation experts love to think they know it all but don't know shit.
@@hemendraravi4787 R37M can and will destroy something flying straight at a reasonable altitude - if they don't know it's coming. This is more about the lack of sophistication on the Ukrainian air-force side rather than Russian technical ability.
If that is true. Can you explain to me how aim54 kills fighters while being 40 years older? Sorry to said, but the r37m right now has numerous shoots downs in the ukranian war, Apart from having the record of the longest A/A kill ever reported
@@ser43_OLDC well because it kills figther from 40 years ago with early rwr. So if the aircraft do not detect the missile then it cannot evade it. Those missile are mainly done to counter "cooperative target" (aircraft that go in a straigth line and that do not attempt to deafeat the missile). The AIM-54 was mainly done to stop soviet bomber (the aim7 was for intented for use against figtherss jet) and the R37m is mainly against AWACS or B52 bombers: big plane that cannot really maneuvers. As he GR said at the start, the missile goes so higth in altitude that it cannot realy maneuvers back there so if the bandit attemps evasive maneuvers, the missile is toast. The russian manage to get it to work in ukraine but we don't know how many were lauched for 1 kill or the distance at witch it was fired. And even if they did shoot down uk air force plane, any missile can do the job aswell I'm not saying it's a bad missile, it's just that the main purpose of it is NOT to shoot down an evading figther.
Russia always looks good on paper/sim. Based on the past year I feel like half their missiles wouldn't work in real life/would never be put in a position like this. Their new stuff sounds awesome but in reality barely works.
Thats why Russian cruise missile KH 101 hit the electric pòwer plants in Vitnitsa and Zhytomir despite being protected by a ring of Nassam, Iris-T and Crotale...right?..
@@kermittoad he lost visual so he used the camera to find his opponent. If the other player makes you lose visual, they deserve the reward from that (even if it’s just a few extra moments before their likely demise).
Cap. Please. When doing these videos, don't fly with them. I want to see what's actually happening, as that's kinda the point of these videos. If I wanted to see first person BVR with this stuff, I have other channels to watch for that.
@@grimreapers welp Sorry then, I guess I just won't be watching any video where you fly in them That's just not why I watch these videos, not even close.
LOL. If it's so good and it's Russian/Chinese, it's probably "unrealistic and fake". If it's so good and it's American/NATO, it's "realistic" and believable.
The inability to program the R37 correctly, or any modded missile for that matter, is skewing the results massively. The loft the missile would do would not only greatly increase the range but it would also hinder its maneuverability. These videos should be pretty much considered wrong.
@@grimreapers Sorry, I didn't mean it in a bad way. It isn't your fault you are limited to programming them. Just trying to point out how the results are possibly completely wrong due to the limitations of the game itself.
@@chuckfarley4130 You misunderstand. They lack the capability of programming the missile to operate correctly. It's a game/mod limit that's completely skewing results.
I'll be honest I love the cult of speed Fighters, just a couple of enormous engines with a cockpit in front and a pilot holding on for life
Probably some of the best weapons you can get for 4th gen BVR as well, considering the sheer speed of that missile is going to make it hard to dodge
@@commandercody6937 the speed is and isn’t an advantage, the faster it is the more distance it it will travel to turn. A welll timed airbrake could allow you to dodge if you somehow managed to see the missile in the cockpit.
That’s what the F-4 Phantom, especially the Israeli version, was.
YF-12A ;)
I love the concept of the Foxhound, the only problem is that it's less agile and if you push too hard, the Airframe will bend, melt and cause damage to the engines.
Technically the Meteor is an "Air Augmented Rocket". I heard that the initial burn of the solid fuel rocket opens up a chamber in which ram air from the intake can mix with the later burn stages of the rocket, which drastically increases the total impulse of the engine. Very clever propulsion system!
Hey Thumble x
@@grimreapers Hi Cap 🫡
Fun video as always. How’s your design stuff going? Or did I imagine that?
I love the fact you use the southern part of Chile/Argentina for all of these exercises.
