I guess, as I understand it, Gaijin modeled the work of radars in general anyhow, because no one would have given them real EPR data, frequencies and modes, that’s why we have what we have - playability from patch to patch(
I’ve always been annoyed since the introduction of the Fox-1 into the game that the radar’s close combat mode ALWAYS preferentially captures an ally)) How many years have passed, but it’s still the same))
Where low smoke motor?
gaijin ate it
AIM-9M was hungry and stole all the low smoke propellant for itself
2 Likes
Are you keeping your F-15 radar looking at the target all the way up to impact? All ARH missiles work a lot better when you treat them like FOX 1 missiles.
no of course, I guide the missile through the tracking mode and launch it from distances less than 20 km and turn away, if the distances are small, 5 km for example, then the F-15 usually gets a return missile, since even with a top crew and experts, the pilot usually goes into shutdown, but the oncoming Rafale somehow cheerfully makes 3-9 at supersonic speed and evades. This is if the distances are small and there are many targets ahead, then in order not to sort through them, I turn on the close combat mode and hard capture.
That’s some delta wing+ canard shit. But the AMRAAM should hit the target at 5 km’s no matter what
keyword “must”)
1 Like
Untill target abuses multipath
That would be the only way to escape an amraam or any fox 3 for that matter
I was outraged that the AIM-120 was nerfed, but after flying new planes I realized that they were re-upgraded) The same Typhoon, completely stock, without a PPK module, easily holds 13G overload and maintains a cruising speed of 1M without afterburner))) What can I say, snails as always))) They’ll nerf it in a month))
Not specifically, but it should be quite similar to the AMRAAM-ER in effect.
1 Like
AIM-120E in the works?
3 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Vbt1n9PpHjMd
AIM-120C-5 excessive drag
.
.
.
.
2 Likes
Higher drag coefficient doesn’t necessarily equal extra drag; even gszabi’s sheet warns against this interpretation.
The A and C have relative advantages in drag at different phases of flight. While the AAM-4 has the same 1.55 CXK it has higher drag across all phases of flight. While the Fakour has a much lower CXK of 1.05 it has much higher drag than all the others.
Should also note that the C-5 is said to be WIP right now and values could change quickly. I’m not even sure if the current datamines are actually reflective of dev server values.
1 Like
in case of AIM-120 it should be. since both AIM-120 has simillar diameter, length.
Yep, but they still can forget to do so, thats why report was created.
well, gszabi said on discord that it is up to date
Can’t use data mine, we need to wait for the devs to notice the issue. It is because the 120C5 was done when 120B first came, the 120B initially had a cD of 1.65 iirc, so the 1.6 of 120C5 represented the drag reduction, but they fixed 120B by dropping the drag to 1.425, but forgot to adjust the C5 too.
3 Likes
My question is when/if they will even notice it
As you said datamines cannot be used for this and we have no easy way of clearly seeing it aside from slightly lower range/speed than what is supposed to be there
Plus in my own testing of the dev server ive definitely found the 120C to be somewhat lacking for range
Currently if i fire both a 120B and 120C on a target at the same time the B always gets there quicker to the point where the C loses too much energy and stalls out before the B does
Im not experienced enough with bug reports though to compile that into my own report so perhaps someone else should do that