Sukhoi Su 30MKI

[WARREN SS]

Very simple because R-27T and R-27ET are not supposed to be launch at 100 km.

Image You are Posting say other Wise Its Seeker is 14 km And Kinematic range 120 km
Source Link
Before FPA technogy
IRS missiles are smarter and use the gimballed seeker head combined with what is known as proportional guidance in order to avoid oscillation and to fly an efficient intercept path.

he seeker of R-77 and AIM-120 doesn't work on the same way as R-27T and R-27ET seeker, because as active radar seeker, they are capable of LOAL while as you can see, even the producer admitted that R-27T and R-27ET must lock on target while they are still on the weapon pylon.

Firstly You Don' really understand Guidance Principle

Do you Even Know What is "Homing of Target"

Once the missile closes to self-homing distance, it turns on its active radar seeker and searches for the target aircraft. If the target is in or near the expected location, the missile will find it and guide itself to the target from this point. If the missile is fired at short range, within visual range (WVR) or the near BVR, it can use its active seeker just after launch, making the missile truly "fire and forget"


Active radar homing is rarely employed as the only guidance method of a missile. It is most often used during the terminal phase of the engagement, mainly because since the radar transceiver has to be small enough to fit inside a missile and has to be powered from batteries, therefore having a relatively low ERP, its range is limited.To overcome this, most such missiles use a combination of Radio Command Guidance And INS modes in order to fly from the launch point until the target is close enough to be detected and tracked by the missile

Radio Command guidance is a type of missile guidance in which a ground station or aircraft relay signals to a guided missile via radio control or through a wire connecting the missile to the launcher and tell the missile where to steer in order to intercept its target. This control may also command the missile to detonate, even if the missile itself has a fuze.

Typically, the system giving the guidance commands is tracking both the target and the missile or missiles via radar. It determines the position and velocity of the target and the position and velocity of the missile and calculates whether their paths will intersect. If not, the guidance system will relay commands to the missile(s), telling them to move their fins in such a way to steer themselves in the direction necessary for them to end up on an interception course with the target. If the target maneuvers, the guidance system can notice this and update the missiles' course continuously to counteract the maneuvering. If the missile passes close to the target, either its own proximity or contact fuze will detonate the warhead, or the guidance system can estimate when the missile will pass near the target and send a detonation signal.

Dedicated radio antenna or antennas for communicating with the missile(s). On others, the radar itself is actually able to send coded pulses which the missile can pick up and interpret as guidance commands. Sometimes to aid the tracking station, the missile will contain a radio transmitter, making it easier to track. Also, sometimes there is a dedicated radar antenna on the tracking station for tracking the missile as well as one or more for tracking targets. It is especially these types of systems which may be able to communicate with the missile via the same radar energy it uses for tracking it.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Image You are Posting say other Wise Its Seeker is 14 km And Kinematic range 120 km
Source Link
Before FPA technogy
IRS missiles are smarter and use the gimballed seeker head combined with what is known as proportional guidance in order to avoid oscillation and to fly an efficient intercept path.

I think it is quite clear you don't actually understand any of the words you have just written and basically just mashing different unrelated terms together
Firstly, the kinematic range of missile is the distance that it can fly before it fall down. It isn't related at all to the effective range or the engagement range. For example: AGM-65 can fly as far as 27 km but its LOBL seeker can't lock target from distance further than 10 km, so that reduce the engagement range of it significantly. R-27ET and R-27T suffer the same issue, they have big motor, but they are LOBL missile, so they can't take advantage of the maximum range of the motor.
Secondly, IIR missile also have proportional guidance and gimballed head, the gimbal is used to increase the field of regard of the seeker (better HOBS) and the proportional guidance is used so that missile will aim at the future predicted position of the target instead of their current position

The difference between a spin reticle infrared missile and a focal plane array (imaging) infrared missile is not in the gimbal or the proportional navigation. The difference between them is in how they see their target. The reticle infrared missile such as R-73 and R-27ET has mechanical modulators, also known as reticle. In layman terms, a reticle is a circular lens with sequentially-arranged transparent and opaque or parts on it (this should not be confused with the reticle with cross hair often seen on sniper rifles).

The most simple form of reticle has 2 parts on it, one-half transparent, the other half opaque. As the reticle spins, the target radiation falling on the opaque portion is blocked and produces no detector signal. A target image falling on the transparent portion is passed on to the detector. As a result, when the reticle spinning, IR radiation from a target off center is alternately passed and blocked, resulting in amplitude modulation (AM). The phase of this modulation relative to a spin reference is used to tell target direction from center.