Greetings from a Chilean citizen, whom recently got 4 AWACs E3 Sentry from the UK 😚
I hope that you haven’t bought a lemon. 😢
Hi!
Beautiful scenery for sure!
Sadly so far away it will be hard to ever visit.
Simba, the term you're looking for is throttleable "Rocket Eductor". The rocket engine has a very fuel-rich exhaust, but it exhausts into the chamber where the ramjet compresses the air. These mix and burn in a second combustion process that contributes a lot of extra energy by completing the combustion. The extra range comes from not having to carry 100% of the oxidizer because it is getting some of it from the ram air. Also, the chamber is designed so that the high speed rocket exhaust expels air out of the back of the missile, hence the "eductor". In a sense, the rocket engine functions as both the turbines and fuel injection in a jet engine. In another sense, rocket eductors are not like anything else, so go read about them, they're fascinating!
It should also be noted that the boron based fuel has an exponentially higher specific impulse, reportedly giving it a no escape zone more than 3 times greater than that of the Aim120C. So not only does it carry far more fuel because the oxidizer is not carried on board, but the fuel itself is exponentially more energy dense.
@@92HazelMocha Many thanks ! Great stuff.
@@92HazelMocha Why is America not buying this missile?!? The more I read about the Meteor, the more impressed I am with it.
@@MoistGrundle A number of reasons, the stated one is to not become reliant on foreign arms, which is a pretty good reason in itself. Additionally the Meteor is incredibly expensive, more than twice the price of an AMRAAM, and that's just what the countries that developed the missile pay for it, not necessarily what the US would be charged. Next we have to look at information sharing. A big part of international acquisitions is what technology is shared in the process. A good example of this is India's initial bid to buy the Su57 that fell through primarily because they believed the fighter would be built in their country and the technology behind it would be shared with them when in fact Russia had no such plans to do so. If MDBA won't let the missiles be built in the US and won't share the tech behind it, that would be a huge reason to not adopt the missile. Finally we also have to take into consideration the fact that the US actually has two current programs to build long range air to air missiles. One will be the conventional Aim260, the other will be a "ramjet" powered missile (ramjet is in quotes because it likely will have a similar propulsion method to the Meteor which is not actually a ramjet). So despite it being a fantastic weapon, there's quite a number of reasons not to buy them.
@@92HazelMocha Thanks for the detailed reply. I knew about the AIM-260, but do you have more info about that domestic "ramjet" model? It's the first I'm hearing about it, other than the one they abandoned back in the 90s (80s?).
The Meteor does have a 2 stage motor.
According to Bayern-Chemie, the maker of the Meteor's propulsion, it has a "solid propellant, variable thrust ramjet with integral rocket booster". it has to have a 2 stage system to get the Meteor up to speed initially.
There were cases during testing where the Meteor didn't continue flying because the air intakes didnt open meaning that it has to have some sort of non air breathing component in it.
The sustainer motor is actually just a gas generator which produces a gas that ignites when it comes in contact with air
That's a 2 mode, not 2 stage engine
Yes... a ramjet is air breathing. The sustainer/gas generator is practically a solid fuel rocket engine with a fuel mixture that has just very little oxidizer in it. The still fuel rich exhaust gasses are fed into the burn chamber of the ramjet and provides the fuel for the ramjet process. The gas generator has a highly negative temperature/pressure coefficient of burn speed, so that the burn rate can be adjusted by throttling the exhaust.
The R-37M can fly for +200km at mach +5 on a rope. 10 x more effective than western tech
@@chuckfarley4130 Such a statement only proves that you lack sufficient understanding of the complex building of sciences around how such missiles work. Speed is not effectiveness...
@@chuckfarley4130 lmao
I suspect in real life it would come down to the EW suite on the Rafale overpowering the PESA radar of the MIG-31.
Remember that the missiles were being guided by the AWACS, not the Mig radar.
1. Pop-up attack
2. ECM/EW support
3. AWACS
4. "what a bell-end"
I thought it was weird that Violet kept being reminded that her Meteors weren't being fired at the ideal range; I imagine that she was cognizant of that, and wasn't shooting the missiles to hit but to push and disrupt the red team, something that you'd probably want to do if the other side has missiles that massively outrange yours.
