There is a video comparing the aim 120a and the aam4 https://youtube.com/shorts/3z_RqUnEip0?si=__i-gcl6SsTPB4yz
Would recommend
Be happy with what you got. Asking for buff= make something else worse.
Aim120Cs are great
most braindead take known to man
1 Like
theyre awful
4 Likes
But they can be so much worse. Keep asking for better and ul see…
Its how it works round here.
i dont see them being much worse, theyre already a downgraded aim120a lol
4 Likes
At this point, they have no point to being in the game
1 Like
Its functionally a C-5 performance wise in functionally all situations. The 120A and B are still better across the board or equal, especially in close in shots as the AAM-4 has a .61 second PID lockout post the .3 second launch lockout that the 120s lack, in effect, it takes the AAM-4 over a full second to reach it’s full G loading while the 120s have only a .6 second launch lockout. Other missiles have lower lockouts like the R-77s having a .3 second lockout or the MICA having a .15 second lockout. The Derby is in the same boat as the AAM-4 and is in part why the derby is painful to use as close range.
It also sports a larger diameter (203mm vs 177.8mm), higher mass (222kg vs 147.87 and 161.5 kg) and higher drag (1.55 vs 1.425, 1.405) compared to the A/B and C 120s.
The C-5 has no reason to exist and is a direct downgrade to the A/B 120, the AAM-4’s performance is in line with the C-5, thus, it is one of the worst modern ARHes on the docket.
And no, the R-77 is not the worst modern ARH in game, that is premium tier cope.
1 Like
Theres worse than r77s?
Derby go brrrrr, thing is really sad, more or less on par with the R-77 at long range, minus the fact that it lofts like its going out of style, but it’s close range performance is just not there, meanwhile both 77s are second only to MICAs for close range use.
3 Likes
Considering the Derby is based off the P4, surely it should turn better than it does in game…
1 Like
By all accounts stat wise it should too, it should be superior to the likes of the 120s by it’s pull values alone, the AAM-4 is in the same exact boat, yet, neither sport the short range performance that would be expected. The C-5 / C-7 are also in the same boat, it should just be a slightly heavier A/B 120 stat wise, yet it’s close range performance is anemic to say the least.
There is a lot of weirdness at play with ARH AAMs, especially in regards to their short range autopilot guidance and it’s effective use of the missile’s performance.
1 Like
That’s not a thing anymore, it got fixed long ago
It used to be a LOT higher, it’s still higher then some, maybe all, but it’s not an unviable amount like it was back then (also given it has some extremely high drag stats, it’s probably to its benefit to lift like that)
1 Like
Its still going to space hoss, and said need for orbit still heavily degrades it’s performance compared to other options.
Hardly, its performance is so low to begin with. It doesn’t have a lot of range to work with and its drag is quite excessive. If anything, the extra loft angle makes it more viable with such drag coefficients. Regardless of what they set the loft angle to, it’s not going to be very viable, it will always have less range then any ARH AAM you put it up against
Yeah no, the only missiles that are worse than it at range among the modern ARHes, is the MICA which just does not loft, and the base R-77 which is very close to the Derby performance wise at long range.
Its still massive garbage at long range due to it’s insane loft, its time of flight is vastly higher than the other options at play.
It’s not just because of that loft angle. Its motor burns out faster than any of ARH AAM, it’s a small missile with low mass and high drag for its size. Its range is low and the lofting angle set for it may inhibit its full capabilities to a minor extent, but they aren’t something special to begin with, nor is the effect of its loft angle as drastic as you seem to think.
Oh and sorry you are right that the Michael and the R-77 are inferior at high alt launches atm, I keep forgetting that they’re in such a broken state and gaijin refuses to fix them. Was thinking IRL capabilities when I thought about them in that regard, mb
At extreme ranges yes, but If I plug in the C-7’s guidance parameters into the derby on stat shark, it’s close range time to hit is improved, shaving about a second off of it’s flight time against close range targets, which it normally has issues with, especially when maneuvering.
Well now you are making me have to defend the R-77, 6 seconds vs 6.53, the Derby and Darter’s burn time is literally .47 seconds below the average which is 7 seconds with change.
The ironic bit is that the MICA is not only lighter but also sports a terrible drag coefficient for it’s size, yet, is surprisingly just a bit behind the Derby in performance at extreme ranges, if I give the MICA the C-7’s loft it gains quite a bit of performance at range, and beats the Derby and catches up to the long range ARH pack quite well.
It compounds the already existing faults to make it far worse than it should be.
Still the highest loft value in game by a fair margin and it does indeed effect it greatly.
Low altitude long range launches, both are fine if you launch them in orbit like every other ARH, the former is still the best ARH in the game by very large margin and the latter is preforming as designed, keep coping about your grid fins, it wont change physics.
Sure my guy.
Still funny how the C-5 being terrible thread still returns to other people coping about the R-77, history really does repeat itself.