I'd like to see you guys do a red on blue similar to this, but with the victory conditions set as the destruction of opposing AWACS and not necessarily the elimination of the other force.
It felt like the Eagles were on the defensive the entire match. Even if the R-37 isn't scoring kills every single time, it can still be a very disruptive and menacing monster. One downside to notching is you would probably be extremely vulnerable if there was a second missile coming in after the first.
See if the MIG-31 carrying the R-37M could snipe an American/NATO AWACS without being shot down by U.S./NATO aircraft not equipped with the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (JATM), since the R-37M is in service, while the AIM-260 JATM is not yet in service? That MIG-31 is much faster than the F-15 is and the AWACS is as slow as a sloth. That and don't tell the CAP pilots what the mission will consist of, but let them be on a true CAP in support of the AWACS.
Kind of mad that the foxhounds did not really punch it and use their strengths at High levels. When I grabbed the foxhound mod I immediately went up to 75,000, sometimes 80,000 ft and then rained down R37Ms, while at top speed( Sadly the jsn 64 mig 31 mod is restricted to Mach 2.83, it seems to be a game engine limitation despite the point having thrust to actually reach Mach3) , but your enemies don't even know to aim their radar elevation to look up at 80,000 feet. All of the foxhound drivers here were babying it, the 260 would have a far harder time catching a plane accelerating to top speed, let alone while climbing up to 80k or higher from near sea level
I can't help but think it would be great to see this with the starting positions reversed! Then the aircraft with the LRM's would have the least cover - unless they were smart.
Great fights! Maybe a video using the R-37M for what it's designed for? Take down B-52's before they can launch cruise and maybe also a deliberate AWACS kill mission?
@@grimreapers The F-15EX is more than just a missile truck! Has substantially more powerful mission computer, new cockpit displays, a digital backbone, and the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS)-- an electronic warfare and threat identification system! More fuel efficient and is faster! That's being compared to The F-15C and F-15E two legendary Airplanes! Lol plus it's a missile truck! The AIM-260 JATM is a Mach 5 Missile with a range around 180 miles quoting an interview with Airforce General AIM-260 JATM is expected to go TWICE as far as AIM-120D!
@@chuckfarley4130 That reminds me of an idea-- B-52 Gunship! Same 25, 40, and 105mm Cannons as The AC-130! However also have stand off weapons, AIM-260 JATM, and AGM-183! Laser weapon at the nose much like The YAL-1 however much more advanced now! Additionally for defense retractable GAU-17 Underbelly Cannon and/or CIWS on top of the Plane as well! Now that would be a flying Super Fortress!🤯😆👍
One should clarify that "notching" always works in DCS. In reality, however, it only works with pulse-Dopler radars. The problem is that very few missiles have ever used pulse-doppler radar, let alone modern ones. Since AWACS and later fighter planes were equipped with AESA, the topic of "notching" is over, history.
Yup it's a HUGE limit we've hit in DCS with the 2020's missiles. The game does not simulate true AESA yet, so none of these new missiles are as effective as the real life version. One day maybe they will address the problem.
Wow, I'm genuinely surprised to find someone else (in the DCS community) who knows that neither 'notching', nor flying on the deck, will magically make you immune against modern, Western radar systems! In reality, even the pulse-doppler (PD) radars in air superiority fighters were relatively quickly upgraded (see the MSIP and MSIP II F-15C/D upgrades during the 1980's) to fix their vulnerabilities to counter look-down-shoot-down tactics, such as notching, while also adding more radar modes, features and, of course, increased power and sensitivity which allowed for a further increased detection range. High-performance DSPs, together with large (for the time) digital memory banks, allowed for the implementation of higher resolution digital coherent integration, along with very long inter-pulse coherence lengths, as well as even wider bandwidth matched filters and a huge radar data cube! While listening to interviews of Eagle drivers who flew as adversaries against F-16s during the 80's and 90's, it became apparent why they used to call the Vipers "Lawn Darts". Apparently, back then the capabilities of the MSIP F-15s was still so highly classified that even the Bluefor F-16 pilots, who flew against them in the same mission, weren't allowed to see the F-15s' tapes, nor would they be told how/why they died. All that F-16 pilots would hear was a callout over the radio, saying that they were dead, even though they aggressively defended into the beam and only gave chase after the F-15s had turned cold.
Notching is history with western pulse sopler RADARs too - you couldn't notch Sea Harrier's Blue Vixen 27 years ago - let alone its more advanced lovechild CAPTOR-M. When we had primitive back-end systems the return could only be tracked looking for relative movement. Modern digital signal processing means the back-end can work out what is clutter and what is an aircraft - even if the return is static distance-wise and of course the returns are oversampled so you can amplify them to what would have been white noise - now you can pick the constants out of that white noise. This is the reason stealth is as good as dead against modern opponents. I don't think Russian real-time data processing is anywhere near the wests' though - the IAF SU-30 fiasco proves they are well behind the curve.
@@LondonSteveLee That is of course absolutely correct. It applies not only to AESA but also to modern pulse-doppler radars with modern signal processing. But not only large radars in aircraft like the Blue Vixen, but also compact ones for guided missiles. The AIM-54C already had powerful DSPs to make "notching" impossible and that was in 1986.
MiG-31 is designet to do that ... its its sole purpose to be a BVR platform...... it is unmatched in that respect ! The new one (R-37M )has fuel reserves and some say it is programmed to burn the reserves at terminal phase to gain speed and energy once more .... Cap you need to be in Hi radar freq as it will give you more chance to see them from further .... ILV is jumping from high to low and you use it when the crank or side aspect :) R-37M qallity VS qantity .... ;)
How is it king of bvr when even the BM/M/D models with the Zholson-M phased array/aesa radar it can only detect (not lock which is closer to 300km based on the companies word and successful test fires) AWACs RCS (16-20m^) Targets at 400km. It won't be able to pick up any proper 5th gen stealth plane from far enough away to take advantage of the extra range of these missiles and that's before all the massively improved jamming capability and on board ECM/EW suites (plus the DAS of the f35 is insane and only getting more so +f22 upgrades happening currently/soon will give it a similar function) they all have reducing the ability to do so. And says nothing for the seekers ability to work as well on LO/ir reduced signatures which it won't. Add in all the networking and integration with so many other systems that they are never without support often with the ability to engage outside their own weapons capabilities. I seriously question how successful they'd even be against AWACs as the missiles can be attacked in many ways electronic and kinematic. can be tracked and targeted by 3-4 F35s turning themselves into AWACs and giving constant 360 1200km passive detection sphere (like I said that DAS be insane can even track a tank shell firing.)
that warhead on that missile is so big that it is even heavier than the ones in the shahed 136 drones used against Ukraine or equivalent to 3 amraam warheads even at a good distance it's explosion is deadly
According to Ward Carrols channel, the Su35s and Mig31s R37m are sucessfully engaging low flying Ukranian Su25s and Su27s at 120nm, in real world conditions, 40nm further than the Aim54c Phoenix was capable of. It is extremely effective against low flying aircraft because of energy states and the fact the UAF Su27s and Su25s can't pop up as the line of contact is covered by S400/S300 , putting the targets at a huge energy disadvantage. Apparently the deficiency in energy state means the targets stand little chance against this missile & the efficacy IRL shows the onboard radar is really good at picking them out from ground clutter.
I figured in the first PvP fight, that Damp had gone low and fast to the island then when Simba popped up he was going to be the lure. It looked as if Simba would draw the 31s over the island so Damp could take pot shots from below and draw them into a dogfight. Sadly they were just doing donuts over the water.
One issue with the video is the 260 was not designed for the F15. It's initial launch platforms are the F22 and F18 Super Hornet. It will be configured for the F35 on a later date. So would like to see this video with the actual design launch platforms. The outcome I think would be radically different.
