I have hundreds of hours in DCS in MiG-29S (one that can actually carry R-77). Only way to win fights with them was to fly low and fast and even then, ECM on something like F-16C practically made radar unusable. I overall enjoyed the jet, but it had no coming to Amraam in BVR. I'm not surprised with the performance, and Im actually glad they went this route and not making them better than Amraam or Mica's which would be crazy. Same way MiG-23ML FM was busted for few years
Yeah, I wasn't surprised by its strengths and weaknesses either. Lots of people are saying the R-77 sucks. It just built for something else, not a bad missile though.
@@AlphaHeavyGamerCompared to the other ARHs that dropped it is pretty bad. You don't need 50Gs of pull. The AMRAAMs 35 is more then enough to be used even at close range. Overall the AMRAAM has both better kinematic performance AND it's on better launch platforms. We'll have to see what Gaijin does with the AAM-4 if they do anything at all.
@@AlphaHeavyGamer The problem is that the amraam outperforms the R-77 up close too given the way that they're currently modeled in game. So it's not a matter of long range vs short range it's a matter of every range vs short range.
There are a few misconceptions here regarding Grid fins vs Conventional or Planar fins that I'd like to clear up - Drag levels of the Grid fins vs Planar fins are very similar if not better at all speeds at level flight except transonic - Grid fins actually allow for greater lift coefficient at greater AoA making them more maneuverable at all speeds EXCEPT in transonic speeds due to shockwaves interrupting the flow over the grid. - Grid fins generally have higher lift to drag ratio at most lift coefficients except at higher coefficients. - Grid fins have MUCH higher drag coefficients at AoA up to when the flow separates on conventional fins at all speeds. 500% to 60% more coefficient of drag depending on the AoA, the lower the AoA the higher the difference in drag! - Grid fins can have much higher AoA due to better flow control and less flow separation. HOWEVER, this is only at extreme AoA and will probably never see in real or in-game combat. Maybe when launched offbore. Note: the highest recorded AoA I've ever gotten in game that isn't offbore fired is 20degrees and that's already pretty extreme. If they make the R-77 in game with greater range (as it did IRL since it had a massive booster) but with greater drag when maneuvering, I believe it would still be a balanced missile. As of right now the AMRAAM has the advantage in range, and drag compared to all missiles EXCEPT for the AAM-4 which is superior in range.
This is similar to the R-27R/T, when they were added, they were(and still are) highly maneuverable, but slow. comparing to other missiles, the R-27R has less range than the R-24R, and everyone who played top tier before S&D, know what gaijin decided to add to fix that issue....
Real problem with r77 in war thunder, gaijin not coded reduced drag at supersonic speed. Grid fins are just drag generators in war thunder. Even if gaijin properly made aerodynamics, still lacks its performace.
i would say for initial bvr which is at long range, if you fly m29 smt or the new su27, i think you want to throw an r27er bc of the speed and range advantage and just remember to fly at an angle to the limit of the radar until the r27er hits then switch to the r77 when you know you are a bit closer and its more likely to still have energy left over to hit its target. for russia you have to think of the r77 as more of a medium range missile whereas for usa for example, aim120 is the long range missile.
