You could only out run it if you hit and run and supersonic speeds. The Raw power of the Pegasus allowed it to easily out accelerate much faster planes up until 400-500 knots.
4 Likes
What missile will go farther…
A .9 Mach launch from 30,000 feet plus.
Or a Mach 1.2 launch from below 5,000 feet.
To add to that what missile will get to the target first one accelerated by gravity or one fighting against gravity.
Don’t forget that the Harrier 11-61 still holds the time to climb record up to 9,000 meters and even beat the Streak Eagle to 12,000 meters or 40,000 feet…
3 Likes
You said 11-62 instead of 11-61 :) but I’m happy to hear that a Harrier holds a world record that is difficult to get
Typo and yes pulling 4G into a vertical climb and still accelerating shows off just how stupid the power was.
People look at the turn rate charts on the AV-8B and see 12-13 degrees a second and go that’s crap…
Until they realize that’s a combat loaded Harrier only using 80% of its potential thrust output.
4 Likes
Thats the point I am making - hit and run on a harrier, from an off-angle/guard position. At that point the harrier will be danced around.
Typical WT players will dogfight anything, unfortunately.
You won’t out run amraam dude,
Even aim 9L/m will be hard.
1 Like
Its not just air speed and altitude.
Its closure speed and altitude.
The higher alt shot will have better range than a lower alt shot.
If you fire at a lower altitude target the missile will have to go into a denser air, which means higher drag.
The initial speed of the missile at launch is the other factor, now with extra 300ish kph, the missile will have a higher initial speed. Mach .9 is like… 1100 kph. M 1.2 is like 1450ish kph (sorry I dont run around with a calculator).
It makes a huge difference.
Point Im making is that because the Harrier is sub-sonic/transsonic its missiles will typically have a shorter range compared to a supersonic launch. Thats both true for IR and radar missiles.
In this regard the Harrier is a one trick pony at lower BRs relying on peoples lack of knowledge with the Harrier, and being off-guard. At higher BRs it can be full of surprises but the original point holds.
Yeah you remember the closure speeds… due to Harriers lower speed, it is arguably easier to defend against BVR missiles. Something I tend to abuse with the Hornet.
In short: due to the difference in closure speed, the missile has to cover a larger range gap, which will slow it down more. Whereas say a typical supersonic vs supersonic engagement would be okay at 25kms (just purely speaking hypothetical ranges here), due to transonic vs supersonic difference in closure speed, your missile might not be effective up until 20kms in range. Thats why I never really die in BVR in the opening 5ish minutes in a game. There are times - as there are perhaps too many missiles in the air at times. There are times.
Well, in BVR, you are supposed to energy fight the missile. Its not about outrunning it. Its about slowing it down enough that it wont be able to steer, or that it will fall out of sky harmless.
Well I’ve gone FA.2 vs various supersonic jets like the F-14/15 and do quite well.
If u wanna test it we can.
Test what exactly? The mentioned thing which sub/trans-sonic jets can abuse? Or the actual numbers for range difference? Or which missile will hit first with the difference in speed and altitude? Im really interested in the results of the last one personally, just out of curiosity.
Just test everything, the FA.2 isn’t nearly as handy capped by being transonic as you make it out to be.
Its not handicapped, it just has a playstyle that might be easily countered by just keeping the distance. Whats the practical range of the missiles on it? (Lets say at close to ground leve) but unmasked by terrain / curvature. Now compare that to say an Eagle. If its around 5 kms or more shorter than a supersonic aircraft’s identical missile, it is… handicapped. The Eagle could dictate the engagement, especially if it at least knows what he is supposed to do. With that said, the lower closure speed will make a difference that might put it in favourable position, with the somewhat lower range of earlier ARH missiles. But that closure speed difference also makes a difference for the supersonic facing it, as the missile will have a lower top-speed, considering the lower speed of a harrier.
The difference is much more like I dunno. Mach .9 and Mach 1.4? I can easily accelerate to that speed with my Eagle, still turn back to and defeat incoming missiles purely kinematically.
Well let’s think about that.
Assuming a perfectly flat terrain with 0 obstacles.
Speeds:
FA.2 can sit pretty comfy at .9-.95 on the deck
F-15 I assume is in the 1.1-1.2 ballpark with weapons.
Even with that little bit extra speed it makes no difference.
Both radars are good I’d argue the Blue Vixen is actually a bit better so both missiles can be launched at the same range.
If both targets continue to fly at max speed in a straight line they will both die.
The realistic outcome is both targets will have to notch and defend both targets will lose speed and by the time they reengage the F-15s speed advantage will be further reduced to potentially subsonic speeds. Considering the closure rate of both fighters it would likely transition to a WVR fight from this point regardless.
I dunno about that. Id probably fire a 2nd amraam with a few seconds of seperation. And instead of re-engaging like that, I would most likely extend away. If I was too close id run past/ through the Harrier. Re-accelerate. But thats me, and a 1v1 situation.
Mind you I havent had a classical dogfight with the eagle for a long time.
Flying straight, I wouldnt have thought of any different outcome.
You’d put yourself in a position of disadvantage lmao.
Extending away would put you in a position where you can no longer dictate the next move. Either you run away or turn to fight.
When you turn you can expect another amraam. Meaning you must defend while the harrier is closing on you with more AMRAAMs to spare.
Also what’s stopping the FA.2 from firing another amraam as well lol.
Either way it’s going to the merge as the difference in missile range on the deck is pointless when you consider the fact that you are flying towards the missile at Mach Jesus.
No. Extending means you can increase the distance between you and your opponent, in this case its possible due to the lower speed of the Harrier compared to a supersonic, in this case the Eagle. Remember, that it is exactly the tail-chase scenario where the Harrier will struggle due to the lower top speeds it can achieve, and that extra .4 mach will be felt.
I do not by any means mean extend to be done from 4kms - a lot earlier, lets say Id try to keep the distance at 20km at the very least as much as possible. The harriers missiles will be struggling at that range to keep up with the Eagle, meaning I can kinematically defeat them.
To make it easier, this is a set up with 120As, identical missiles.
The Eagles 120As will perform better than the Harrier exactly because of the higher launch speed.
Ok lol, so what do you plan to do run away supersonic in a tail chase until you run out of fuel??
You can’t fire the missiles from behind you.
No. Just simply wouldnt let myself be allowed in your No-escape zone. Aka extending. Should we end up in WVR, one of us has made a mistake, that would be the idea.
Supersonics can do this to a sub/transsonic aircraft.
Or just force you out of your ARH missiles.
Of course easier said than done. From what ive gathered the effective range or amraams on harriers is around 15kms, and 20kms are pushing it.
I think my Eagle would sit comfortably at 18ish kms. Covering 2kms isnt slow in it, dragging the missile with myself to lower altitudes and further and further away to bleed its energy.
Ok lol except you’ll find that nearly impossible.
1 Like
Keep you at a distance? No. Being constantly mindful of the distance between us would be harder, considering myself. And say the lack of an SA map in general. It wouldnt work when you are in my back without awacs, but quick glance at something like that would make it easier to… guesstimate.