@@appa609 more like they hevnt finsished the R&D for the makeing the poper munthson monting racks for the F-35 hardpont mouting racks for the f-35s intenral and extranl weapon payload bays might take a few more years for that.
Pretty sure that F-15 was used as a test platform for 260. They usually are the first to carry new missiles even if they don’t get some for operational use. The relatively modest flight hour cost, wide range of conditions available in the flight envelope, and plenty of stores available for whatever they want to bring along makes F-15s good weapons test platforms.
Ukraine reports suggest a "No Escape Zone" of around 120nm , this is against low flying targets in real combat conditions against Su27/25/24 , apparently they have complete dominance over the Ukrainian Airforce because the low altitude being forced by the S400 coverage means the R37m has a huge energy advantage, it also apparently has no issues discriminating the targets against the ground clutter
The main purpose of the Mig-31 is the fight against cruise missiles, and the confrontation with the SR-71 was only a matter of prestige. A well-known phrase of the Minister of Foreign Affairs A. Gromyko during negotiations with the Americans in 1978, when he was informed about the successful interception of a low-flying cruise missile by the then prototype of the 31st MiG: "Now you can fly your cruise missiles wherever you want." Earlier, the USSR negotiated to limit the range of cruise missiles
But of an observation. There's always surprise at the range the missiles are launched at, but given the planes are closing towards each other the actual flight distance would be significantly less.
This looked like it was fun. I only have experience in the A10a atm.... I flew the su-25.... it has a massive amount of hard points... .comical to me. i did however buy an F-15, and learning how to not rip off my gear when landing. I use these videos to see your guys having fun. Also, learn how to dodge missiles and informational things like that.
The main purpose of the Mig-31 is the fight against cruise missiles, and the confrontation with the SR-71 was only a matter of prestige. A well-known phrase of the Minister of Foreign Affairs A. Gromyko during negotiations with the Americans in 1978, when he was informed about the successful interception of a low-flying cruise missile by the then prototype of the 31st MiG: "Now you can fly your cruise missiles wherever you want." Earlier, the USSR negotiated to limit the range of cruise missiles
@@scpgaming-452 fighter jets are small jet powered combat aircraft of which you get different roles like interception, air superiority etc. don't be pedantic for no reason
@@grimreapers nobody said it was, but ironically the MiG 31 design mantra was essentially the same as air superiority jets like the f22, first look. first shot. first kill.
This video does not show how Russia uses these missiles. They do not "mostly" miss, as Cap says. They use the MiG-31 to carry the missile all the way until the last section of what would be it's long range travel. In other words, the missile never ends up losing it's target because it can't manuever well at high altitude. The MiG-31 dives at high speed onto the target. It fires the missile which builds even more speed. The missile is already on target and is never unable to manuever and hits every time.
Non-core game missiles have an altitude limit of something like 70,000ft. Above that they die. Core game missiles are allowed up to something like 300,000ft before they die.
More so unlikely engagement scenario. Even if all the parameters for the missile and kinematics of the aircraft were perfect and the designs of all its systems radar jamming ew and weapons were modeled perfectly this still wouldn't give you a realistic result. Networking and system integration between allied assets are sooo important to any real scenario.
@@MrDJAK777Since nobody has such an advanced networking and integration systems like NATO.. As well as the most effective weapons.. The BVR game changer the Meteor alone would keep russia at home.. It would be another massacre of russian aircrafts. Everybody with decent knowledge, still remember what happened with the Mirage III in the 6 days wars and the other conflict after it.
wonder if anyone has thought about including a SEFOP in the missile warhead, so if it looks like a direct hit isn't happening, it fires a slug at the target?
I am pretty sure the seeker head on the 260 is equivalent in tracking to a Kardashian chick on a laser-hair removal facility.... My understanding is that it has the ability to burn through jamming and with it's RCS thrusters it is very maneuverable. As you point out the R-37 was never designed to turn tightly - it hauls ass in a straight line to hit a big fat target that itself can't turn well.
The only issue I have when changing radar cross sections is when I find the RCS parameter instead of a value I just see (NULNULETX) or (NULETX). So, at this point I have no idea what i'm doing.
Love these vids, never even thought about any kind of flight sim a month ago... And now its a daily watch. 😊 So is Simba German then.? He got all the lines thrown at him today.. The ICH BIN EIN TELEGRAPH POLE! line killed me.. 😂
@@grimreapers ahhgg, my message has disappeared again after trying to fix a word. So yeah, there you go. 15 minutes of writing lost again. Happens almost daily now.. 😕
One note - The Russian R-37M has only demonstrated a range of 200 km/125 miles in the Ukrainian conflict - I would be VERY SKEPTICAL of Russian claims for this missile.
Maybe true. But I wouldn’t give any credit for equipment to the Ukrainians as they didn’t develop any of them. Artillery Tanks, Nlaws, migs, javelins? None of which were R&D by ukriane. Just begged for!
It means nothing, they simply launched it from 200 km to increase hit probability, 300 km range is against a bomber which has poor maneuvrability, not a fighter.
Generally, the ranges given for missiles are usually theoretical maximums, meaning that if absolutely every condition is perfect, and the enemy target doesn't maneuver, the R-37 can go to 300Km. Every country does this, America, China etc. You can see this even with the AMRAAM. The AMRAAM C variant has a given maximum range of 105 kilometers, but in actual combat the furthest AMRAAM kill ever recorded is only 45km.
@@grimreapers MIG 31BM is a specialized aircraft. Only for valuable targets and low flying cruise missiles. Using them against an F15 or F22 is a waste of resource.
I wonder what the cost of each missile is going to be. If it’s a battle of attrition, that will factor. Something tells me that’s the 37 will be quite expensive.
@@grimreapers : I dunno, man. Now that Russia has really cranked up its military production, they’ve shown themselves able to produce surprisingly large numbers of even their most sophisticated equipment of every kind, including their latest missile models. It’s really tremendously impressive to see Russia hit its stride in real time.
@@grimreapersyou presented r37 as brand new while it's literally was accepted and started mass production at 2014 while testings of this missile started at 1988. And you comparing this thing to brand new Aim260 which didn't even finished testings... Sounds kinda iffy right? And you implying thst there isn't much of them although they were producing it since 2014... I think you clearly biased against it
@@samy7013russian sophisticated equipments? That's why their few days or weeks special operation is still unsuccessful. They're not good at sophisticated military things, that's why the precision of their weapons, and their successful hitting rates are very bad.
@@nathaniellazo5912 I guess it is just a game of chance. I think those long range missiles can be defeated once you know what you are dealing with. It is the close range ones that suck
@@brianwesley28 I guess it matters that the American’s prefer their weapon’s and missiles ACTUALLY FKNG WORK… compared to say… your N A Z I ass country Then again, what does one expect when Russia can’t stop U.S. missile tech from the fkng 80’s… so maybe um shut your face 🥴
@@brianwesley28 No. If the Russians cannot produce it at scale then it cannot make a significant tactical or strategic difference. If Russia only has a few dozen of those missiles then they can only, at best, shoot down a few dozen American fighters. America has literally thousands more where those came from. Meanwhile, if their opponent (America, in this case) can produce something at scale that is superior to what you have in large quantities (R-77 vs AIM-120C/D), then it doesn't matter if America hasn't deployed its next-gen missile yet, especially since it is a foregone conclusion that when America DOES start producing it they will be able to produce it in vastly larger quantities than the Russians can produce theirs. Further, when it comes to the specs of the missile the only data we have is courtesy of the Russian MoD. The last nine months have shown us how reliable their word is (not very). And before you say "Well, the only source we have about the US missile is the DoD" first; American weapons procurement is FAR more transparent than Russia's (though obviously not completely. The DoD still doesn't disclose the full capabilities of the F-35, for example), and second; while the DoD is far from completely trustworthy it is still far more trustworthy than the Russian MoD.
funny how the R37M is considered "new" when it's been in service since 2019 while the JATM isn't even in service yet. In terms of missiles, the Russian ones are so much faster.
nonsense. F22s are not invisible...there have been USAF briefings from YEARS AGO that stated that they are low observable and CAN BE TRACKED and HAVE BEEN able to have been tracked for some time. It is just difficult to get a firing solution you people believe far too much propaganda
@@grimreapers After failing to get a lock on two Pakistani F-16s in Indian airspace (RADAR jitter above mach 1) - the IAF SU-30s fired mad-dog R-77s at the F-16s flying directly away from them well within the expected kill range - the missiles also failed to find a lock. The Russians couldn't fix the issues with the SU-30 RADARs - the Indians were furious - the real reason India pulled out of SU-57 and have dropped R-77 which is being actively replaced with Derby - India realised Russian tech just doesn't work and they are being taken for a ride. India are desperately searching for a western partner to replace the avionics in their SU-30s - but nobody will touch the project because India wants full technology-share as part of the deal and it's practically inevitable, given the endemic corruption, that they will leak the data to the highest bidder anyway.
