They are the reason US stuff is undertiered. the F-15 WR will stabilise after some time imo, especially once the 12.3 vs 12.3 time is over, and they start getting 11.3-12.3 matches. Right now its a team full of clueless F-15s vs actual players
The only thing that i feel is lacking in F-15 is HMD, but that is a historical thing, after having HMS not having it feels bad
Wiser words have never been spoken
Man, F15C with BOLs and JHMCS would be pretty nutty. And well, god damn working sparrow.
In the game target is illuminated by separate antenna with beam width wider than main lobe width of the radar, but narrower than FLOOD antenna beam width. The power allows to have lock on fighter-sized target at 40 km. There is no such logic like continuous waveform switch attempts.
It is still unclear if the same HPRF signal is used both for tracking and illumination or there is two HPRF different waveforms. Waveform for tracking must be optimal for the given radar, waveform for illumination must be missile seeker compatible. In the game it is assumed that two different HPRF waveforms are used and switched in time-division manner - that is why RWR can detect misssile launch now.
The same is for SARH-capable AN/APG-66/65/68 versions.
I have this information… Ламповые солдаты свободы: самонаводящаяся бомба ASM-N-2 “Bat” (livejournal.com)
the first missile with a Passive Radar Homing Head GAR-1/AIM-4…
When SARH missiles were introduced they were keeping control fins deflected into the last position, calculated by the autopilot, during the time the seeker lost its target.
This worked too good : hit rate 3–5 seconds after the target lose (if you intentionally drop target tracking a well) was really high - we received multiple reports like “AIM-7 turns to AMRAAM” and reworked the missile so the control fins are set into neutral position after the target lose. This makes the missile to fly straight w/o lateral acceleration, which causes the missile quickly miss direction to the target interception point because of constantly changing missile speed.
This is a typo in the machine translator…Sometimes “intelligent” translation based on machine learning of user messages is included in the translation…if you don’t check, there may be errors, especially in aviation terms…
Semi-active radar homing system (SARH) is a type of missile guidance system, air-to-air and ground-to-air long-range. The name refers to the fact that the missile itself is just a passive radar signal detector…
Lol I can so see reports/complaints with the title “Aim7 turns to AMRAAM”.
Yes, I agree it would have been way too potent at the time, especially the number of sparrows western fighters can carry, but that was upon release, right?
Being that we are in the realm of 4th generation high performing fighters and the Sukhoi can equip 6x R27ERs.
Don’t you think now that an increase in amount of time a player has a chance to reacquire a target is called for? Not by insane amounts of time or that of the R27ER, but just a little more. It seems you guys have already done so slightly recently. Perhaps, just 12.3 fighters?
I think keeping the control fin reset to neutral position upon signal loss is probably a good thing. It just that the very short amount of time before detonation is becoming a greater disadvantage to the user as newer high performing aircraft come in each update.
Anyway, thanks for the insight. I can see achieving game balance can be quite the juggling act.
KS-1 (abbreviated from “Comet-projectile”, product “B”, GRAU index — 4K87, according to the classification of the US and NATO MOD — AS-1 “Kennel”)…
On September 8, 1947, the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 3140-1028 was issued on R&D, during which it was supposed to create anti-ship projectile aircraft with a firing range of 100 km …
The first flight of the manned prototype “K” was performed on January 4, 1951…
In 1953, the “Comet” was officially adopted, although it was launched in series a year earlier (1952)…
Guidance system: semi-active radar radar (target illumination from a carrier aircraft)…
At the first stage of the flight, the on-board missile control system kept it inside the guidance station beam (taking into account the readings of the barometric altimeter). Usually the flight altitude was 400 m above the surface of the water, and the speed was 1060-1200 km/h. When approaching the target at a distance of 10-20 km, the on-board radar of the K-2 rocket captured the beam of the K-1 guidance station reflected from the target, after which the Comet control switched to homing mode…
You might be right. The Firebird is radar guided but I have not looked into it much on exactly how it operates.
It’s definitely not actively guided.
Ask for AIM-7P…
I do agree, to a certain extent.
However, just like aircraft models that may not be performing in a reasonable manner according to technical capability/balance, we should not give up and throw up our hands just to ask for a better one.
Because in doing so though it may lead to a better game experience for a moment, this process will continually repeat itself and produce forgotten, unfinished models throughout the entirety of any given tech tree.
Same principle goes for weapon systems like missiles and radars applications. That’s just the way I see it from my limited perspective.
I have no idea what @k_stepanovich truly experiences in modelling these things and can only imagine the many elements/parameters that must be considered that are completely outside of a particular weapon systems technical capability alone.
Lol I love how I am immediately greeted by a hamster/Guinea pig thing dressed as some sort of captain in the background as the link you referred me to loads.
Reading through it now, thanks.
They definitely know a lot about the ASM-N-2 “Bat” in this forum you shared and a lot about many other military applications. Very interesting.
(update)
I was incorrect.
the AAM-A-1 Firebird was radio controlled after launch by host aircraft and radio controlled is not entirely considered radar guided.
Most importantly in the terminal phase, the AAM-A-1 Firebird goes active and actually has a radar in the nose of the missile.
Therefore, it is considered an active radar missile not a SARH. Because as long a radar missile has the ability to guide all by itself (does not matter whether it is in the terminal or the entire flight envelope) it shall be considered an active radar missile.
lol R-27ER is less reliable in real life, and definitely going to be less reliable in War Thunder.
120 vs ER is unbalanced in favor of 120s. 120 is so far ahead.
Flight performance early 120s are worse
That’s the thing, you don’t need to have better flight performance than a 27ER, you just need the momentary lock to launch the missile after defeating their SARH lock, then go back to defeating their radar.
And that is going to miss 9 out of 10 as it’s going to be obvious when someone turns hot to launch an ARH for a second and then turns back cold. Meaning you slightly change your heading, completely nullify their ARH and continue to press them. While they have to remain defensive lest they eat a mach 5+ missile that will arrive well before their own missile would go active if they were to try to support it.
You’ll learn soon enough that the R-27ER’s time to target makes it lethal because it can hit an AMRAAM target at medium distances before it ever gets within active lock range.
Lol yeah because the radar cross section of a tiny aim-120 is really as big as a B-52 Stratofortress.
This is literal Hollywood movie logic.
Can you please show us a single source that states that the Mig29 or Su27’s radar can successfully detect & track an Aim-120 and has the fire control capability to make the calculations necessary of shooting down air to air missiles flying Mach 4?
You might wanna reread what he said