The R-77 does struggle at range, this was never in doubt given the lack of a sustainer and the grid fins at lower speeds, however given that the R-27ER was already a decent missile at least (plus or minus a few upgrades over the years as the early R-27s did have issues with it's seekers), The Russians also with the Collapse of the Soviet Union wasn't looking to entirely reinvent the wheel with what one could call an 'all purpose missile' as the AMRAAM ended up becoming (at least in game). Thus keeping the R-27ER as the long range engagement missile and the R-77 more as the mid-range fire and forget missile makes sense at least. While I'm convinced that the R-77 isn't working as intended as even 5km at rare times proven to be unreliable due to the missile just going stupid seemingly for no reason. It's however a little comforting to know that the R-77-1 (which as far as I know is the earliest R-77 model that the Russians actually use) not only has much greater range than the first R-77 model, but it has a better seeker, and while it does retain the Grid fins, at least in some models, I have yet to see a public showing version of the R-77 without the Grid fins. (though the R-77M supposedly has it removed, again only 1 public picture of the R-77M exists it's a long range photo and little detail can be gained from it). Another thing the R-77-1 has that the base R-77 apparently does not, is a Booster Sustainer, which would explain why the R-77 in game struggles so much, having no sustainer (which comparatively the Aim-120A does have), causes the R-77 to struggle heavily at maintaining speed especially with the Grid fins bleeding speed maybe more so in the game than it does IRL, however this isn't as much of a concern to me as this is at least close to what I expected, though I did expect the R-77 to have more reliable range than it does in game, this isn't so far off that I have to launch a dozen complaints XD, though it is rather frustrating. But having a sustainer also explains why the R-77-1 may have opted to keep the grid fins, it would remove the need to completely redesign the rear fin layout, plus with a Sustainer at high altitudes the R-77-1 could also sustain higher speeds for much greater distances reducing the draw backs of the Grid fin design as the grid fin apparently has less drag at high speeds but greater drag at transonic speeds. The problem I see is that the R-77-1 being a much better missile than the R-77 and more comparative to the Aim-120C/D, the Su-27SM is either gonna have to get a higher BR variant somewhere (which could take the shape of a Su-30 or a Su-27SM2/3) to avoid bringing in a much stronger R-77 at lower BR levels. So hopefully in the future the BRs are decompressed a little more, and maybe with the introduction of more aircraft above and below the current top tier we have now.
Great points. Later versions of most missiles with a sustainer is going to be pretty nasty. As it goes hopefully Gaijin will refine the energy models of the missiles in game right now. Probably not going to happen though.
Considering an r77-1's range. In 2022 there was a RUclips video (until YT deleted it) from a su35's hud camera about a bvr engagement with a mig 29. Su35 had about 5,5 km altitude and 900 tas. Mig 29 was flying low (that's the information shown on the hud in that video). Max range was shown as slightly above 60km, su35 launched at about 50km, and it was stated that it resulted in a kill. Anyway 60km max range for those parameters is really close to aim120c performance
R-77 in its M variant dropped its fins in order to fit into Su-57s internal bays. I believe that if grids were a poor choice for bvr they would've been dropped before 77-1 was developed
@@filipstraka8964 I know about that. But it seem strange as R-27 was aleredy in production and compatible with their 4th gen fighters, while R-77 was a new design.
The russian Doctrine Expanded the Ideas of the Late Soviet Doctrine. With better technologies they found that there Was no need for a missile like the R27 anymore (They Still use it since the R27 is abounded). For long ranges engagements they would use Mig31's and Su 35's Equiped with R37M's. The R77 would be used for Medium ranges (in RL it has a much better range) since it has better maneuverability and was actually Designed to have an active seeker. For some reason they weren't big Fans of the idea of a super missile like late AMRAAMS but Wympel does offer an equivalent to that now R77M, R77-1 etc.. The 27 wasn't that good of a missile at its introduction which left a bad after Taste for the russians I guess. Another guess of mine is that it would be better for several different missiles to exist, since if there were Information leaks the loss wouldn't be that fatal since its just one of several missiles in russian Service. It is probably also cheaper for them not to launch their super long range cabable missile against a Medium range target.
@@Amon-ht7pothe R-27ER’s seekerhead was also already mediocre at best, and the EA/EM missiles were never adopted into service. The R-77-1 is the only “competitive” active radar homing missile that the Russians have in real life that I can see coming into the game. The R-37M exists but we don’t have any planes that can carry it yet
@@christopherchartier3017 I never argued about the points you've mentioned nor have I said anything about adding the R37M. I will say that the R77 is probably very much wrongly modeled in WT. R77 should have a much better seeker and range which would put it on AIM 120c level. The R77-1 would be much more "competetive" than any ARH missile we have in the game rn. Its around AIM 120 C5/6 level whise. I dont think adding it to the game would benefit anyone since it would create the same chaos we had with the R27ER. R77M which is the equivalent of a AIM120D has been ordered by the russian army as far as I know, so they are very much real life.
