265s of sea level ISP without proper nozzle on such a small motor is insane number
(copy paste, just said this in the other 120D thread)
This is going to be a bit of an unpopular opinion… and I by no means think that the 120C-5 and D are perfect, but after playing with them for a bit, I have noticed a marked increase in lethality with the 120D. The GNSS/Zero IOG drift make a HUGE difference in lethality with regard to reacquiring the target if the missile is spoofed. If you are able to defeat their missile and turn back in quickly, you can update the missile with your radar, and I find it will ACCURATELY relock and continue pursuing. I’ve even had instances where I’ve hit enemies who are notching the missile itself through frequent updates from the AESA radar on my jet.
Tldr: I still think kinematic fixes are needed but the improvements on the guidance end of the missile make it noticably more lethal. A step in the right direction for sure.
1 Like
I have noticed literally no difference in defending against or using the aim120D compared to the C.5 and zero drift ins is not a huge difference considering ins drift was already low enough to have the plane still in the missile seeker anyways. in fact giving it a seeker FOV of the mika would have been a bigger change to lethality than better ins
Your enemies probably weren’t guiding it then. If it’s not being assisted by the jet’s radar, it’s no different from any other fox3. If it is, though, it’s different. Like I said, it’s possible to hit enemies actively notching the missile if the jet’s radar can still see them. Vice versa if the enemy is notching your jet’s radar but not the missile. If used correctly the missile and the radar will be looking at the enemy from different angles and it will be difficult/impossible to notch both and dodge the missile. I’ve noticed this both from shooting and defending pov.
this is how every top tier Fox 3 works, aslo if the planes radar loses lock once the missile is entirely on its own even if you relock with your planes radar it dose nothing for the missile.
No, the 120C-5s don’t update nearly as often or as accurately as the 120Ds do. It’s the difference between pure IOG guidance where little errors in the IOG calculations add up to the missile not looking in the right place relative to itself, versus the GNSS where the missile has an absolute point of reference with which to orient itself and to relock accurately every time. It also seems like the 120D “asks” for datalink updates more often. I’ve had the 120C-5 lock chaff, go into IOG, and then just not update via DL. Doesn’t happen with the D.
ok so you clearly have no clue what your talking about lol, IOG dose not Affect the update rate of the Datalink and its identical on both missiles.
this doesn’t matter unless your shooting at targets full fox 3 at extreme ranges as iog drift matters less the closer the missile gets to a target.
Is there anyway to force gaijin to fix the underperforming of 120c5 and d
You could try to leak classified documents )))
Papers ive read from the US naval colleges reviewing missile tests generally have testing parameters for missile ranges at mach 0.9, although I have seen mach 1.1 show up a few times.
Mach 0.9-1.1 launch for 180 km launch range would be wild lol
its not like the hornet can go much faster with a full air to air load
makes sense naval colleges would go with that
1 Like