Discussion on Kinematics and Behavior of Modern Air-to-Air Missiles

[MARS7]

I’d like to start a detailed discussion about the kinematics and overall behavior of modern active radar homing (ARH) air-to-air missiles. There are currently quite significant differences in their performance, especially at high altitudes and long ranges.

The main missiles I’m referring to are:

• The R-77 family (all variants currently in the game)

• Various versions of the AIM-120 (particularly B, C, and D)

• The PL-12

• And other similar next-generation ARH missiles

Key issues I’ve observed:

• The R-77 loses energy much faster at high altitudes (8–12 km and above) compared to the AIM-120. Launches from 35–40 km often result in the missile arriving at the target with very low speed and limited maneuvering capability.

• The R-77 has noticeably weakened seeker resistance to countermeasures. When the missile has already bled off a lot of energy on the terminal phase, it can easily break lock even on relatively weak chaff.

• Lattice (grid) fins generate excessively high drag, which significantly hurts the missile’s kinematics.

• Missile AI frequently performs unnecessarily sharp and suboptimal maneuvers even when smoother pursuit would be more efficient. As a result, on the final approach the missile often lacks the energy to make the necessary correction and simply falls short or misses.

Additionally, it would be great to see further development of the R-77 family in the game.

Currently there are relatively few variants. It would be interesting to add more modifications, including an R-77 with a ramjet engine, which in reality provides significantly better energy retention at long ranges.

I would also like to see a rework of the R-77-1: right now after launch it delivers one powerful impulse, but according to available data the engine should work differently — strong initial acceleration followed by reduced thrust to maintain high speed on the cruise phase. This noticeably affects the missile’s kinematics and energy management.

The main goal is to bring the modeling of kinematics, fin drag, seeker behavior, engine performance, and AI logic closer to real-world physics and open-source information.

I’d appreciate test results, track recordings from identical conditions, and opinions from the community.

[Skyzonix]

False title. Your not talking about mutliple missiles, your just talking about the R-77’s

[Beeschurger]

@MARS7

The R-77 has noticeably weakened seeker resistance to countermeasures

Single ARH missile that differs in seeker terms is MICA. Others are identical to my knowledge and missile datasheet.

@MARS7

Launches from 35–40 km often result in the missile arriving at the target with very low speed and limited maneuvering capability.

I wouldnt launch ARMAAM at that distance and expect a hit, let alone R-77.

Now why dont you mention the strongpoints of R-77, such as higher peak G pull and thus better performance in sub 20km fights when compared to AMRAAM/PL-12/AAM-4?

[MARS7]

So you don’t care about the words about pl-12

[Skyzonix]

Why would i care about the words “PL-12”? You listed them as a talking point but then never talked about them same with Aim-120’s

Thats like me listing 3-4 planes but then only talking about 1. So your topic is wrong, you aren’t discussing the behaviours of modern Air to Air, your talking about the behaviours of the R-77’s

[Necronomica]

They are already working on improvements for missile flightpaths and high altitude drag and engine power:

Flight Model and Missile Autopilot Improvements

[image] We’re constantly refining many vehicle and weapon parameters, and the Heavy Cavalry major update is no exception. While tuning missile flight models to better match their real-world counterparts, we’ve introduced new missile mechanics, and we’re excited to share them with you! The Effect of Pressure on Rocket Engine Thrust One of the major changes is related to a new mechanic used in missiles: the dependence of the rocket engine’s exhaust velocity on atmospheric pressure. Previously, r…

[MARS7]

I apologise, I didn’t notice how it happened, I wrote additionally about pl-12 and completely forgot to add to the final version of the post as well as about aim-120, but not much was said about it, the human factor just posted the wrong version of the text instead of the final one. I’ll be glad if you share your opinion about the aim-120, pl-12 or p-77 missiles

[Skyzonix]

We all forget things from time to time so its understable.

As for adding a talking point for the missiles, I don’t have enough data on each of them since the nations I mainly use are equipt with Aim-120’s, I have no experence at all with PL-12’s and limited use of R-77’s

[Morvran]

So you want to see the second best Fox-3 in-game buffed?

The R-77-1, especially its carriers, dont need any buffs right now

[xef56]

PL 12 since the latest changes has become the worse Fox 3 in game at top tier
its strongest point before was it very good off boresight capabilities that could rival the r77 and the mica
Its weakest point is its really poor effective range no matter the platform it is being fired with
It has a really bad drag coefficient and its weight makes it considerably worse
The recent changes despite making the missile very stable and also destroying its hobs capabilities did not improve the effective range of the missile whatsoever