The main reason they are missing, besides them aiming at a point in empty space, is because the missiles are limited to 5,75º of fin AoA when the should have at least 24º, although the proxy fuse would be helpful to mitigate server desync.
1 Like
I suppose for the USAF maybe late vietnam war service equipment
not now oom
1 Like
gimme XAIM-4H F-106 PLEASE gaijin
afaik, only the F-4D tested that
they’ve already put AIM-4G on an F-102 🤷♂️
Dude. It’s getting the later missiles due to balancing.
Late Falcons are already near useless on the F-106
1 Like
The “lack of guns” mention in multiple places is suspicious.
3 Likes
that was not Gaijin’s statement. Gaijin is giving it the Super Falcons under their flawed idea that it could use them. Theres no evidence to say that it can. its not a balancing reason
2 Likes
It does have guns tho? Also I’m pretty sure it physically can’t have 6 AIM-4G/F
This is a misconception. It has nothing to do with balancing.
Here are some write-ups by other people in the F-102A/AIM-4 thread.
Can we stop pushing the “Super Falcon > Falcon” myth for once?
The AIM-4G/-4F is actually worse than the others, but nobody is bothering to do any educated research.
6 Likes
not hunting any bears with this bomber damage model (the missile in this video has more than double the TNT of the F-102’s all 6 missiles combined)
1 Like
This aircraft has a very pressing need for a missile that was actually designed for use on the aircraft, like, in a literal sense, the AIM-4G is designed for high speed platforms. The F-102 is not a high (enough) speed platform and will not be able to use them like it would the earlier versions of the AIM-4 (A, C, D)
2 Likes
This is imho a plain false propaganda narrative:
A short reminder of basic aviation knowledge: The Ju 287 (flown in 1944) was designed and built with the area rule already applied — Otto Frenzl’s 1943–44 work and patent at Junkers made that possible. The widely spaced engines were a direct result of managing the cross-section.
US engineers then spent years ignoring the captured German research, produced an F-102 that could not break the sound barrier in level flight, and only fixed it after Whitcomb “reinvented” what had already been patented and flight-tested in Nazi-Germany. Classic case of seized patents meeting slow learners.
2 Likes
I’m genuinely curious if the falcons are still effective against bombers with these revamped damage models because of the lack of proxy fuse. The tiny warhead in the aim-4 falcon was enough to take down a b-17 btw.
2 Likes
If it ends up not getting anything hope it gets a lower rating
Would be quite the quirky plane flying around super fast looking for noticeably slow targets
Nevermind the F-106A which looks incredibly similar, especially at range.
They are not
This B-29 took two and kept flying like nothing happened
1 Like
Well that just confirms the damage model is a bit overtuned/overpressure damage from bombs has a smaller radius than it should be (hole in the fuselage too small).
3 Likes