I expected the Eagles to take advantage of low altitude and blend in with the ocean and terrain. With the advantage of having twice the missiles, one of them could have been a distraction once close in, while the other unloaded on the Migs. Once the Migs had their hands full of say 8 incoming missiles, Eagle # 2 (the decoy) could have turned back in (had he been dodging well) 😁and unloaded and made it a bad day to be a Mig driver. At least that's how I had strategized it out before it happened. Maybe it would not have worked...I don't know??? But, that's how I would have done it. Might just as well fire all those missiles as to let them be blown up while still on the pylons. Great video as always. :)
according to the British military magazine (in the winter of 2022), the use of the ground effect, as well as dropping chaffs and maneuvering at high overloads, does not help to avoid hitting this missile If the air combat distance is 100 miles and r37m was fired, then for the 4th generation aircraft this is almost one hundred percent loss of this aircraft very often along with the pilot, the missile falls from above and the missile tries to get into the cockpit, just like an anti-aircraft missile does SAM "Buk" if you read the whole article and then watch this DCS simulation, it becomes clear that the behavior of this rocket is not true. This rocket looks more like an advanced phoenix with modern electronics and a dual-mode engine (the first phase is acceleration to Mach 5, the second phase is much less thrust and a long engine run time to keep the speed at Mach 5), and not an edited r77 Therefore, IRL cannot be won kinetically at a distance of 100 miles, the rocket engine will still work and the rocket will constantly receive energy.
*Note*: I am not trying to argue that the latest Russian tech is anywhere near as good as even late-model AIM-54's from the Cold War, nor do I support the Russian government. I'm just trying to correct a basic physics misunderstanding as these missiles do not look like unmaneuverable missiles should. If it really was designed to be limited to something as restrictive as a maximum of 8G, then it would actually have a *higher* Pk when fired from more than the stated max range, as it would be able to turn tighter at the same 8G! *{TLDR}* The square-qube law means that a larger diameter missile will burn off a larger % of its total mass than an identical scaled-down version, resulting in a larger aerodynamic force/weight ratio, but also incurring a larger non-maneuvering drag. It's rear-mounted movable fins are used to apply a torque and start the turning process, but they cannot generate the lift needed for sustained high-G turns. Those long strakes near the R-37's COM, would generate very large lifting forces at low AOA, thus making it much more maneuverable and allowing for more sustained maneuvering than something like the AIM-120C-5, as they are *much* more effective and efficient than relying on the missile's body for the required lift. *{/TLDR}* The R-37, based just on its external geometry, doesn't at all look like a missile designed to be restricted to 8G's, like you showed. Because most of the mass of modern missiles is just fuel, the square-qube relationship between volume and surface area means that a larger missile will shed a greater % of its total starting mass than a small missile would. Furthermore, if you take an AIM-120C-5 and scale it up to roughly the same diameter, you'll see that the R-37's fins aren't really that puny, but even more important is the length of the moment arms between the empty COM and, respectively, the fins and the rocket's nosecone. Those lengths, multiplied respectively by the sum of the tangential forces exerted by the fins and the forces exterted upon the nosecone section, is what determines the total pertubatory torque available to start turning the body of the missile. Obviously, as the missile starts to turn, those control surfaces can't actually generate the large perpendicular force through the missile's COM, which is required to sustain the turn, otherwise the missile will simply oscillate in pitch or the critical AOA of the fins will be exceeded and the missile will start tumbling. For something like the AIM-120-C5, which doesn't have any lifting surfaces near its COM, this actually limits the maximum sustained-G turn that it can make, while also making turns *much* more inefficient as it needs to use its body as a makeshift lifting surface, with a massive drag penalty. It is at this point where those mid-mounted strakes/fins on the R-37 come in. They allow the missile to generate an *enormous* amount of lifting force, while keeping the body's AOA very low, thus resulting in the missile not just being *more* maneuverable, but also retaining *much* *more* of its energy while it does so. The largest issue I see if with the missile autopilot and target persuit guidance algorithms. Due to DCS limitations, this missile 'acts' just like an AIM-9 or am AIM-7. It doesn't try to exploit its advantages or compensate for its disadvantages and consequently it runs into that 8G limit even harder than it should. Think about it like this: If this *hypersonic* missile was really so heavy and sluggish, hard-limited to 8G's, and really had to make due with Proportional Navigation (especially one in which the gain monotonically increases with a decrease in the target's distance), then the best defence would be to actually fly almost directly towards the R-37, increasing your altitude and decreasing your CAS airspeed so as to achieve your peak rate speeds, then just before the missile acquires you, you just turn 90 degrees to beam the missile and enter into a vertically downward, maximum sustained-G circle. This is obviously absurd, and would make spending so much on hypersonic A2A weaponry seem silly, so I propose that this whole situation is completely unrealistic. No-one capable of developing hypersonic weaponry would make such elementary mistakes.
A you speak of this hypersonic technology like its decades in advance when in reality multiple countries field missiles of hypersonic speeds hell the Minuteman 1 was "hypersonic" technology. All it does down too is a faster and more powerful burning fuel to reach those speeds. But because of these extreme speeds and the amount of fuel they need to carry these missiles are absolutely massive and all the outer walls and reinforcement needs to be even thicker making this missile extremely heavy compared to missiles that travel slower. This is why the US has decided to concentrate more of its efforts into stealth missiles because they can actually be far far more effective. B and lastly you also speak like they have demonstrated incredible technology and are halfway across Europe dominating anyone in their way when they have been absolutely embarrassed in every sense of the word. I wouldn't be surprised if this missile tops out at mach 4 and only travels 100 miles given what we have learned so far in Ukraine. Why haven't we seen the infamous SU-57 or what about the T-14 Armata MBT Russia have again and again proven its all smoke and mirrors for them. They can't even seem to make a reliable car so what makes you believe they have a game changer missile. The only reason everyone respected Russian military might was because the Defense contractors are the ones that are contracted to gather intelligence on foreign defense capabilities so of course they will always have this cool super effective unicorns that can track F22 and travel at light speed and have the destructive capability to split the Earth in half. In the end it all comes back to making money and spending money. Russia isn't great at either which is there biggest enemy in Ukraine, poor training, poor maintenance, troops with rifles from the early 1900s etc...
Great Vid as always Cap! If you or anyone else wish to know more about this particular missile and how the current air-war in Ukraine is going i recommend checking out Ward Carrol´s channel on YT. In his latest video he talks with Justin Bronk from the Royal Uniformed Services Institute about this very subject. Around the 30 min mark in the video they talk about the MIG-31b, R-37M and Russian tactics regarding the two. I would recommend the whole video to anyone who is interested in the current conflict in Ukranie however. Thanks for the video!
Just an important data, Russia hasn’t deployed a single AESA radar on a fighter aircraft, that might change the capabilities of the MiG-31 to clear a shot, for the worst.
