MiG-19 >:)
The issue with Full-Real in Realistic is the lack of buffeting and flutter that is found in Sim. A MiG-19 performs properly in Sim, barely being controllable past 150% CAoA, but in Realistic you can commonly reach 5x the critical limit… Which shouldn’t happen.
7 games does not tell anything lmao, keep coping.
MiG19, J35D, Dassault IAI Kfir, F-4E, Bf109, J5n1… the list goes on!
edit: you really telling me that in sim you have buffeting and other mechanics not found on air rb? Eeek.
Kfir can’t, F-4E can’t, BF-109 comes nowhere close, same with the J5N1.
The few planes I can think of that CAN do it are the J-35s, MiG-19, MiG-29 in its current FM, F-84F, and Mirage IIIE.
Yeah, if you go to a custom battle and go to advanced options, there are sim only options
Yes, weight and mass has nothing to do with drag.
Thats what i mean? 7 games does not make one able to judge others how they perform in a vehicle. It also doesn’t allow one to judge exactly how the vehicle compares to others when spaded
I commented there because you said they were garbage in a vehicle they had barely played
i said they were garbage in order to make them elaborate more, because saying “this plane is amazing” and leaving it to be does not help at all on the argument, as such the strawman grindset of MiG23M.
Go read. Not my job to teach yet another person physics on the forums.
Ah ok, so regardless of the stat card you were making that message purely for the purpose of bait.
I’ll respond I guess.
Well, the AIM-9L is an extremely potent missile (to which it has 6x of them) and the flight performance is so far unrivaled at the moment. I don’t think it really needs explanation, it’s quite obvious that it is a top of the line competitor for air RB. Especially in down tiers when it clubs the seals unlike anything else in the game. You just have no hope of stopping it in an 11.0 and even in a 12.3 you have no sure-fire way of beating it without some intervention from teammates.
In fact, I’ve got a few more games with it now and it’s mostly unlocked in modifications and already my poor stats are recovering, reaching a similar winrate and K/D as the F-14B currently. If I can do equally well in an aircraft without any SARH missiles and only 30 countermeasures surely there’s something going for it.
Yet you want to reply in the least toxic manner possible, it was clear what I was saying initially. The mass of the missile has nothing to do with why it’s so fast or maneuverable. They lost the argument when they sidestepped the issue and started focusing solely on my out-of-context comment.
This report is done solely on the basis of the same exact speed, at the same exact altitude.
They even use a passenger airliner as a basis for the equation and speculation, which, unlike a missile, relies on lift for its continued flight and DOES NOT CONTAIN ROCKET PROPULSION OF ANY KIND.
Fox 1’s are in a completely horrid place in WT at the moment, with rampant unreliability and absurd levels of multipath error. They really arent needed, and you can fake people out by radar locking them in a head on anyways to achieve similar results (make them pull off)
9L’s are perfectly workable. Not top of the pack, but not bottom either. Kind of odd to be complaining about them.
Nose authority has been “fixed”, although quite frankly, if you just played the F-16 like rate fighters (what they excel at) nose authority becomes more of a problem than an advantage.
Overall, the F-16A block 10 is not even close to borderline useless in air RB. It is either average or strong in most respects.
It says a lot about this community when a jet being “average” is seen as “useless” or “needing a buff” like the Russian players that begged for the R-73 to be added to the MiG-29, or the R-60M to the MLD back in the day, or the current chinese players begging for PL-8’s on the J-7E (which is already by FAR the best 11.0 jet, and is easily undertiered)
yes, i have to bait some users into getting more creative since they would rather stay on strawman and ad hominems.
aim9l are now currently worse than the r60m’s as their flare resistance has been worsened while r60’s have gotten better at ignoring flares from rear aspect. Apply the other caveats of aim9l such as slow accel and bad initial pull, this leaves you with a mid distance missile that is more than subsceptible of not reaching the target on time or going in for a teammate instead because top tier is now about 1km or less engagement furballs or 30+km missile slinging; scenarios in which both r27er and et excell at–they perform better than the sraam below 2km and better than anything else further from 2km, and unlike aim7’s you can’t go cold against them unless you’re 10km+ away.
In fact, I’ve got a few more games with it now and it’s mostly unlocked in modifications and already my poor stats are recovering, reaching a similar winrate and K/D as the F-14B currently. If I can do equally well in an aircraft without any SARH missiles and only 30 countermeasures surely there’s something going for it.
since when 2.5kd is similar to 1.5? I knew you were bad at following conversations like an adult person, but i didn’t know you were this bad at math, and i can’t even do basic equations without using nodes.
I do agree now that the f16a block 10 is much more agreeable to play now that it does a 360 in 8 seconds, but when i flew it it would barely pull 12g’s on 10 minutes of fuel and everyone else could one circle you for life.
i unironically had no issues with f16’s “nose authority”, the “fix” made them arcade b*-*sh and they rate fight in a dime. F16A block 10 survives because it’s undefeatable in a 1vx when only guns or “fair” heatseekers are used. I exclusively play air RB to get the performance mods on the aircraft i find cool/dogfight greatly. Air RB has never tickled my brain. It’s been 5 years of absolute pain and despair and now i’m finally free til the eurofighter comes out and i feel the urge of skinning it like the Spanish TigerMeet eurofighter with tiger eyed canards.
It’s the second best F-16 airframe behind the F-16AJ in terms of flight performance. It’s only downside is lack of Fox 1s.
Self explanatory, but off topic. Suggest you either carry it on in DM’s or quit complaining since the original point was to focus on a small specific aspect of an argument instead of addressing the actual erroneous statement originally made by Ziggy.
Stability during high alpha maneuvers. The wings really aren’t all that necessary for keeping the missile guiding towards the target. They improve maneuverability, not range in most cases. In fact… there are several theories dictating the use of a “wingless” missile as a function of improving drag, speed, range, etc. Body lift is better, but until more recently this was a hard thing to code into a reliable guidance section.
I think this was self evident since the beginning of the thread, it’s being used as more of a cesspool for bad takes on all accounts since. Somewhat entertaining, though.
Why are you replying to me, mate?
Yes, main stage rocket propulsion and sustainer stages.
Do you think that an aircraft just drops the missile and it glides into its target? That’s what the aerodynamic shape and find are for, right?
But please, read into the fuckin topic man. That reply had nothing to do with missiles.
In all seriousness, the aerodynamic shape is to reduce drag of any type to extend range and decrease speed loss in turns.
The fins, though, are primarily designed with stability in mind. The less the missile has to pull to change direction, as well as the angle at which is flies, is the less drag it will have to fight against.
AAMs are not glide bombs. Unless you can show me one with a pulsejet or some shit, you can’t refute this.
(MBDA Meteor is an SFDR system, so still inapplicable)
Next time try to copy/paste a random document that actually agrees with your stance, and don’t immediately contradict it on the next reply.
I think that second part was meant for me, he linked a random assessment on passenger aircraft and their weight tolerances and tried equating that to SFRMs
Open these to get a good laugh
