You are missing the point. Buffing C+ would make it ahistorical in comparison to the regular C model as these two should indeed be identical in performance at the current state of the game. If ECM gets modelled that would be a different story since C+ should have improved resistance to jamming. However as of now such mechanics are not present in game hence why AIM-54C and AIM-54C+ should remain as exact copies of eachother.
AGAIN:
That being said they should receive buffs to their performance as they are not true to their potential capabilies.
I get that but that gives us nothing really. We have no clue if these changes improved onboard radar capabilities in any meaningful way. You are saying “[…]AIM-54C+ should receive improved range and tracking reliability compared to the standard AIM-54C.” but you also give no values or even clues as of how much (if even at all) these improved the missile in the ways you described.
It could very well be as much of a change as AIM-120A and AIM-120B or AIM-9G and AIM-9H but you dont know it. ECCM was the real deal and sure would be great to have it when ECM comes to the game but as of right now its not there so these listed changes are irrelevant.
After reviewing the current missile parameters, I believe the issue is not that the Fakour-90 is too strong by itself, but rather that the upcoming AIM-54C+ may not be receiving enough improvements to justify its introduction as the top-tier Phoenix variant.
According to the current in-game values, the Fakour-90 has a substantial kinematic advantage over the AIM-54C, particularly in total ΔV, ballistic coefficient and terminal energy retention. This results in a significantly larger practical engagement envelope despite both missiles being descendants of the same Phoenix family.
If the intention is to keep the Fakour-90 unchanged, then the AIM-54C+ should receive improvements that reflect its advanced guidance package and modernization while remaining historically plausible.
Proposed Comparison
Parameter
AIM-54C
AIM-54C+ (Proposed)
Fakour-90
Mass (kg)
463
463
637
Total ΔV (m/s)
1159
1350
1433
Ballistic Coefficient
2571
2900
3032
Maximum Speed (Mach)
4.3
4.5
4.0
Guidance Duration (s)
160
180
150
Inertial Drift (m/s)
10
2
10
Datalink
Yes
Yes
Yes
Track Rate (°/s)
20
30
20
Gimbal Limit (°)
60
60
60
Maximum Fin Lateral Acceleration
21
24
25
Maximum G Load
17
20
20
ECCM Capability
Medium
Very High
Medium/High
Terminal Energy Retention
Good
Very Good
Excellent
Rationale
The Fakour-90 is generally understood to be an indigenous modernization of the AIM-54 Phoenix rather than a completely new missile design.
Because of this, it is difficult to justify a situation where the Fakour-90 possesses a very large kinematic advantage while the AIM-54C+ remains only marginally better than the AIM-54C.
The proposed AIM-54C+ values would:
Preserve the Fakour-90’s advantage in raw energy and range.
Give the AIM-54C+ a meaningful performance increase over the AIM-54C.
Better represent the advanced avionics, guidance and ECCM improvements expected from a late Phoenix variant.
Create a more balanced and historically believable relationship between the three missiles.
Under this model:
AIM-54C remains the baseline Phoenix.
AIM-54C+ becomes a modernized and highly capable Phoenix.
Fakour-90 retains a slight edge in pure kinematic performance.
AIM-54C already should have all-aspect shoot-down capabilities with PD instead of CW radar and we know that for a fact. These are the changes we should push for and not some assumptions or speculations about computer chips or singular components with unknown performance improvements.
Believe me, I completely get it, but outside of finding an illegal document there is no info online. What we know is that it has the AMRAAM’s TWT transmitter and from that it doesn’t take a genius to know that its TWT emits far more powerful radar emissions that bounce back much clearer and more precisely. But this is a little ridiculous that they can’t infer such, given that there are plenty of examples in-game where Gaijin just guesstimated or fudged the numbers because there is no publicly available information, or things simply didn’t exist like an armed Yak-141 or the KH-38MT.
We’re not using only AI. We’re using publicly available data, historical references, and the game’s own files. AI is simply helping organize and analyze that information, much like a calculator helps with math. Unless someone here has access to classified US Navy or Iranian Air Force missile reports, we’re all working from the same public sources.
The C+ has the same body and rocket motor as the C. It should receive tracking and range upgrades due to its AMRAAM TWT transmitter. Not a bunch of made up crap
That’s not really my point. If the AIM-54C+ is intended to represent an improved Phoenix variant, it should perform better than the AIM-54C. Otherwise there’s little reason for it to exist as a separate missile. I’m not arguing for premium bias, I’m arguing for internal consistency between variants.