Finding target direction is not the only purpose of reticles, some forms of reticle also help seeker distinguish targets from the background signal. For that purpose, these reticles divided into very small opaque and transparent slides, this is often called full spokes reticles. The design is based on the assumption that the signal from real targets such as aircraft is often a point or very small, while false signal such as cloud reflection is often distributed over a large area. When the reticle rotates, it will chop the radiation from optics before they can go to the detector. If the targets are very large, such as clouds, the energy will transmit through most transparent slides, resulting in detection but with very little change in output signal. But if the target is small, IR radiation will pass through a single transparent slide only, resulting in an output signal in style of separate square pulses. This helps the missile distinguish between massive clutter such as clouds and real targets such as aircraft.

To give the seeker ability to determine the direction and at the same time distinguish between the signal from real target versus cloud, one method is to combine the 2 patterns introduced earlier into a single reticle, this form of reticles are called rising sun reticles. A rising sun reticle has one-half semi-transparent while the other half consists of fan blades shape sectors, these sectors are divided into transparent and opaque parts.

The method of determining target direction and rejecting clutter of rising sun reticles is the combination of two methods introduced before. It is important to note that, the way missiles scan will be the deciding factor for the pattern on their spatial filters. Most early IR missiles used spin scan tracker combined with rising sun reticles. For this scanning method, the goal is to get the target to the center of the reticle. When the target is at the center, the signal is not modulated by the reticle’s spoke, as a result, generate zero voltage for the detector and the missile knows it flying toward the correct direction.

The main problem with spin scan design and rising sun reticle design is that because the seeker always looking at the target, it is more vulnerable to decoys.
One way to get around this problem is by using conical scanning (con-scan) and full spokes reticles. Conical scanning in Infrared guided missiles is very similar to conical scanning of radar. In a conical scan tracker, the missile’s instantaneous field of view rotates around the target so that target is always at the center of the rotating “beam” pattern and the radiation from target is at the certain point on the edge of the reticles.

Using the same principles as introduced earlier, when the reticle rotates, thanks to the opaque spokes, it will chop the radiation from optics before they can go to the detector. If the target is at the center of the nutating beam, the detector output will have a fixed pulse width that equal to the chopping frequency of the reticles. On the other hands, if the target is not at the center of the nutating beam, the output of the detectors will have a varied pulse with.

Firstly You Don' really understand Guidance Principle

Do you Even Know What is "Homing of Target"

Once the missile closes to self-homing distance, it turns on its active radar seeker and searches for the target aircraft. If the target is in or near the expected location, the missile will find it and guide itself to the target from this point. If the missile is fired at short range, within visual range (WVR) or the near BVR, it can use its active seeker just after launch, making the missile truly "fire and forget"


Active radar homing is rarely employed as the only guidance method of a missile. It is most often used during the terminal phase of the engagement, mainly because since the radar transceiver has to be small enough to fit inside a missile and has to be powered from batteries, therefore having a relatively low ERP, its range is limited.To overcome this, most such missiles use a combination of Radio Command Guidance And INS modes in order to fly from the launch point until the target is close enough to be detected and tracked by the missile

Radio Command guidance is a type of missile guidance in which a ground station or aircraft relay signals to a guided missile via radio control or through a wire connecting the missile to the launcher and tell the missile where to steer in order to intercept its target. This control may also command the missile to detonate, even if the missile itself has a fuze.

Typically, the system giving the guidance commands is tracking both the target and the missile or missiles via radar. It determines the position and velocity of the target and the position and velocity of the missile and calculates whether their paths will intersect. If not, the guidance system will relay commands to the missile(s), telling them to move their fins in such a way to steer themselves in the direction necessary for them to end up on an interception course with the target. If the target maneuvers, the guidance system can notice this and update the missiles' course continuously to counteract the maneuvering. If the missile passes close to the target, either its own proximity or contact fuze will detonate the warhead, or the guidance system can estimate when the missile will pass near the target and send a detonation signal.

Dedicated radio antenna or antennas for communicating with the missile(s). On others, the radar itself is actually able to send coded pulses which the missile can pick up and interpret as guidance commands. Sometimes to aid the tracking station, the missile will contain a radio transmitter, making it easier to track. Also, sometimes there is a dedicated radar antenna on the tracking station for tracking the missile as well as one or more for tracking targets. It is especially these types of systems which may be able to communicate with the missile via the same radar energy it uses for tracking it.

I fully understand what is "homing on target"
Seeker on active radar missiles are not powerful enough to lock on target from max range, so the mid course guidance is used to guide the missile till it can acquire the target by itself. But the point is that the radar seeker can discriminate and acquire target by themselves once they are at the target area. A reticle infrared seeker doesn't have that capability, that why most infrared guidance missile are LOBL and even the manufacturer admit R-27T and R-27ET must be used in lock-before launch mode. R-27T and R-27ET doesn't have a mid course command guide like R-27R and R-27ER because they must acquire target before they are launched, mid course guide is quite irrelevant once the seeker acquire target.

