For most Chinese equipment you can only find them on Air show posters like this below
even with the official title they choose to not believe it
And bug report manager only need to type a few letters in their mind to reject it without any evidence
BTW they are even asking you to proof pl12ae is pl12a?? “e” for export as a common sense
what about RVV-AE? how can you proof it is R77???
That makes sense; the problem is when you fire the missile at 10 km and it’s able to do the same
Crazy criteria
the PL-12AE stuff is wrong, you are able to bug report the PL-12A with PL-12AE information
and the medium range missile statement is not really valid cause the R-77 and mica´s exist which do perform well at short ranges
Not contradictory at all — the two pictures describe completely different scenarios.
The widely circulated picture shows “powered missiles launched simultaneously.” Due to the AIM-120D’s low thrust-to-weight ratio and a maneuvering delay of up to 0.6 seconds, it is at a significant disadvantage in such tests compared to other medium-range missiles (even so, you can see that at this point the 120D still has higher overload).
The data I collected, on the other hand, is for “unpowered missiles with all maneuvering limits removed.” In this case, the missiles begin pulling maximum G at the same time, using only aerodynamic fins for maneuverability (within the game, during the rocket burning, the thrust off-boresight caused by the missile body’s angle of attack provides additional overload).
At low altitude if you fire one at high speeds, even after the missile accelerates to its top speed it will have trouble going over 20G.
It has ok off bore performance, but after picking up speed, the missile doesn’t pull much, and bleeds energy like crazy when doing so.
Also, sometimes it has trouble connecting to targets because tracking/autopilot is bugged for some reason, kinda like the PL-12 now
It must be understood that although neither the PL-12A nor the AIM-120D is currently suitable for close-range HOBS shots, the reasons for their shortcomings are very different —
120D only starts maneuvering 0.6 seconds after launch, and at low speed its available overload is low. The combination of a low thrust-to-weight ratio and induced drag keeps the 120D at low speed for a considerable time after launch. Therefore, even though the 120D has decent overload at higher speeds, its off-boresight performance (especially at low launch speeds) remains very poor, making it difficult to point at the target at close range.
The PL-12A starts maneuvering just 0.3 seconds after launch, and with a decent thrust-to-weight ratio at low speed, large wing area, and high rudder AOA, its available overload immediately after launch is better than that of the 120D. However, when its speed reaches Mach 2 or higher, it instead fails to pull sufficient G-load. As a result, although it appears to have a tighter turning radius than the 120D, it ultimately struggles to hit the target.
It is not making demands. There is a misunderstanding here, we are saying the Pl-12 no longer hits the performance metrics that public data has available and does not function correctly. I mean, a modern missile to be outrolled like that? It doesn’t take an engineering degree to know that is simply incorrect… This is fundamentally an unintended game bug that the devs didn’t notice when trying to fix the excessive wobble on the missile. We should be able to submit a report for the devs to review over and tell us if that was intended or not. There is actually enough qualifying evidence to submit a report, but they deny it anyways. We have the claim from AVIC on close-range performance and AVIC’s own statcard listing the 38G’s. That is 2 primary sources saying, hey the missile is not performing as the manufacturer would describe.
However, what we have instead is the Bug Report Managers gaslighting every time something like this happens, not just to Chinese equipment, that no everything the dev team does is 100% on purpose is functioning correctly. Yet we know that isn’t the case, mistakes happen, and Smin has already stated they are investigating. See where there is a disconnect? One aspect of the team says what we want to hear, while the other side of the team says ‘nope, be quiet, prove to me this medium range missile with 38G’s as publically stated by the manufacturer can actually pull 38G’s; but other medium range missiles do not need this proof’.
mean, a modern missile to be outrolled like that?
I’ve criticised this from the start, I criticise the fact that they’ve lost the old manoeuvrability , clearly the missile has trouble being outmanoeuvred at 10 km
e aspect of the team says what we want to hear, while the other side of the team says ‘nope, be quiet, prove to me this medium range missile with 38G’s as publically stated by the manufacturer can actually pull 38G’s
In the game, it reaches 38G, but only in rare situations; today I saw a PL-12 reaching 30G, so
This is revisionism lol
I’ve never denied that the missile has problems. I’ve simply criticised the fact that, technically speaking, the missile still outperforms an AIM-120, yet they continue to complain. The fact that it can be outmanoeuvred using W+D is something that needs to be rectified
It is currently far less maneuverable than AIM-120C and D. The “gimmick” of PL-12 is that it was a versatile missile that could be used in a variety of situations, similar to AAM-4. Not anymore.
It doesn’t
30G ≠ 38G
23G on PL-12 vs 28G on 120D. Cool story bro.
you see
the issue is that your test doesnt represent any in game situation
and it also straight up does contradict your graph as it shows a PL12a traveling 2600 km/h pulling 23.4 Gs
where your graph claims it can only pull ~21 Gs
there is also this screenshot someone posted earlier of a post patch PL12 going 2840 km/h pulling 27.6 Gs while your chart sugests that it would only be able to pull ~20 Gs (its actually about what your chart shows the AIM-120 pulling)
so im pretty sure that your testing procedure doesnt accurately reflect in game performance
Yes, because the PL-12 has a larger wing area and accelerates faster, so it’s only natural that it could achieve a higher angle of attack
your own screenshot shows 120D going faster than PL12
That’s not to say they have the same speed; the AIM-120 has less drag and conserves more energy, whereas the PL-12 doesn’t perform quite as well (and the difference is 4 km/h for the PL-12)