And looking at Tac View, that's exactly what happened; half of the red team immediately went cold in response to Violet's Meteors (with the other half following quickly suit after launching their R-37's, as they likely assumed more missiles were coming their way), allowing the blue team to push to a range that put the MiGs at a serious disadvantage. Had she not fired those missiles, I'm pretty sure the red team would have lobbed far more missiles with impunity. All that said, great teamwork and tactics in the face of very dangerous missiles.
I think it could be interesting to do JAS-39 Gripen (with Meteors) vs MiG-31. Basically I saw some videos of people saying the Gripen would be perfect for Ukraine to operate, so this could simulate that scenario
The gripen against the Russian jets it was made to fight with modern missiles would be absolutely devious
I'm pretty sure we'd get same result. In DCS Gripen is pretty much same as Rafale in most ways for A-A.
@@grimreapers no mountains in eastern UA
This is a beautiful map. Like these more than the desert ones.
To my understanding, the Mig-31 isn't a dogfighter? So if they get to close quarters the only weapon the Mig-31 has is speed?
The AIM-260 is also dual-pulse motored so it's likely it'll loft up for lower drag and cruise at Mach 4 with a little bit of fuel to help with maneuvering high up until it gets closer to terminal range.
Also Cap I'm not sure if you could get one working in game but Raytheon's developing a Peregrine missile about half the size of an AMRAAM but with a AMRAAM-C's range, a Sidewinder's maneuverability, and a tri-mode seeker of active radar, IR, and millimeter wavelength receiving. It's meant to be fielded on NGAD and the F-35 to make more use out of its internal bays, would be awesome to see in game
Doesnt matter.
The R-37M can fly over 200km at hypersonic speeds on a rope.
Super maneuverable in its terminal phase.
Growling Sidewinder showed this to be true.
Oh, a couple of huge engines with big missiles strapped to them. And a real plane with missiles with big engine!
yeah, but.... that combo kind of resembles the tactics of the two sides (as demo'd by the Mig-31's country recently)
It's probably a fairly reasonable 'conflict' to test.
@@randalljones4370 from what I’ve read of the Meteor, it’s ability to manoeuvre throughout its track is what makes it’s a game changer.
1st look 1st shoot....it's all about the sensor fusion.
The Mig 31 and its missles are easy to defeat if you stay low. The Migs radar is powerfull but looking down it really struggles. Ive run many scenarios in the F16 coming in low and pulling up under the Mig for a shot. Both the Mig radar and its missles struggle looking down onto the terrain.
The Mig-31 radar is outdated. Useless communist USSR outdated tech.
But not in viddie games
Growling Sidewinder tried in an F-14.
The Mig-31 launching R-37 supermanuverable hypersonic missiles wins every time.
He couldnt even lock the Mig-31.
Perhaps GR might try the following scenario. After watching some current real world combat missions showing SU25s from both Ukraine and Russia perform low level strikes (under 100 feet) in heavily contested urban area airspace..... the unique portion of this scenario would be multiple MANPADS for both sides, as well as SAMs.... involving alternating bomb runs in short proximity in space and time to each other. One video shows a Ukraine SU25 hit a Russian target and no later than 20-30s later a Russian SU25 hit a Ukrainian target within 100Ms of each other. It was chaos.
That terrain was INSANE!!😮
Had an idea that would maybe make an interesting video. Do a warbirds vs. first gen jets match, first gen jets vs. second, second gen vs. third, etc. Just to examine how big a difference each generation was.
Really good breakdown of the missiles and great dogfights as well 👍
Like I said, we are not experts, it's mainly wiki level of understanding.
@@grimreapers Understood. I can get that elsewhere, but I also enjoy the mission setups & details of how the mods work as a former IT geek. I appreciate all the work you guys put in!
Simba is right the meteor has a variable throttle scramjet engine.
The CCCP was way more advanced then modern tech
There is nothing variable about a scramjet engine.