 

[StealthFlanker]

The seeker of FPAs (imaging) infrared missile will see target as a 2D image:
Like this:

 

[WARREN SS]

I think it is quite clear you don't actually understand any of the words you have just written and basically just mashing different unrelated terms together
Firstly, the kinematic range of missile is the distance that it can fly before it fall down. It isn't related at all to the effective range or the engagement range. For example: AGM-65 can fly as far as 27 km but its LOBL seeker can't lock target from distance further than 10 km, so that reduce the engagement range of it significantly. R-27ET and R-27T suffer the same issue, they have big motor, but they are LOBL missile, so they can't take advantage of the maximum range of the motor.
Secondly, IIR missile also have proportional guidance and gimballed head, the gimbal is used to increase the field of regard of the seeker (better HOBS) and the proportional guidance is used so that missile will aim at the future predicted position of the target instead of their current position

The difference between a spin reticle infrared missile and a focal plane array (imaging) infrared missile is not in the gimbal or the proportional navigation. The difference between them is in how they see their target. The reticle infrared missile such as R-73 and R-27ET has mechanical modulators, also known as reticle. In layman terms, a reticle is a circular lens with sequentially-arranged transparent and opaque or parts on it (this should not be confused with the reticle with cross hair often seen on sniper rifles).

The most simple form of reticle has 2 parts on it, one-half transparent, the other half opaque. As the reticle spins, the target radiation falling on the opaque portion is blocked and produces no detector signal. A target image falling on the transparent portion is passed on to the detector. As a result, when the reticle spinning, IR radiation from a target off center is alternately passed and blocked, resulting in amplitude modulation (AM). The phase of this modulation relative to a spin reference is used to tell target direction from center.

Finding target direction is not the only purpose of reticles, some forms of reticle also help seeker distinguish targets from the background signal. For that purpose, these reticles divided into very small opaque and transparent slides, this is often called full spokes reticles. The design is based on the assumption that the signal from real targets such as aircraft is often a point or very small, while false signal such as cloud reflection is often distributed over a large area. When the reticle rotates, it will chop the radiation from optics before they can go to the detector. If the targets are very large, such as clouds, the energy will transmit through most transparent slides, resulting in detection but with very little change in output signal. But if the target is small, IR radiation will pass through a single transparent slide only, resulting in an output signal in style of separate square pulses. This helps the missile distinguish between massive clutter such as clouds and real targets such as aircraft.

Again You Mixing Infrared Guidance With current FPA Imaging sensor

Secondly I Explained you

R-27T and ET variants can be used out of cloudiness, at least 15 degrees away from the bearing of sun, and 4 degrees away from the bearing of moon and ground-based head-contrasting conditions. In cases of maximum head-on range launches where lock-command cannot be utilised, missile can be fired in PPS: In this mode, missile will fly straight until achieves target lock. As missile lacks capability of maneuvering before lock, aircraft itself must maneuver so that missile will be pointed to no more than 15 degrees bearing of the target for confident capture by the IR seeker after launch. Equalising altitude is recommended but not required.

LOBL comes Into Play In WVR combat Not BVR
And R-27T or ET are BVR both version

I fully understand what is "homing on target"
Seeker on active radar missiles are not powerful enough to lock on target from max range, so the mid course guidance is used to guide the missile till it can acquire the target by itself. But the point is that the radar seeker can discriminate and acquire target by themselves once they are at the target area. A reticle infrared seeker doesn't have that capability, that why most infrared guidance missile are LOBL and even the manufacturer admit R-27T and R-27ET must be used in lock-before launch mode. R-27T and R-27ET doesn't have a mid course command guide like R-27R and R-27ER because they must acquire target before they are launched, mid course guide is quite irrelevant once the seeker acquire target.

I already Explained You Guidance modes It Doesn't Need Data link
Once it reaches terminal Distance With INS and Radio guidance its Heat Seeker Switches To Heat Seeking Passive Infrared Like Any Previous gen IRS it Uses use the gimballed seeker head combined with what is known as proportional guidance in order to avoid oscillation and to fly an efficient intercept path.

Radio Command guidance is a type of missile guidance in which a ground station or aircraft relay signals to a guided missile via radio control or through a wire connecting the missile to the launcher and tell the missile where to steer in order to intercept its target. This control may also command the missile to detonate, even if the missile itself has a fuze.

IRS missiles are smarter and use the gimballed seeker head combined with what is known as proportional guidance in order to avoid oscillation and to fly an efficient intercept path.