R27 EA for Russia. Seeker not as good as AMRAAM but range would be only slightly smaller than R27 ER. Fox 3 jousting at long range possible than. BTW I like R77. But it is short range, just as you say.
um. no. it would have basically the same performance as the r27er, which goes a shit ton faster than all the other radar missiles in game. for one, i don't even think it was used, just designed and maybe there was a prototype. second, the game is the most balanced it has been since they added the f14, let's not ruin it. russia doesn't need to have the clear best radar missile again. also, after some research, it has a range of 81 miles (130km) and up. we do not need that. just add the meteor at that point, and the derby er, and the aim120d. and the ea was never used, it was dropped for the r77 mid production. just because you can't seal club everyone bvr anymore doesn't mean your fox 3 is bad, thats a skill issue, you have to use it right
Useless not only in bvr but in any situation. Crit after crit, meanwhile any aim 120 completely destroys my mig29smt. I need to fire 2 r77 from close range to kill a target because the first missile just does crit instead of several and they manage to still fly and fight back. Got an r73 from 3 km off bore from an su27sm after it got a r77 in the face, still managed to turn and fire after crit from my r77. You can't make this sht up.
Although the R77 is very effective in killing enemy aircraft in medium and close range combat, if I were to choose the FOX-3 with the best overall performance, I would probably still choose the AIM-120, after all, the limitations of the R77 are quite obvious.
You are wrong at 2:12. Grid fins have higher drag overall, not just transonic subsonic. Basically the shockwaves interact with each other, the local air pressure(and mach) is lower thus drag force is higher. It's worse when the interaction happens inside the grid fins(Mach 2.2 for a 1:1 chord/gap ratio) and terrible terrible terrible when the shockwave impacts the other plate/chord(under Mach 1.4). You can look at schlieren images of the shockwaves along with Mach and pressure contours to see it yourself. There's a reason they were dropped for A2A missiles, and the less drag than normal at high mach numbers fairy tale falls apart when you see they aren't used on missiles fly qt those speeds like the R37 pl21 or anyother hypersonic missiles. If you want to dwelve a bit more into it and have a bit of fluid dynamics knowledge I recommend. "Wind tunnel investigation of high L/d projectile with grid fin and conventional planar control surfaces" - E.Y Fournier. This is a very good research. "Analysis of grid fins as efficient control surface in comparison to conventional planar fins" This one is easy to read and understand without a background "Numerical analysis of static and dynamic performancrs of grid fin controlled missiles" "Novel high performance grid fins for missile control at high speeds: preliminary numerical and experimental investigations" These last two would require a bit more knowledge but doable if you have it. All these have either computational data, experimental data or both. On "nqvier stokes computation of grid fin missiles using hybrdi structured unstructured grids" you can clearly see the pressure contours. The pressure is higher where shockwaves meet. Unfortunately they only talk about normal force and not about axial force.
@@raphaelsantiago9387 su25, a10, harrier gr1, mig21s, turms III, 2s38 cv90105, and many many more premium/op event vehicles that are sold for tons of money. All of these were or are over powered premiums that should or should have gone up in BR. Yet they didn't and haven't, some got power crept, or nerfed, but for a long time were/are unbalanced. Use your brain, quit sucking up to gaijin, they don't care about you, it's ridiculous to defend them blindly.
I have hundreds of hours in DCS in MiG-29S (one that can actually carry R-77). Only way to win fights with them was to fly low and fast and even then, ECM on something like F-16C practically made radar unusable. I overall enjoyed the jet, but it had no coming to Amraam in BVR. I'm not surprised with the performance, and Im actually glad they went this route and not making them better than Amraam or Mica's which would be crazy. Same way MiG-23ML FM was busted for few years
Yeah, I wasn't surprised by its strengths and weaknesses either. Lots of people are saying the R-77 sucks. It just built for something else, not a bad missile though.
@@AlphaHeavyGamer I think they are complaining too much. It could have been worse, they could be playing Tornado lol
@@AlphaHeavyGamerCompared to the other ARHs that dropped it is pretty bad. You don't need 50Gs of pull. The AMRAAMs 35 is more then enough to be used even at close range. Overall the AMRAAM has both better kinematic performance AND it's on better launch platforms. We'll have to see what Gaijin does with the AAM-4 if they do anything at all.
@@AlphaHeavyGamer The problem is that the amraam outperforms the R-77 up close too given the way that they're currently modeled in game. So it's not a matter of long range vs short range it's a matter of every range vs short range.