These Russian missiles are only really good for the situation where you are snipping at a enemy that can't see you on their radar and are not expecting a attack. Much like the iranian use of Phoenix from tomcats in 1980.
The theory about flying straight at it is to give it a much tighter turn when you break. You had better have done your maths pretty well before trying this risky escape!
Oh, the rematch from 70s after F15A vs MiG25P, if my ole brain ‘members. F15s protecting RF4s on recce missions. MiG25s trying to intercept…. Seem to remember it went badly for them…. Let’s see how the ole planes do with new missiles 😳😎😂😂😂
F15-EX's RADAR will be soooo much better than MiG-31's. I suspect the same would be for US AWACs too. The IAF SU-30 fiasco has shown how poor Russian RADAR tech really is.
Very cool, but I do believe the new RU missiles are overperforming, merely due to the crap performance we've seen from Russia throughout the war (pre-war, I would have had zero evidence to say that with confidence). Russian advanced technology is an oxymoron at this point. As you said, it's likely the core game influencing them, as they appear to be responding to data link much more than the AIM-260s per the Tacview. I say this with love and the desire to see some amazing future war games/simulations. I think GR needs to establish a "best practices" instruction set for the AIM-260 to learn how to use it in optimal conditions and make each one count (perhaps a table of estimated PK rates at a given range and altitude). There was just way too many of them mad-dogged, fired at low altitude or fired at a generally low probability of kill. I believe the F-15s would have had more success keeping more in reserve (and having bags) as both ended up dodging a bunch of incoming missiles and within visual range of the MIGs, but essentially had nothing left when getting in close. Thanks guys!
Hey Cap - didn't the AIM-260 previously have a longer first-stage booster programmed in? It looks like the head pops off really quick (it learned to pop from Damp).
your understanding of why this war is the way it is- it's ignorant. Russia has been fighting against an army that knows what it is going to do before it does it due to persistent NATO ISR that RF will not shoot at
When utterly dominating an enemy massively armed up by NATO and willing to just throw the lives of hundredsthousands of men away with a mere fraction of their army and massively holding back = "crap peformance", I don't know what a good performance would be. Instant destruction of everything?
How many times must it be pointed out that R37M is not designed to hit small manoeuvrable targets - it's an AWAC killer. If this thing is taking down fighter jets taking evasive action in the game then it's just plainly incorrectly modelled. It's got practically zero chance of intercepting a fighter that's trying to not to be hit! Turning hard will just rip itself to pieces immediately.
yes but can it be used agesnt a stealth F-35 or F-22? however if it can't track or lock on then hyper sonic missles are very useless. aslo makes so much heat in flight that aegis missle usa defenses on both the grnud based and sea based ship luchers would use its huge infead tracking singture and see it from a very very very long way away. also they munuver like S***T so a much more menuverble SM-2 anti missle missle can just fly infonut of it and use the hyper sonic missiles lack of miuverblty agest it.
I'd like to see you guys do a red on blue similar to this, but with the victory conditions set as the destruction of opposing AWACS and not necessarily the elimination of the other force.
It felt like the Eagles were on the defensive the entire match.
Even if the R-37 isn't scoring kills every single time, it can still be a very disruptive and menacing monster.
One downside to notching is you would probably be extremely vulnerable if there was a second missile coming in after the first.
See if the MIG-31 carrying the R-37M could snipe an American/NATO AWACS without being shot down by U.S./NATO aircraft not equipped with the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (JATM), since the R-37M is in service, while the AIM-260 JATM is not yet in service? That MIG-31 is much faster than the F-15 is and the AWACS is as slow as a sloth. That and don't tell the CAP pilots what the mission will consist of, but let them be on a true CAP in support of the AWACS.
Get a couple experienced MIG-31 pilots, and that Is most certainly a real possibility. The MIG-31 Is an absolute beast In BVR engagements.
Stuff like f22 and f35 could take it out because it's steath and the mig 31 wont see it from long range
@@christopherfox7650 Stealth ≠ Invisible to Radar completely.
Yes but only from short range like at 20 30 miles
@@christopherfox7650
but mig-31 flying in stratosphere lol -_-
This was some real quality content. Love the intricacies of BVR combat and love that I'm seeing the mighty Mig-31 in combat.
This was some of the most interesting BVR stuff I have seen. I love that we get to see team tactics, you don't get that on other channels.
♥️
Kind of mad that the foxhounds did not really punch it and use their strengths at High levels. When I grabbed the foxhound mod I immediately went up to 75,000, sometimes 80,000 ft and then rained down R37Ms, while at top speed( Sadly the jsn 64 mig 31 mod is restricted to Mach 2.83, it seems to be a game engine limitation despite the point having thrust to actually reach Mach3)
, but your enemies don't even know to aim their radar elevation to look up at 80,000 feet.
All of the foxhound drivers here were babying it, the 260 would have a far harder time catching a plane accelerating to top speed, let alone while climbing up to 80k or higher from near sea level
I can't help but think it would be great to see this with the starting positions reversed! Then the aircraft with the LRM's would have the least cover - unless they were smart.
Great fights! Maybe a video using the R-37M for what it's designed for? Take down B-52's before they can launch cruise and maybe also a deliberate AWACS kill mission?
OK
@@grimreapers The F-15EX is more than just a missile truck! Has substantially more powerful mission computer, new cockpit displays, a digital backbone, and the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS)-- an electronic warfare and threat identification system! More fuel efficient and is faster! That's being compared to The F-15C and F-15E two legendary Airplanes! Lol plus it's a missile truck! The AIM-260 JATM is a Mach 5 Missile with a range around 180 miles quoting an interview with Airforce General AIM-260 JATM is expected to go TWICE as far as AIM-120D!
Cruise missiles from a B-52 would be launched 1,000 miles from target. WAYYYYYY beyond the range of the R-37M.
@@chuckfarley4130 That reminds me of an idea-- B-52 Gunship! Same 25, 40, and 105mm Cannons as The AC-130! However also have stand off weapons, AIM-260 JATM, and AGM-183! Laser weapon at the nose much like The YAL-1 however much more advanced now! Additionally for defense retractable GAU-17 Underbelly Cannon and/or CIWS on top of the Plane as well! Now that would be a flying Super Fortress!🤯😆👍
@@chuckfarley4130 or all of that and more in/on a C-5!
One should clarify that "notching" always works in DCS. In reality, however, it only works with pulse-Dopler radars. The problem is that very few missiles have ever used pulse-doppler radar, let alone modern ones. Since AWACS and later fighter planes were equipped with AESA, the topic of "notching" is over, history.
Amraam doesn't use pulse Doppler radar?
Yup it's a HUGE limit we've hit in DCS with the 2020's missiles. The game does not simulate true AESA yet, so none of these new missiles are as effective as the real life version. One day maybe they will address the problem.
Wow, I'm genuinely surprised to find someone else (in the DCS community) who knows that neither 'notching', nor flying on the deck, will magically make you immune against modern, Western radar systems!
In reality, even the pulse-doppler (PD) radars in air superiority fighters were relatively quickly upgraded (see the MSIP and MSIP II F-15C/D upgrades during the 1980's) to fix their vulnerabilities to counter look-down-shoot-down tactics, such as notching, while also adding more radar modes, features and, of course, increased power and sensitivity which allowed for a further increased detection range.
High-performance DSPs, together with large (for the time) digital memory banks, allowed for the implementation of higher resolution digital coherent integration, along with very long inter-pulse coherence lengths, as well as even wider bandwidth matched filters and a huge radar data cube!
While listening to interviews of Eagle drivers who flew as adversaries against F-16s during the 80's and 90's, it became apparent why they used to call the Vipers "Lawn Darts".
Apparently, back then the capabilities of the MSIP F-15s was still so highly classified that even the Bluefor F-16 pilots, who flew against them in the same mission, weren't allowed to see the F-15s' tapes, nor would they be told how/why they died.
