The Vihkr and that MIM146 aren’t made by the same company, comparing them as the same makes no sense.
well the company that makes the vihkr does claim to be able to engage ground and air targets…
If you think you can just point and click and have a missile hit a air target or ground target when the missile is set to proximity detonation instantly, then i don’t know what to tell you. There a reason the Vihkrs range cuts down to 5-6km at night and can only fire two. All missiles are not built using the same technology.
unless you have better information about the modes that it can use, all you are saying is speculation.
before launch, certainly, electronic fuzes are a thing and i dont think that the vihkr have a fuze that it is set manually
bruh its literally a toggle switch in the cockpit of KAs… the Vikhrs fuse has a 5m radius for it to proc, when engaging ground targets you physically have to disable the proximity fuse otherwise the warhead simply detonates before the Vikhrs hits the ground target with its 5m detection radius.
This isnt new nor do you need documents its flat out a switch in the cokpit the pilot has to enable/disable prior to launch.
but if you want sources - Antitank complex 9K121 Vortex | Missilery.info right before the charcteristics graph. it states “The “Vortex” has contact and non-contact fuses.” unless you can find me a source that states the KA and Vikhrs had the ability to determine if the target its flying towards was “air or ground” which I’ve read MANY sources on this missile and not a single one has EVER referenced that capability. heck even most modern missiles struggle to do this and I doubt a missile from 1990 could somehow do this.
Oh and its ironic how the “non contact fuse” has a range stated to me about 2.5-3.0 miles which pretty much falls in line with multiple sources ive read on this missile. but do please argue otherwise when its current state simply doesnt exist in any document or testing
2 Likes
you all talk about spec and statistics etc yet whenever i play high/top tier, literally everyone is just flying straight in at max speed, launching missiles and immediately turning after the merge and furball or just moving onto next target launching again, turning flares, lock another launch, headon furball etc - it is partially a result of the maps but majority seem fine with this quick, 3 min experience so they can do it again rather than actually spending time flying it in a valuable or authentic capacity.
This thread would make you think everyone is a top level master pilot irl or something, yet the matches say the complete opposite.
In any case, decompression, map layout, map size, # of players, # of ai stuff would be a good improvement to change or alleviate the current gameplay method, meta or mindset.
1 Like
I hate the headon furball missile missile missile spam. It’s just so mind numbingly boring and repetitive. It’s about time Gaijin makes a gamemode that isn’t like 1939 “let’s throw our massed fighters at eachother” strategy.
2 Likes
i agree the mig29 fm’s were bad, but air RB is not about dogfighting, it’s about who has the best missiles that can kill people either from very far away quickly or from very close up quickly, and that happens to be the mig29. Do you really want to have mig29 and su27 with realistic FM’s at 17.0? them having some FM’s that only the eurofighter 2000 could deal with plus russian amraams and six r27er’s would make them fight only against each other because it’s a fact that the only competence of the mig29 and the su27 in air RB is other mig29s and su27s.
that was an old comment, MiG-29 fm is fine right now (got improved in November 2023) and, while very bad, still can’t speak for Su-27 as I never extensively tested it.
F-16 still pulls too much AoA in full real and the instructor settings for the MiG-29 are awful (this is what makes the difference in a dogfight in sim and air RB respectively), but
overall right now now F-16C and MiG-29G is a fairly balanced matchup.
I think this is really only the case in Sim and only if the F-16 player is limited to SAS Damping where it cannot do the excessive AoA thing.
IDK about F-16A Block 10 and F-16A ADF but, IMO F-16A MLU can be moved to 12.7BR, giving it all the armament it currently lacks, and 13.0BR when the ARH missiles comes in the game.
As far as I know, the Block 20 is pretty close to the early F-16C and can be competitive in the top tier games when the new Gen 4 and Gen 4.5 jets come along in the future.
İn order to compete with upcoming 4.5th Gens you need at least Block-40.
İ dont think MLU should face those planes.
If the F-16A MLU gets all the loadouts it currently lacks (AIM-9M, GBUs, targeting pods, 120 flares), it would be a very similar to the current Barak II.
And in light of the fact that Gaijin is preparing ARH missiles and the J-11 may no longer be a meta plane, the Block 20 should move up to 12.7 with better loadout, receive AMRAAMs, and move to 13.0BR if they decompressed BR.
Barak-II has better radar, more countermeasures, integrated Ecm and can recieve advanced Amraam models, Python-4 and 5.
Even with upgraded armament MLU can possibly struggle against those jets in the future.
If Barak II receives Python-4/Python-5 and other better AAMs, it should then have a much higher BR than the F-16A MLU that received the armament upgrade.
Current meta and until Gen 4.5 jets such as Super Hornet and Viper-Zero arrive in the game, Barak II (also F-16C) should not get better AAMs.
We don’t know what jets would comes in 13.7BR and 14.0BR but, at least the F-16A MLU can go there as long as the current top BR is 12.7 BR.
Well not only them but current Block-50 upcoming Rafale,Gripen C,EFT and similiar planes will be better then MLU thats why it should not face those jets if Gaijin doesnt increase BR bucket anytime soon.
İf they increase Top tier BR to 13.7-14.7 then MLU will be fine with Aim-120 and Aim-9M’s at 12.7.
Overall your idea is good but it will up how Gaijin execute.
Will u share youre ibk file for x56 setup
AIM-120 on a “4th” gen airframe at 12.7 is madness.
hmm?
1 Like