that’s the problem of the majority of this community, they love to complain, throw a bias here and a op there and boom ecstasy, but when it’s time to collect documentation and open a Proper bug report they just leave, don’t even try on the best case, on the worst case is the rivers and rivers of bugreports that are basically “Me nation strong, dev dumb, buf nation unga bunga” instead of a proper complain, hell even about this same issue on sparrow that i decided to start collecting stuff and come across this post on forum i saw a report that was basically “Sparrow can’t track the enemy” and that’s it
Locked someone in a training room, and the missile just avoided the lock and went after someone else. This was in my f16 Aj, and i was firing Aim 7f sparrows
1 Like
the other plane was in the same frequency and faster turning into the target for the missile, if you had unlocked and re-locked the missile would have fixed itself going for the new target
The thing is that there is bias towards russia because of the R27 seeker that should not be that powerful but i say we wait until we get fox 3’s and see if gaijin does the funny bias thing (as far as I am aware the Amraam and R77 is very close in performance)
My brother in warthunder, except for some diferences in PID(all except the integral term limit), the Doppler gate search range(AIM-7F/M have a bigger value), they have “almost”* the same seeker, the diference being 7F/M are better since the seeker has a way better range(40~45 km or 21.5~24.3 nm) compared to 27R/ER(25~30 km or 13.5~16 nm), what makes the missile good is the inertial navigation that can make it be on track to the last target while unlocked, and the datalink that can give mid course correction to the missile even when the target is outside the seeker range
*edit: remember that every SARH missile on warthunder is coded as a inversed monopulse seeker as a post on the old forum explained why the devs did it
1 Like
It’s more that for a few particular topics, we either get told;
That things are functioning as intended.
They won’t be changed due to balance, or can’t due to engine limitations.
To pound sand.
Or they simply never get actioned.
That or they just misinterpret the sources / report and do what they want.
It’s really not that hard to find examples just ask @MythicPi about the AIM-54 or AN/AXX-1 TCS
and @MaMoran20, about radar performance in general.
or Myself about the AGM-65’s / TOW-2B’s performance.
10 Likes
The unintended target was probably approaching at similar velocity when you obtained the lock. When multiple targets are approaching your PD lock at similar speeds, the missile in game basically treats it as one big signal and targets the center of that return.
As you and the other planes maneuvered, the stronger signal came from the unintended target based on the relative velocities. So as that centroid dissolved, the stronger signal came from the thing you werent trying to hit.
1 Like
A lot of variables come into play with longer range shots that could all contribute in some way. It would be difficult to answer with a general case statement.
Finally got a good one. Here is several videos at an engagement 10-15KM in ACM/PD. The target selected is about 2-300 feet AGL. The missile goes up towards the target and then sharply dives into the water. There are three of these videos.
( 2/3 Removed do to background noise)
@InterFleet id appreciate it, if you get time to review these.
1 Like
you have no Idea
Has more flares. Su-27 is also hotter. Nice bait or lack of understanding. Doesn’t shit it’s entire speed in turns, while accelerating faster than Su-27. Radar is also better than Su-27. Su-27 radar is basically the worst all aspect PD radar. İt is the same as 12.0 mig-29 radar, just with more range. ACM mode has 2x the range of Su-27 ACM. AAM-3/9M İRCCM is also more consistent than R-73 irccm
The fact that you are telling people to COPE and get better because they have to face F-15s is hilarious. And then you make the stupid argument that the F-15 is shit and it should stay at 12.3. It seems like you need to COPE and get gud.
You are contradicting your own argument.
1 Like
Not my problem
Not my problem
? i dont care enough to bait or have a lack of understanding, somehow you people think the su-27s are on par with planes that don’t have HMDs or missiles that can do a 60 degree turn.
K you keep thinking gaijin has fixed the radar on u.s planes.
Everything at the point in technology was better than anything russia could put out, gaijin has you all disillusioned with them giving russian planes and tanks fantasy stats.
And? ACM has been at 19km for the phantoms too.
3 Likes
Is that why USA was still using 9M until they got their hands on East German R-73 and realized our missiles are shit? And decided to make 9X?.
Dude who has never played any nation except USA talking about how USA is best at everything, with a patton profile pic? why am i not surprised
You talk like you know the game so well yet you have never even used any R-27 carrier, or any eastern high tier plane in your life. Average american hearsay copium knowledge
Do you mean the time they tested the R-73 and said it compared favorably to the Aim-9L?
Yeah i dont think that says the Aim-9M is shit comparatively, but they it did indeed kick the euroes and US into gear to keep their advantage.
1 Like
They did not have an advantage in 80s in IR missiles until they made 9X, if you think otherwise, thats copium
Only magic-2 was great compared to R-73 because of it’s superior seeker IRCCM
American IRs were literally inferior to R-73 in the 80s until 9X
They US had the IR advantage until R-73
Well not a notable advantage anyways. Thats why they persued Aim-9X and IRIS-T.
But that is the comparison point we have, the Aim-9L, not the Aim-9M or its variants. So idk exactly how the IR seeker of the Aim-9M performs against the R-73. Sadly that is probably the point in IR seeker tech where they were the closest. Well in All aspect seeker terms anyways. We have yet to see an IIR seeker from the post Soviet states.
Maybe, i havent seen info indicating as such, but that would also be the last time the soviets/post soviet states had an IR advantage
In what sense? Development of the AIM-9R (What would become of the AIM-9X’s IIR seeker on a -9M body, basically a very early AIM-9X counterpart) [1986], and before that the AIM-95 Agile [1968] which is what the R-73 borrows heavily from, which itself is derived from the earlier Taildog missile (early member of the SRAAM lineage), also there is an obvious link between the Electro Optical seeker variant and the IIR Sidewinders.
Considering the Agile was, not procured on cost grounds; over the AIM-9L it made sense to salvage what they could since the development was already started where possible.
The way to beat the R-73 was to use the Much better seeker on the AIM-9L / -9M & AIM-7, AIM-54, etc. to kill them before the dogfight and they could employ missiles.
It doesn’t help that the radars for various aircraft are barely functional, the maps are far to densely populated, and lack cover.
4 Likes
At least in aquisition and sensitivity terms the 9L very likely is worse than the R-73.
At least whatever 9L was used for the testing in germany at the time.
Besides, the main R-73 advantage is that it is
very maneuverable and lightweight
Edit: wrote 9M instead of R-73 for some reason
It depends when it took place the AIM-9L has two major variants of the seeker, the detector of the later is shared ( known as the Dechirped mod, which was a British kludge that was eventually backported) with the AIM-9M / -9S, sans IRCCM module and so the late seeker has roughly similar acquisition performance, since the original good-track logic was very conservatives, as such to practically allow them to ignore clouds and other non radiant sources of IR band clutter at the expense of greater range, since in most cases it couldn’t be used kinematically.
1 Like