added not a bug
closed issue
closed comments
2 Likes
Is it just me or is the PL-8B’s IRCCM really bad? It feels worse than the PL-5EII
1 Like
Yeah, tried today too, gonna give more after finish spading Mirage, but Im having a bad feeling. Also on rail FOV seems to be also way bigger than other IRCCM missiles (but I dont know how big/small it “should be”)
I think its sadly still using a R-73 IRCCM seeker
Idk, it feels more flare hungry than the R-73.
I think the rail FOV is pretty high.
Apparently there is a new problem with the PL-12 after the update
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ICChPe76QxlC
According to this issue post after 10km of tracking a target the radar of the missile turns off and it goes into inertial nav mode without the radar turning back on, I do notice the PL-12 not being as reliable at longer ranges this update compared to previous.
2 Likes
Well damn, thats explains. Does it still uses the data link? (so you could at least lead it by your own radar)
No, cause the datalink turns off after ARH seeker turns on.
Hey, we’re almost done with the report, could you link both of these articles to where you found them?
As a side note, I think this will be our last attempt at the Seeker Shutoff report, after this we’ll work on the booster if the seeker report is denied.
1 Like
how? the paper is proved to be a concept
I think we should try and find out what is wrong with PL-12 first.
2 Likes
2-3 of the others think it’s a good idea. I think there’s no point in not trying. They’ve been collecting a number of secondary “sources” (paper written by students who just want to pas the class). It likely won’t work but would be a decent buff if it did.
this is what I said about “proved to be a concept”. It says enlarge the booster which doesn’t seen in PL-8B.
I think their goal is to make it so ambiguous that the devs can’t tell what’s real or not and just add it. I admire their hopefulness although I have a strong feeling it’ll be shot down before it ever reaches the devs.
they already know that is a concept, and I think it’s not good to “make it so ambiguous”, honesty is the basic rule of making reports, at least for us.
I try to keep it honest, which is why I am only helping them find their papers but will not be submitting the report or adding my name to it.
To their credit the Yak-141 is a “concept”, so it’s not entirely unprecedented.
not similar. The paper is about a PL-8 version that not exist and designed by a student hemself, YAK-141 is unfinished official project.
For YAK-141’s example, I think it’s ultimate J-8PP with F404 and AIM-7M
It may be, but you have to admire their dedication to it. I’m hoping they find more sources that mention the seeker.
2nd try on that should be out by mid-late afternoon today
Thank you, I’ll have the report in soon