Yeah the F-15JM gets front IR (With the pod), rear radar. The F-2’s Missile detection is a bit more ambiguous though, as there’s nothing saying it’s specifically part of the ECM package. Given the context around how it’s talked about, it’s most likely just for detecting launches to intercept with AAM-4s, so its kinda unclear how it would work in game. As it is technically a launch detection, but it’s not really for that kind of use, you know?
1 Like
mk80 seeker is for R-73, not R-27…
read better please
1 Like
I just haven’t seen a study showing quantified benefits of dual pulse yet. I understand the theory as to why it’s better.
There are variants of the R-27ET with these seekers.
I’m particularly interested in the one with the MK-80M with the insane HOBS
I didn’t say dual pulse.
I haven’t seen evidence of more than 2 pulse, also each pulse reduces the volume efficiency of a motor.
isn’t mk-80m a r-74 seekerhead
It’s the R-73M seeker. The R-74M uses the MK-2000
You know, with my recently accepted AAM-4 motor bug report, I wonder if it gets implemented if it will be enough to push japan back to having the best ARH in the game again. (Hopefully then we’d finally have a 14.0 if nothing else).
3 Likes
link?
Bug Report, basically it will make the missile have the second highest deltaV of any ARH behind the fakour. From messing around on statshark simulations (my user missions have been broken since leviathans), it is multiple seconds faster to target in many situations.
4 Likes
so it will be straight up the best modern long range fox 3 in the game, while still being like top 4 in close range performance (mica, 77 / 771, pl-12 better than it). sounds like a nasty missile.
im not 100% sure you’re assumption that the fill rate is 80-90% holds very well at all, imo im expecting about 75kg ±5 from a 102kg motor… based on other motors from that time frame.
1 Like
Even at the lowest estimate of 75kg I made it would still have more deltaV then any modern ARH besides the mica. (The claim i made in here about it being the second highest DV was assuming 80kg, as that was the middle ground between the percentage weight and the volume weight estimations).
Either way you look at it the missile is underperforming in deltaV in game, it’s just by exactly how much that’s slightly ambiguous.
1 Like
Agreed, i hope it does get improved, like all of the ARH missiles tbh…
I suddenly really want to finish my japan grind…
will they do anything yet? i think we could see a bit later, maybe with addition of leaked F-22, some improvements for quite a lot of missiles. especially would be nice to make them less prone to chaff and avoiding overall
1 Like
You want them nerfed?
I mean, the AAM-4 specifically shouldn’t really be prone to chaff, if anything future additions will just make it even more hard to chaff if gaijin ever adds in it’s proper datalink.
I am planning on making some more future bug reports to help, balance it out though. It’s proximity fuse should have a dreadful 4 second minimum arming time. And, while i’m having problems finding proof to sufficiently quantify it, the missile has been said to have poor ability to track maneuvering targets (seemingly relying somewhat heavily on it’s DL to reaquire them). From my understanding this would translate to a lower angular velocity rejection threshold, among other things. However, as i said, the evidence for this is less quantifiable, so this will likely be a while.
Although the proxy fuse delay nerf im planning on reporting soon/as soon as we get any idea on an actual implementation on the motor buff.
3 Likes
oh, no.
English issue…
nvm, asked for buff
im about that changes are better to be done for everyone at once. since aam-4 isnt only missile that underperforms - that can be done.