120A War thunder is level 120C-5 DCS
Which means that everything is clearly wrong in WT
How do you know DCS isn’t wrong?
Because DCS has superior modeling even though they’re going off of older and more inaccurate materials /s
C5 isnt correctly tuned yet, its still an improvement based on the original amraam tune.
yet it’s still underperforming in wt so how’s that?
I don’t understand how you model rockets.If the max speed is 1800 m/s, not 1750 and the max Mach is not 5.75.But 6.05
1750х296=5.91 not 5.75
TAS is constant, MACH depends on temperature
Why is it impossible?
The temperature from 11 to 20 km is the same and the speed of sound is constant. All parameters are set to STD
ER is much faster
yes initially, but it’s also slightly draggier per unit empty mass. That doesnt include the hefty fins on it and the drag co-efficient
To be fair, that isn’t a good argument since AIM-120 is draggier than MICA, but the inertia/weight of the AIM-120 should carry it further and retain speed better. Here though, the R-27ER doesn’t loft. Last time these charts were made, manually lofted R-27ER had beaten all the missiles in both categories. So it’s just the lack of loft.
changed it to per unit mass to avoid that
It’s not clear that the machMax and endSpeed values even do anything for air to air missiles. The main performance parameters are the motor force, fire time, and start/end masses.
In your test scenario, the R27ER is drag limited due to it reaching the critical mach number early and is wasting a lot of propellant mass flying into a brick wall of air.
The Aim120 is not because it has smaller fins and a more streamlined body.
WT AIM 120A has 60nm Range?
And 100 sec battery life time?
mid attitude test, 6000m (20kft)
C5 seems to be more effective at long range.
Phoenix looks pretty good.
But for now, the best in the game is still 120A.
At a higher altitude, the 77-1 still looks unsuitable for BVR.
The difference in resistance is not 2 times, only 10-15%
What happened to both MICA EM and PL-12 at 40km?