Bad news bears; the AAM-4 is still effectively non-practical even with the last potential update of the dev server. It can get up to speed, kind of, but once the burner and sustainer are off it just dumps all of it as if it’s a really, really draggy missile even though it should be one of the least draggy ones.
Burner is still too weak, sustainer as well, and drag still too high to do anything with for testing purposes.
The Drag is fine (and close to AIM-120), the actual problem is that parts of the Missile (especially the motor) are C&P from MICA EM, but also the end masses are too low and unrealistic.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DrXP5HPtwz0f
I used drag as just an example more than anything; I don’t know what is causing the missile to bleed all of the speed it gets more than anything. The motor is underpowered, sure, but is it just because the end mass means it can’t carry any momentum forward while still having a drag similar to an aim-120 which is modeled to be around 30% heavier yet?
The MICA EM weights just 112kg at the begining. The AAM-4 weights 223kg, but is powered by the MICA EM motor at the moment, which is too weak for this missile. Using the motor of the AIM-7M (thrust and burntimes) and adjusting the weight of the AAM-4 in all three stages (initial, after booster and sustainer) to the roughly correct numbers, brings the missile on par, if not slightly above, the current AIM-120A/B.
Although we are not yet at AIM-120B+ level with these adjustments, we are far from where the missile is currently on Dev.
this dev server shutdown not update anything about f15j kai and aam4 i think, it still fly like drunk
Server updated from 2.36.0.16 to 2.36.0.18 and, to no one’s surprise- they didn’t change the weight or burner on the AAM-4 as a quick numbers swap. Still the MICA stats.
Was probably a minor change. I’d imagine we’ll see bigger changes towards the end of the week as they have time to cook, so to speak.
It might be a quick numbers change, but that’s also why it’s low priority until bigger issues are sorted.
Well, unless they open another dev server at the end of the week, I don’t see it happening in this run unless they do it on the 5th when they plan on closing the server entirely.
Suppose we’ll have to cross our fingers and pray it isn’t the final version of the missile.
These days they just keep the dev server open and then update it everyday, sometimes extending it.
I think the update is next week so hopefully whatever they get done this week is substantial.
Haven’t been on the dev server yet after the update but this should be pretty nice change.
That should help with the Apache Hellfire’s and F-16AJ/Tai Fighter’s AGM-65’s at the very least
well, thy says “not a bug”
I try to summarize the current data usage and source.
The page 3 show this table:
The Japanese government uses AAM-4 as a standard value (1.0) to evaluate the performance of other missiles.
We can draw the following conclusions:
Range: AAM-4 (1.0)>AIM-120B (0.9)>AA-12(R-77) (0.7)
Active guidance radar start-up distance: AAM-4 (1.0) = AIM-120B (1.0) > AA-12(R-77) (0.8)
The above data is from government public non-confidential information, and because it is goverment first hand data so it should be the most trust tier data.
So by goverment info, if AAM-4 are 100km range, AIM-120B should between ~90km, and R-77 should only 70 KM
And by this year (平成13年度 = 2001), I think this AIM-120B+ maybe AIM120-C5?
Page: 177 (at II 技術研究開発 5.技術開発官（誘導武器担当）PDF page 11)
We can know the missle range is because
a. much powerful engine (高推力推進裝置)
b. lower air resistance (低空気抵抗機体形状)
c. best path planning (最適飛しよう航法を確立し)
Seems as though the folks in charge of the communities issues tab see otherwise to any source ya throw at them; cryin’ shame that is
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
My better guess is they want to be ultra particular on what data they get from nations other than Russia because A) They can readily get Russian/USSR files themselves without much assistance, and B) Things like the 2S38 are in the game when it hasn’t even entered into official Russian Service.
Also, chances are it isn’t them, the people typing responses, who is making the call and they could very well just be the mouthpiece of the manager of the department. I don’t know the inner workings and I’m not going to throw insults because it doesn’t help, and will likely make them less willing to work anything out.
People in the Japanese wiki community have found an introductory page to the XAAM-4 practical exam document. This information may have already been published here, but I’m sharing it because it may be material to get AAM-4 bug reports approved.
There is said that researching about new missile started in 1988 year.
Don’t you have the similar info about AAM-3, AAM-5, Type 91 (Or other missiles) when researches about this missiles started and by what companies?
It is useful for search patents at j-platpat
The information I can share at this time is an archive of documents related to JSDF missiles that volunteers have gathered through disclosure requests.
If I find any more information in the future, I will share it.
Thank you very much.
I’ve already found many interesting info about Type 91 seeker for example and info about companies will help in this work
If anyone lives in tokyo they could try to borrow it from the library, seems to be in use until the 20th of june sadly.
Who knows maybe someone is trying to find info for warthunder :P
