Why does the R-Darter proceed to loft itself into space all the time
The point is that the R27ER is hitting its speed limit very early in the motor burn, resulting in a signficant waste of propellant and poor efficency.
In such a scenario it would benefit from having a slower burning propellant
The AIM120 is using its propellant much more efficiently when launching at these parameters because it doesn’t hit the speed limit until near the end of the motor burn.
What are you talking about, all solid-fuel engines work on the same principle and AiM-120 is an exception here, it reaches max speed at the end of engine operation just like 27ER.ER has a lot more energy, because E=mV^2/2
That’s only if drag and pressure doesn’t exist
Unfortunately, drag and pressure do exist, and efficency is lost trying to accelerate the missile beyond its design limits as drag increases exponentially with higher speeds.
This is basic rocketry.
2 Likes
oh thats kind of a perfect example to demonstrate the AIM-54 is underperforming, the AIM-120C5 outperforms it passed 54km lmao
How does that demonstrate anything…
2005 rocket beats 1963 one?
1 Like
It doesn’t.
1 Like
finished.
high attitude test 9000m(30kft)
C5’s performance at long distances is largely due to its higher LOFT.
MICA is the best within 30 km.
PL-12 failed 70km due to autopilot.
MICA failed 60km due to autopilot.
120A failed 80km due to battery life.
PL-12,120A,AAM-4 have the same paper range in the game, but their actual ranges are quite different.
7 Likes
Honestly, theres no better proof than this that the AIM-54C’s loft profile is incorrect. It should not be getting kinetically outperformed by an AIM-120C5 at range
Heres testing I did with various modified loft profiles for the AIM-54C for comparison:
Its pretty clear that if the AIM-54C got an improved guidance/loft profile ingame (as it did irl), it would retain the crown for impact velocity at range.
2 Likes
Why shouldn’t it? AIM-54A design was finalized in 1963 and AIM-120C-5 entered service in ~2005 iirc
Literally the jump between 3rd and 5th Gen aircraft between the two.
4.5M SL
Aim-120 Drag=0.4x0.7x101325x4.5^2x0.0248=14247.9N
R-27ER Drag =0.27x0.7x101325x4.5^2x0.053=20553.31N
As you can see, the difference is not great. The graph is most likely an error in Cd0, someone attributed an extra zero
Because AIM-54 is bigger /s
That is the only reason I can see why someone would think so.
Are you arguing that the AIM-120C5 should be outperforming the AIM-54C in velocity at range?
nope, but its fun watching you seethe when you lied to yourself that the R-77 was going to be so much better and now that its ingame everyone can see its a fat dud
2 Likes
Are you arguing AIM-120C5 shouldn’t outperform AIM-7MH in velocity at range either?
AIM-120C-5 has many things going for it over the AIM-54. Better propellants, more condensed electronics, better guidance laws, higher fuel mass ratio to total mass and I might be missing some other factors. AIM-120C-5 has several things going for it. I’m not concluding either way, I’m completely open to the possibility of AIM-54 having higher velocity at range but it doesn’t seem pragmatic to definitively conclude it does.
2 Likes
can you add R-27R for test? (to compare with r-77)
You’re a dumb person. Don’t you see the coefficient graph?
1 Like
nice cope graph made in excel i guess mate, have fun continuing to cope!
3 Likes
We have the guidance time and max known impact range for the 54A (~204km/160s) which gives an average velocity of 1.275km/s.
We have the claimed max range for the 120C5, and there is the in-game claimed 120s of guidance time (unsure if this is the real guidance time, it being higher would actually be worse for the missile range-wise), which gives an average velocity of 0.875km/s.
For the two to even match in average velocity, the C5’s range would have to be underclaimed by 60km (putting it into the AIM-120D claimed performance territory) or the claimed battery life would have to be ~82sec (effectively unchanged from that of the 120A). Both seem rather dubious…
As for guidance, the C5 likely has better guidance laws yes, but we KNOW the 54C has improved guidance over the 54A due to it having a completely new all digital guidance computer instead of the previous analog guidance section, which IT DOES NOT in-game, making it immediately erroneous.
Also, glad to have you immediately arguing in bad faith with that AIM-7MH strawman lmao
3 Likes
That math doesn’t work because you are using the maximum launch range with a target flying towards you. So for a 203 km launch the missile flies a lot less than 203 km (horizontally at least).
6 Likes