Does this f16 have 90 or 120 cm IRL? It looks like 60 in game is wrong
The statboard says 30 large and 60 normal, but only 60 seem to be modeled, so I don’t know.
Smaller surfaces usually mean less maneuverability, but then the problem with the AIM-120C5 is the ability of these surfaces to rotate ? Is there any documentation? I’m curious.
…
3 Likes
From what I understand, angular momentum is conserved only when no external torque acts on a system. This principle applies to isolated systems, for example, an object spinning in deep space without any external forces.
However, a missile such as the AIM-120 is not an isolated system while flying through the atmosphere. But I may be wrong, open to corrections.
If all conditions were the same, then the B would be more maneuverable than the C due to the larger fins. But IRL the c-5 can maintain the same maneuverability as the B as the smaller fins can generate equal turning force at the higher speed of mach 4.4. If you want to get into physics, just look at the lift force equation: L=1/2pV^2SC. Velocity is squared vs S or the surface area has a linear relationship. Plus the c-5 has better seekers and algorithms so it doesn’t need to pull hard in most cases. However, at low speeds the aim120B does pull more than the aim120c5
OK, so the Aim-120C5 only starts turning when it is already fast, and when the Aim-120B has a higher angle of attack capacity faster
The C-5 should turn the same as the B at max speed. There’s more to consider like reduced drag, internal mass redistribution, and actuator improvements but gaijin doesnt care about that
1 Like
Okay, I understand. The AIM-120C5 needs speed to generate torque with the surfaces to increase manoeuvrability. It needs speed, but in return, the missile gains less drag, etc. (along with a better seeker and any other advantages
correct
1 Like
Thank you for your help.
1 Like
Is this document correct?
1 Like
honestly they should just give it to people who reasearched the F16C its literally on the edge of being a copy slop upgrade should folder it
The new F-16C feels pretty fun to play on the dev server currently, but the overwhelming majority of the opponents I’ve seen have been J-10C, J-11B/15T, other F-16 Bl.50/Bl.52 and some 15C GE/18E sprinkled in. So not the best aircraft.
I dread having to fight Rafales, AESA EFTs and Su-30SM2s in it.
The full PoBit upgrade package should indeed be added, but the multi ejector racks should definitely not be added, as this is a pretty damn ficticious change. Not all aircraft should be meta.
This is a typical plane that could benefit from more decompression at top tier, but is currently a bit squished between 14.0 and 14.7 planes.
sure but in its current state it’s on the worse side of the 14.0s we currently have, never mind 14.3. An F16 with 10 AMRAAMs would be far from meta, but at least it wouldn’t a completely pointless addition and actually offer something new
2 Likes
which is why you’d suggest a lower BR instead of some fake loadout. The radar alone offers something new on an F-16 frame.
an actual F-16V would be better.
Any updates to F-16C blk 52 after todays dev update?
Problem is that Gaijin won’t move it down as long as the F-16I remains at 14.0.
shouldn’t it have 120 CM not 90