Exactly, that’s what I wanted to say. But if you see the 9M coming from any direction, you can easily flare it. With the R73 and Magic2, when they are at their optimal range, they cannot be flared unless the opponent is in a head-on or firing from a side aspect.
i wouldn’t say easily
Yeah, not easy but ‘possible’
My average R73 experience, Meanwhile Aim-9M acts like: “Fetch me your souls”.
That’s about the R73 before the fix , right?
My R73 has never behaved like this, and I also never fire at ranges over 3.5km to see how they perform.
İnteresting claim considering most R73 users had this kind of similiar experience at least one i believe.
People often use them as close range missile but R73’s can easily reach 3-4km depending on angle and speed, the reason they dont fire to those long distances because IRCCM can easily decoyable with flares at those distances while Aim-9M doesnt.
3X AIM-9M 1km rear
one of those hit the ground
this is 9M’s seeker problem, F16C not pre-flare this one.
no that guy perfectly dodged each 9M
Pretty much a master class in defeating 9M.
2 Likes
Player that knows how to defeat Aim-9M perfectly.
İts a very rare thing at top tier.
Its still something that is formulaic, and possible to learn how to do so reliably.
Where as its not possible to prevent an R-73 from being held onto until its within the range to ignore flares, the larger gimbal and loading allow for comparatively aggressive use in dogfights forcing people to jam the WEZ to have any hope of not eating a missile which means that its easy to catch someone out or force them into a disadvantageous position.
3 Likes
Not really, just like Aim-9M R73 can also be flareable in those ranges, especially in high intense dogfight scenarios where opponent forces R73 user to launch at HOBS angles.
Not to mention TVC is so inconsistent that chances of missing target is actually higher then getting decoyed by flares at those angles.
İ saw people flaring my R73’s in 1-1.5km regurarly and i’ve done it before, its just requires different technic compare to Aim-9M requires bit more pre flaring.
If you don’t have a good nose aspect simply don’t shoot, they can’t force you to expend a missile. Wasting missiles by launching at low SSPk is just wasteful.
The other option is to simply not dogfight and just skate off into the distance, then come back and joust, it’s possible to defeat both the AIM-9M and AIM-7M as has been demonstrated.
And so puts them on a countdown to where they will eventually run out of CMs and so be helpless, nothing stops you from holding onto the missile until that point or using a radar guided option.
2 Likes
As a fellow aviation enthusiast, I’d like to share my thoughts on the upcoming F-15’s in War Thunder
-
F-15 Radar and Missiles:
The F-15 indeed had a powerful radar system, which evolved over time. The APG-63 radar, for example, was a significant advancement. However, the specific details of the radar in War Thunder would require closer examination. Regarding the missiles, the F-15 was equipped with AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles during its early service years. These missiles were effective but have limitations compared to more modern systems. -
Flight Model:
Flight models in simulators aim to strike a balance between realism and playability. While some aspects may not perfectly match real-world physics, they are often adjusted for gameplay reasons. The F-15’s handling characteristics should be based on historical data, but achieving a perfect match can be challenging. -
Mig-25 Comparison:
The Mig-25, a Soviet interceptor, was indeed a unique aircraft. Its high-speed capabilities were impressive, but it had limitations in maneuverability. In War Thunder, balancing the Mig-25’s performance while maintaining gameplay fairness is crucial.
Is closer to a mix between the F-106 and F-12A, for aircraft actually implemented in game its closer to the F-14A at least in terms of role and armament.
In short the Sapfir-25A (MiG-25PD) is absolute trash in comparison in comparison to the AWG-9 or APG-6x let alone the -7x series, the R-40s’ have issues, and a 4 x 1.5 = 6G loading limit is painfully low, making it practically a worse F-104; being forced to deal with much stronger airframes and missiles.
Most relevant fighter airframes have RCS values(X-Axis) between ~2 to 5m^2
The AWG-9 / ALR-32 in the same situation has almost twice the range in the same situation (values are in Nautical miles, not km with a conversion of 1Nmi to 1.85 km)
3 Likes
Why does this look so AI-generated?