All that F-16 pilots would hear was a callout over the radio, saying that they were dead, even though they aggressively defended into the beam and only gave chase after the F-15s had turned cold.
Notching is history with western pulse sopler RADARs too - you couldn't notch Sea Harrier's Blue Vixen 27 years ago - let alone its more advanced lovechild CAPTOR-M. When we had primitive back-end systems the return could only be tracked looking for relative movement. Modern digital signal processing means the back-end can work out what is clutter and what is an aircraft - even if the return is static distance-wise and of course the returns are oversampled so you can amplify them to what would have been white noise - now you can pick the constants out of that white noise. This is the reason stealth is as good as dead against modern opponents. I don't think Russian real-time data processing is anywhere near the wests' though - the IAF SU-30 fiasco proves they are well behind the curve.
@@LondonSteveLee That is of course absolutely correct. It applies not only to AESA but also to modern pulse-doppler radars with modern signal processing. But not only large radars in aircraft like the Blue Vixen, but also compact ones for guided missiles. The AIM-54C already had powerful DSPs to make "notching" impossible and that was in 1986.
MiG-31 is designet to do that ... its its sole purpose to be a BVR platform...... it is unmatched in that respect ! The new one (R-37M )has fuel reserves and some say it is programmed to burn the reserves at terminal phase to gain speed and energy once more .... Cap you need to be in Hi radar freq as it will give you more chance to see them from further .... ILV is jumping from high to low and you use it when the crank or side aspect :) R-37M qallity VS qantity .... ;)
@@waynegriswold8953 correct , wrong wording ..... thanks !
because mig-31 only one role bvr in vks
How is it king of bvr when even the BM/M/D models with the Zholson-M phased array/aesa radar it can only detect (not lock which is closer to 300km based on the companies word and successful test fires) AWACs RCS (16-20m^) Targets at 400km. It won't be able to pick up any proper 5th gen stealth plane from far enough away to take advantage of the extra range of these missiles and that's before all the massively improved jamming capability and on board ECM/EW suites (plus the DAS of the f35 is insane and only getting more so +f22 upgrades happening currently/soon will give it a similar function) they all have reducing the ability to do so. And says nothing for the seekers ability to work as well on LO/ir reduced signatures which it won't. Add in all the networking and integration with so many other systems that they are never without support often with the ability to engage outside their own weapons capabilities. I seriously question how successful they'd even be against AWACs as the missiles can be attacked in many ways electronic and kinematic. can be tracked and targeted by 3-4 F35s turning themselves into AWACs and giving constant 360 1200km passive detection sphere (like I said that DAS be insane can even track a tank shell firing.)
@@MrDJAK777 Except there aren''t any F-22s or F-35s flying in Ukrainian service.
How is it unmatched? It definitely doesn’t have the best radar and the r37 isn’t really for fighters
that warhead on that missile is so big that it is even heavier than the ones in the shahed 136 drones used against Ukraine or equivalent to 3 amraam warheads even at a good distance it's explosion is deadly
According to Ward Carrols channel, the Su35s and Mig31s R37m are sucessfully engaging low flying Ukranian Su25s and Su27s at 120nm, in real world conditions, 40nm further than the Aim54c Phoenix was capable of.
It is extremely effective against low flying aircraft because of energy states and the fact the UAF Su27s and Su25s can't pop up as the line of contact is covered by S400/S300 , putting the targets at a huge energy disadvantage.
Apparently the deficiency in energy state means the targets stand little chance against this missile & the efficacy IRL shows the onboard radar is really good at picking them out from ground clutter.
Nonsense
@@chuckfarley4130 I'd beleive a pilot over you anyway, especially given the source got the information from the Ukrainian side .
@@TheAddanz Go ahead.
I figured in the first PvP fight, that Damp had gone low and fast to the island then when Simba popped up he was going to be the lure. It looked as if Simba would draw the 31s over the island so Damp could take pot shots from below and draw them into a dogfight. Sadly they were just doing donuts over the water.
I would go for the AWAC as well. If you can't see them because they are low then take their ability to see you out by taking out the eye in the sky.
This is one of the most interesting fight I ever seen in dcs
I just built my huge new computer, HOTAS and accessories are on the way, VR is all set up on DCS. Im excited to jump in and learn how to fly on here.
300km?? you could fire a missile from a plane flying over Standard Hill and hit a target flying over the North coast of France.
One issue with the video is the 260 was not designed for the F15. It's initial launch platforms are the F22 and F18 Super Hornet. It will be configured for the F35 on a later date. So would like to see this video with the actual design launch platforms. The outcome I think would be radically different.
What's the difference? Are the pylons not cross compatible?
@@appa609 more like they hevnt finsished the R&D for the makeing the poper munthson monting racks for the F-35 hardpont mouting racks for the f-35s intenral and extranl weapon payload bays might take a few more years for that.
Pretty sure that F-15 was used as a test platform for 260. They usually are the first to carry new missiles even if they don’t get some for operational use. The relatively modest flight hour cost, wide range of conditions available in the flight envelope, and plenty of stores available for whatever they want to bring along makes F-15s good weapons test platforms.
F-22 and F-18 make sense as initial operational platforms based on needs. But I don’t think they were the first to carry them.
F15-EX are missile trucks that will be data linked with more stealthy forward aircraft.
Ukraine reports suggest a "No Escape Zone" of around 120nm , this is against low flying targets in real combat conditions against Su27/25/24 , apparently they have complete dominance over the Ukrainian Airforce because the low altitude being forced by the S400 coverage means the R37m has a huge energy advantage, it also apparently has no issues discriminating the targets against the ground clutter
Nonsense.
Take your meds
The main purpose of the Mig-31 is the fight against cruise missiles, and the confrontation with the SR-71 was only a matter of prestige. A well-known phrase of the Minister of Foreign Affairs A. Gromyko during negotiations with the Americans in 1978, when he was informed about the successful interception of a low-flying cruise missile by the then prototype of the 31st MiG: "Now you can fly your cruise missiles wherever you want." Earlier, the USSR negotiated to limit the range of cruise missiles
But of an observation. There's always surprise at the range the missiles are launched at, but given the planes are closing towards each other the actual flight distance would be significantly less.
This looked like it was fun. I only have experience in the A10a atm.... I flew the su-25.... it has a massive amount of hard points... .comical to me. i did however buy an F-15, and learning how to not rip off my gear when landing. I use these videos to see your guys having fun. Also, learn how to dodge missiles and informational things like that.
It is very good. Crimea is now not suffering from Storm Shadow
Lol, no cheating, but.... We're gonna use a really really conservative, minimum range for the R37m but use the max published range for the aim260.
Hot dog, another test. Look forward to these.
And new planes. Would love to see more of the less well known jets modelled.
Excellent !!! you change the map!!!☝🏼☝🏼🧿🧿✈✈👀👀🙋♂🙋♂
yay more mig 31 content! easily my favorite fighter jet, a disciplined mig 31 pilot practically owns the sky
mig-31 not fighter jet its interceptor jet
TBH Mig-31 was never made to be an air superiority fighter. That was the job of the Su-27. Mig-31 was to hit and run against bombers/AWACS etc.
The main purpose of the Mig-31 is the fight against cruise missiles, and the confrontation with the SR-71 was only a matter of prestige. A well-known phrase of the Minister of Foreign Affairs A. Gromyko during negotiations with the Americans in 1978, when he was informed about the successful interception of a low-flying cruise missile by the then prototype of the 31st MiG: "Now you can fly your cruise missiles wherever you want." Earlier, the USSR negotiated to limit the range of cruise missiles
@@scpgaming-452 fighter jets are small jet powered combat aircraft of which you get different roles like interception, air superiority etc. don't be pedantic for no reason
@@grimreapers nobody said it was, but ironically the MiG 31 design mantra was essentially the same as air superiority jets like the f22, first look. first shot. first kill.
