Because it has a unique seeker to all the others.
Yesn’t. Phoenix seekers correctly activate themselves ±16km away from IOG indicated targets. Given you rarely are fired upon when travelling at top speed, missile indeed does activate “in your forehead” when you fly predictably enough to still be within seeker FoV of a missile flying with IOG and without datalink assist.
However newer ARH missiles do activate themselves further away, I had cases of them going live as far as 20-21km with or without datalink, which further makes BVR a gimmick.
2 Likes
Hey bro, thanks, I didn’t quite understand that, but now it makes more sense why ARH missiles from the top tier are detected by the RWR much earlier than Phoenix and Fakour missiles. Perhaps that makes dodging AIM-120s and others in that range relatively easy; in this respect, MICA missiles are very difficult.
MICA when used in BVR is equally easy to deal with, arguably even easier as you can just outrun the missile as its not exactly stalwart of energy retention.
1 Like
peak gameplay by a certain someone
3 Likes
That first stupid CCRP on first radar lock. I didn’t binded a key to disable it.
CCRP wont affect A2A weapons
I was on my first rounds with the Su-34, so I had 100kg bombs.
Now I use R-27ETs (the SU-34 is unique in how many ETs it has) and R-73s on it, along with 2 napalm bombs.
Except they don’t have realistic guidance Delay. The guidance delayed Nerf is based off of ejector racks but every missile in game is modeled as if it comes off a rail when the AMRAAM is launched from a rail it has no guidance Delay if you look up the test firing of an AMRAAM from an F 15 on that video you can see the fins start to turn AK the missile guiding not 2-3 feet off the rail. and even if the source was correct, it was probably for the aim120a which is a non-reprogrammable missile so it is likely if that source was accurate. The later variance B onward were reprogrammed to have a shorter delay.
3 Likes
yes
I have the impression that in all the discussions and comparisons between the Fox3, one very important aspect is being overlooked. I’m referring to the platform carrying the missiles. The same AIM120 will be completely different on an AV8 than on an F15. The potential energy is different. If we’re going to compare missiles, let’s present a specific situation that we’re all thinking about. Then we can have a sensible discussion.
Bro is genuinely a celebrity in the community as a master ragebaiter
Some might say he is even a master of baiting in general
When comparing stuff like this, it is obviously implied that the launch speed and altitude are the same for all.
Same for HOBS testing.
You’re wrong, the initial speeds are different when they leave the rail. The launch speed of the rocket is added to the launch platform’s speed. For example, an AIM120 with an Av8 will receive +0.8 Mach, while for an F15 it can be as much as +2 Mach.
You don’t get it…
Okay, explain it to me
If I am comparing missiles, I am comparing them at similar launch parameters.
What’s so hard to understand?
If you pick an harrier, and if it could launch a derby and an aim120, the aim120 would still have higher range and the derby would still be more manouverable off the rail, regardless if you compare them at 0.9 mach or while hovering.
2 Likes
This is all an analogy for how napalm burns longer than bombs and can take out a larger range of bases.
That’s comparing empty numbers. Without relating this to the specific combat situation we might find ourselves in, let’s focus on one type of missile, the AIM120. Are you claiming that the missile has the same knockdown capabilities when fired from an AV8 and an F15? That’s my point, not some imagined situation that might never arise. When making such comparisons, one must consider the platform and the overall situation, not just the textbook parameters. Following this line of reasoning, would an AV8 with an AIM120 beat from distance an F16 with Derby?
if the Harrier was high enough, yes.
Sea Harrier FA2s use to outrange quite a few aircraft because they tended to cruise 10k ft higher than most others, even supersonic aircraft
Paul Tremelling
But when comparing say Aim-120 vs R-77-1, it does no good to have the Aim-120 fired at 30k ft at mach 1.5 and the R-77-1 fired at mach 0.8 at 10k ft and then claim Aim-120 is better. Battle rating generally balances out platform performance though (well, at least it should) which is why the FA2/AV-8B+ are 13.0 and not 13.7 alongside an F-16 with the same AMRAAM