Dedicated radio antenna or antennas for communicating with the missile(s). On others, the radar itself is actually able to send coded pulses which the missile can pick up and interpret as guidance commands. Sometimes to aid the tracking station, the missile will contain a radio transmitter, making it easier to track. Also, sometimes there is a dedicated radar antenna on the tracking station for tracking the missile as well as one or more for tracking targets. It is especially these types of systems which may be able to communicate with the missile via the same radar energy it uses for tracking it.

 

[WARREN SS]

The seeker of FPAs (imaging) infrared missile will see target as a 2D image:
Like this:
View attachment 46449

The infrared homing seeker technology used in Russian BVR missiles has also evolved considerably since the Cold War. Early R-27 Alamo variants used the legacy Geofizika 36T seeker. There are claims that more recent variants use the far more agile Arsenal Central Design Bureau Mayak/MK-80M seeker series, developed for the R-73M Adder WVR missile, and since then announced by Vympel as the seeker for the initial heatseeking variants of the R-77 Adder. The R-73 series WVR missiles have evolved, to the extent that the 'digital' K-74E variant is a highly competitive scanning two colour design, inherently resistant to many flares and with the counter-countermeasures flexibility inherent in software programmable guidance systems. Given the established pattern of migrating extant WVR missile seekers into BVR missiles, it is a safe prediction that late build heatseeking R-27ET/Ts and early build heatseeking R-77Ts are likely to use late build derivatives of the Arsenal MK-80M series, such as the MM2000 subtype.

One interesting Russian development, which underscores the willingness of Russian industry to experiment, is the Agat 9B-1103K-150 "Hummingbird" seeker, a downsized derivative of the R-27EA/RVV-AE seeker family sized to fit into an R-73/R-74 Archer WVR AAM seeker. The reasoning behind this evolution has not been disclosed to date. There are two obvious possibilities. The first is an active radar guided R-73/R-74 Archer derivative to provide counter-countermeasures diversity in close combat. Another possibility, given the Russian history of two stage or booster equipped missiles, is mating a 9B-1103K-150 or MK-80M/MM-2000 equipped R-74 terminal stage with a BVR capable long range midcourse stage for instance derived from the R-27 or R-37 series. Such a weapon would use the jettisonable midcourse airframe to effectively deliver the high kill probability terminal kill airframe into close proximity of the target. While such a weapon would be more complex than established BVR missile designs, it would overcome the primary deficiency of most such designs, in endgame lethality.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Again You Mixing Infrared Guidance With current FPA Imaging sensor

No, I am not mixing between infrared guidance and imaging infrared guidance, it is quite impossible to make such a mistake given that their working principles are completely different

Secondly I Explained you

R-27T and ET variants can be used out of cloudiness, at least 15 degrees away from the bearing of sun, and 4 degrees away from the bearing of moon and ground-based head-contrasting conditions. In cases of maximum head-on range launches where lock-command cannot be utilised, missile can be fired in PPS: In this mode, missile will fly straight until achieves target lock. As missile lacks capability of maneuvering before lock, aircraft itself must maneuver so that missile will be pointed to no more than 15 degrees bearing of the target for confident capture by the IR seeker after launch. Equalising altitude is recommended but not required.

LOBL comes Into Play In WVR combat Not BVR
And R-27T or ET are BVR both version

Did you just directly copy and paste a paragraph from Wikipedia and expect that to be taken as more believable evidence than the manufacturer themselves who said R-27T and ET must lock on target while on the rail?. Oh I see, now you gonna say, Wikipedia is more believable because they said they referenced Su-27 Flight Manual booklet-1, guess what, I also have that Su-27 flight manual and this line "In cases of maximum head-on range launches where lock-command cannot be utilised, missile can be fired in PPS: In this mode, missile will fly straight until achieves target lock" from Wikipedia isn't in there. This is the table that they took their information from:

rough English translation for non Russian member:

Now you probably gonna tell me that I couldn't find that line because I didn't look hard enough, well guess what, apart from the Russian Su-27 flight manual, I also have the Russian Mig-29 flight manual and fortunately for us they stated the limitation of R-27ET and R-27T rather clear.

Rough English translation for non-Russian member
"R-27ET missile with a passive thermal homing head (TGS) provides a mean to defeat heat-contrasting air targets flying at altitudes from 30 m to 25 km at a speed of up to 3500 km / h (on opposite courses), day and night, under conditions of their optical visibility at attack from various angles. In addition, the rocket can be used to destroy unarmored heat-contrasting ground targets.