Isn't in DCS prototype R77 vs AIM120C-5? Not like mass-produced R77-1
There are a few misconceptions here regarding Grid fins vs Conventional or Planar fins that I'd like to clear up
- Drag levels of the Grid fins vs Planar fins are very similar if not better at all speeds at level flight except transonic
- Grid fins actually allow for greater lift coefficient at greater AoA making them more maneuverable at all speeds EXCEPT in transonic speeds due to shockwaves interrupting the flow over the grid.
- Grid fins generally have higher lift to drag ratio at most lift coefficients except at higher coefficients.
- Grid fins have MUCH higher drag coefficients at AoA up to when the flow separates on conventional fins at all speeds. 500% to 60% more coefficient of drag depending on the AoA, the lower the AoA the higher the difference in drag!
- Grid fins can have much higher AoA due to better flow control and less flow separation. HOWEVER, this is only at extreme AoA and will probably never see in real or in-game combat. Maybe when launched offbore. Note: the highest recorded AoA I've ever gotten in game that isn't offbore fired is 20degrees and that's already pretty extreme.
If they make the R-77 in game with greater range (as it did IRL since it had a massive booster) but with greater drag when maneuvering, I believe it would still be a balanced missile. As of right now the AMRAAM has the advantage in range, and drag compared to all missiles EXCEPT for the AAM-4 which is superior in range.
This is similar to the R-27R/T, when they were added, they were(and still are) highly maneuverable, but slow. comparing to other missiles, the R-27R has less range than the R-24R, and everyone who played top tier before S&D, know what gaijin decided to add to fix that issue....
Real problem with r77 in war thunder, gaijin not coded reduced drag at supersonic speed. Grid fins are just drag generators in war thunder. Even if gaijin properly made aerodynamics, still lacks its performace.
i would say for initial bvr which is at long range, if you fly m29 smt or the new su27, i think you want to throw an r27er bc of the speed and range advantage and just remember to fly at an angle to the limit of the radar until the r27er hits then switch to the r77 when you know you are a bit closer and its more likely to still have energy left over to hit its target. for russia you have to think of the r77 as more of a medium range missile whereas for usa for example, aim120 is the long range missile.
The R-77 does struggle at range, this was never in doubt given the lack of a sustainer and the grid fins at lower speeds, however given that the R-27ER was already a decent missile at least (plus or minus a few upgrades over the years as the early R-27s did have issues with it's seekers), The Russians also with the Collapse of the Soviet Union wasn't looking to entirely reinvent the wheel with what one could call an 'all purpose missile' as the AMRAAM ended up becoming (at least in game). Thus keeping the R-27ER as the long range engagement missile and the R-77 more as the mid-range fire and forget missile makes sense at least.
While I'm convinced that the R-77 isn't working as intended as even 5km at rare times proven to be unreliable due to the missile just going stupid seemingly for no reason. It's however a little comforting to know that the R-77-1 (which as far as I know is the earliest R-77 model that the Russians actually use) not only has much greater range than the first R-77 model, but it has a better seeker, and while it does retain the Grid fins, at least in some models, I have yet to see a public showing version of the R-77 without the Grid fins. (though the R-77M supposedly has it removed, again only 1 public picture of the R-77M exists it's a long range photo and little detail can be gained from it).
Another thing the R-77-1 has that the base R-77 apparently does not, is a Booster Sustainer, which would explain why the R-77 in game struggles so much, having no sustainer (which comparatively the Aim-120A does have), causes the R-77 to struggle heavily at maintaining speed especially with the Grid fins bleeding speed maybe more so in the game than it does IRL, however this isn't as much of a concern to me as this is at least close to what I expected, though I did expect the R-77 to have more reliable range than it does in game, this isn't so far off that I have to launch a dozen complaints XD, though it is rather frustrating. But having a sustainer also explains why the R-77-1 may have opted to keep the grid fins, it would remove the need to completely redesign the rear fin layout, plus with a Sustainer at high altitudes the R-77-1 could also sustain higher speeds for much greater distances reducing the draw backs of the Grid fin design as the grid fin apparently has less drag at high speeds but greater drag at transonic speeds.
