My bad then, didn’t noticed.
1 Like
Regarding the Meteor: have any sources been found that allow us to estimate the booster’s Δv or cruise speed? How good is its cruise performance supposed to be — around Mach 3.7? Mach 4?
In general, faster is better, of course, but if it uses the sustainer to gradually build up speed, it feels like that might not be especially effective within this game’s combat ranges.
If I recall correctly, the only known figure is that it can do 100km in 90 seconds.
Remember, the core strength isnt necessarily its top speed, but rather the fact it maintains that speed over a considerably longer distance.
Yes, that is true. However, the Meteor should fundamentally still have the same seeker activation distance as other ARH missiles — around 20 km, correct? If so, then at engagement ranges of roughly 30 km, without strong acceleration performance, the target would end up with a longer evasion window compared to other ARH missiles. That seems to imply the missile could become relatively vulnerable.
What I am concerned about is the possibility of it ending up with a speed profile similar to the AIM-54A shown in the chart below. Sustained speed retention is certainly important, but acceleration performance may be just as important — if not even more so.
I could be wrong, but I would suspect Meteor would look a little like that in yellow
Yeah, In War Thunder, its max range is heavily mitigated by how simple it will probably be to defeat using a notch, but its kinematic performance basically wont be changed. Something like AMRAAM is fairly easy to defeat when fired at 60km vs it fired at 15km. Meteor wont really matter what range its fired at, it will have the same kinematic performance.
I also hope its performance ends up being close to the yellow line. However, the R-77-1 achieves that level of acceleration while using almost the entire missile body as the booster section despite having nearly the same weight. Can the Meteor’s first-stage booster really achieve the same thing…?
I do want to be optimistic about it overall, but at the same time I am probably about half worried as well.
Im just assuming that at some point the Ramjet takes over and its acceleration is probably fairly reasonable
So maybe this would be more reasonable.
but would still be good.
Its shorter range performance probably wont be great, but hopefully by then we’ll have ASRAAM for that theatre so im not that concerned
The reason I’m like this right now is probably because I was just playing the Eurofighter earlier. The AMRAAM (C-5) feels so weak that it’s driving me insane. I really want something with GNSS guidance already, like the C-8 or the D variant.
Also, my radar has been acting up lately. For some reason, it stops maintaining the DL on enemies on the radar scope.
The best way to make C5s feel a lot better is to fire them high and fast.
Try and avoid launching below Mach 1.5 and if you can, fire as fast as you can. Also firing from 25k ft is also quite good (below contrail height, but as high as you can get)
Firing also when the missile is within the LSZ helps a lot though is still bugged
But yeah, GNSS would be great for the Typhoon’s Fox-3, though the Meteor isnt GNSS
We can guestimate the mass of propellent is probably circa 40-50kg due to it being constrained within the combustion chamber, it only needs to be enough to to accelerate the missile to >M2, given its employment range is >>100km, the expectation is likely that the launch a/c will be supersonic or close to it upon launch.
1 Like
Yeah, ARH missiles with GNSS tend to behave in a way that lets them break out of TRK against notching targets, so pairing them with the CAPTOR-E would probably be fantastic. (Although lately it feels like that behavior may have been nerfed, but oh well.)
If the blue line is related to the AMRAAM, and this speed performance is accurate while the seeker performance remains unchanged, then I might not even be able to regard this missile as a serious threat…
My Medium/Long range AMRAAM shots miss mostly because the time from missile Pitbull to impact is long enough for the target to defend. If that defend time was cut in half or more? I would have alot more medium and long range kills, most of my ARH’s are notched close in.
I really hope all of this turns out to be unnecessary worrying.
My only major concern is that they arent added when they should be and we are left to fight F-22s and Su-57s with only C5s for an unreasonable amount of time
Cant wait, need it :)
Will Make Eurofighter Typhoon Great Again
Or in short MAGA → METGA :)))))))
1 Like
Before that happens, though, the era where all your AAMs get intercepted by the F-15EX will arrive first, so don’t worry.
Yeah… unfortunately probably true.
If at least they would design it like the missile seeker wouldn’t be decoyed by chaff in a notch as long as your AESA radar keeps valid track of the target, that would be so much better… Currently every DL ARH missile goes for chaff in a notch even if your aircraft radar keeps a valid TWS track. This is especially pesky when attacking high-alt targets from below as for some reason the notch window appears to be much bigger in this scenario as enemies just have to “hint” a notch while chaffing for the missile to go for chaff no matter if at 10 km or 1 km distance…
The Meteor reaches Mach 2 after two seconds from “high subsonic speeds” (whatever that means). So the speed gain should be steeper in the beginning AFAIK.
So close to “MEGA” → Make Eurofighter Great Again
1 Like