Talk:R-27 (air-to-air missile)

Possible Massive direct copying

Newest edit looks to have massive sections directly ripped from Janes without reference, including the table. I'd try and fix it up a bit later. Kazuaki Shimazaki 04:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted the text to a non-copyvio version. - Dammit 08:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Errr... the current page setup is not nearly as informative as the old one was. Since, as far as I can tell, it simply looked like it might have been copied, I don't see what the problem is... 209.129.117.2 04:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

When I said possible, I really was going on "benefit of the doubt" and "beyond reasonable doubt". IIRC, it is quite clear several sections were rather coincidentally identical to the Janes article. The table was a direct rip. Additionally, it is not a very good idea to use only 1 source for this kinda thing. Kazuaki Shimazaki 09:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Operational History Bias

"The Russian sources claiming R-27 damage to the B-52 also list Iraqi MiG kills in direct contradiction to statements by Iraqi pilots, who deny such kills,[7] casting doubt upon the veracity of the claims."

I dont know what kind of an idiot fan boy wrote this, but the source does not say iraqi pilots deny it. Instead, it DOES give the incident as a kill, but says its unconfirmed.Andraxxus (talk) ~

Also, everyone in wiki feels fine when taking a US source for a US equipments' glorious service history, (Example, it says "no F-15 lost in air combat and all downed F-15s are B/C of SAMs", even if other party claims otherwise) but everyone has a problem when taking a Russian source for a Russian military equipment. 21:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

R-27T Used as SAM over Yemen

Lots of edits keep putting in the Houthi claims of actually downing F-15s over Yemen as facts. One reference even led to an article from theaviationist which, confusingly enough, at first suggests the F-15 was shot down but explicitly says it appeared to be unaffected by the hit in the video. Keep an eye out for biased edits claiming kills - so far from what I have seen, the videos show hits but do not confirm anything beyond that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endemantis (talk • contribs) 03:51, 24 March 2018 (UTC) Endemantis (talk) 04:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Unintelligible sentence

I think this may have been translated word-for-word from Russian "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.". The first bit is OK although some articles are missing, but does anyone know what "ground-based head-contrasting conditions" are? Does the "head" mean "heat"? Could we say "ground conditions with high heat contrast"? Theeurocrat (talk) 14:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Use as SAM in Yemen

The Houthis have been using them as SAMs Farbne (talk) 00:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)