A secondary source just like Janes. If you search the image i posted on Google you can find it. And Janes is not 100% right as they have been wrong before. Though I don’t know c-8 well so your friend could be right.
Meteor has longer range than both has the largest NEZ of any missile. And you think the seeker is downgraded from a 120D or PL-12?
We know in game Meteor will be crap as we know any missile that cannot pull high G is.
Its possible that the newer Aim-120D may have a better seeker purely on the grounds of being newer, though Europe has always been ahead of the curse when it comes to developing radars, so there is a good chance its not far off.
If you mean regarding GNSS, then there is advantages to not having GNSS, such as the guidance being immune to jamming. IOG is heavily exaggerated in game and with DL, let alone 2way DL that kind of drift should be non-existant.
Hey guys, I haven’t seen it discussed frequently, but what is the deal with complete instability of any EFT when you pull hard Gs at low speeds? And stability without the limiter is just utter trash. It wouldn’t bother me much because well, ok, high Gs airframe strain etc, plausable. But I played F-18 recently… I’m able to recover this thing from any kind of situations with one hand while picking my nose. It’s just so much smoother with and without the limiter, so what’s the deal with that? Is it just an instructor problem? If it is then why it’s taking so long to fix?
Because Gaijin doesn’t know how to model delta canards properly.
1 Like
I think the Typhoon’s Instructor needs an overhaul, it feels very Squirrely in a number of regimes, but feels totally fine when in ASB on full controls
You gotta thank the rudder for that one buddy, it’s very wonky and it makes you drift left n right all the time.
If you use mouse aim it gets even worse.
Yea, not that long ago It just did a 180 roll on me out of nowhere.
I hope they fix the bug where BOL doesn’t 2-pop soon.
aAfaik, the meteor has 2 way datalink and inertial navigation only.
There is nothing to say it has or hasn’t got gps/gnss.
The inertial navigation is very accurate though with less than 1 meter of drift per minuite.
This is then automatically updated by the radar and two way datalink.
I thought the unusable rudder was just a thing with the aoa button, are you telling me the f18 actually retains rudder authority when on the aoa mode? I mean, the only jets ive tried with the aoa button are the mig 29, drakken and typhoon.
Wouldn’t call it a downgrade. Aside from when fired from a Rafale, an AESAphoon equipped with Meteors will basically be unavoidable in BVR.
In both of their cases (AIM-120D, PL-12A), GPS nav was included to make their mid course navigation more efficient. Something you’d need to do because the engineers (and really, anyone with a brain cell) knew energy was finite.
This is not the same case as with the Meteor. It can travel further than both of them and still maintain a little over Mach 3 speeds while they’d be gasping for air at Mach 1. Of course, in a Meteor MLU, it could be included, which means its effective range would go up by a bit and its NEZ extended further.
Trying to use the Meteor like a MICA or R-77 will naturally disappoint people. That’s not its use case… at all. If you’re or anyone is going to take those kinds of shots, you might as well just use ASRAAM/IRIS-T/MICA EM or MICA IR.
I’ll also note that it still features 2 way datalink, as a rafale successfully managed to get one to switch target during its flight. That means that aside from a somewhat improved mid course navigation (which, considering that an INS probably wouldn’t drift much in the time frame even a long range missile would travel), the METEOR still is capable of doing those fancy long range missiles things.
It is however in need of a better seeker which would be corrected with the MLU getting an AESA seeker
You must be aware that seekers considered superior increase the detection range of the ARH and provide the enemy with more time to initiate evasive maneuvers. If the aircraft’s radar is excellent, seekers that are considered not superior are generally more powerful.
I don’t think you’ll be able to switch targets after launch in War Thunder. I hope we eventually can, but for now it doesn’t seem so. It’s probably just gonna be basic to start.
Going from the seeker it has (which isn’t bad at all) to AESA would be… something. I don’t see how that’ll help things (do educate me), though.
True, however in the case of missiles like the Meteor or even the R-37, the “time to initiate evasive manoeuvres” is still low, considering it’s screaming at them at Mach ~3-4 (or roughly Mach 5 for the R-37, in war thunder at least).
Seeker stuff aside, I am genuinely interested how they plan on implementing Meteor lol. The physical body screams high drag, but at the same time the missile propels itself against said drag and accelerates linearly and doesn’t drop off at all. It could be coded in to simply hit a “speed wall”, because if they don’t it’ll probably accelerate well past Mach 4.5 and into hypersonic regimes.
Dual-pulse is definitely the easier new propulsion system to develop, lol.
Aim 120d and pl-12a both have 2 way datalink irl but isn’t modeled in wt so why would meteor be any different
I would say it “depends”. If the ARH missile radar is capable of LPI operation (pulse compression with variable output depending on the distance to the target) it’s extremely difficult to even detect the missile before it’s way too late. The meteor seeker is said to have a “silent mode” which coheres with the nomenclature of “silent radar” which is used for “pulse compression” capable radars.
2 way datalink is not modeled in war thunder as mentioned by @kizvy.
I was just mentioning how, even IRL, the meteor missing GNSS doesn’t make it worse than missiles with GNSS but regular propulsion.
As for the missile getting an AESA seeker over a regular seeker (still IRL, not in game), it would make it much better at seeing through low observable aircrafts, as well as defeating counter measures and Jamming pods.
For the exemple of the rafale being shot down, it’s possible that if the PL15 had been a missile featuring a normal radar (and not guided by an AWACS most probably), it would have been decoyed by the SPECTRA jammers. That’s also why those same jammers are getting upgraded in the near future, to keep up with more modern radars.
1 Like
It is said that the AMRAAM has improved its ECCM capabilities with every variant update, but has that actually been implemented in War Thunder? No, it has not changed. I simply cannot believe that Gaijin will add any additional value to the AESA seeker.
AMRAAM doesnt use a AESA seeker or any inservice A2A missile for the phoon afaik, and since gajin for the most part models AESA as just strong MECH i dont believe much would change + ECM isnt implemented (hopfully soon tho)