I know this might be an unpopular opinion but I think Gaijin shouldn’t add the AIM-120C-5 yet, this missile is way too powerful for the current state of air RB. Yes I know the R-77-1 exist and it is currently the best missile in game but look, the R-77-1 only beats the AIM-120A/B by a small margin, what about the AIM-120C-5?
This missile utterly blows all three out of the water in terms of performance, this missile would be hitting you before you even if you launch first and had a slight altitude advantage. R-77-1 may be better than AIM-120A/B by 10-20% but the AIM-120C-5 is 30-45% better.
R-77-1 is only better at short distances, in pair to the MICA-EM, the AIM-120B performs perfectly fine at long distances at least against unaware players, I think we could have atleast some information from the Community Manager if there’s a real reason for this addition, it seems to be a very unpleasant addition as far as I can tell.
With the arrival of AIM-120C-5, the other missiles such as AAM-4 and PL-12 (who’s performances should be similar to that of AIM-120C-5) should be buffed to their more realistic kinematic performances.
I suppose thats why Gaijin is considering R-27EA (according to leaks), since the R-77-1 is unable to achieve a performance as close to the AIM-120C-5 (from what we know atleast).
We’re still in the first iteration of the dev server, so we’ll have to see throughout the rest of the week on what Gaijin does to all the missiles.
The R-77-1 is capable of reaching such performance if gaijin introduces variable drag coefficients as the drag coefficient of grid fins is heavily dependent on the mach number. The current 77-1 implementation is just a highly draggy planar fin.
110km at 12,000 meters vs 80km isn’t as big as you think.
AIM-120B with its lower lofting angle [even if AIM-120C’s loft is reduced] would be advantageous for a number of scenarios still.
In a controlled test while the target is flying straight and not maneuvering, yes the R-77-1 outperforms the AIM-120A/B.
But in a more realistic situation we see in War Thunder, the R-77-1 has significantly less range due to the higher induced drag against maneuvering targets.
So while the R-77-1 does provide greater capabilities compared to the R-77, it still retains the range limitations of the R-77.
yes, hence why the variable drag coefficients based on the mach number would greatly help as grid fins generate the most drag at mach 1.0, but then the drag falls off as speed increases and the shocks disperse differently in the fins, helping the range a lot. this would benefit the R-77 and R-77-1
proper grid fins modeling would also reduce the drag in turns as grid fins don’t have to move nearly as much as planar fins to create an equal moment on the missile
Most of the time the “Launch” notification from the RWR is not even on the player. I was playing a match when I got the alarm beep of a missile being launched at me but the missile was nowhere to be seen and the guy who did launched was focusing in someone else.
When a newbie player know about this information is two paths: either they apply this and be more aware or they just ignore next time and on the third encounter they begin to be aware but fail not knowing how to properly evade.
So… Again. If an Aim-120A is only killing “newbie players” at long range, but anyone with experience and confidence is defending easily. What advantage does Aim-120A really hold anymore?
Imo it lost most of its potency after the first few months of being in game. A year later? Could be considered one of the weaker ARHs these days.
At least i have yet to beat an Su-30 in a BVR fight. They just shoot down every single AMRAAM without even trying to defend
yes, it doesn’t matter what someone like this dies to, what does matter is the energy difference between a 120A/B launched at mach jesus and higher than others from an F15E and a legacy R-77 launched from a barely transsonic Su-27SM trying to have some bvr, when either missiles go pitbull, the 120A/B will have much more energy than any other missile making it actually harder to fight since even tho it may have less peak pull, the pull is much more sustainable, the peak pull isn’t everything
