You still don’t understand my point. The aerodynamic state of a missile is different with and without thrust. Because the missile flies at an AOA, the rocket thrust deviates from the missile’s velocity vector (producing an effect similar to TVC). This means that for some missiles, the available overload with thrust is greater than after burnout — they are completely different scenarios. In my tests, you can also see some “prettier” overload figures, but they are not directly comparable.
2 Likes
The fact that the PL-12A has a smaller turning radius right after launch and the fact that the AIM-120D has higher available overload at a later point in time coexist in this game without contradiction
7 Likes
If the aircraft separation distance and off-boresight angle are both large enough, the AIM-120D might even be able to hit targets that the PL-12A cannot, thanks to its greater overload in the later phase (at 7.7 km range and nearly 55° off-boresight)— the aerodynamic models of these two missiles are so different that some counterintuitive situations can occur.
8 Likes
To be fair, I don’t believe any of the top tier Fox-3s can actually hit their G overload, can they?
r-77 and mica can albeit I’ve rarely see it happen
Yes. But other missiles are difficult to reach, but the PL-12 is completely unreachable and has a huge gap from theoretical standards.
PL-12 misses targets because of the bugged flight performance, Derby misses them because uh… ummmm
@CofCof why are you trying to rage bait people by saying that the PL 12 is fine in its current state and calling other people delusional for stating that the missile is bad
your talking like your the best player when you are bellow average sitting with a overall negative kd in air rb
plus the only chinese jet that you have is the jf 17 and you cant perform well in it
on top of that you have 2 of the best jet in the game and you still struggle to keep them above 1 kd
why are you saying the the pl12 is fine when yourself cant even perform with the only plane that has pl 12s that you own
to me that just seems like the pl 12 is not performing like it should
if it really was fine i highly doubt a mig 17 would be able to roll it
even the c.200 the lowest br prop can evade a pl 12
9 Likes
Nah he is just ragebaiting, ignore him man. Atp he is illogical.
3 Likes
That buddy wasnt here to discuss about pl12
Damn, aim120 is actually pulling better than pl12, its just that aim120 takes 0.6s to start manoeuvring after firing.
2 Likes
saying the aim120d can pull 35g is stretching it, it can pull it for a very small time related to its average lifetime, and it doesnt provide any use, g pull is only usefull at short ranges and at short range the aim120d isnt pulling 35gs
1 Like
It does matter bro.
that’s also a stupid limitation that definitely does apply in games. like for example, I love r-77 because it actually can hit those shots, making a su-27sm with a microwave radar better than the damn AESA eurofighter.
Compare these 2 shots.
In the EURO aesa, I’m forced to be defensive the entire time and take bullets up my asshole, even after shooting an amraam at 5km which is completely useless because the missile is useless below 7km off boresight.
While in something like the su-27sm with r-77s, the missile can easily pull in for these kinda shots which lets me stay alive.
5 km AIM-120 shot:
4 km r-77 shot:
3 Likes
in grb you have to do those shots all the time as well
1 Like
I’ve been reading this thread, I don’t think he said that it’s fine in its current state. He said the reduced pull where it is still pulling more than the AIM-120s is fine, while the reduced missile responsiveness to targets rolling should be fixed. In essence, he is probably arguing that the PID should get fixed but the overall nerfed maneuverability should remain where it is, so the PL-12’s HOBS is nerfed while it should still be able to hit a target that’s rolling.
2 Likes
And why it should stay where it is?
Pl-12 designed for both BVR and dogfight scenarios, saying it should stay in it current state where a prop plane can easily evade in close range is simply bad faith in this case.
4 Likes
Thanks :)
He never said this. He said that itself should be fixed, but that its maneuverability should be closer to AIM-120s while still being better than AIM-120s (which it currently is aside from the PID issues). Just like how AIM-120s can’t be evaded by a prop plane, or even by rolling, he believes that should not be the case for the PL-12.