The R-27ET missile differs from the R-27ER only in the type of homing head and the absence of a radio correction line. The homing thermal head has two photodetectors: one with deep cooling to a temperature of T = –360 ° C, and the other is uncooled. The main mode of operation of the TGS is with a cooled photodetector. When the cooled gas (nitrogen) is used up, an uncooled photodetector is turned on, while the target capture ranges are sharply reduced and its attack is possible only in the ZPS. TGS has good noise immunity from active and natural interference.

In contrast to the CWG, the homing thermal head must capture the target while on the suspension by target designation from the aiming system (RLPK, KOLS, NSC, OPT) or without target designation in the Ψо mode"

So it is undeniable that R-27T and R-27ET are LOBL missiles without a radio mid-course correction as confirmed both by Vympel and Mig-29 flight manual.

I already Explained You Guidance modes It Doesn't Need Data link
Once it reaches terminal Distance With INS and Radio guidance its Heat Seeker Switches To Heat Seeking Passive Infrared Like Any Previous gen IRS it Uses use the gimballed seeker head combined with what is known as proportional guidance in order to avoid oscillation and to fly an efficient intercept path.

The point I am trying to tell you is that R-27T and R-27ET doesn't have radio mid course guidance like R-27R and R-27ER and their infrared seeker can't lock on target once they leave the weapon pylon.

 

[StealthFlanker]

The infrared homing seeker technology used in Russian BVR missiles has also evolved considerably since the Cold War. Early R-27 Alamo variants used the legacy Geofizika 36T seeker. There are claims that more recent variants use the far more agile Arsenal Central Design Bureau Mayak/MK-80M seeker series, developed for the R-73M Adder WVR missile, and since then announced by Vympel as the seeker for the initial heatseeking variants of the R-77 Adder. The R-73 series WVR missiles have evolved, to the extent that the 'digital' K-74E variant is a highly competitive scanning two colour design, inherently resistant to many flares and with the counter-countermeasures flexibility inherent in software programmable guidance systems. Given the established pattern of migrating extant WVR missile seekers into BVR missiles, it is a safe prediction that late build heatseeking R-27ET/Ts and early build heatseeking R-77Ts are likely to use late build derivatives of the Arsenal MK-80M series, such as the MM2000 subtype.

One interesting Russian development, which underscores the willingness of Russian industry to experiment, is the Agat 9B-1103K-150 "Hummingbird" seeker, a downsized derivative of the R-27EA/RVV-AE seeker family sized to fit into an R-73/R-74 Archer WVR AAM seeker. The reasoning behind this evolution has not been disclosed to date. There are two obvious possibilities. The first is an active radar guided R-73/R-74 Archer derivative to provide counter-countermeasures diversity in close combat. Another possibility, given the Russian history of two stage or booster equipped missiles, is mating a 9B-1103K-150 or MK-80M/MM-2000 equipped R-74 terminal stage with a BVR capable long range midcourse stage for instance derived from the R-27 or R-37 series. Such a weapon would use the jettisonable midcourse airframe to effectively deliver the high kill probability terminal kill airframe into close proximity of the target. While such a weapon would be more complex than established BVR missile designs, it would overcome the primary deficiency of most such designs, in endgame lethality.

That high lighted paragraph from Airpower Australia is basically just Carlo Kopp going to fantasy land.

Firstly, there is no such thing as a R-77 T in production, just like R-27EA and R-27EM, the infrared R-77 is nothing more than a paper missile that never got beyond the concept stage.

Secondly, there is no such thing an R-73 or R-74 with active radar seeker in production

Thirdly, there is no such thing as a BVR killed created by mating R-74 terminal stage with R-27 or R-37 booster, this one is even worse as it is nothing more than wishful thinking from Carlo Kopp.

The part about MK-80M and 36T are just what I already told you, R-27T use 36T seeker and R-27ET uses MK-80M seeker, both are reticle

View attachment 46452

What makes you think that posting a random comparison between mid-wave infrared (MWIR), long-wave infrared sensor will help your case? this isn't even taken with R-27 seeker.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Some bonus from the flight manual

Rough translation for non Russian member:
Allowed launch range R-27ET substantially the same as that of the R-27ER but PPP are limited by TGS target capture range.

The launch of R-27ET missiles is possible only with an interval of at least 8 s or thermal radiation from the previous launch eliminating the possibility TGS of the newly launched missile capturing target

The R-27R, R-27T, R-27P missiles have technical data similar to those of the R-27ER, R-27ET, R-27EP missiles, respectively, with the exception of the mass, which is: for R-27R - 253 kg, for R- 27T - 245.5 kg, for R-27P - 250 kg.

