Why does it matter if MICA comes immediately? The R-27ER already drastically out-ranges these missiles. To the point that the R-27ER is still very much a threat in BVR and they will be forced to fly low and get closer to engage enemies efficiently.
They seem to think it’s too advanced, which is absolutely not true to the best of our current knowledge. Even if it was, the best public knowledge suggests it isn’t and likewise could be added and fixed later like Magic 2.
I prefer stuff to be added up to spec.
R-27ER/ET are lovely perhaps if Gaijin starts with AIM-120A/B only R-27EP would be needed but I would not completely ignore what fire and forget BVRAAMs of that calibre could mean for gameplay.
All depending on implemention of course.
MICA RF for example with lock on after launch and thrust vectoring etc. is somewhat advanced as far as War Thunder is concerned.
Depending on what changes between missiles and radars are being made such missiles could be added sooner or later without breaking the game.
I don’t mind facing R27E variants with Super 530D since usually who climbs dies anyway or get’s sniped by a target that was to low to be targeted and just waited for good range, angle and speed.
Range is not everything.
Is it even certain that the effective ranges of both missiles or all three are measured similarly?
When would you add MICA pray tell?
R-27EP isn’t necessary at all. It’s not a useful missile really.
The AMRAAM would counter the R-27ER not with better performance but the ability for the user to guide in TWS against multiple targets. You can’t “forget” the AIM-120 until it’s gone active which really isn’t that scary imo.
Requiring electronic warfare, perhaps… but even so the IR model wouldn’t be that OP. The AIM-120 is LOAL much in the same way and already 50G… What’s the issue?
Yesterday along with R-77, AIM-120, PL-12, etc.
Outside pylon can also mount MICA EM.
So you can go 6 FOX3 or 6 FOX 2 in the MIRAGE 2000-5F if you want to.
The AIM-120 is 35G single plane and 50G dual/combined plane. But i haven’t seen a source stating it uses dual plane.
The goal of the missile was 50G when they devopped it but we don’t have any source regarding the production varaiant AIM-120.
50G TVC and 50G is not the same at all regarding maneuvring capabilities.
The 50G TVC is going to be mutch more maneuvrable off the rail until the end of the booster burn.
The 50G aerodynamic is going to be more maneuvrable after the booster burn.
Since the MICA is already 30G after the burn and 30G is almost undogable anyways, the early maneuvrabilty boost of the MICA is a bigger advantage than the 50G (if real) of the AIM-120.
AIM-120 static stability pre-burn is sufficient that it can tighten the turn radius significantly off the rail. AIM-120C-5 introduces high-angle off-boresight launch capability due to this and the adjusted weight balancing.
The MICA is still better at close range, but the AIM-120 being 50G will actually be more potent at range. It can maneuver harder in terminal phase than the MICA.
All tail control missiles with design similar to AMRAAM or MICA have to use combined plane by nature. AIM-54 uses combined plane as well. This is something Gaijin should now be aware of.
Will depend on the AIM-120 version as far as I know.
Passive seeking missiles or rather multiple seeker types were a corner stone of Soviet doctrine…
Wasn’t R-27 also supposed be launchable via TWS?
r27 is useable in tws isnt it thought that’s been here for a long time with DL
They made a few hundred R-27P types.
Not on the MiG-29 afaik.
does the missile still self explode on tws launch i thought that was fixed i dont have mig 29 so i dont know.
İt basically doesnt let you fire in any situation.
FCS basically says you need hard lock to fire R27.
ah then they must have removed being able to fire in tws i havent tried in a while
You can fire it up into space and then lock someone later, it will continue guidance and hit the target with less warning.
Hello. Anyone have news about the fuel tanks on C-S5? Because it’s anoying in sim. I’ve found two post but one is “duplicate” and the other one “not a bug”…
Soemething is coming just wiat.
Is there anybody have an data about Mirage 4000 dose have RWR in IRL?
Same as Mirage 2000 C
Namely SERVAL
Does anyone know what the Mirage 4000s flare situation should be as in what would have been proposed
Take it with a grain of salt but I’ve read about roughly ~400CMs
