PL-12 Extreme Wobble // Gaijin.net // Issues
Apparently there is a bug going on PL-12 that had been acknowledged, let’s see how long it takes for devs to fix it :(.
1 Like
Strange bug, it didn’t happend on me. and it’s not like the wobble bug when ARH first updated
kinda feels like the R73 wobble
It is but IDK why it happens, like the shake of the crosshair when tanks are touching each other.
it’s the physics engine’s problem
but the missile, is gaijin’s tracking code
Looks like PL-8B and other drop tank pylon configurations have been mentioned in the most recent dev report
With the mighty J-10A arriving, many of you requested that we consider the PL-8B missile for this aircraft. We didn’t give the aircraft this missile as it may be a bit of a strong combination given the missile’s potential performance in conjunction with the platform, so PL-5E II was a more logical and balanced starting point. It may be given further consideration depending also on how the J-10A is performing in the current meta. At this time however we can’t say for sure it will come to the game at any point soon, just to be clear. We just wanted to keep you updated that we are indeed aware of the missile and are looking into it.
Staying on the subject of the J-10, its drop tanks were also a point raised, as the current wing tanks occupy a missile pylon. The developers are indeed aware of this and we do have alternative tanks in the pipeline. So work is indeed underway.
Still no mention of the acknowledged reports for the following additional features though:
- Guided bombs on inner pylons (additional report here)
- GB1000
- Additional radar modes
- Centerline double bomb rack
- CM-704KG ATGM
- C-701T/KD ATGM
- RWR change to the correct model
- PL-11 SARH Missiles
These are ONLY acknowledged reports that I could find regarding adding additional features the J-10A (not including acknowledged modeling error reports such as pilot position, intake modeling, etc), there’s definitely other reports that haven’t been acknowledged yet which are very valid to the aircraft.
I’m hoping that they fix most of these by the next major update around the end of October/beginning of November, it is silly that the update’s titular vehicle is still half-baked.
5 Likes
Pl8b’s aren’t even better than pl5e2’s. They have less range and are smokier. Pretty bullshit reason to not add them. Excited to get an underbelly drop tank though.
What are you talking about?
The PL-8B has considerably more range and acceleration than PL-5EII.
The pl5’s can glide, the pl8’s can’t.
The PL-8 has more range than the PL-5EII, period. The PL-5EII has 3 seconds more guidance time (23s vs 20s), and launching short range IR missiles at ranges where you hope they can glide into a target is a fools errand to begin with. It’s a total waste of ordnance.
The correct usage of the PL-5 or PL-8 is to launch them at an enemy from side or rear aspect at such a range that the IRCCM type (FoV reduction) would function correctly and prevent it from being decoyed by flares. The PL-8 is more optimal for this, as the sudden acceleration gives the enemy less than 1/3 the amount of time depending on distance to react - and makes it considerably harder to flare a lot sooner as the distance is closed and the FoV technique for flare resistance is more efficient.
Long story short; You’re wrong. The PL-5EII has some notable advantages, like maneuverability at low speeds and off the rail. Similar to R-27R vs R-27ER for dogfighting, the slower acceleration allows it to hit targets closer and at higher off-bore angles than the PL-8… but that’s about it.
2 Likes
I think you’re misremembering, the pl5 accelerates quite a lot faster than the pl8.
It seems I was mis-remembering the capabilities of the PL-5EII. The in-game manueverability off the rail goes to the PL-8 which indeed accelerates slower (24 m/s less acceleration and less than 1/2 the burn time for booster).
Still, it depends and my statement is somewhat true.
Technically yes, the PL-5E accelerates slightly better (24 m/s more) for the initial burn time of 2s. The issue is that it runs out. For targets beyond the distance the motor burns (>2s flight time) the PL-8 begins to take a lead. The PL-5E will reach top speed sooner - and the PL-8 will continue to burn for an addition ~1.6s. In that time the PL-8 has an additional ~300 m/s energy that it must expend accelerating. This keeps it at a higher average speed to target and closes the distance with further targets.
What needs to be compared is the loss of energy at longer ranges as you stated but again - as in my initial comment this is a fools errand to be launching these SRAAM’s at targets where it still needs to glide or utilize more than a quarter of the guidance time.
The PL-8 is more optimal for slightly longer ranges or low speed dogfights than the PL-5EII but both are somewhat comparable.
1 Like
In my experience the pl5 is happy to glide to a target after the motor burns out but the pl8 isn’t. Sure it burns for longer but that basically means if it doesn’t hit something within 5 seconds of you launching it then it’s not hitting anything at all. Whatever the case it definitely wouldn’t be op with irccm. Would be a r73 that can’t do high offboresight
1 Like
it’s still much faster than R-73
R-73 has 1/3 the acceleration and has issues causing it to lose all airspeed and can’t chase down targets at all, PL-8 is one of the longest range IR AAM’s that isn’t the R-23/24/27T
2 Likes
Thus why they (smin on devs) said ‘considering balancing issue’ I guess. PL5EII should have a little better seeker IRL but all IRCCMs are nerfed anyways.
PL-5B is likely overperforming, PL-5C is likely underperforming in seeker and PL-5EII is obviously underperforming with the seeker.
The kinetic performance of the PL-5 series seems suspect now that I’ve taken a closer look at it. The PL-8 also seems to be overperforming. I don’t really care to look into it too deeply these days. Everything Gaijin does is for balance now, realism is not a consideration.
PL5B is not over performing at least not to PL5C standards as I have literally had F20s just afterburner away 2.5km range. PL5B is great for sneak kill but PL5EII is like obviously a dual colour seeker.
You stated it is not overperforming and then didn’t link a valid real world source or reference for comparison. If you’d like my data we can discuss in DM’s but I don’t think it is worth a report (yet). Insufficient data is available to show how exactly it should perform - only enough to suggest it isn’t as good irl as it is in-game.
As far as I understand no plane even used the PL5B so if going for realistic stuff it should be all PL5C and add 0.3 BR (0.7 maybe for J7E). I just simply stated that in game it is not close to PL5C (maybe full aspect does help cause a lot easier to engage) and that they should be very similar except seeker, (in game 100% ctrl c + ctrl v) lol.