The X-15 had reaction control thrusters for the very reasons. Which can make talking about RCS a bit confusing.
Of course i didn't stop at a flimsy 140.000 ft :)
Cool thx
I think the Meteor has longer range than officially released. If the Ramjet part is just using the solid propellant only to ignite and so use atmospheric Oxygen as propellant, there should be a very long range attainable.
When looking at Russian tech performance in Ukraine I kinda feel like the DCS version are somewhat over performing as well
Makes sense, however it has to fly at lower altitudes which increases the friction and that would reduce the range
Why not modify missiles that are already more similar to the missile you want to simulate? For example, instead of using the AIM-120C as a basis for the R-37M, why not use the AIM-54 Phoenix? It should mostly fix the lofting issue.
The communists that designed the R-37M missile 50 years ago, were WAY more advanced than what modern technology has today,
That Mig-31 is a beast
Highest tech ever!
as previously seen in the last episodes of this series, the underdog wins again because of tactics!
It would cool to see the yf-12 in one of these fights
It would be cool to see more team dogfights and WVRAAM fights
There is lots of snow and ice and the planes are up high they should be bloody freezing not just cold.
Hey Cap, just FYI the Meteor does loft and can reasonably fly at 85,000ft. Think like the SR-71. The throttleable ramrocket motor of the Meteor can throttle back enough to maintain about 3.5M at 85,000ft. I made a missile performance model some years ago and I have been able to alter it to allow the Meteor to climb towards 85,000ft, cruise at 3.5M, then dive on the target. This was all much more complex than my AIM-120D model so if you are stuck in the bounds of AIM-120C then I see how this limitation prevents you from making a better meteor. Also of note, the AIM-120D has the same motor as the AIM-120C5 core game missile, all range improvements come from higher loft into thinner air which also means that these shots are best done in TWS or against low maneuverability targets.
i used to live in virginia near the NAS Oceana navy base and i would love to see some type of war games involving that base. By looking online there seems so be about 250 F/A-18 super hornets and i was lucky enough to get a tour of the base and hangers from my friend an F-18 pilot. Also with the navy ships stationed in that area and the Langley air force have with 5th gen, it would be cool to see THE BLOB of F/A-18s all scrambled.
Try this again without mountains.
We all know where this is going
Dogfights?
1:15 I hope ED will give modders the abilities to implement such stuff
At the moment we just have to make do with what we have.
I'm not sure your air breathing engine explanation for the meteor is exactly right. Ramjets work better in thinner air at high speeds. Think SR-71 bypass function. 80k feet + at mach 2.5 should be a sweet spot for the meteor engine, the thin air will mean that the engine doesn't have to produce much power to keep it going. The throttling is about adjusting thrust to the altitude.
that was exciting time. I had a good time ven though im just a cannon fodder most of the time. RB
If the specs for missiles is not coming from the warthunder forums, then can we really take it as fact?
(sarcasm)
ohh lets see maybe i can find some Meteor files to leak
Putin said it flies at mach 15, so mach 10 supermanuverable seems realistic.
LOL @12:07 "Everybody Dies" (
Everytime you say Ricky Bobby, I just imagine a gator on a bbq! Hope I'm right? 😋😂
Dang right! RB is true Florida man.
The Russians are not gonna see the rafale at that range. The rafale has got the spectra ecm suite that I heard reduces the effective rcs of the rafale to 0.5 m2. There is some very advanced jamming mechanism in there.
but with all those missiles + mig31s massive radar its possible
Do you have any idea just how enormous and powerful the radar is on those MiG-31s ?
Did you forget that the Mig-31BM has one of the most powerful and biggest radar of any other combat aircraft, the Zaslon-M?
0.5 is probably *before* the ECM, Rafale is made mostly of composites just like the F35, which significantly reduce the strength of the radar returns. Also, albeit anecdotally, the Rafale has flown *over* active sam sites undetected with its ECM on. While obviously there is no public information on the Rafale's ECM, it likely reduces its detection range by an order of magnitude greater than a .5 m2 rcs would imply.