The launch of R-27T missiles is possible only with an interval of at least 6 s or thermal radiation from the previous launch eliminating the possibility TGS of the newly launched capturing target

 

[WARREN SS]

Did you just directly copy and paste a paragraph from Wikipedia and expect that to be taken as more believable evidence than the manufacturer themselves who said R-27T and ET must lock on target while on the rail?. Oh I see, now you gonna say, Wikipedia is more believable because they said they referenced Su-27 Flight Manual booklet-1, guess what, I also have that Su-27 flight manual and this line "In cases of maximum head-on range launches where lock-command cannot be utilised, missile can be fired in PPS: In this mode, missile will fly straight until achieves target lock" from Wikipedia isn't in there. This is the table that they took their information from:

You To copy Pasting Stuff But From different Sources like google searching Old Use Su-27 Manual Still Its Say Maximum head on Mode 52 Km

That high lighted paragraph from Airpower Australia is basically just Carlo Kopp going to fantasy land.

Firstly, there is no such thing as a R-77 T in production, just like R-27EA and R-27EM, the infrared R-77 is nothing more than a paper missile that never got beyond the concept stage.

Secondly, there is no such thing an R-73 or R-74 with active radar seeker in production

Thirdly, there is no such thing as a BVR killed created by mating R-74 terminal stage with R-27 or R-37 booster, this one is even worse as it is nothing more than wishful thinking from Carlo Kopp.

The part about MK-80M and 36T are just what I already told you, R-27T use 36T seeker and R-27ET uses MK-80M seeker, both are reticle

He is Professional Did Pretty accurate detail
the missile control system also includes an inertial navigation system with radio correction. The all-aspect R-27 attacks the target at its any initial position within a 50 degree gimbal limit for the semi-active radar seeker and 55 degrees for infrared. Maximum aircraft G loading at the launch can be up to five units. The R-27 can intercept targets flying at speeds up to 3500

Seesh You To are google searching things You no expert Too

Some Images u posted Depicted Kinematic range Of 120 km


He making current Assumption
Vympel did This With R-77T

No, I am not mixing between infrared guidance and imaging infrared guidance, it is quite impossible to make such a mistake given that their working principles are completely different

Look At R-77 T It uses Same M-80M seeker Plus RF Data link you point Nullifies

Ancile

www.deagel.com

 

[WARREN SS]

Some bonus from the flight manual

Rough translation for non Russian member:
Allowed launch range R-27ET substantially the same as that of the R-27ER but PPP are limited by TGS target capture range.

The launch of R-27ET missiles is possible only with an interval of at least 8 s or thermal radiation from the previous launch eliminating the possibility TGS of the newly launched missile capturing target

The R-27R, R-27T, R-27P missiles have technical data similar to those of the R-27ER, R-27ET, R-27EP missiles, respectively, with the exception of the mass, which is: for R-27R - 253 kg, for R- 27T - 245.5 kg, for R-27P - 250 kg.

The launch of R-27T missiles is possible only with an interval of at least 6 s or thermal radiation from the previous launch eliminating the possibility TGS of the newly launched capturing target

It Talks about Seeker head-on ranges
Inertial radio-corrected guidance And command guidance Will always there

 

[abhay rajput]

Here is an interesting question what do you think which missiles are in this photo..? They might be new Russian missiles which we ordered

 

[WARREN SS]

The point I am trying to tell you is that R-27T and R-27ET doesn't have radio mid course guidance like R-27R and R-27ER and their infrared seeker can't lock on target once they leave the weapon pylon.

 

[StealthFlanker]

You To copy Pasting Stuff But From different Sources like google searching Old Use Su-27 Manual Still Its Say Maximum head on Mode 52 Km

He is Professional Did Pretty accurate detail
the missile control system also includes an inertial navigation system with radio correction. The all-aspect R-27 attacks the target at its any initial position within a 50 degree gimbal limit for the semi-active radar seeker and 55 degrees for infrared. Maximum aircraft G loading at the launch can be up to five units. The R-27 can intercept targets flying at speeds up to 3500

Seesh You To are google searching things You no expert Too

Some Images u posted Depicted Kinematic range Of 120 km

I didn't criticize you because you copy and paste from different sources, I criticize you because you think a random Wikipedia paragraph which can be edited by any random person is gonna be more accurate than Vympel talking about their own product. And as I mentioned earlier, there are a different between kinematic range and engagement range and while the seeker of R-27ET may be able to lock SR-71 from 50-60 km, it is not the case when it face small and slow aircraft like F-16, F-18
You can think Carlo Kopp is accurate as you want, but the fact doesn't change that about half of the missiles that he talking about are paper project that never entered production or just out right fantasy missile created by his imagination.

