120D is significantly better at correcting back to datalinked information from inertial guidance than most the rest of what I’ve used. Even without datalink, it tends to be far more reliable on ensuring reacquisition of the target. Person is focusing on the figures instead of the practical outcomes. 1m of deviation a second is also not exactly insignificant (assuming their provided figure is correct).
5 Likes
I mean you can say its not realistic but it does happen frequently. In every single NT game you will lose DL on targets and the missile will fall back to IOG only in this situation the GNSS missiles are better and do have higher pK, its just delusion you think this doesn’t happen.
Sure in a situation where you maintain perfect DL or the seeker lock isn’t broken there is little to no difference but you’ve just discounted the situation where this isn’t the case happening for reasons I can only assume to be “if I concede this I would be wrong”.
Let me fix this for you “Okay so there are situations which happen every game where GNSS missiles have a advantage which results in a higher pK than non GNSS missiles.”
Its not delusion, its simple math. If you mean higher PK by less than you getting kills on AFK because of longer battery - than its simply irrelevant.
Strictly not true
I’m sure the “no you” approach works on other people but it doesn’t fly with me chap.
You’ve got a literal example demonstrated above by another user, want to back your claim, make the same demonstration go ahead, I’ll happily change my position if you can demonstrate it.
7 Likes
Maths can be used to prove anything if you choose to ignore relevant variables that don’t support your proposition.
That is literally not example by fabrication of screnario - Thats not how example works
You’ve got a literal example demonstrated above by another user, want to back your claim, make the same demonstration go ahead, I’ll happily change my position if you can demonstrate it.
Come back with your own testing and I will change my position.
1 Like
You cannot prove a negative. So i don’t know what you’re asking me to do
The fabrication of not locking missiles doesn’t show anything that happens in an actual game is not an example for this “theory”
You’re not being asked to prove a negative. You’re being asked to prove a demonstrable behaviour profile that results in a substandard probability of a kill compared to the baseline non gnss munition. Statistically challenging, but certainly doable.
You can fire numerous shots under numerous conditions and demonstrate a 1:1 with each missile? If you cannot replicate any consistent behaviour difference that is proving a negative.
But that’s again proving a negative.
The positive proof is to show A SINGLE situation where IOG drift is more than plane flying straight for whatever scenario - and that’s already plane flying straight.
The shown “positive” example is exactly of what i said. Firing on a hovering helicopter in pulse.
You are bascially asking me to fire thousands of C-5s into aether and show the negative case
Might be a better methodology than that, as it can be malinterpreted to prove their position. Ignores plenty of use case variables outlined above. It also isn’t proving a negative, it’s proving a behavioural advantage/disadvantage to the munition on it’s probability of success.
1 Like
You theorized an example. And I doubt it would take thousands of shots, the game is very binary in what does and doesn’t work. Once you’ve found the binary it is usually repeatable and consistently so.
At this point you’re just arguing the situation doesn’t happen frequently enough. But provided nothing to back that beyond your own assertion.
7 Likes
I didn’t theorize an example, that’s what the “example” you said i’m going against is.
If you remove the hovering part with non-locking radar + DL.
Its the same example.
You want me to go into every server replay, look at notching player and show the difference in speed and direction makes more than 2m/s? But that’s still proving negative case.
I would love to see a single example of the positive case - but its gonna be 1 in 100 or 1 in 1000 kills.
And even in those cases we are not talking about actual example that it has the most chance of happening in.
And thats 2 second to impact TRK → IOG (1second is prolongation for amraam) moving exactly off target to randomly not get sprayed by proxy fuse damage
a bad faith argument was used and forced gunjob into his second phase, using the blue message background
9 Likes
So uh, Where is the AIM-120D for the Gripen E? The C is ancient compared to the plane.
Not added
Not added.
Was on the topic of the 120C-8 since it would be akin to the 120D but we don’t have it.
Besides we might just get Meteors right of the bat, depending what gaijin does.
Meteor would be interesting with the NEZ of basically the entire map from takeoff. Not sure game is ready to handle that.
Think we’re beyond that point if the game can handle XYZ mechanics