@@hemendraravi4787 migs have passive phased array radar compared to active array radar of rafale. Passive radars are more easy to jam.
For the meteor is fired from an aircraft in supersonic speed, hence things in motion stay in motion, that adds to the meteor max velocity making it more lethal... Is that not right?
Absolutely awesome video!!
“F-you Ricky Bobby!”
I almost chocked on my coffee from laughing so hard. 😂😂
Love your videos, keep them
Coming! Easily one of my favorite channels now. 🤙🏻
The info about the R-37M has me wondering, could Mig-31s with the R-37M track down and stop a B-21 raid on a Russian airfield?
Good question, I don't think so with the crazy new stealth and "experimental" stealth paint makes its cross section (speculation) smaller then the raptors and F35s.
Again, no one really knows for sure. It's got my peak interest now you mentioned it!
The Russians would have to find the B-2 / B-21 first & then get a lock on it. They won’t be able to find these stealth aircraft until they get within 25-35 km.
@@TraditionalAnglican that's the challenge
@@commandercody6937 - B-21 would also be maneuvering quite a bit, as would the B-2. Remember the R-37M IRL has a hard time hitting planes that are maneuvering.
The best current countermeasure is to use L-band radar to vector fighters to stealths general location and fighters use radar/irst to find exact location.
I’ve heard the long lines of the B-21 are meant to make it less visible in L-band; no way to know how much.
RUSI reports that the R37M is being used successfully against Mig29s and helicopters in Ukraine. So perhaps it can be fired on flatter trajectories, can turn better at altitude in real life than in the game, or is simply more effective at shorter ranges than at max range. The GCI player in this did a great job I think, lots of useful talk but not drowning out the frequency.
Also magic unicorns are being used too
Sheer nonsense
@@chuckfarley4130 you are saying the Royal United Services institute publishes nonsense?
@@chuckfarley4130 here is actually an interview on those newer articles if you prefer rather than reading them. ruclips.net/video/Lot6i8bqvpw/видео.html
would wanna see a Rafale VS a gripen E (prob C tho)
"Explaining missile realism": What a great explanation. Just saying 160 miles! in most publication is not the complete picture. The video after is a good bonus. (Wink wink!)
I always like the inverted turns low to the terrain to limit sky-lining... First time I saw that by an F-4E at Red Flag, it looked like he slithered over the ridge and looked pretty ballsy, then learned it's actually the safest way to do it as pulling positive Gs close to the ground isn't a good idea. I always got a chuckle out of the published missile stats: They are all based on a target coming straight at them doing the "speed of heat", non-maneuvering, and no ECM. Is a G rating of missiles modeled in? The number of cumulative G's a missile Guidance Unit can handle before it goes stupid? Driving one or two high while others run low trying to stay undetected... The time honored "rope-a-dope"
Very enjoyable video, the standard good stuff.
Great fights - thanks!
It’s a GREAT DAY!
2 migs should go as high as possible and go after AWACS. If rafales try to come up you have the range on them. Blind them
So why is the R37 doing so well? Also can it be released at the MIG-31's ceiling and top speed?
Dear Simba: The Meteor strictly speaking has a solid fuel jet engine, not a rocket engine. Rockets are defined by having both fuel and oxidizer in their supply on board. All the mass of the oxidizer the Meteor uses is taken from the environment.
This in turn means that in effect about half of the mass of its fuel is the atmosphere. This again means it very roughly has he total energy of a rocket twice the size of this air breathing solid fuel jet available. It is in a class of its own with the concept of propulsion among air-to-air missiles.
Maybe that is why you lot ignore what actual research data made it to the public from TU Delft?
For me, someone who studied natural science, it is painful to see such research being ignored while the banter of "Military experts", all too often people who studied history or politics or other subject that end with a master of arts degree (As opposed to a master of science) and are challenged in their technical understanding when they have to change a tire without breaking anything, is quoted.
Me, I watch the Grim Reapers as there is an aspect of simulation to what you do that really is interesting. I may be putting wrong expectations into things and maybe just should stop watching for good. It's not what I'm looking for.
