Getting killed by splash damage from MICA is just you being unlucky lol. MICA has the lowest explosive filler of all ARH missiles, so it probably wasn’t a splash damage but more likely a direct hit.
Also, if you’re close enough for the MICA to turn around and still hit you then that’s on you.
(Multipath height is 50-60 m btw)
50-60m if u wanna get killed.
10-30m if u wanna live.
if someone launches a fox-3 above u, u’re basically cooked no matter what u do.
Yeah, but I think it’s a balancing measure. Imagine 120s and 77s having equal or better FoV than the MICA. You’d hardly see the merge, ever, so this is something I can condone. What I can’t condone, though, is MICA getting its actual FoV, while everybody else being nerfed for a year now…and even after stats kept showing it way overperforming. There’s really no excuse for that.
There it is, give this man a beer.
Although, MICA currently has too small of a Cd in comparison to 120 eg. considering both missiles’ wetted area, so reducing it even further is questionable.
Not a problem for me, but i can get why some people would still want the dogfight part in the game
To note : at the time, it was speculated that the Delta V on MICA was only 750m/s and not 1000m/s (contradictory sources and no known thrust figures), which is why reducing the drag somewhat would have been necessary. A source has since been found which was not available at the time.
MICA booster is indeed 3.5s, but it burns slightly harder than the current boost phase in game, and not less like it was thought at the time
Sustainer should still be deleted though.
As for Cx, since the booster thrust should be increased a bit, i suppose it can still remain more or less the same, although the missile should still be able to reach 80 km and not be capped at 50, maybe giving its lofting back would solve that issue without touching the drag, idk.
Diameter should be decreased from 165 to 160mm however.
All-in-all when i wrote this, the MICA was really in no need of a buff, Rafale was basically the best plane. Now it still does not need it because Rafale is still competitive amongst its peers
Give it 2 or 3 more update and i think this will change, and having a MICA with a bit more legs will be somewhat necessary
That’s appears to not actually be the case. It seems the MICA’s motor case is actually 165 mm diameter, while the rest of the missile is 160 mm. Going off the precedent set by the R-27ER Gaijin use the widest part of the missile for the diameter in game
From MBDA
There is a slight bump on one side i’ll give you that, but does it justify 165 instead of 160 ?
Idk
A 5 mm increase in diameter would be a 2.5mm increase in radius. The bump looks to be quite easily 2.5 mm.
ha its in between the fins, makes sense then
Heh so long as they eventually fix the MICA so it doesn’t self explode at 50 clicks i’m good
Can’t have a missile without insane drag anywhere in the french tree, gets boring in the long run (i thought the curse would end with Asters, turns out i was wrong)
I wonder if there are other missiles that MBDA “wrongly” claims when it comes to missile diameter besides the Rafale.
I definitely agree. MICA should get its advertised range.
The only question is how and I’d say using way more lofting and redistribution of acceleration and speed over the range, like you outlined before. Now, put the FoV back to 15° like everybody else and Rafale may actually become playable.
Its not something unique to MBDA. The AAM-5 is 130mm at its widest point, despite commonly being claimed to be 127mm. IIRC the ASRAAM also gets slightly thicker around its motor connection point as opposed to claimed diameter. And there’s some others. Even missiles like the Aim-9 series are actually wider at their connector braces then the listed diameter.
Basically, missile diameter is kinda a lie lol. There’s a reason primary sources sometimes specify size as the size of the motor casing, cause that’s usually the standard point of measurement as far as I can tell.
