After the update almost everything about the AAM-4 is wrong. The early AAM-4 should only weights 220kg and the AAM-4B should be 223kg. why do you guys make it the same weight as the AAM 4B? its range is also wrong, it should be slightly more than the AIM-120B in both seeker range and flight range. both of the AAM-4 and AAM-4B have the same range expect one is an improved version like the seeker with the ability to lock on enemy target without sounding their missile warning. The AAM-4 should also have a bigger proximity fuze since it has a bigger war head than the AIM-120A/B so it should be a one hit one kill directly and do more damage if the enemy is in proxy range also well as better tracking ability, current in game tracks too weird like it tries to go behind the enemy in far range. Its boosters should be stronger and slightly longer because it has a sustainer maybe 5 seconds more than the current in game. I hope you guys take a look and take actions on fixing it this is very unfair.[quote=“TuitionSuxs, post:1, topic:113251, full:true”]
Sorry if this has been posted already but anyone else notice that the AAM-4 only reaches Mach 2.7 then dumps its speed? shot 2 of them 6km behind another F15 and in the replay it showed mach 2.7 then dipped to 1.6 immediately and lost all tracking. Once again sorry if this was posted already or posted in the wrong section.
I apologize that is some misunderstanding sentences and unorganized sending. this is my first time being here i just wanted the devs to know that they messed up a the AAM-4 a bit and i am very upset. ive been waiting for a long time for this missile
I also thought the range was off and should be about 100km. Also the first image isn’t loading for me.
the first image is the black and white image i posted down bellow
This has been rejected by the tech mods as a valid source due to not having the entire original / not knowing where it originates from. If you have it please share the original :D
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Aez83CMONLu0
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DrXP5HPtwz0f
no wonder people post classified information here cuz when we post simplifed stuff yall never listen but sure here are the sources they are not classified.
- <5461726F2D825882588EAE8BF391CE8BF3975593B19265816989FC816A2E6A> (ndl.go.jp)
source: Type 99 Air-to-Air Guided Missile (Revised)," FY 2009 Policy Evaluation Report (Ex Post Facto Project Evaluation), 2010. Ministry of Defense and Self-Defense Forces: Policy Evaluation in FY21 (ndl.go.jp) - 19.pdf (ndl.go.jp)
- <91E682538E6C94BC8AFA95AA82CC955C8E86814596DA8E9F81698250824F89AD88C88FE3816A2E786C73> (ndl.go.jp)
- 99式空対空誘導弾（B）CPS-U13200-4.pdf - Google Drive
i hope this is enough
Looks good. Do you have the source for this? I’ve been trying to find it for a while, but the only place I’ve found it is in an article, which was a dead end. It is rather annoying that they are so picky with these sources and want exact numbers, even if they are obviously wrong.
this file was posted in a website called secret project forums in 2014 which is where i founded. they are private community which i am also in.
original post: Joint New Air-to-Air Missile (JNAAM) | Secret Projects Forum
here is where he found it F-2__수출된적이 없는 팔리지 않는 고가의 F-16 오버튜닝 전투기 미스비씨 중공업의 F-2 위키백과 (일본어) 자료_Part-10_(Part-7_보충자료-3-1 램제트 타입 정보_AAM-4 추가자료) : 네이버 블로그 (naver.com)
i dont think they are wrong because similar files have the same numbers as them. these info are hard to find i have to use a vpn in japan to find them
No, no, I was talking about the current numbers in the game. Currently, the engine for the AAM-4 is the same as the MICA, which is most definitely wrong. I agree that the numbers in the table make sense. The issue is, I doubt Gaijin is willing to accept it as a true source until the original document is found. They won’t budge with estimations; they want hard numbers with hard evidence (which I think is rather short-sighted). This makes it super hard to try to correct much of anything.
im afraid this could be classified? or maybe its just cropped out cuz theres to many useless information
We have already used all of the sources listed here for both reports. The devs only accept concrete numbers.
japan is the most under looked country and many of their info are really hard to find so we cant really find the real document unless its classified.
as I know this pic is from a Military columnist
http://tokyoexpress.info/2014/08/05/欧州製「ミーテイア」空対空ミサイルに日本製シ/
This table is from 「９９式空対空誘導弾（改）(aka. AAM-4B) 事前の事業評価 評価書」
Type: government public information
Link: https://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/11488652/www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/hyouka/seisaku/13/jizen/youshi/19.pdf
防衛省・自衛隊：平成13年度 事前の事業評価 評価書一覧
some infomation is post at Japanese Weapons Master Thread - #227 by skultew1234
there have a google drive link contain collect of japan gov public data of JSDF and there asset, maybe can check the thread, maybe there have some new data is useful.
And from datamine, looks AAM-4 data hase change in 2.36.0.23
People need to distinguish between Range(Rmax) and Time To Hit(TTH). Most of players, even some experienced ones, consider Rmax is in positive relation, or even equalize it, yet it is not. Especially the missile with small size(i mean, can carried by aircraft size, not the ground launch one) strongly depends on LOFT mechanism to achieve its Rmax, this making missile trajectory more arc-ish, and this causing more TTH than direct fired missile with same spec.
Point is this, current AAM-4 in game has enough Rmax. However, due to its not-configured motor and detailed spec, TTH may need to be adjusted. IMO, final version of AAM-4 may have similar TTH with PL-12 in game. But since its heavy weight(compared by other RAAMS) over 200kg, lacks of acceleration, penaltizes glide speed, TTH may not that exceptional like MICA and AIM-120.
TL DR; AAM-4 may have long range, but may slow due to its heavy weight.