Thanks!
solid fuel, liquid fuel, jet engine, rocket engine, all made by wizards.
It’s so enjoyable to see the difference between ultra long range missiles fired by bad pilots and lower range missiles fired by good pilots. Thank you reapers for bringing logical sense to this world of missile range debates!
What do you mean by bad and good pilot.
Love how you assume Russian pilots are bad pilots when USA hasn’t engaged in air to air conflict since Hussein and failed to gain air superiority over Serbia after 3 months.
MIG31BN has way bigger radar IRL. As well as way more pulse power. You are not allowed to turn it on on the ground and at oow alritude just cause of how powerfull it is it can fry everything
Next do a horizontal hellfire with stormbreaker vs su35
Great Series!
That was great ,more 👍
ehm, so what happens if Rafal has to fight over flatland or body of water?
Home made King prawn curry Capt! Thank you for all the hard work!
Good man x
Except that the aim-57 was so useful for the Iranian Air Force that they micgivered hawk missiles onto there f-14 inroder to keep the firepower when they started to run out. And the fact that the r-37m and mig-31 combo has been the only part of the Russian airfoce to have had any success in this Ukraine war. It’s almost like energy is maneuverability when it comes to missiles.
*Please Please Please* make the mouse pointer larger during overview and briefing 😢🧡
It's maxed out already.
@@grimreapers I promise you it's not - try settings - ease of access - mouse pointer and not within control panel - mouse. 🧡
big bear vs lil mouse… good fight
Cap compromise with the meteor max 2.75-mach 3 to level overal speed and boast section
I would actually like to, it would also create a bit more balance, problem is internet would rip me to pieces if I nerf it from M4...
couldn't you modify the aim54 to more accurately model the r37m
I would LOVE to Emma, but it's property of Heat Blur, we can't get access to the .DLL file :(
@@grimreapers thats deeply unfortunate :(
The R-37m was developed in the 1980's by the communist Soviets.
The west was never capable of Soviet 1980's tech, even today!
Foxhounds are awesome.
yup
I have been watching these videos for a few months now. I am starting to wonder why nobody puts missiles that are fired backwards. There must be reasons.
The missile is flying backwards at launch and has to fight its way through zero airspeed some time after (no control at that point).
try throwing a dart backwards.
it simply does not work aerodynamically.
@@zahnatom Yes. I see.......
@@voradfils Thanks.
Because missiles like ASRAAM can already turn around right after launch and target aircraft to its rear.
F-22 with AIM-260 vs. The MiG-31 and R-37M at some point?
One Mig-31 with 6 R-37's vs 6 F-22s
NO CONTEST.
3 Mig-31's vs 12 F-22's.
That would be a no contest too.
What about US vs Eu? Or did I miss that one?
nice
جزاكم الله خيرا اخي الكريم
Where do you get the mod for MiG-31BM?
how did u get that rafale mod??
Hey Cap, Guppies eat their young.😋 Just a laugh.
That's cannabalism...
How can you concentrate with the constant OVER G, OVER G in your ears?
Yeh that's annoying.
Mig-31 RCS is ways too small here
The Mig-31 sends magical super maneuverable hypersonic missiles from an airframe the size of a Greyhound bus. Can't be detected from ranges less than 20 miles away by western technology in DCS. Seems legit.
A schoolbus has a smaller RCS
In real life R-37M hit the Rafale before the pilot notice that a MIG 31 are flying...
In this "real life" russians have any AWACS left after Ukraine and NATO forgot theirs? Even then Rafale has better radar and like one tenth the RCS of Mig-31 :)
Gd 1 :)
Meteor is better
Well obviously, you need a missile which is fast and can maneuver aswell.
DO RUSSIAN ZIRCON
working on it now.
R-37M's are specifically designed to target Western AWACS, aka "non-maneuvering targets".
Old Soviet garbage
Silly video - R37M has no chance of shooting down an evading fighter. And still people are managing to out-manoeuvre Meteor while it's still burning - no piloted aircraft could do so without shedding its wings or killing/blacking out the pilot. Electronic jamming would be the only way out in open airspace.
