I hate this missile Fakour with all my heart. This missile seems to have modern capabilities that allow it to be undetected by the RWR (Launch) only when it’s already 10 km away and there’s no time to dodge it. I don’t know why nobody talks about this missile, but it’s very good at long range (I say this not because I want it nerfed, but in the BR where the F-14 IRAF is played, it should have better capabilities, as it historically has).
But the AIM-120C is very good too; it was added anyway because the Main US wanted to match Russian R-77-1 missiles.
C5’s advantage is in range IRL (+ maybe a better seeker? Unclear on that part). Simulations bear out that the missile’s fins just can’t keep up with improved agility (a fair number showing they stall before the limit we see in game. So best case, you get the higher agility but lose a tonne of energy. But highlighting this gets you crucified). Which would be good, if they made IR missiles more threatening in the short range and BVR seekers a bit more reliable to encourage longer range play.
Though C5’s current implementation is very lacking regarding the range it reaches out to. But so are many missiles compared to IRL figures. Which would certainly help their effective kinematics at longer range.
In RB, generally score kills past 20km, if it proves necessary to engage someone interrupting strike. Found AMRAAM achieves success consistently at this distance, alongside ERs. Don’t particularly find either missile engaging, but they do the job when I bother to use them.
Neat, I generally only investigated the physics and such behind the kinematic performance claimed by many on the forums. I do not care enough about the minutiae of American armament to go any further than that as my curiosity most definitely falls to the wayside on the topic.
the issue with this is that the simulations almost all are working off incompressible flow (sometimes with some sort of correction factor, but those are still normally wildly off) while the real missile operates at speeds where you absolutely can not ignore compressability
The C-5 isnt exactly better than A/B ingame. They are only really better for ranges greater than 10 miles or 15km in which the lower drag allows them to hit the target faster and with more energy.
The A/B are lighter and have a stronger boost phase which allows them to pickup speed quicker which also allows them to pull the 35G’s sooner. As an example after 3 seconds of launch the A/B may be at Mach 2.8 which allows them to pull the full 35G’s. And compare that to the C-5 is only Mach 2.5 which means it can do about 30G’s. So the A/B is generally better close range as it gives the target less time to react and it can preform better with HOB shots.
The way to fix this according to real life would to give the C-5 the extra fin AOA which it got from its control section. This would allow it to achieve 35G’s at just Mach 2-2.2, or the C-5 before it left the dev server. Which it was worth the extra bit of weight for a much better missile but in current live server that is not the case.
Also another thing the C-5 doesn’t lower your parasitic drag ingame so you’ll be slower than just carrying a all A/B loadout since you gotta haul around slightly more weight, and not to mention the c-5 is 6.5Kg overweight which does reduce its HOB performance
Are there any patents or anything of the sort that state the maneuverability of the amraam? For example,the r77s are modeled after its patent which gives it a max lateral g load of 50gs and 45 degrees of aoa (between 0.6 and 5.0 Mach)
Good thing you can see it from miles away, it’s seeker is trash, and any sustained pull over 7G it can’t keep up with. Otherwise you’d be self-reporting saying you have no awareness and die to a bomber missile in the TDM state of Air RB!
Calling anyone who dies to it bad is a bit of a stretch when I’ve seen videos of it only giving an RWR warning when it’s 6km away. I’ve also had issues with it showing up on my RWR unreasonably late as well.
Aim-120s are not mid, and I would consider them decent at least.
So which variant of the AIM-120 would need to be added to make America Air back in top in terms of missiles? like would it be the phase 2 or phase 3 variants or hell the D and D-3 variant if you really want to overkill it.
Yeah but from what I understanding there’s no source for it.
For example there’s good sources for pl-12 max pull being 38g in very specific circumstances.
While for aim 120 we don’t have anything other than simulations
If the C-5 was properly added it would already make a massive difference. In the future? If Gaijin adds Long-Range missiles like Meteor, PL-15 etc. maybe not for a while, the US doesn’t have an equivalent (tho that assumes Gaijin adds way larger maps and changes the game modes for the range to even matter). The AIM-260 exists, but we know way to little about it to add it to the game.
for min range/maneuverability? I havent seen anything regarding min range, ive seen some for maneuvering targets which indicates its ability to conserve energy, not necessarily min range/turning ability.
