some test for 2.34 dev arh test
tips：
1.During the test, there was a slight error in the missile launch distance and altitude.
2.If there is no special instructions, the aircraft is aimed at the enemy aircraft when launching, and there is no manual LOFT missile.
3.The polyline in the graphs is connected by some tested points. Due to insufficient sampling, the line may have errors.
The “hit speed” on the right refers to the speed of the missile at the moment before it hits the target. It is represented by a solid line. The higher the better.
The “hit time” on the left refers to the time it takes for the missile to reach the target from launch, represented by a dotted line. The lower the better.
The horizontal axis is the distance of the enemy aircraft when the missile is launched.
test1: 1000m M0.9 vs 1000m M0.9, Vc≈610mps
tested 15km/20km/25km/30km/35km/40km
I do think that one part of the missile they modeled but they didn’t have info about it so they gave them the same as the only other fox 3 (ie the AIM-54) even if the 54 is a totally different kind/size of the missile.
So this part is probably only temporary and will not last. It will probably be modified in the future.
Some conclusions：
1. At present, the best arh missile is the AIM-120A (blue). It has the shortest flight time, the fastest speed, and good maneuverability. almost no disadvantages.
2.Then there’s MICA(purple). it has amazing dv 1102mps, and the only TVC . Although the MICA will start to tremble when flying at faster speeds, which causes the missile’s kinetic energy to be quickly consumed, its performance at medium and short distances is still excellent. Limited by the short battery time, mica cannot shoot ultra-long-range targets at high altitudes, but this is not a big problem in War Thunder. If the flight control problems are solved, the mica may become the most powerful air-to-air missile.
3.Next are R-77(red) and PL-12(yellow). When launched at close range, R-77 is much more flexible than PL-12. In BVR situations they are relatively similar. Their flight time is similar at each distance. The R-77’s terminal speed is 0.1-0.2 Mach slower. However, the R-77’s control surface data is significantly better than the PL-12, so their maneuverability at the terminal may be are similar.
The flight control problem of the PL12 is also very serious. When the missile starts to dive, if the speed is below Mach 1.2, the missile will start to shake seriously (other missiles require lower speeds to shake) .This results in the PL12 having the shortest maximum range of all missiles in some cases (although it has a decent paper range)…
4.Derby(green) are very strange missiles. It is similar to the mica with bigger drag and no TVC. In order to achieve long range, the Derby will fly very high and then hit the target almost vertically. Its flight time is the longest among all arh missiles, making it almost unsuitable for long-range bvr.derby and pl12 should be the worst missiles in the test server right now.
5.The R-27ER(black) has a dynamic advantage over these active missiles. It may fly 5 seconds or more earlier than these active missiles, but it requires the player to illuminate the target until the missile impacts.
If you manually loft the r27, it will gain great dynamic advantages. The long-distance flight time may be more than 10 seconds faster than all arh missiles, and the terminal speed is very fast. why did they not produce R-27AE, but R-77???
6.Currently, all arh missiles use loft at close range, which results in unnecessary overload (the maximum may reach 30G). I think gaijin should ban missile automatic LOFT at close range (maybe within 15 kilometers)
i think MICA EM will dominate because its the best in short to medium range engagements which most fights will be at due to how easy it is to defeat long range shots
You should know that RB.99 is an AIM-120B. So nothing new here.
The SD-10 is a worse performing PL-12. The current performance of the PL-12 feels more like the SD-10 than the PL-12.
The AIM-120C3 is technically the same as the AIM-120A/B. It just has shorter wings to be carriable by the F-22. So no improvement kinetically wise (should be a bit worse maneuvrabilty wise even because of the shorter wings).
The RVV-AE is as Mythic said, a R-77. The R-77-1 could be added but alongside counterpart (C5/PL-12 (corected/updated) …)
The ASTRA MK1 could indeed be added in the futur. Kineticaly wise it’s between the AIM-120B and the AIM-120C5 from what i found. Maneuvrability wise its also around 20/40g maneuvering like we have ingame.
The I-Derby is “just” a Derby missile with better electronic (ie harder to chaff and notch).
With its already mediocre kinetics, it will lag behind the other (even if it have one of the best maneuvrability of the bunch).
AIM-120 maximum overload is not limited by the size of the fins. The reduction in width does little to reduce maneuverability. Missile is less stable than previous types, must reduce fin AoA to avoid over-G in normal situations.
This will no doubt re-ignite controversy, but its hard watching a subject I’m well versed in get mis-characterize. I don’t care to get into specifics, but merely to add my Bonafide’s to what Mythic is saying. I studied and taught fluid mechanics at the grad school level, among many other aerospace engineering topics, he’s absolutely right in saying Grid fins on the R-77 will hugely increase trans-sonic drag, hugely. How much, is impossible to say without a CFD model, but just by looking at it, and reading the statements made in this source, I would lend my credibility to the statement that, sub-optimal launch conditions (like as a stationary SAM at sea level) where the missile spends a large time at low/trans-sonic Mach numbers, will hugely decrease its effective range. And thus, for gaijin to truly capture the characteristics of the R-77 , would necessitate an entirely different drag profile compared to planar fin missiles.
The drag model is already too simple even for planar fin missiles. They optimize performance at a single middle altitude range and it either over or underperforms above and below that. To adjust the R-77 in such a manner would make sense, but it would also be quite an outlier to model that solely for one missile.
I also happen to heavily disagree with some of the conclusions made. There is no point arguing it further, since Mythic has blocked me (even though he continues to read my comments). The necessary data and performance was given for grid fins by the people who use them. External evaluations have been quite far off quite regularly.
Judging from the HUD, the speed of the su-35 is 1200kph/M1.1 and the altitude is 10200 meters. The target is 10200m, 1185kph, and is close to head-on. At this time, Rmax1 of R-77-1 is about 73 kilometers, The target distance is about 63 kilometers, at this time, the missile’s flight time is 81 seconds.
seems to be weaker than the R-77 missile tested.
That’s not target parameters. It’s speed set for autopilot to gain. And altitude is exactly is same as planes own for whatever reason. If you watch full video, it will change to target altitude (about 2000m)