The problem I see is that the R-77-1 being a much better missile than the R-77 and more comparative to the Aim-120C/D, the Su-27SM is either gonna have to get a higher BR variant somewhere (which could take the shape of a Su-30 or a Su-27SM2/3) to avoid bringing in a much stronger R-77 at lower BR levels. So hopefully in the future the BRs are decompressed a little more, and maybe with the introduction of more aircraft above and below the current top tier we have now.
Great points. Later versions of most missiles with a sustainer is going to be pretty nasty. As it goes hopefully Gaijin will refine the energy models of the missiles in game right now. Probably not going to happen though.
Considering an r77-1's range. In 2022 there was a RUclips video (until YT deleted it) from a su35's hud camera about a bvr engagement with a mig 29. Su35 had about 5,5 km altitude and 900 tas. Mig 29 was flying low (that's the information shown on the hud in that video). Max range was shown as slightly above 60km, su35 launched at about 50km, and it was stated that it resulted in a kill. Anyway 60km max range for those parameters is really close to aim120c performance
Also, the R-77 is flare-hungry. At this time, it is just an R-60. And I don't want to talk about the flight models of Su and MiGs.
I think you mean chaff. But yeah, most missiles are very chaff hungry in game.
Su-27 flight model is great. Did you tried SM? It is trying to kill you all the time, but this is where the fun begins
R-77 in its M variant dropped its fins in order to fit into Su-57s internal bays. I believe that if grids were a poor choice for bvr they would've been dropped before 77-1 was developed
Put so much faith in Russian brain tho
@@Reaver3214 i think a missile engineer is about 99999 times smarter than you bro
It will change when the K/R-77M comes to WT. It has a double pulse Motor. Nice Video 🎉
but when will it come to warthunder the r77s dont hit at 10km in my game and i get shitted on by the other missles
Thanks!
If the R-77 actually can dogfight, it cant hit shit at 5Km, it just vanished from existence we know
facts they are pure dog shit compared to the other ones
I wounder why didn't russians bolt active-head to their R-27ER and went with R-77 instead.
They did, they called it R-27EA and R-27EM but by that time the R-77 was easier to get into production
@@filipstraka8964 I know about that. But it seem strange as R-27 was aleredy in production and compatible with their 4th gen fighters, while R-77 was a new design.
The russian Doctrine Expanded the Ideas of the Late Soviet Doctrine. With better technologies they found that there Was no need for a missile like the R27 anymore (They Still use it since the R27 is abounded). For long ranges engagements they would use Mig31's and Su 35's Equiped with R37M's. The R77 would be used for Medium ranges (in RL it has a much better range) since it has better maneuverability and was actually Designed to have an active seeker. For some reason they weren't big Fans of the idea of a super missile like late AMRAAMS but Wympel does offer an equivalent to that now R77M, R77-1 etc.. The 27 wasn't that good of a missile at its introduction which left a bad after Taste for the russians I guess. Another guess of mine is that it would be better for several different missiles to exist, since if there were Information leaks the loss wouldn't be that fatal since its just one of several missiles in russian Service. It is probably also cheaper for them not to launch their super long range cabable missile against a Medium range target.
@@Amon-ht7pothe R-27ER’s seekerhead was also already mediocre at best, and the EA/EM missiles were never adopted into service. The R-77-1 is the only “competitive” active radar homing missile that the Russians have in real life that I can see coming into the game. The R-37M exists but we don’t have any planes that can carry it yet
@@christopherchartier3017 I never argued about the points you've mentioned nor have I said anything about adding the R37M. I will say that the R77 is probably very much wrongly modeled in WT. R77 should have a much better seeker and range which would put it on AIM 120c level. The R77-1 would be much more "competetive" than any ARH missile we have in the game rn. Its around AIM 120 C5/6 level whise. I dont think adding it to the game would benefit anyone since it would create the same chaos we had with the R27ER. R77M which is the equivalent of a AIM120D has been ordered by the russian army as far as I know, so they are very much real life.
R27 EA for Russia.
Seeker not as good as AMRAAM but range would be only slightly smaller than R27 ER.
Fox 3 jousting at long range possible than.
BTW I like R77. But it is short range, just as you say.
Not as good as the Mica-EM but it will do. I kind of prefer a dogfighting missile for my style of play.
@@AlphaHeavyGamer Same. I like to be able to see my opponent.
