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.
Question, why is this plane with six Fox3 flies in GRB against 11.3 like Su-39, Su-24m and AV-8b NA? All equal fox3 careers (F-16C, JAS39C) at 12.7
It gets 2 guided bombs maximum why would it be the same BR as the F-16C? fox3 missiles are pretty much irrelevant for GRB.
Unlike an su-39, where you do that exact same thing but it’s 800sp and 10 free kills just by pressing a button? What’s your point here?
It’s anti cancer. I spawnkill planes and helis to make the game better for people who actually want to play ground. You really can’t complain about people stopping you from being a troll.
1 Like
I don’t use CAS at all in GRB
lol, IRCCM jammer so you can’t even be killed by IR AAM’s
Skill issue on the CAS part seeing as it has ordnance that easily out-ranges all CAS.
Facts, CAS doesn’t belong in GRB at all. Remove all aircraft from the ground battles except for SIM.
1 Like
“Facts, CAS doesn’t belong in GRB at all. Remove all aircraft from the ground battles except for SIM.”
That so gaslighting.
Dude rly go try WOT, insted of gaslighting here.
Let me guess you are typical F&F in low br enjoyer. You spawn a AV-8B NA for 800 rp, basicly most OP CAS in that br, and get 4 ez kills just by pressing button.
There are tons of unreasonable br in game, J-10A’s is the most reasonable one. It still in top br, 0.3 lower is just a certificate of its poor CAS ability.
When i play AV-8B NA in GRB its 3 out of 4 matches i fight agaunst Pancir S1, u have no idia how hard it is cos u mostly play with SOV.
J-10 with Pancir S1 against subsonic plane, even without Fox1, even without radar. I understand u play CH and selfishly wish it to be OP, but every time i see J-10 toptiered agains 11.3, i realise that balace ruined.