Definitely time for an AWACS hunting mission Cap....Please.
This video does not show how Russia uses these missiles.
They do not "mostly" miss, as Cap says.
They use the MiG-31 to carry the missile all the way until the last section of what would be it's long range travel.
In other words, the missile never ends up losing it's target because it can't manuever well at high altitude.
The MiG-31 dives at high speed onto the target.
It fires the missile which builds even more speed.
The missile is already on target and is never unable to manuever and hits every time.
I still don't quite understand the reason why the missiles can't loft? Is there like a hard limit to DCS as far as altitude?
Non-core game missiles have an altitude limit of something like 70,000ft. Above that they die. Core game missiles are allowed up to something like 300,000ft before they die.
No idea why. Probably some old code.
Great video! A lot of fun to watch. Good job guys. 🙂
The MIG can launch at excessive range because the aircraft are closing the range.
Cap....what about a fly-off for HS missiles? Can they go 'pitbull'....firing over max range, different aspects? Height launches? What do you think?
Seems like a pretty unlikely outcome IRL--but definitely fun to watch.
More so unlikely engagement scenario. Even if all the parameters for the missile and kinematics of the aircraft were perfect and the designs of all its systems radar jamming ew and weapons were modeled perfectly this still wouldn't give you a realistic result. Networking and system integration between allied assets are sooo important to any real scenario.
@@MrDJAK777Since nobody has such an advanced networking and integration systems like NATO.. As well as the most effective weapons.. The BVR game changer the Meteor alone would keep russia at home.. It would be another massacre of russian aircrafts.
Everybody with decent knowledge, still remember what happened with the Mirage III in the 6 days wars and the other conflict after it.
Can you simulate what would happen if a Russian cruise missile were to hit Poland?
wonder if anyone has thought about including a SEFOP in the missile warhead, so if it looks like a direct hit isn't happening, it fires a slug at the target?
The visibility of that Mig is atrocious
yip
I am pretty sure the seeker head on the 260 is equivalent in tracking to a Kardashian chick on a laser-hair removal facility.... My understanding is that it has the ability to burn through jamming and with it's RCS thrusters it is very maneuverable. As you point out the R-37 was never designed to turn tightly - it hauls ass in a straight line to hit a big fat target that itself can't turn well.
Sadly we are hamstrung by the current limits in game for the AIM-260, we've done the best the game will allow.
@Grim Reapers naw I understand Cap... was just commenting. :)
The only issue I have when changing radar cross sections is when I find the RCS parameter instead of a value I just see (NULNULETX) or (NULETX). So, at this point I have no idea what i'm doing.
Are you able to change the value?
@@michaeljoefish8115 No because I don't know what NUL is
There is no value-that's the problem.
@@fatbubba2097 Nul is just the absence of a value. I'm not sure of the specifics of it in regards to RCS, but I imagine you'd be able to change it.
@@michaeljoefish8115 So my problem then is the fact that there is several "NULs" regarding RCS so idk what to change
Should do a video with R37M trying to attack F4 and F5s which are interdicting Shahed drones.
Love these vids, never even thought about any kind of flight sim a month ago... And now its a daily watch. 😊
So is Simba German then.? He got all the lines thrown at him today.. The ICH BIN EIN TELEGRAPH POLE! line killed me.. 😂
It's addictive isn't it? lol
@@grimreapers ahhgg, my message has disappeared again after trying to fix a word. So yeah, there you go. 15 minutes of writing lost again. Happens almost daily now.. 😕
One note - The Russian R-37M has only demonstrated a range of 200 km/125 miles in the Ukrainian conflict - I would be VERY SKEPTICAL of Russian claims for this missile.
But R-37M can into space.
It’s at a point now where it’s difficult not to doubt every single claim about Russian tech and equipment.
Maybe true. But I wouldn’t give any credit for equipment to the Ukrainians as they didn’t develop any of them. Artillery Tanks, Nlaws, migs, javelins? None of which were R&D by ukriane. Just begged for!
It means nothing, they simply launched it from 200 km to increase hit probability, 300 km range is against a bomber which has poor maneuvrability, not a fighter.
Generally, the ranges given for missiles are usually theoretical maximums, meaning that if absolutely every condition is perfect, and the enemy target doesn't maneuver, the R-37 can go to 300Km. Every country does this, America, China etc.
You can see this even with the AMRAAM. The AMRAAM C variant has a given maximum range of 105 kilometers, but in actual combat the furthest AMRAAM kill ever recorded is only 45km.
The AIM-260 JATM is Mach 5!
I'm near giving up however once again it has a greater range (Especially from F-15EX) of 180 miles!
Honestly, I doubt either of the BVR missiles has the stats you entered. But I suppose that's why the actual stats are classified.
dont worry eventually someone will leak the specs on warthunders forum
Did you guys just think up a use case for an EB-1B Bone-based AWACS?
f-15 eagle bi like :
f15 vs mig-29 easy
f-15 vs su-27 medium
f-15 vs su-57 hard
f-15 vs mig-31 ?
OH NO IS NIGHTMARE AGAIN -_-
IRL I doubt Mig-31 would ever be used against fighters, that's Su-35's job, but interesting to try.
@@grimreapers Is the SU-35 compatible with the r-37 or r-33 though?
@@derekjohn7535yes it can carry R37M also Mig 35 can
@@grimreapers MIG 31BM is a specialized aircraft. Only for valuable targets and low flying cruise missiles. Using them against an F15 or F22 is a waste of resource.
MIG-31 fuel played a major role in this! Gotta Love Fuel 😃
I wonder what the cost of each missile is going to be. If it’s a battle of attrition, that will factor. Something tells me that’s the 37 will be quite expensive.
I imagine Russia will not produce enough to be a real worry.
@@grimreapers : I dunno, man. Now that Russia has really cranked up its military production, they’ve shown themselves able to produce surprisingly large numbers of even their most sophisticated equipment of every kind, including their latest missile models. It’s really tremendously impressive to see Russia hit its stride in real time.
@@grimreapersyou presented r37 as brand new while it's literally was accepted and started mass production at 2014 while testings of this missile started at 1988. And you comparing this thing to brand new Aim260 which didn't even finished testings... Sounds kinda iffy right? And you implying thst there isn't much of them although they were producing it since 2014... I think you clearly biased against it
@@raphaelambrosiuscosteau6685 You discovered america my bro xD
@@samy7013russian sophisticated equipments? That's why their few days or weeks special operation is still unsuccessful. They're not good at sophisticated military things, that's why the precision of their weapons, and their successful hitting rates are very bad.
Goodness gracious. Simba and Damp had 24 missiles. Am I missing something?
Correct.
@@grimreapers So, is it that Simba/Damp could not ever get an effective firing solution? Why no SPAMRAM just to keep you occupied?
This one will be fun!!
I will take a guess and say F-15 over the Mig-31 for the multi plane engagements, and maybe the 1v1
You already watched. I haven't, but given distance, I bet on the R-37m
@@AhmedAdly11 you were right... honestly thought they would do WAY better with a group of them.
@@nathaniellazo5912 I guess it is just a game of chance.
I think those long range missiles can be defeated once you know what you are dealing with.
It is the close range ones that suck
@@AhmedAdly11Sadly in real world, there's something else called Meteor, which would completely turn the tables on a different way.
@@pinayinfrance2642 Theoretically only.
It is safe to assume the Russians have something for the meteor.
I would really like to see these tests redone once you are capable or figure out how to make the lofting actually loft correctly.
Imagine that tree of missile just zooms by and you know: 10 meters left and I would have been smoke
The C comes before the H in mach.
Poor guy sounds like hes trying to hack up a furball onto his keyboard
Does it matter if Russia will probably never reach a meaningful production rate (ie - see the SU-57)?
Does it matter that the Russian missile is already in service and the American missile is not?
