I think we’ll be seeing F-15C/J this patch; the F-2 can only use AAM-4 for ARH which is MASSIVELY above AMRAAM A/B. Barak II can’t use AMRAAM, it’s only cleared for Derby which is probably too good to come, and the Kurnass 2000 never got AMRAAM either. I would expect this update to be just like Apex Predators, with F-15/Su-27/Gripen like F-16/MiG-29/Tornado was last year. Germany will get the F-4F ICE, and Britain a Tornado F.3 CSP or Sea Harrier with AMRAAM. I do think they’ll limit AMRAAMs to the 4 belly ones for now on the F-15, to match the Tornado, F-4F ICE and Gripen though.
1 Like
So, F-15C/J, F-4F ICE, Su-27SM, Gripen and perhaps fox 3 applications for existing aircraft.
1 Like
Derby isnt much better than AIM-120A/Bs but regardless the Israeli airforce does not use the Derby and it was only tested on a Barak I. Nothing in the Israeli TT will likely get Derby’s unless we get one of those export Kfir C.10/block 60s
I’d expect either an F-15 or the F-16I to come with amraams for them
Assuming they add BVRAAMs to all nations at once like was mentioned on dev streams, this is the tentative list that I put together:
New:
US- F-15C
Germany- F-4F ICE
Russia- Su-27? Maybe?
Britain- Tornado F.3 CSP
Japan- F-15J
Sweden- JAS 39C
Israel- F-15C Akef
Existing:
F-16C
Yak-141
MiG-29SMT
F-16A MLU
J-8F
F-16A ADF
AV-8B+
Mirage 2000-5F
JA 37D? Maybe?
I think Gaijin will add the Su-27 along with the F-15, but assuming they’re limiting the F-15s to 4 AMRAAM I think it’s possible they may leave the Su-27 with only ERs for now, and let the Yak and MiG-29SMT be the R-77 carriers. The R-27ER still outranges and is kinematically superior to the AMRAAM A/B, and it would get 6 of them; plus 4 R-73s to give the dogfight advantage. This would leave the Eagle with a BVR advantage due to being able to pull off early, and the Su-27 with the dogfight advantage.
Also, I have a suspicion that the D Viggen might just stay with 9Ls and skyflash at 11.3, since they recently moved it down in BR.
Isn’t this a Barak II testing Derbys? And yeah I agree, I don’t think it would get them, but they’ve done weirder before (SRAAM on Harrier GR.1 because it got mounted on a prototype) so I wouldn’t put it past them is all…
count the flare dispensers on the spine, 3 on each side, Barak II (Block 40s) only have 2 on each side. and since the number is visible 083 is also a barak I
Ah my bad, the first site I found the plane on said block 40, I checked F-16.net and it’s a block 30 lol, you right.
im starting to wonder if gaijin will let the mirage 2000 take 4 magics and 4 micas
that’s if they skip the first production models of the F-15 and Su-27.
We’re getting Gripen C this patch, which has no CW illuminator and would have to drop with either only sidewinders a year after the F-16 (which would really suck) or it’s coming with AMRAAM. I highly doubt that they’re going to add the F-15 with only sparrows in AMRAAM meta, especially since 2 nations need it for their AMRAAM carriers. I could be wrong ofc.
I wouldn’t entertain Mythics opinion on any of these missiles. He’s blocked me because he couldn’t handle honest discussion of this very topic.
The PL-12 isn’t as good as people suggest. On par with early AMRAAM and about as good as R-77. They just modified the R-77s seeker and combined the favorable and domestically producible PL-11 parts into a single missile which would fit the mounting points of their existing fighters with PL-11.
It has less overload / maneuverability (28G) than the AMRAAM or R-77. Range is similar, early models likely don’t loft. Early fighters for China can only carry two.
2 Likes
its 38g per manufacturer https://www.avic.com/sycd/ywly/jyhkyfw/qt/?PC=PC
and can hit a target 70km away in a mach 1.2 launch against a mach 1.2 target at 10km per an interview with the designer, same interview claims its a little superior to the R-77 iirc since they mention russians measure range at a much higher altitude and speed
1 Like
It can be taken with a pinch of salt, I’m going off memory so it may well be 38G but I very much doubt that’s the single plane number. 38G is 26-27G single plane.
We know the AMRAAM is at least 35G, likely 50G with combined plane.
