A Question for the ages!!!
^^^ So how can it be that the AMRAAM ER can pull 40G of over load with smaller fins then the larger fins found on the C7 and C5??? Would love to get some clarification from an official on this!
1 Like
The AMRAAM ER has thrust vectoring while the C5 and C7 don’t
4 Likes
In-game it does, at least according to the missile sheet, which is based on datamines
IRL it seems to make use of much improved control surfaces to achieve a similar effect
1 Like
Very very very very very Gaijin is all I’ll say :/
they prob cant code better control surface so they just code tvc on it
Its possible the actuators are hooked up to a TVC system. But that’s just a possibility and I have no evidence to back it up
They don’t model dual plane maneuvering, so they have to make use of existing mechanics to emulate certain mechanics like that
1 Like
So why can’t they emulate it for the AIM-120
1 Like
The “Norwegian Propulsion Stack” contains some special Control Actuator System developed by Kongsberg, but that’s all I can find currently lol
many thing weren’t probably ready either, like AS90 or Eitan, which i remember they said were either rushed to “completion” or partially unfinished
I just hope we see a lot of tasty bugfixes in the patchnotes tomorow (852ps Chieftain when please, and L23 being deleted as a whole, as its fake)
or Crusader armour (underperforming by a staggering amount, would require it reclassified as a medium tank)
4 Likes
Because they use a different way of emulating dual plane maneuvering on most missiles, including the regular AMRAAMs
The AMRAAM ER seems to be a special case
DING DING DING DING DING DING we have a WINNER!
The ESSM on which the AMRAAM-ER is based on has thrust vectoring. So that’s why the AMRAAM-ER has it too. Although I can’t say of the top of my head there is specific mention of thrust vectoring in regards to the AMRAAM-ER, it may be possible they removed this feature, but no explicit mention means it just gets it due to ESSM.
2 Likes
Didn’t know about the ESSM, but it does seem like the AMRAAM ER actually uses the same (but probably altered) back-end portion as the ESSM, just with a AMRAAM seeker on the front-end portion
At least that’s what the few sources I found say lol
Usually we see a lot of bug-fixes in March updates if history is anything to go by but I would honestly hold your breath when it comes to ground vehicles just cause ground devs are pretty bad in terms of prioritizing historical reports.
1 Like
Actually now that it is mentioned again. I think the AMRAAM-ER is actually not supposed to have thrust vectoring, but I don’t have documents or anything to prove it. But supposedly the extra unit on the exhaust (the black part) is a TVC unit. This unit is only seen on the VLS variant of the ESSM in order to orientate fast.
This can be further confirmed by the lack of TVC vanes at the exhaust of the non VLS variant (which the AMRAAM-ER also is):
I guess have fun whoever wants to nerf NASAMS, but idk if Gaijin will accept it based on just this. The image I sent does point towards the extra unit at the exhaust though.
1 Like
I want to wake up tomorrow and see the opportunity to remove excess fat from TES/OES on DEV 🙏
Spoiler
1 Like
Well, unfortunately, we will all wake up tomorrow and most likely have to start making bug reports and “suggestions” for vehicles.
3 Likes
Interesting…
Either way, it seems like they based the flight characteristics of the AMRAAM ER on the ESSM
Even if it actually shouldn’t have TVC in-game, I believe it would still keep the higher overload due to the improvements that the so called “Norwegian Propulsion Stack” is supposed to provide