He making current Assumption
Vympel did This With R-77T

Look At R-77 T It uses Same M-80M seeker Plus RF Data link you point Nullifies
View attachment 46477

Ancile

www.deagel.com

Firstly, there is no such thing as R-77T, not even as a plastic mock up let alone a production version.
Secondly, even if that paper R-77T exist in physical form, it still doesn't change the fact that R-27T and R-27ET doesn't have radio mid course guide and they are LOBL missiles.
Thirdly, that diagram was draw by Carlo Kopp from Airpower Australia site, it wasn't made by Vympel.

It Talks about Seeker head-on ranges
Inertial radio-corrected guidance And command guidance Will always there

They stated very clearly that the engagement range is limited by the range when the IR seeker can capture the target. And don't forget the previous part in the mig-29 manual where they mentioned that R-27ET and R-27T don't have a radio correction line and that they must lock target while still on the rail. And flight manual are pretty much FACT not OPINION, because they are used to teach actual pilot

I am not sure what you are trying to accomplished with that photo? the information I gave you are not hear say stories, they are information directly from official Su-27, Mig-29 pilot flight manual and manufacturer brochure, In shorts, it is as accurate and reliable as it can get. It is not something that you can argue against

 

[StealthFlanker]

Here is an interesting question what do you think which missiles are in this photo..? They might be new Russian missiles which we ordered

:look like R-73 training round (no fin) , R-27ET and R-27ER

 

[fire starter]

a lengthy one but must read.

In surge ops, the IAF demonstrated almost cent per cent serviceability, high dispatch rates. Credit for this hoes to the troika of IAF, MOD, HAL and of course, the late RM Mr Parrikar who pushed for HAL to maintain spares stockpiles to raise Su-30 readiness rates. (2/n)
With further agreements with Russia, spares production is now being moved to more Indian firms allowing for more economical linger term maintenance contracts, and even higher readiness rates of the order of 75% and above. (3/n)
What makes the Flanker H so important to the IAF beyond its raw performance, is its combination of persistence, further aided by AAR (the aircraft can themselves carry Cobham UK pods), plus its phenomenal weapons carrying capability (8Tons) and above.
The design is particularly suited for upgrades even though it remains highly potent. Multiple accounts of its performance in India and the west, make mention of both it's long range radar, its raw performance and power, apart from the skill of the Indian pilots who flew them.
The Flankers boast a huge multi-role weapons package. In IAF service, while called Air Dominance platforms by virtue of their primary role, it mustn't be forgotten they field PGMs (Kh-29, KAB-500/1500 EO/LGBs, Griffin LGBs, Kh-59 ASMs), CMs (Brahmos land/antiship), Kh31s ..
The IAF is now adding an entirely new suite of homegrown weapons for long range strike. These include the 100km ranged SAAW (16 per Su30), 100 km, 1Ton glide bombs, and brand new ARMs - NGARM with wideband attack capability.
The domestic upgrades also include a more reliable RWR, to replace the original Russian and Tarang series unit, to be followed by an all new digital design currently in trials, which will be the defacto standard and can even detect LPI radars.
The other upgrades are a new domestic SPJ, based off of the work on the MiG-29 and LCA programs which saw a modular design with different power ratings being fitted to different classes of aircraft. The IAF is pleased with the fit on the MiG29 which bodes well for the Flanker.
A full blown Su-30 upgrade would also include a new radar, new large cockpit displays, either Indian or Russian, based off of the Su35. A new domestic IRST is in the works.
In terms of AAM additions, the Su30 will likely receive the ASRAAM, the Astra has been inducted already, addressing the IAFs gap vis a vis the SD10A/AMRAAM C5, but more inductions are also likely, with options such as the Derby ER, to newer Astra variants and the RVV-BD.

 

[fire starter]