Does it matter that Russian forces are performing abysmally in Ukraine and would probably get fucked by a full F15 force if it tried?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.DEAD. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
@@brianwesley28 I guess it matters that the American’s prefer their weapon’s and missiles ACTUALLY FKNG WORK… compared to say… your N A Z I ass country
Then again, what does one expect when Russia can’t stop U.S. missile tech from the fkng 80’s… so maybe um shut your face 🥴
@@brianwesley28 No. If the Russians cannot produce it at scale then it cannot make a significant tactical or strategic difference. If Russia only has a few dozen of those missiles then they can only, at best, shoot down a few dozen American fighters. America has literally thousands more where those came from.
Meanwhile, if their opponent (America, in this case) can produce something at scale that is superior to what you have in large quantities (R-77 vs AIM-120C/D), then it doesn't matter if America hasn't deployed its next-gen missile yet, especially since it is a foregone conclusion that when America DOES start producing it they will be able to produce it in vastly larger quantities than the Russians can produce theirs.
Further, when it comes to the specs of the missile the only data we have is courtesy of the Russian MoD. The last nine months have shown us how reliable their word is (not very). And before you say "Well, the only source we have about the US missile is the DoD" first; American weapons procurement is FAR more transparent than Russia's (though obviously not completely. The DoD still doesn't disclose the full capabilities of the F-35, for example), and second; while the DoD is far from completely trustworthy it is still far more trustworthy than the Russian MoD.
Thanks for creating all this content (:
@Cap are you guys planning on eventually releasing your modernization package? The community would really appreciate it I am sure.
These R-37 were much easier to dodge than ukranians report. They say it's very hard.
I mean it's a mach 6 ballistic missile, if they don't react in time that could mean death or getting downed
@@MiG-23_enthusiast Mach 6 at 100,000 feet. Terminal velocity is more like mach 2
@@chuckfarley4130👈Pssssst 🤐🤫 You're an I.. mbecile.🤐🤫
svensvensson2724....👈 Pssssst 🤐🤫No one can Dodge R37M. Yet they think it's Mach 6, It's most probably Mach 9-10...
funny how the R37M is considered "new" when it's been in service since 2019 while the JATM isn't even in service yet. In terms of missiles, the Russian ones are so much faster.
Notching no longer works against modern RADAR systems - you couldn't notch a Sea Harrier's Blue Vixen 27 years ago.
Not depicted - MiG-31s detecting F-15s right as F-22s shoot down MiG-31s
Probably not the purpose of the video but would definitely happen.
nonsense. F22s are not invisible...there have been USAF briefings from YEARS AGO that stated that they are low observable and CAN BE TRACKED and HAVE BEEN able to have been tracked for some time. It is just difficult to get a firing solution
you people believe far too much propaganda
Hey Cap, Are there any models for the Loyal Wing Man or Valkyrie drone fighters? Would be interesting to see a war game incorporating them.
Working on it but 6 months min.
I dont this thats the aim-260 the aim-260 is a single piece weapon the LREW long rang engagment weapon is gonna be two pieces
Btw I had a question how good do you think are the r77 missiles ?
Below Meteor AIM-120D and PL15
R-77 = garbage R-77-1 = semi garbage R-77M actually looks quite worrying...
@@grimreapers After failing to get a lock on two Pakistani F-16s in Indian airspace (RADAR jitter above mach 1) - the IAF SU-30s fired mad-dog R-77s at the F-16s flying directly away from them well within the expected kill range - the missiles also failed to find a lock. The Russians couldn't fix the issues with the SU-30 RADARs - the Indians were furious - the real reason India pulled out of SU-57 and have dropped R-77 which is being actively replaced with Derby - India realised Russian tech just doesn't work and they are being taken for a ride. India are desperately searching for a western partner to replace the avionics in their SU-30s - but nobody will touch the project because India wants full technology-share as part of the deal and it's practically inevitable, given the endemic corruption, that they will leak the data to the highest bidder anyway.
It’s a great day!
And do they fly back to source 🤔
I expected the Eagles to take advantage of low altitude and blend in with the ocean and terrain. With the advantage of having twice the missiles, one of them could have been a distraction once close in, while the other unloaded on the Migs. Once the Migs had their hands full of say 8 incoming missiles, Eagle # 2 (the decoy) could have turned back in (had he been dodging well) 😁and unloaded and made it a bad day to be a Mig driver. At least that's how I had strategized it out before it happened. Maybe it would not have worked...I don't know??? But, that's how I would have done it. Might just as well fire all those missiles as to let them be blown up while still on the pylons. Great video as always. :)
according to the British military magazine (in the winter of 2022), the use of the ground effect, as well as dropping chaffs and maneuvering at high overloads, does not help to avoid hitting this missile
If the air combat distance is 100 miles and r37m was fired, then for the 4th generation aircraft this is almost one hundred percent loss of this aircraft very often along with the pilot, the missile falls from above and the missile tries to get into the cockpit, just like an anti-aircraft missile does SAM "Buk"
if you read the whole article and then watch this DCS simulation, it becomes clear that the behavior of this rocket is not true. This rocket looks more like an advanced phoenix with modern electronics and a dual-mode engine (the first phase is acceleration to Mach 5, the second phase is much less thrust and a long engine run time to keep the speed at Mach 5), and not an edited r77
Therefore, IRL cannot be won kinetically at a distance of 100 miles, the rocket engine will still work and the rocket will constantly receive energy.
How about 4 x F-35A with AIM-260 vs. 10 x Su-35?
OK
*Note*: I am not trying to argue that the latest Russian tech is anywhere near as good as even late-model AIM-54's from the Cold War, nor do I support the Russian government. I'm just trying to correct a basic physics misunderstanding as these missiles do not look like unmaneuverable missiles should.
If it really was designed to be limited to something as restrictive as a maximum of 8G, then it would actually have a *higher* Pk when fired from more than the stated max range, as it would be able to turn tighter at the same 8G!
*{TLDR}*
The square-qube law means that a larger diameter missile will burn off a larger % of its total mass than an identical scaled-down version, resulting in a larger aerodynamic force/weight ratio, but also incurring a larger non-maneuvering drag.
It's rear-mounted movable fins are used to apply a torque and start the turning process, but they cannot generate the lift needed for sustained high-G turns. Those long strakes near the R-37's COM, would generate very large lifting forces at low AOA, thus making it much more maneuverable and allowing for more sustained maneuvering than something like the AIM-120C-5, as they are *much* more effective and efficient than relying on the missile's body for the required lift.
*{/TLDR}*
The R-37, based just on its external geometry, doesn't at all look like a missile designed to be restricted to 8G's, like you showed.
Because most of the mass of modern missiles is just fuel, the square-qube relationship between volume and surface area means that a larger missile will shed a greater % of its total starting mass than a small missile would.
Furthermore, if you take an AIM-120C-5 and scale it up to roughly the same diameter, you'll see that the R-37's fins aren't really that puny, but even more important is the length of the moment arms between the empty COM and, respectively, the fins and the rocket's nosecone. Those lengths, multiplied respectively by the sum of the tangential forces exerted by the fins and the forces exterted upon the nosecone section, is what determines the total pertubatory torque available to start turning the body of the missile.
Obviously, as the missile starts to turn, those control surfaces can't actually generate the large perpendicular force through the missile's COM, which is required to sustain the turn, otherwise the missile will simply oscillate in pitch or the critical AOA of the fins will be exceeded and the missile will start tumbling.
For something like the AIM-120-C5, which doesn't have any lifting surfaces near its COM, this actually limits the maximum sustained-G turn that it can make, while also making turns *much* more inefficient as it needs to use its body as a makeshift lifting surface, with a massive drag penalty.
It is at this point where those mid-mounted strakes/fins on the R-37 come in. They allow the missile to generate an *enormous* amount of lifting force, while keeping the body's AOA very low, thus resulting in the missile not just being *more* maneuverable, but also retaining *much* *more* of its energy while it does so.