It also barely existed
um. no. it would have basically the same performance as the r27er, which goes a shit ton faster than all the other radar missiles in game. for one, i don't even think it was used, just designed and maybe there was a prototype. second, the game is the most balanced it has been since they added the f14, let's not ruin it. russia doesn't need to have the clear best radar missile again. also, after some research, it has a range of 81 miles (130km) and up. we do not need that. just add the meteor at that point, and the derby er, and the aim120d. and the ea was never used, it was dropped for the r77 mid production. just because you can't seal club everyone bvr anymore doesn't mean your fox 3 is bad, thats a skill issue, you have to use it right
@@batlax18 Ameriboos crying before anything even changes. LMAO
shot at a 15c in full afterburner at 7.5k flying away from me and the r77 couldn't do it. r27er smacked him.
Tbf if he’s going cold like that then no wonder it didn’t hit
I still use the R-27ER as well. The 5.8 Mach and range is still very useful.
@@AlphaHeavyGamerbe honest the missile goes nowhere near those speeds, the fastest I got the missile to go was mach 4.8
To make it work properly you have to launch it from ten kilometers high
Useless not only in bvr but in any situation. Crit after crit, meanwhile any aim 120 completely destroys my mig29smt. I need to fire 2 r77 from close range to kill a target because the first missile just does crit instead of several and they manage to still fly and fight back. Got an r73 from 3 km off bore from an su27sm after it got a r77 in the face, still managed to turn and fire after crit from my r77. You can't make this sht up.
Mines dont even hit at close range
Although the R77 is very effective in killing enemy aircraft in medium and close range combat, if I were to choose the FOX-3 with the best overall performance, I would probably still choose the AIM-120, after all, the limitations of the R77 are quite obvious.
The worst part about them too is that with any A120 you get a GUARANTEED top 3 flight models as well (except for av8s)
shouldve added the r77-1
i call them chicken fences ☠️☠️
💯😄
yes
Resume: 6:27
No worries.
R-77 is broken and model in game is for R-77-1. There's an issue with R-77 tracking target after launch.
You are wrong at 2:12. Grid fins have higher drag overall, not just transonic subsonic. Basically the shockwaves interact with each other, the local air pressure(and mach) is lower thus drag force is higher. It's worse when the interaction happens inside the grid fins(Mach 2.2 for a 1:1 chord/gap ratio) and terrible terrible terrible when the shockwave impacts the other plate/chord(under Mach 1.4). You can look at schlieren images of the shockwaves along with Mach and pressure contours to see it yourself. There's a reason they were dropped for A2A missiles, and the less drag than normal at high mach numbers fairy tale falls apart when you see they aren't used on missiles fly qt those speeds like the R37 pl21 or anyother hypersonic missiles.
If you want to dwelve a bit more into it and have a bit of fluid dynamics knowledge I recommend.
"Wind tunnel investigation of high L/d projectile with grid fin and conventional planar control surfaces" - E.Y Fournier. This is a very good research.
"Analysis of grid fins as efficient control surface in comparison to conventional planar fins"
This one is easy to read and understand without a background
"Numerical analysis of static and dynamic performancrs of grid fin controlled missiles"
"Novel high performance grid fins for missile control at high speeds: preliminary numerical and experimental investigations"
These last two would require a bit more knowledge but doable if you have it. All these have either computational data, experimental data or both.
On "nqvier stokes computation of grid fin missiles using hybrdi structured unstructured grids" you can clearly see the pressure contours. The pressure is higher where shockwaves meet. Unfortunately they only talk about normal force and not about axial force.
if you ask me, it's payback for the r27 over-performing against the sparrow for some years.
Thats not how a competitive game should work. The game should always strive to be as balanced as possible.
unless it makes money...then it's okay to be unbalanced.
@@cookiecracker2 No?
@@raphaelsantiago9387 su25, a10, harrier gr1, mig21s, turms III, 2s38 cv90105, and many many more premium/op event vehicles that are sold for tons of money.
All of these were or are over powered premiums that should or should have gone up in BR.
Yet they didn't and haven't, some got power crept, or nerfed, but for a long time were/are unbalanced.
Use your brain, quit sucking up to gaijin, they don't care about you, it's ridiculous to defend them blindly.
@@cookiecracker2 what I mean is, Gaijin shouldnglt make things OP even if theyre premium.