Wonder what the guy above said this time
Im sure it’s nothing about Russian bias.
1 Like
It was something about Russian bias lol
It was about Russian bias
He called the game Russian propaganda
Something something US can’t have anything but Russia can have fake missiles (referring to kh38 which is irrelevant for an air thread)
1 Like
You guys really can’t catch sarcasm.
He got 2 sides clearly
1 Like
Sir you are on the war thunder forums, what do you expect?
Might as well give AAM4 to F2 ADTW and make it 13.3 or 13.7 and give the Tech tree F2 the AAM5 and raise it to 14.3 , not like every Russian Top tier plane has IRCCM Thrust vectoring IR missiles but it’s hard to add a Thrust Vectoring IRCCM missile to other nations…
Since Su 30 MK2 AMV has 2 DL , ARH , R27 ER , R73 (which is IRCCM Thrust vectoring) and sits comfortably at 13.3 , while F2 ADTW has 4 SARH and 4 IRCCM and sits at 13.0 only because it has AESA radar and IRCCM funny. who needs AESA and 4 DL if you can’t even use it since you get AIM-7M …
1 Like
Because the Russian ones ingame are from the 80s and not the 2000s
They have way weaker irccm than the missiles you are asking for, they also are less manouverable
The game is not ready for Iris-T 9x and the kind
“less maneuverable” you have got to be kidding me , the amount of BS the R73 does is mind boggling. it can sometimes even do an entire 180 and still have energy to reach you it’s rare yes but it can
I think he was talking about it being less maneuverable than the aam5
Not saying that the maneuverability is bad on the r73
Comparing it with the aam 5, yes, the r73 is less maneuverable, also a shorter range.
What’s aam5 max gload? And min ranges? You can’t just say it’s more maneuverable than r73 without any citation imo
And the missiles you are asking for can do that consistently with some of them also being able to be launched at ppl behind you on while having way better irccm
Or they could just, actually give the AAM-3 it’s IRL performance. Irl it has better off boresight performance then an R-73 supposedly.
Let me guess it doesn’t have it due to dual plane not being modeled?
According to what
Its stated on multiple arms brochures from its time of introduction to have 3x the offboresight capability of an aim-9L, that would put it at around 60 degrees of offboresight capability as opposed to the R-73’s 47 degrees.
Yep
I actually tested an approach for modeling BTT performamce a while ago in user missions, using math around rotated fin areas and relative deflection angles and such, and it really did perform basically as expected. Will try to find the videos of it.
Oh, yeah that makes sense. For some reason I was thinking more off-bore= better maneuverability off bore, which has no correlation. r-73e has only ±45 degrees off bore before launch, and can lock up to ±75 degrees after launch, so aam3 is likely better if it’s 3x the 9l which if I remember right is 30 degrees? I forgot tho for the 9l
The Aim-9L has a guaranteed engagement zone of 20 degrees, although yeah it can hit stuff farther off bore, as it’s seeker gimbal is 40 degrees before lock.
1 Like