I’m getting sick of these j11’s, can we just have a j15 or a f-ck-1 or something? I know it’s finally a good one but three unfoldered j11’s is a bit much.
J-11B is totally different, J-15 is not a material of 14.0, ot may come in the future like SU-33, so as F-CK-1.
@Smin1080p_WT
Any information on the kuznetsov being added to air battles? I believe it was previously stated in SU-33 devblog that it would be added to air battles.
More diversity in air and Sim air is always welcome…
1 Like
that wouldn’t change anything anyway
MICA EM currently lacks about 30 km of range
The range difference would more or less stay the same as right now
mind you i don’t think fixing the MICAs right now would be reasonable. They cause enough problem as they currently stand.
It’s just that it has growth potential when others receive more advanced stuff
1 Like
Where can i found leaks?
I don’t get the hype over MICA EMs. I used them exactly once as a thrust vectoring missile, and no one else has against me.
It could get alleged range fixes and be fine from my perspective, but will that happen this major? Dunno.
what makes mica good at close range isn’t necessarily the manoeuverability, although it helps, but the raw acceleration. It gives little reaction time.
French missiles tends to be like that, always : they have absurd delta V, burn for very little time compared to missiles of the same class, and then are designed to be aerodynamic and glide for most of their flight.
You basically sacrifice long range performance for medium range performance and smaller reaction time for your target.
Example :
Mistral : M2.5, burns for 2s, Stinger : M2, burns for 5+s
MICA : burns for 6.5s, AMRAAM for 8
Aster-30 also reaches M4.5 in 3.5s, but then the entire booster (340kg) is depleted, with only the terminal dart remaining (112kg)
Many examples like this. Depending on the scenario, speed IS range
Regarding a fix on MICA, i don’t think it is needed right now. When the russians get 77-1 (or later variants) and the americans get a C-5 amraam, then most likely.
A bug report is pending but has not been activated by Gaijin.
I am a big MICA enjoyer, but giving it it’s historical range would basically make it the best missile in every area (except maybe AAM4 if they fix its range). Combined with the Rafale airframe, i don’t think that would be fair
2 Likes
Fully unleashed AAM-4 would be an absolute monster, and that’s without taking the B variant into consideration…
Even AAM-3 is underperforming, though understandably so given a near-flare-immune 40G IR missile would be scary.
The AAM-4 wouldn’t be all that great. It’d be similar to the AIM-120C-5, which would be faster and have better range than the A/B, but with worse manoeuvrability.
Will you answer why the DF105 isn’t just given to France?
1 Like
Check your plumbing
1 Like
I’m talking in context of currently ingame missiles. Of course the 120C-5 would also be incredibly powerful, but it isn’t actually in War Thunder yet :P
You are missing the point, despite me making it clear.
Read this again:
You seem to have missed the part where I’m not comparing it to its real-life counterparts, but to its current ingame counterparts.
You seem to have missed the part where I’m doing both in order to illustrate that the AAM-4 having it’s real life performance wouldn’t make it overpowered compared to what is in the game.
It’s missing a ton of speed and range at the moment, which if given along with seeker changes to be true to life- Would, in fact, make it more powerful than any other ARH ingame, and by a good chunk too.
1 Like
I never said it wouldn’t.
How can it be not "all that great” and the best missile in the game?
Not all that great relative to what some people are making it out to be, not what we have now.
F-ck-1 would only be like 13.3 and the j11b is just a j11 with a better radar rwr and pl12’s.