Both can get spun out, making them go past the target.
Same maneuverability
AIM-120C-5 is ARH, so that makes it better in BVR
Same notch resistance it seems
TL;DR
The AIM-120C-5 can get barrel rolled like the sparrow. It has pretty much the same performance as an AIM-120A/B. Nothing new, despite multiple sources claiming otherwise
4 Likes
It has much longer range than AIM-120A/B at altitude, the NEZ is huge for co-speed targets at mach 1.5~ above 10km;
You’re likely employing the missile in situations where its advantages play little to no improvement rather than looking at all aspects of its performance. These high speed, high altitude shots may only result in a small time to impact difference but the speed the missile has at the edges of its NEZ are much improved which leads to higher hit chance.
7 Likes
I understand what you are saying. My point is that my AIM-120C-5 was barrel rolled like a sparrow. Yea, minimal range upgrades over the AIM-120A/B, but that’s it?
Where’s the smokeless motor? the HOBS capabilities that any other Fox 3 has besides the AIM-120??
4 Likes
It improves on range (rMax & NEZ), Maximum speed, guidance time, impact speed, time to impact and a larger warhead, all while losing no turning performance.
HOBS is also improved over A/B as the motor is all boost with a longer boost duration than the complete boost/sustain on A/B, so your missile is always faster off the rail and will have more energy after a hard turn against a HOBS target.
That’s pretty damn good. When the missile didn’t grow in size beyond a weight increase and lost fin area as well.
Smokeless motor however, I don’t know, could be a balance choice or gameplay decision for the time being I really don’t know. AIM-120A/B also has a reduced smoke motor and has had a report in since it first came to the game.
1 Like
I beleive he is referring to the sources showing it should have 40G pull (likely not possible due to lack of dual plane) and the 0 guidance delay off the rails. Unfortunately, finding non-classified sources for those I think its gunna be virtually impossible.
3 Likes
Well if its multiple secondary materials then a report can be formed on that basis. My impression of AIM-120C was that in spite of lost fin area it didn’t lose any G pull, not that it gained pull, intuitively that doesn’t pass the sniff test to me, even with stronger actuators for the fins, you’d still be compensating for the lost fin area.
I don’t really care about the 5 more g. I want my AMRAAMs to not be barrel rolled. I want them to pull 35Gs and I want them to be a viable solution in WVR for NATO jets (besides the MICA)
1 Like
Comparing the AMRAAM to the sparrow was a bit overkill but still, it shouldn’t be barrel rolled like the sparrow
1 Like
That would be great if notching was actually a challenge in this game, getting hit by any missile further than 20 km away is a severe skill issue, an AIM-120 getting out-barrel rolled it’s laughable to say the least.
5 Likes
The MICA being the only one to have a different seeker is another thing. The AMRAAM’s gets defeated once you hit that 90 degree angle for a second. The MICA needs a lot of chaff too
4 Likes
An incredibly niche situationa that os almost completely irrelevant in the current meta. And its not “much longer” its meh.
And saying that its better at “hobs” is half true, its not against closer targets as it cannot pull enough(its noticeably less agile off the rails than an aim120a), so yeah its slightly more effective when im a fox 3 duel when >10km.
And that aside are we forgetting literally every amraam had its maneuverability nerfed for no apparent reason?
4 Likes
from what testing I have done it has a slower impact speed at ranges below ~20km where time to target equalize, and it has slightly worse turning performance than 120A/B
the 120C is actualy slower off the rail, because while it is a all a booster stage, its booster only has slightly more impulse than the 120A/B sustainer
2 Likes
yeah but if it was dual plane the single plane G would be ~28 which might be correct due to the fin area
then you are trying to use the missile in a way it wasnt designed to be used
AMRAAM → Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile
WVR is short range
The thing is. MICA and R-77-1 are so overwhelming better than AMRAAM at normal ranges and the Aim-9M is so much weaker than Magic II and R73 in a dogfight that the hope was that C5 would at least help close the gap even a little. It hasn’t. Even in BVR it’s weaker than MICA at the moment
Now it is time for Gen 5 IR
3 Likes
at relevant ranges for war thunder that is
but that dosent mean that the C-5 should be artifically buffed
like Gunjob said:
We have loads of reports for the A/B that have never been actioned and I can’t think of any reason why the C5 would be any worse. In fact should be better. it’s also a shame the C5 never got the better seeker that the mica got.
Also, they should have had 0 guidance delay, it’s just finding a source Gaijin would accept.
But still, C5 is somehow still one of the weakest ARH at top tier at the moment
1 Like
Derby, R-Darter, R-77/RVV-AE…
I’d rather have a C5 than one of those.
1 Like
R-Darter pulls more GS at closer ranges as does R-77. I think Derby does the same. R-27EA would need better ARH than what we’ve already got to counter
Maybe if it took effort to notch an Aim-120 it would be different, but it is the weakest at short ranges at the moment. Especially at 14.0 though. R-77-1 and MICA EM curb stomp the C5
1 Like
it does, Afaik R-Darter and Derby are Copy n Paste of one another.
An ER with an ARH seeker would probably be kinda OP. Since the main flaw with the ER atm is the need to keep a constant lock…
Not just the C-5, but basically everything else…
I do hope they buff the C-5 soon though. I wasn’t expecting an upgrade like that of the R-77 to the R-77-1, but still, I was thoroughly let down.
3 Likes