I was more talking about in general when the next gen IRs arrive, borderline unflarable, crazy maneuverable, full 360 engagement zones close range deleters.
3 Likes
exactly whoever fires first will get the kill. rafale with 8x mica ir will outrange every other IIR missile and carries more IIRs than any other fighter in game. + it also gets datalink.
i honestly feel like gaijin will add next gen bvr missiles before adding IIRs cus its soo much easier to balance those.
4 Likes
To be fair I think the only planes that would be able to actually take advantage of the 360 degrees kill zones are the planes that have beyond 90 degree radars, so very few planes would actually be able to take advantage of that, because plane to plane datalink isn’t a thing in game
with fixed fm and aim120c5 itd be 14.7
With 14.3 Rafale?
we’re talking fixed aim120c5 here, that means much better maneuverability and a smokeless motor, this on an agile airframe with an aesa radar and other nice things to boot.
1 Like
Where do you get better maneuverability from?
In graphics release by the Air Force, it usually talks about improved kinematics which is likely referring to range
aim120c5 is currently perfoming below even the aim120a, which is already nerfed, aim120s didnt suffer any reduction in maneuverability from clipping the fins you will not see that ever, aim120c5 has a slower accelerating motor, so afaik it should be able to pull a bit more aoa at launch by virtue of compressing less.
2 Likes
that would be true if it was G limited
bug gaijin nerfed aim 120 fin AOA into the ground without any sources, so it pulls less than 120A off the rails
1 Like
Yeah I was talking in a “all else being equal” scenario.
C5 does need a buff for close range engagement
Instead of adding 9x
Also people fail to realize that the US isnt the only nation that uses aim 9x
Finland and both their f18 uses it
Australian f18 that we recently got in game are supposed to have it and they could also get the python 4 since they didnt a lot of test with them
The f16 in the french tt will also get it
The eft in the Italian could also get it
The swiss f18 will get it
Japan technically has operated them on f15 jm
And the list will only get bigger because of the multitude of minor nations that will eventually be add later on
Also i think that when it will be added for air people will still be coping here saying thay its bad because all of the aim 9x counterparts are essentially better in their own ways
Now am not saying the 9x is going to be bad but it will be overshined by everything else maybe except the r74 m2
For now buffing the c5 thrust and close range capabilities would be better and make it more relevant in the current meta
Currently the c5 is only better at range if fired on a f15 or eft form high or medium alt
Has a lower drag compared to the aim 120a, a longer burn time and a long battery life which is relatively annoying to deal with
theyre just adding more ground to add it right away without counterparts(except of Py4, 73M or whatever) that better(in their dreams at least)
People often forget that abismal short range maneuverability also means awful terminal maneuverability. This is also a problem for aim120a, as the nerfed maneuverability means it can’t hit the real life numbers terminally.
I’m skeptical that gaijin will had next gen fox 2s without modifying how fox 3s behave, right now fox 3s are incredibly gimped, of they were realistic even modern fox 2s would be a secondary weapon.
In-game right now fox3s are so temperamental and weak, it’s even more insane on spaas, like the buk, kinematically it’s broken as fuck but because of fixed modelling it misses 90% of shots, for missiles which have been implemented like shit like aster 30, aim120c7, camm(maybe I’ve hard bad things) these problem just pile on to make the whole system even worse.
I hoped that when adding all those ARH aas they would change their behaviour but nope, still behave like stone age radars
The aim 120a was never meant for short range engagement to begin with and its maneuverability it fine currently
People saying that it should be more maneuverable also forget that it will hinder its terminal velocity because the missile will constantly try to overcorrect its trajectory and will end up bleeding to much energy
The aam4 has that issue when it comes to hitting maneuvering targets at ranges past 15 km also because it has to much drag
Abysmal short range doesn’t meant its gonna be bad on terminal either
Mica is the best at short range yet one of the worse when it comes to long range
Derby is considered the worse fox 3 in game
Its ok at short range probably close to the pl12 but absolutely horrible at past 10 km
R77 is considered to be comparable to the mica but a little less maneuverable but still bad at ranges past 15 km
aim 120a may not be as maneuverable compared to its peers but its still considered to be good when it comes to bvr
And the c5 if launched on a good platform is a bit better by a couple seconds
Also for spaa with fox 3 like the buk and the aster 30
The reason why they are easy to chaff is manly because they dont have angle gating which would make them harder to chaff but they didnt because it would make it impossible to play air in grb
For the c7 its currently just a copy paste of the c5 if am not wrong with the same seeker
the thing is aim 120 c7 and up didn’t need to be maneuverable close range, they had 9x for that.
so it wasn’t a priority for it to be ultra maneuverable like the r77 or the mica
1 Like
it is not, it is by far the most slugish fox 3 other than aim 54 and offers no HOBS capability
no? thats not how missiles work in game, and it already does to an extent
yes it quite literally does, it has an artificially low fin AOA meaning that it doesnt pull as much as it should be able to at any point in flight
it isnt, it is actually one of the best until 30-40km
it is not unless the target is outside of ~20km at which point either is easy to avoid
1 Like
I’ll give you MICA but the Russians had the R-73/74M
r77 has same target overload as r73 (less actual overload though). the only thing the r73 variants are better than the r77 are in low speed launches that no amount of fin angle will fix that thrust vectoring does. at high speed launches they’re both essentially the same. so the r73 was specialized for that one specific scenario, that the 9x fills similar in relation to the 120
1 Like