The PL-12A is essentially a PL-12 shell with a PL-15 missile inside, but without a dual-pulse capability.
1 Like
1.2 Mach/1400kmh IAS at low alt, where missile has all the air density to leverage steering controls. Distance to target, flying in opposite direction was… sub 2km, with positioning requiring missile to do 180 turn. Using custom battle EC map for somewhat consistent test environment.
Thrust vectoring leaves the chat when motor burns out. And finding scenario where missile doesn’t maneuver until last second is difficult to create.
Neither did Gaijin by the looks of it, as it should be J band by NATO classification used in game.
120D continues to be C5 copypaste as expected.
IRST used in Rafale (and Eurofraud?) is coded as targeting pod, hence you can “look through it” with TV or IR channel for visual, passive identification. The moment you slap targeting pod on US/Ru jet of choice, they also place Point of Interest onto selected TWS contact.
1 Like
hopefully that would change :(
Honestly not much to change for it. The factor upgrades will be longer engine burn better radar with GNSS. Don’t expect a miracle missile on an affordability upgraded. (Unless they add DL with multi aircraft)
So no change to maneuverability?
The big question is: Will the AIM-120D get its dual-pulse rocket motor? This would improve its terminal performance significantly opposed to the AIM-120A/B/C.
you have more maneuverability at range cause the motor is still burning.
I wouldn’t be surprised if current motor used by C5/C7/D ie 7.75s burn, 15.5kN thrust is THE famous “+5 motor”, it does have about 5kg of propellant extra on board.
as far as I am aware the 120D does not have a dual-pulse rocket motor.
There is conflicting info and uncertainty which version of the 120D has a dual-pulse motor AFAIK.
From everything I have read online. It uses the +5 motor. So just more fuel.
hopefully they first fix the torpedo bugs which are present since months - missing aiming marker in gunners view and reload bug (prevents launching torps after reload cycle started in AB)
GNSS is more than capable of determining altitude.
Hoping this doesn’t get fixed for a while longer, as long as the Su-30s at 13.3 can spam them and ruin the BR bracket, I don’t want PL-12s that can fly properly.
You just need to click the link on the post and make sure you’re signed in to your account.
thats why im asking in here
On a bit on a sidenote here, but this game will never be a true esport given how this game does not follow a symmetrical balance between nations.
There’s a reason Gaijin esports balancing team gatekeeps top tier planes, SPAAs and even some tanks on both air superiority and combined forces tournaments.
And its not bad to not be an esport ready game, not many people really likes to watch competitive WT, you can tell by the difference between viewership with and without drops.
2 Likes
So no “new” maps for ground?
1 Like
Janes, which is about as close to primary of a source you can get. Cannot post the specific PDF page concerned however there are still publicly available information based around what’s found in said PDF that is still available there (and elsewhere). It explicitly states a 40 G maximum overload for AMRAAM variants C-5 through to the Delta variant.
While I’m still on the subject… I suppose everyone is wondering “clipped fin missile = +5 more G?” and for a time I wondered that too. Apparently the arms of the fins were upgraded to essentially force more AoA out of them to allow for overall more pull. Alternatively, this could have also have been done to maintain the current 35 G overload because old actuator + clipped fins probably decreased their performance. Either way, in-game it shouldn’t be ‘snappy’ like the A/B but it also should eventually catch up and overtake its maximum overload performance.
1 Like