Best of luck, it is a very well written report. Much better than mine.
1 Like
Congrats on the accepted label
1 Like
That’s good news lol.
Also thank you for your effort.
1 Like
Could someone test the PL-12 at ranges past 10KM+? Apparently there are some problems with it after the update now, especially against targets flying perpendicular or something is off with the radar.
In my experience, there seems to be a discrepancy between my client and Gaijin’s servers. From my perspective, the PL-12 often exhibits erratic large-angle maneuvers yet still manages to hit the target, or it flies smoothly but loses lock inexplicably.
For some reason this problem seems to particularly common with the PL-12, I don’t notice it too much when using R-77 or AIM-120.
Would you mind explaining how does seeker shutoff work in the game and how does it compare to fov shrink? I assume the TY90 is this flare resistant in large part because it also has seeker shutoff?
After the seeker achieves initial lock, it continuously monitors its field of view (FOV). If interference (such as flares, sun, or rockets) is detected within the FOV, the seeker immediately suspends guidance signals, causing the missile to temporarily maneuver based on its last received trajectory data while the seeker continues scanning for a clean target signature. Once the interference exits the FOV, the seeker reacquires and relocks the target to resume guidance; however, if interference persists for over 3 seconds, the seeker permanently disengages the lock. This method maintains robust resistance across all engagement ranges, whereas the simpler “FOV shrink” mechanic (which narrows the tracking gatewidth to physically block flares) is more effective at close ranges, maybe less than 2km.
Your assumption are right. The gatewidth FOV of TY-90 is 1.25°, not enough to flare resistant.
So if I’m reading the bug report correctly if it gets implemented it would have both FoV shrinking to 1° as well as Seeker shutoff? That would instantly make it the best IR missile in the game lmao
1 Like
Yes. And I have provided two alternative options for balance adjustments: 1. Seeker shutoff +1.5°; 2. Only seeker shutoff.
not really, when combined both, there will be like 1+1>2, especially when AIM-9M has 3.6° fov, 1.25 is a great improvement.
they will come into effect by turns, providing great irccm ability
so I only stand for shutoff +1.5° gatewidth
And having the fov shrink makes sure that the seeker shutoff doesn’t engage too early or too often to give the seeker shutoff more time to “reset” so it doesn’t have to be stuck in IOG mode for too long right?
1 Like
yes, it will “reset” much more frequently
P sure what he meant was just having 1.25° won’t really be that good, but having reduced fov to augment seeker shutoff is comically powerful
1.25° will be very good, even too good, it will provide almost an absolute kill in PL-8B’s range.
so 1.5 to 2° for balance is acceptable
And this is why we dont have such missiles on jets in the game… yet
I’ve heard a claim that when both IRCCM methods are present simultaneously, only the seeker shutoff actually takes effect, though I haven’t verified it.
clearly not real. if so, manpads and ty-90 won’t be so hard to flare
commonly 1.25° fov with shutdown provides almost 4km unflareable range.
1 Like
Seems to also be the case that AMRAAM and R-77 they do not lock onto wrong targets. For example when planes fly close to each other they still maintain their lock whilst PL12 might switch the lock to another target, commonly a friendly. Seems a bit to me that the ‘previous update’ on seeker didn’t get applied or was retreated from PL12.
still can’t find anything in DM, every arh seeker shares almost same values.
could be something about radar, everything concerning radar has problems in this update