IRL wvr-wise the mig29 and the f16 are pretty close to each other, the Viper is better at sustained rate and the fulcrum is better at insta turns and 1C fights. Ingame the f16 does everything that the other planes do but better but imo that’s due to the fact that they Gave the mig the R27Er, as long as western aircraft can’t compete with the russians bvr-wise they’ll keep the f-16 overperforming when talking about maneuverability.
Planes have >1 multipliers in game compared to real life. This in general makes missiles less effective which are modeled as close to 1-1. And everyone hugs the ground at that. I doubt even if fixed aim-54s will be as effective as they were irl
Hugging the ground would be largely rendered irrelevant, or atleast its effectiveness would largely be reduced if gaijin finally decided to remove the crutch that is their excessive modelling of multipath error.
This wouldnt be unique to the AIM-54C, but the 54C (and AIM-7M) having directional warheads and “smart” fuses for ultra low altitude intercepts would make them the best radar missiles against deck hugging. For example, 7M’s minimum intercept alt is 5m, which although in ideal conditions still goes to show how different it is from the in-game 95m vs a completely non-maneuvering target.
As for the >1 multiplier, yes this will always be an issue for missile modelling in general, but the issue is shared equally among missiles so its not really a balance issue imo. What IS an issue is that the AIM-54C is modelled as a 17G missile when there are primary and secondary sources stating up to 25G, and congress transcripts describing the missile as having “High maneuvrability”, and “Formidable kill capability in most dogfights”, and it specifically being stated that the allegation that the missile was “not useable for close-in combat” was false.
Never mind the fact its seeker is effectively a copy paste of the AIM-54A’s in-game, that its warhead has a lower kill potential than the AIM-54A because the lower HE filler used in a directional warhead was modelled, but NOT the advantages of a directional warhead, that the low smoke motor has not been modelled despite being a thing in-game for 2 updates now, etc…
Granted this is mostly off topic at this point, but is to say, fixing the AIM-54C would actually make it a genuine threat in BVR to MiG-29’s, which it just outright isn’t rn. Quite frankly, if you arent AFK, it should be impossible for you to die to an AIM-54C as is in-game atm.
1 Like
Hopefully it gets fixed when more fox 3s get added and not ignored
1 Like
Same, rn radar missiles (with the R27Er as an exception) are kinda mediocre
I unlocked the f14b yesterday but sadly currently there’s no purpose to play with that vehicle.
I mean, its fun, and its not terrible, but its not meta either.
Its strong, if not dominant in radar missile combat, but;
- radar missiles are terribad atm, worse than the legacy AIM-7E was back when the F-4E was top dog imo
- As previously mentionned, the 54C’s are awful atm, worse than theyve ever been, and they were already a shell of what they were irl
- Its TCS literally doesnt do what its supposed to do, so its AWG-9 is not being utilized to its full potential vs notching/chaffing opponents
- Its IR missiles are sub-par in the age of 9M, P3, R-73
- The RIO isn’t actually doing anything in-game, which makes the radar a bit of a hassle to use to its full potential
Its kind of pointless to be “the best” at something thats genuinely bad in-game as currently implemented, and its made worse by not even being “the best” at said niche because of gaijins modelling errors/decisions.
I still think its a lot more fun than flying the F-16 or MiG-29 though
2 Likes
I’m sure they will fix it, right as the add DECM mechanics which then no-sell SARH / ARMs at longer ranges.
29 pilot.
one
When switching the RLPK on radiation, using the information of the SPO-15 indicator is not possible due to fallacy, and in some cases, chaotic.
6 Likes
Well, AIM-54C is supposed to be rather strong in heavy ECM environments, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they casually forget to model that when they add ECM, or try to gaslight the community saying it wasnt good in high EW environments lmao
Maybe I should make a bug report…
But “reliability” isn’t modeled?
This isnt a “reliability” issue, this is an issue of the SPO-15 being barely usable or outright unusable according to both the british document following testing vs germans and from what I understand from your post, the pilot manual for the aircraft as well as the pilots account.
This would also be a good way to balance out the MiG-29’s dominance in BVR, as having to choose between using your radar OR your RWR on everything but the SMT means that when you are offensive, you lose the information of the RWR entirely.
SMT has spo-150
I know, but 3/4 29’s is better than none.
It also gives a bit of an edge to the SMT in BVR (granted it already has a MASSIVE advantage with its fantastic gimbal limits) compared to the 29G, which I know a bunch of players complain about due to the 29G being “better” in-game (its not really its slightly more maneuverable but has worse radar and RWR in exchange and worse ground attack options too).
This is an actual thing.
From SU27 manual.
L006LM is the SPO 15 and L203IE is a the jamling pod I assume.
При одновременной работе РЛПК и Л006ЛМ возможно индицирование ложной информации на индикаторе Л006ЛМ (высвечивание меток пеленгов 10, 30, 50, 90 слева и справа, типа X, градации мощности до 8, метки В, Н и ЗАХВАТ).
Для определения фактической обстановки необходимо (при возможности) на этапах поиска и обнаружения цели переключатель ИЗЛУЧ-ЭКВ-ОТКЛ на щитке управления РЛПК установить на 5-10 сек в положение ОТКЛ.
На работу Л006ЛМ оказывает влияние работа на излучение аппаратуры САП (изд. Л203ИЭ) – высвечиванием на индикаторе Л006ЛМ ложной информации (типы X и F, 90°,30°,10° неглавный слева, 50° главный слева, «низ», «захват», 12 градаций мощности, левый задний сектор).
ПРЕДУПРЕЖДЕНИЕ. При работе аппаратуры изд.Л203ИЭ на излучение информацией высвечиваемой на индикаторе Л006ЛМ не пользоваться.
После выполнения задания отключить станцию.
When the RLPK and L006LM are operating simultaneously, it is possible to display false information on the L006LM indicator (displaying bearing marks 10, 30, 50, 90 on the left and right, type X, power gradation up to 8, marks B, N and CAPTURE).
To determine the actual situation, it is necessary (if possible) at the stages of searching and detecting a target to set the IZLUCH-EKV-OKL switch on the RLPK control panel to the OFF position for 5-10 seconds.
The operation of the L006LM is influenced by the operation of the radiation of the SAP equipment (ed. L203IE) - by displaying false information on the L006LM indicator (types X and F, 90°,30°,10° non-main on the left, 50° main on the left, “bottom”, “capture” ", 12 power levels, left rear sector).
WARNING. When operating equipment iz. L203IE for radiation, do not use the information displayed on the L006LM indicator.
After completing the task, turn off the station.
1 Like
SMT is already by far the best BVR vehicle
So using a jammer disables the rwr? Not just normal radar operation?
Is RLPK the radar?
Doesn’t disable it. Just that it’ll like it up like a christmas tree. RWR gives false info when the jammer is ON