The AMRAAM from 0.9 mach launch has ~74km range against a 0.9 mach target at around 12,000m+
So the PL-12 is a bit inferior as I said. R-77 is closer to 100km in the same scenario.
all sources (including the manufacturer) clearly state 38g lateral no idea where you came up with the 20’s g figure
also managed to find the full text of the interview the chinese consider the PL-12 slightly superior to the AIM-120A/B and on par with the R-77 and inferior to the 120C
Spoiler
About the max shot range:
The Deputy Chief Designer of SD-10 said: The parameter of “max range” is determined by the relative position of missile’s carrier and the target aircraft. The assumed conditions by various countries are different. So what the Russian said the max range 100Km may not be better than what we said the max range 70Km. The max range 70Km in SD-10 marketing promotion brochure is measured under the condition that both the missile’s carrier and the target aircraft are flying at 10Km’s altitude, both the missile carrier’s velocity and target’s velocity are 1.2Mach, their flying direction is reverse(head to head). AIM120’s test condition is similar to SD-10. However Russian’s propaganda is a little more exaggerated. For example, R-77’s test condition is: carrier and target are flying at 20Km’s altitude; each has 1.5M’s velocity, head to head flying. Under such a condition, the max range is 100Km. The problem is higher altitude means less aerodynamic resistance, plus the faster velocity for both the carrier and the target. The range is naturally longer. So you shouldn’t only consider parameters isolated with each other. In fact, our SD-10’s range is better than AIM-120A/B, a litter less than AIM-120C, almost same as R-77’s.
About ranking MRAAM:
Designer : It’s not easy to rank ……Various persons have various standards…
First of all, Euro’s Meteor should be No.1. This missile’s performance is very advanced, its range reaches 160Km.It belongs to next generation missiles. Next, I think the AIM-120C is more advanced. For original AIM-120 missile, whatever components, materials and craft are world first class. Now it is upgraded to Type C, it makes new progress on range, precision and anti-jamming capability. Following, It should be our SD-10. Then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Active Skyflash at equal fourth. Then Israel’s Derby, Derby has a comparable overall performance with the above missiles, but its range is relatively short. Last of all, MICA, its tech is not bad, however it’s a tradeoff between BVR and dogfight, so is naturally inferior to dedicated MRAAM.
Reporter asked : Our SD-10 has a good ranking. Why do you say our SD-10 is more advanced than R-77?
Designer: We adopted some technologies more advanced than R-77’s, so SD-10’s overall performance is better than R-77’s. For instance, our strap-down initial navigation system, signal processing system are more advanced than R-77’s. Our missile was developed relatively later than R-77.Some new technologies were not mature when R-77 was developed, so R-77 didn’t use the new technologies, but when SD-10 was developed, the new technologies became mature, so we adopted the new technologies in SD-10.
2 Likes
It should be noted the SD-10 is a development of the initial PL-12 which uses identical seeker to the R-77 for the most part among other changes. It’s also worth noting that they’re not necessarily correct about the AMRAAM and could simply be lying about the R-77. We’ve got better sources for both of the non indigenous missiles.
I’m not at my PC at the moment but I’ve created threads for the AIM-120 and R-77 with sources in the OP. I recommend checking out the AIM-120 one as I’ve got more comprehensive sources listed. I need to update the R-77 one.
Proof .that the range of the R-77 is 12km
I mean, isn’t it still a bit iffy on whether the K2K also carried Python 4s? Like, it wouldn’t really be that bad to balance out in game but I assume getting any good, concrete sources to back it up would be a pain
Edit: at the same time, did Israel use AIM-7M/R missiles? Because if so the Kurnass could actually use them, but only because of the DL mode on the APG-76. Or am I thinking of the 7R?
It’s iffy, and the Python 4 has no place in War Thunder right now even if it could come on the K2K. We’re talking about a missile that has 60 degree+ HOBS capability, can do a 180 in 3 seconds off the rail, and has better kinematic performance than every short range IR missile ingame… while having similar IRCCM to that of the stinger. The Kurnass 2000 is better at 11.3 with Python 3 than it would be at a higher BR regardless. As for the sparrows, I’m unsure if they ever received the 7M, but the Kurnass 2000 never carried any radar missiles regardless so they’re gonna be iffy on receiving it in any case.
2 Likes
Good find. There are multiple explanations for this very short range:
-
Seeker Range: The SAM is limited by the seeker range of the R-77 missile, as it doesn’t use any external radar. The 12km range may be the maximum against a fighter-sized jet. Note: The 9B-1348 seeker is reported to lock on to a medium-sized target (5M^2 RCS) at 16km.
-
Kinematic Range: The lattice fins on the R-77 result in increased drag in the transonic region (0.9 to 1.2 MACH). Since the missile has to traverse this entire region, it reduces the overall range of the R-77. Unlike missiles that can loft, the R-77, when fired at low altitude, faces dense air, causing significant drag and a substantial reduction in range. A lofting missile can achieve greater range at the expense of time on target. For comparison, the MICA EM, also with a stated max range of 80km, can reach around 20km when ground-launched. However, it can loft and lacks lattice fins, minimizing drag at low speeds.