The largest issue I see if with the missile autopilot and target persuit guidance algorithms. Due to DCS limitations, this missile 'acts' just like an AIM-9 or am AIM-7. It doesn't try to exploit its advantages or compensate for its disadvantages and consequently it runs into that 8G limit even harder than it should.
Think about it like this: If this *hypersonic* missile was really so heavy and sluggish, hard-limited to 8G's, and really had to make due with Proportional Navigation (especially one in which the gain monotonically increases with a decrease in the target's distance), then the best defence would be to actually fly almost directly towards the R-37, increasing your altitude and decreasing your CAS airspeed so as to achieve your peak rate speeds, then just before the missile acquires you, you just turn 90 degrees to beam the missile and enter into a vertically downward, maximum sustained-G circle.
This is obviously absurd, and would make spending so much on hypersonic A2A weaponry seem silly, so I propose that this whole situation is completely unrealistic. No-one capable of developing hypersonic weaponry would make such elementary mistakes.
A you speak of this hypersonic technology like its decades in advance when in reality multiple countries field missiles of hypersonic speeds hell the Minuteman 1 was "hypersonic" technology. All it does down too is a faster and more powerful burning fuel to reach those speeds. But because of these extreme speeds and the amount of fuel they need to carry these missiles are absolutely massive and all the outer walls and reinforcement needs to be even thicker making this missile extremely heavy compared to missiles that travel slower. This is why the US has decided to concentrate more of its efforts into stealth missiles because they can actually be far far more effective. B and lastly you also speak like they have demonstrated incredible technology and are halfway across Europe dominating anyone in their way when they have been absolutely embarrassed in every sense of the word. I wouldn't be surprised if this missile tops out at mach 4 and only travels 100 miles given what we have learned so far in Ukraine. Why haven't we seen the infamous SU-57 or what about the T-14 Armata MBT Russia have again and again proven its all smoke and mirrors for them. They can't even seem to make a reliable car so what makes you believe they have a game changer missile. The only reason everyone respected Russian military might was because the Defense contractors are the ones that are contracted to gather intelligence on foreign defense capabilities so of course they will always have this cool super effective unicorns that can track F22 and travel at light speed and have the destructive capability to split the Earth in half. In the end it all comes back to making money and spending money. Russia isn't great at either which is there biggest enemy in Ukraine, poor training, poor maintenance, troops with rifles from the early 1900s etc...
Would quickly eliminate any air refueling capability.
How good is a real in mass production and with confirmed kills missile vs. something in development with speculated performance*
Mikoyan would be very happy after all....
God this looks fun
Great Vid as always Cap!
If you or anyone else wish to know more about this particular missile and how the current air-war in Ukraine is going i recommend checking out Ward Carrol´s channel on YT. In his latest video he talks with Justin Bronk from the Royal Uniformed Services Institute about this very subject. Around the 30 min mark in the video they talk about the MIG-31b, R-37M and Russian tactics regarding the two. I would recommend the whole video to anyone who is interested in the current conflict in Ukranie however.
Thanks for the video!
thx
Su35, Su57 and Su30Sm also are using this missile in Ukraine now.
So are AIM-260 in production?
THE NEW COOL F35 MOD
This missile just shot down n F16 in Ukraine
Just an important data, Russia hasn’t deployed a single AESA radar on a fighter aircraft, that might change the capabilities of the MiG-31 to clear a shot, for the worst.
These Russian missiles are only really good for the situation where you are snipping at a enemy that can't see you on their radar and are not expecting a attack. Much like the iranian use of Phoenix from tomcats in 1980.
Agreed
They downed 29 aircraft in 5 days according to reports. I'd say it's pretty effective.
Ooo mg what an underrated fighter jet is the mig 31 😐😐😐😐😐
mig-31 not fighter jet but interceptor jet
@@scpgaming-452 ok thanks but i mean its soobad ass unlike what i was thaught
It was probably the best combat aircraft the soviets ever built.
Not really - it's a fast missile truck - not really a fighter.
My pilot friend says the way to beat the missile is to first head straight for it? What do you think?
I've always been told to fly 90º to it, but I'm not a real pilot!
The theory about flying straight at it is to give it a much tighter turn when you break. You had better have done your maths pretty well before trying this risky escape!
Luv me Telegraph poles
'ate me manouverability
Simple as
Welcome to Russia?
Oh, the rematch from 70s after F15A vs MiG25P, if my ole brain ‘members. F15s protecting RF4s on recce missions. MiG25s trying to intercept…. Seem to remember it went badly for them…. Let’s see how the ole planes do with new missiles 😳😎😂😂😂
How did you make a datalink capable aesa radar?
F15-EX's RADAR will be soooo much better than MiG-31's. I suspect the same would be for US AWACs too. The IAF SU-30 fiasco has shown how poor Russian RADAR tech really is.
Did you notice that the island looks like a running rat?
Desert rat?
You have 12 missiles on the 15, why not shoot a few??
Which mig 31 mod is this?
Calling something from 2014 a brand new missile?
Gud vid 😍
3:57 lmfao no it freakin isn't!🤦♂️
Who won?
mig-31 & r-37 but glitch in multi-player
@@scpgaming-452 Figures. The Russians are better at most everything, especially hitting Polish grain silos
@@LostBeagle
rusia hiiting polish grain silos ? what ?
@@scpgaming-452 Check the news
@@LostBeagle lol it was Ukraine that hit it 😂 😂
Very cool, but I do believe the new RU missiles are overperforming, merely due to the crap performance we've seen from Russia throughout the war (pre-war, I would have had zero evidence to say that with confidence). Russian advanced technology is an oxymoron at this point. As you said, it's likely the core game influencing them, as they appear to be responding to data link much more than the AIM-260s per the Tacview.
I say this with love and the desire to see some amazing future war games/simulations. I think GR needs to establish a "best practices" instruction set for the AIM-260 to learn how to use it in optimal conditions and make each one count (perhaps a table of estimated PK rates at a given range and altitude). There was just way too many of them mad-dogged, fired at low altitude or fired at a generally low probability of kill. I believe the F-15s would have had more success keeping more in reserve (and having bags) as both ended up dodging a bunch of incoming missiles and within visual range of the MIGs, but essentially had nothing left when getting in close. Thanks guys!
Hey Cap - didn't the AIM-260 previously have a longer first-stage booster programmed in? It looks like the head pops off really quick (it learned to pop from Damp).
your understanding of why this war is the way it is- it's ignorant. Russia has been fighting against an army that knows what it is going to do before it does it due to persistent NATO ISR that RF will not shoot at
MiG-31 have performed well apparently and are continuing to present a long range threat.
When utterly dominating an enemy massively armed up by NATO and willing to just throw the lives of hundredsthousands of men away with a mere fraction of their army and massively holding back = "crap peformance", I don't know what a good performance would be. Instant destruction of everything?
How many times must it be pointed out that R37M is not designed to hit small manoeuvrable targets - it's an AWAC killer. If this thing is taking down fighter jets taking evasive action in the game then it's just plainly incorrectly modelled. It's got practically zero chance of intercepting a fighter that's trying to not to be hit! Turning hard will just rip itself to pieces immediately.
makes sense though... fire off your long range stuff... then go home for tea and borsht
👍😁👌
Get a stealth in there
R-37 400KM
yes but can it be used agesnt a stealth F-35 or F-22? however if it can't track or lock on then hyper sonic missles are very useless. aslo makes so much heat in flight that aegis missle usa defenses on both the grnud based and sea based ship luchers would use its huge infead tracking singture and see it from a very very very long way away. also they munuver like S***T so a much more menuverble SM-2 anti missle missle can just fly infonut of it and use the hyper sonic missiles lack of miuverblty agest it.
jfc, Aegis is radar-based
I have no idea TBH.
I personally doubt it. Russia says it was designed for large targets.