The Flankers are already datalinked, they have the Polyot which allows flights of Flankers to share targeting information, designate, attack. However, IAF is now standardizing on it's new Operational Data Link, Israeli hardware/Indian software, a far more advanced system.
With a mix of TVC, HMS and the R73/ASRAAM combination in the close in fight, plus the plethora of BVR options on the table, in service, the Flankers are bound to remain very dangerous opponents for a long while. The 1 mtr dia antenna makes the Flanker radar a potent VLO counter.
In fact, with newer P/AESA tech, higher power alternators, it is very likely the IAF Su30 upgrades will act as long range "eyes" for IAF strike packages in areas where AWACs coverage may not be feasible. And also pick up low observable targets at range.
The IAFs Flankers are nearest in terms of co.parison to the F15 E Eagles operated by the USAF and the specialized Eagles used by the IDFAF. Its instructor to watch how the Indian aero industry is using the LCA to propel itself, the same way the Israelis used their Lavi, Kfir.
The original Su-30 MKI used the Mission computer, Display Processor, RWR and other avionics developed for the LCA Tech Demo. Today's Su30s will receive far more advanced systems again developed via the LCA, parallel programs, as upgrades.
The one thing that the IAF has yet not implemented in the Su30, but likely will, over time, are NLOS SATCOM datalinks. These will allow the Su30s to act as distributed mission controllers and soak up, retransmit sensor data they pick up.
India's UAV program under development has a SATCOM datalink, as does its AEW&C. While some of the hardware is imported, increasing familiarity with the tech., in the tactical arena will likely have the IAF move towards using its Flankers as battlefield, C3I managers.
HAL and its private partners are developing swarm drones. More options wre also likely to be available ex-import. The AURA program is picking up steam with GTRE looking towards firming up powerplant development. Latency advantages would support frontline Su30s as controllers.
Then there are the EW roles. The Su30s already carry huge SAP518 SPJs (likely to be replaced by a new Indian unit) and SAP14 escort jammers. With new facilities coming up, and greater experience in fielding high power AESAs, more domestic options are likely.
With a mix of EW, Spice, NGARM, SAAW, Astra - packs of Flankers would act as both Suppressive/Destructive platforms vs opponent AD assets, able to retarget on-the-fly. India recently launched its first ELINT sat for radar data. Has multi-spectral sats for geo-location as well.

 

[fire starter]

In short, the Flanker fleet will remain the backbone of a revamped IAF fleet, able to act as the core of any offensive strike package.
None of this hardware would be as useful as it can be, without the IAF investing heavily in its frontline crews. The IAF now has Full Mission sims for its Flankers set up in AFB. Its Su30 carry ACMI and have participated in exercises across the west and in India.
Fighter types they have flown against include the F15, F16, Sea Harrier, Mirage 2000, Rafale, the EF Typhoon, the Tornado ADV. Each exercise has honed the IAF SOP that extra bit in terms of ACM tactics, ashwell as managing logistics, interoperability.
The RSAF now brings F16s regularly to India at KKD, not inconceivable they will bring the Eagle and perhaps one day the F35 as well (w/US permission). Each international exercise has the IAF deploy as many of its young officers as possible, to broadbase their experience.
Interestingly enough, the constant additions to the IAF fleet often escape attention. For instance, the IAF ordered 483 Software Defined Radios for its ODL program, to be equally split between ground assets and its fighter fleet, with the Su30s at the forefront. This is Phase1.
The IAF also ordered over 160 Litening G4Is for its fighter fleet, again these extremely modern sensor pods will be distributed across the IAFs Flanker and Jaguar fleets in particular. These allow the Su30s to observe, designate, attack at range.
Further, the Su30s also received Radar Targeting Pods from Israel's Elta, to allow round the clock radar surveillance of ground targets at stand off range. Again, niche capabilities, few AF can deploy on their frontline fighter platforms at short notice.
The Indian AEW&CS mission system, LCA Mk1As advanced cockpit displayed by HAL also shows avionics integration capabilities plus advanced data fusion generators (oft referred to as sensor fusion) are also now within in Indian aerospace capabilities.
The Uttam program progressing for the LCA also holds phenomenal promise for Su30 upgrades. A Flanker sized unit can offer significant advantages for picking up LO targets at range.
The issue has always been one of funding, capacity building and consistency plus accountability with user involvement, rarely capability. And with the LCA program acting as a phenomenal tech generator, those advancements will all constantly flow into the Flanker.

 

[fire starter]

Around a decade back itself, USAF pilots visiting India noted the IAF Flanker crews got around 200 hours a year, with senior pilots often acting as mission commanders. Thereafter, IAF has boosted Su30 serviceability, added sims, broadbased ACMI.
What is often also ignored is IAF fighter crews focus on "all up training" with full "blue on blue", training ing is not conducted against downgraded "red sir". High fighter hours in effect, translate to superb proficiency with the aircraft and high readiness levels.
On Feb 27th, that is what paid off in spades as a Flanker pair literally held off 8 Vipers, evaded multiple AMRAAMs and yet, turned hot again, forcing the Vipers to disengage. Training, courage, elan combined with the Flankers performance.
The previous night, a pack of Flankers triggered PAF defenses. They raced to the border, forcing the PAF to respond. The Mirages struck elsewhere as the Flankers played their role.
When the Su-30 was first purchased, many critics questioned its utility, asked why the IAF needed such a heavy, powerful platform. Questioned whether IAF would ever be able to deploy it. Today, it is is the core of the IAF. A procurement decision which was an excellent choice.

 

[FGFAPilot1]

No matter what, the Sukhoi 30MKI remains to date the most beautiful fighter ever made (in my humble opinion), there is something to be said about Russian designers, almost all of their fighters are better looking than their American/Western couterparts. [IMG credit: BRF]

 

[Gautam Sarkar]