New R-24R (AA-7 Apex) – DCS Patch 2.9.14.8222

For the last few years, the R-24 has suffered from major issues. The missile tended to reach almost hypersonic speed, just to drastically slow down the moment its rocket motor depleted. A wise friend of mine described it perfectly: “the one that dies once the motor runs out like a damn badminton ball”.
Fast-forward a few years. The recent video I made about SARH missiles, often simply called “FOX-1”, seemed to have helped the cause of this neglected missile. Let’s see how it performs, shall we?

Characteristic

Let’s start by checking the missile speed curve in Mach in a head-on shot at 35,000 ft. Acceleration of the first couple of seconds is not linear, but becomes steeper until the rocket motor is depleted after circa 7 seconds. The maximum reached is close to M3.3. The speed is then sustained for less than a second. Then, the drag starts chipping away the missile’s speed. The characteristic shows the lack of a dual-thrust rocket motor, something that characterises the AIM-7 Sparrows from the F onward.

Old vs New

The displayed charts compare speed and separation versus time for the old R-24R and the new one. Numbers are collected at 35,000 ft, and the missile is launched at M1. The “badminton” effect is clearly visible in the old R-24’s behaviour. The overhauled missile is much closer to what we may expect from a DCS missile.

R-24 vs AIM-7E/F

According to some sources, the R-24 was considered much better than the AIM-7E Sparrow. Built upon the R-23, the R-24 should settle somewhere between the AIM-7E and the 7F. Let’s see what they look like.
The difference between the AIM-7F and R-24R is minimal. The first part of the envelope shows how the AIM-7F’s dual-thrust rocket motor propels the missile gradually rather than in a single, bigger push. The AIM-7E behaves like the R-24, but it does not reach the same speed.

R-24 vs Later variants

Since the R-24 was in service well into the ‘90s and, in some cases, it is still used, it is worth checking how it fares against likely contemporaries. In particular, AIM-7M and 7P, R-27 and AIM-120B.
The AMRAAM’s kinematics are better than those of the other missiles. The AIM-120 is also the newest of the batch, entering service in 1994, almost 15 years after the R-24.
Besides the active radar-homing missile, the difference between the two Russo-Soviet missiles and the Sparrows is marginal. The main difference is, once again, the typology of rocket motor thrust.

Impact Speed vs Range

A different type of chart now. This is the Old versus New R-24 plotted as impact speed versus range. The “badminton” R-24 shows again its weird characteristic, as if it had a parachute opened as the rocket motor died.

Onward to more interesting data, this is the R-24 versus the AIM-7M and the AIM-7P. I do not have data for the AIM-7F, but the Foxtrot is very similar to the Mike kinematics-wise. The main difference is the Monopulse radar of the 7M. Compared to the Sparrows, the R-24 seems to lose a bit more energy over time, something that the previous charts have shown as well. The AIM-7s build up their speed slowly, but they maintain energy for a slightly longer period. Another interesting observation concerns the altitude: the R-24 seems to perform better at higher altitudes.

Conclusions

To wrap up this quick view of the new missile, it is surprising to see how close it is to the later R-27 kinematics-wise. The latter should have marked advantages in contested scenarios, but I wonder whether the differences are replicated in DCS besides countermeasures rejection.

Another point worth mentioning is the difference between the R-24 and the AIM-7. From the F forward, the Sparrow family features a dual-thrust rocket motor. Nevertheless, the curves appear quite similar. The difference increases instead at lower altitudes, where the bigger and heavier R-24 seems to struggle more despite its greater initial explosivity.
Lastly, it is good to see Eagle Dynamics solving issues and improving the game. Thanks, devs!