I don’t think the mechanics are the issue. More like if the overall structure of the game will allow for a missile whose range is so far that you can’t realistically be “safe” at any point of the map.
2 Likes
That would be for stuff like AIM-174 and PL-17 not Meteor
Meteor has a NEZ of like 100km (if i remember correctly, Edit: I did, info: Meteor Missile System - #5 by Gunjob). Which outranges practically all maps in air RB.
The difference is that those two are solid rocket propelled, the Meteor is a ram-jet.
2 Likes
They would use the bigger EC sized maps. The solid rocket missiles are still longer ranged than meteor, ramjets aren’t magic
Well yeah, but longer range doesn’t automatically mean that they have the maneuverability once they get to their target, once they are out of fuel they are out. A ramjet can adjust it’s throttle as needed for the specific range it is fired at to save some fuel for the terminal phase, this increases probability of kill as it can maneuver harder without losing energy during the last few km to the target with a burst of acceleration and speed.
For war thunder specifically there are not many maps at all where the Meteors No Escape Zone isn’t larger than the map, that’s the NEZ and not the max range, max range on the Meteor (200km+) is still larger than all air maps in the game.
4 Likes
That only works at shorter ranges, when you get to cross map distances it has to burn all or most of its fuel.
You also forget about Dual pulse motors which do the same thing with less space taken up by the gas generator and far less drag due to the lack of intakes
Meteor max range might be 200km flat considering how much quicker it will lose speed compared to a comparable AAM like the AMRAAM
No. Since it can control how much fuel it burns at any given point it literally tries to save a specific amount of fuel to quickly burn for the terminal phase.
Not at all the same thing, they have set timings and thrust profiles, boost + sustain. i.e. get up to speed fast and then burn fuel slower to get as far as possible. A solid motor doesn’t magically burn more fuel and accelerate faster once it gets close to the target because it can’t change the burn rate. A ram-jet can. The Meteor is also both, it is dual pulse AND a ram-jet.
The two missiles you mentioned are larger in frontal aspect (and fin area) than the entirety of the Meteor, they will very likely have more drag. The Meteor is almost exactly the same size as an AIM-120, here is the AIM-174 next to the AIM-120:
Do you really think that two highly optimized and engineered air intakes (with the ability to close if needed) will make the AIM-120 shaped missile create more drag than that behemoth?
info from 1995.
Some other extra info on the motor:
I’m not saying the others aren’t great. They will easily outclass the Meteor at ranges likely above 150km, but below that i think the Meteor wins, and map sizes in WT are smaller than that.
6 Likes
Yes the max range is not extremely insane but the ram-jet makes the NEZ almost half of the max range which is quite insane. The AIM-174 and such mentioned in the thread are significantly larger and of course have longer max range but I am not sure their NEZ against a manoeuvring target is longer at all.
Given the small size of the Meteor you can fit a lot more of them on any given plane. The 174 is only carried by the Super hornet last I checked with a max of 4. Meteor is basically the same size as AIM-120 and is carried on the same pylons so if that super hornet had the Meteor integrated that would be 12 of them then no?
You worded it a lot better than I did. 👍
2 Likes
So why add a plane without it’s weapons? The Gripen E does not carry AIM-120C despite being capable of it, it carries mainly Meteors and has been mounted with AIM-120D’s
Sweden has bought C-8, not D, for Gripen E. But to my understanding the C-8 is pretty much an export early D model.
munitions are up to balance. Almost no planes in the top two ranks in the game carries all the munitions they do IRL for balance reasons.
2 Likes
Dual pulse lets the missile time the second motor firing actively. That’s what sets it apart from boost sustain like on aim-120a
It still needs to burn fuel just to maintain altitude, and also because afaik there isn’t a way for it to turn off and reignite in flight.
For drag, of course it will be less total than the bigger missiles just because of size, but estimates are ~50% more drag than same size missile without intakes. The bigger missiles also have much more momentum due to their weight.
1995 is before meteor was test fired, there is a document with a similar max kinematic range estimate for AIM-120A without battery limits, the same could go for this one.
Based on what, that’s a small fraction of the max range of both PL-17 and AIM-174, they are rockets too so they would accelerate similarly if not faster than a ramjet missile.
So why do we let the premium Su-30s dominate without giving the F-14 AIM-120s, or at least the best versions of the AIM-54, if balance is the justification?
Don’t ask me , ask the devs :)
Also off-topic.
The F-14D does get the best version of the AIM-54
We don’t have the one with smokeless engine or increased thrust. / Off topic yeah, last words.
Yes? It’s still a set acceleration, all or nothing.
(I realize my usage of “timing” there can be read as “time in the flight at which it fires” , i ment " time for how long it burns" . Apologies if that was confusing. )
It can control how much fuel it burns at what parts of the flight smoothly.Uncertain on this next part but It should theoretically (if it sees the need) be able to turn off and on as it is Auto ignited combustion. Turning of the engine should just as easy at not using the fuel injector and closing the air ducts.
Based on the fact that a smaller missile is by nature going to be more maneuverable at any given situation compared to a larger one. What the other two have is range, and a lot of it. What the Meteor has is comparatively shorter range but far better kinematics during that comparatively shorter range.
Square cube law anyone?
3 Likes
I’m not aware of it being able to completely shut the motor off, but it can reduce the fuel flow to less than 10% of the maximum.
4 Likes
as flame said, it can go down to 10% but that is the engine’s limit, not the % required to maintain flight at the most efficient speed and altitude for the missile.
R-77 vs AIM-9, Aster 30 vs AIM-7, etc.
i promise this is not the hill you want to die on
not really, these missiles would still be moving very fast even in shorter ranges.