First of all NOBODY knows how these missiles perform IRL but the pilots and crew because they are both CLASSIFIED to the public so all we can do is guess. Too many RUclipss aviation experts love to think they know it all but don't know shit.
i think u should check ukraines report
@@hemendraravi4787 R37M can and will destroy something flying straight at a reasonable altitude - if they don't know it's coming. This is more about the lack of sophistication on the Ukrainian air-force side rather than Russian technical ability.
If that is true. Can you explain to me how aim54 kills fighters while being 40 years older? Sorry to said, but the r37m right now has numerous shoots downs in the ukranian war, Apart from having the record of the longest A/A kill ever reported
@@ser43_OLDC well because it kills figther from 40 years ago with early rwr. So if the aircraft do not detect the missile then it cannot evade it. Those missile are mainly done to counter "cooperative target" (aircraft that go in a straigth line and that do not attempt to deafeat the missile). The AIM-54 was mainly done to stop soviet bomber (the aim7 was for intented for use against figtherss jet) and the R37m is mainly against AWACS or B52 bombers: big plane that cannot really maneuvers. As he GR said at the start, the missile goes so higth in altitude that it cannot realy maneuvers back there so if the bandit attemps evasive maneuvers, the missile is toast.
The russian manage to get it to work in ukraine but we don't know how many were lauched for 1 kill or the distance at witch it was fired. And even if they did shoot down uk air force plane, any missile can do the job aswell
I'm not saying it's a bad missile, it's just that the main purpose of it is NOT to shoot down an evading figther.
Russia always looks good on paper/sim. Based on the past year I feel like half their missiles wouldn't work in real life/would never be put in a position like this. Their new stuff sounds awesome but in reality barely works.
Yup well corruption etc is not modelled in sim.
The Soviet 1980's tech is unsurpassed
Thats why Russian cruise missile KH 101 hit the electric pòwer plants in Vitnitsa and Zhytomir despite being protected by a ring of Nassam, Iris-T and Crotale...right?..
@@rhodium1096 I think you are uninformed, to say the least.
@@chuckfarley4130 Then go to that plants and ask them...
Why was cheating allowed? Unsportsmanlike if you ask me.
Wdym cheating
@@kermittoad he lost visual so he used the camera to find his opponent. If the other player makes you lose visual, they deserve the reward from that (even if it’s just a few extra moments before their likely demise).
@@kermittoad nope, he used F2 view.
F5 camera is allowed in the GR fights within 5 miles. It's our agreement. The reason is to keep the fights short and not drag on too long.
Cap. Please. When doing these videos, don't fly with them. I want to see what's actually happening, as that's kinda the point of these videos.
If I wanted to see first person BVR with this stuff, I have other channels to watch for that.
Problem is, with my reduced schedule, I need to fly sometimes, otherwise I'll lose all of my muscle memory. I'm struggling enough as it is.
@@grimreapers welp
Sorry then, I guess I just won't be watching any video where you fly in them
That's just not why I watch these videos, not even close.
LOL. If it's so good and it's Russian/Chinese, it's probably "unrealistic and fake". If it's so good and it's American/NATO, it's "realistic" and believable.
When will the next modernized U. K. And U. S. A. v. China and Russia come?
busy making new Type 45 destroyer.
@@grimreapers yes take your time captain.
The inability to program the R37 correctly, or any modded missile for that matter, is skewing the results massively. The loft the missile would do would not only greatly increase the range but it would also hinder its maneuverability. These videos should be pretty much considered wrong.
Thanks Nick
@@grimreapers Sorry, I didn't mean it in a bad way. It isn't your fault you are limited to programming them. Just trying to point out how the results are possibly completely wrong due to the limitations of the game itself.
Dude.
The R-37M is the latest Soviet 1980's tech
@@chuckfarley4130 You misunderstand. They lack the capability of programming the missile to operate correctly. It's a game/mod limit that's completely skewing results.