Who knows. I think it will be same too.
So addition of 120D would be pointless until link 16 or something like that is added?
Maybe. I don’t know how the developer will configure it. But for now, it’s just looks like C-5 with zero INS drift.
GPS quality updates to the midcourse will improve BVR performance.
An AMRAAM fired from Typhoon with the CAPTOR-M isn’t nearly as good as when fired from the same Typhoon with ECRS MK1/2 as the frequency of updates is much much better. Figure that in with GPS level positioning for both launching aircraft and missile, your BVR will improve.
Is the current C5 implementation accurate even? Performance wise it seems to be virtually the same as a A/B in terms of raw deltaV, so not really much of an improvement. The only thing enhancing the range for the C5 is the battery life.
Which was one of the things holding back 120A/B, the battery.
1 Like
Right, but my point is, the motor itself doesn’t seem to be much of an upgrade and my question is, are there any documents that actually justify the current burn/thrust values.
It says there is a significant increase in performance, where is that?
2 Likes
Maybe it’s a marketing thing but if the public information position is that the A/B/C motors offer pretty much the same performance and that there’s no motor improvement on the D variant, it might mean we are gonna have to continue to cope with A/Bs for close range.
Performance can be other things including but not limited to service life, servicing intervals, maintenance, range and operating temps etc etc etc.
performance is probably the actual performance
1 Like
And there in lies the problem.
its the only one that makes actual sense. they did not make a 5" longer “enhanced rocket motor” for it to just be better for maintenance. it specifically talks about “an all-boost design that delivers a significant increase in performance as compared to the baseline production motor”, why would they talk about that part of the motor’s design if they were talking about a completely different part of the performance?
2 Likes
It could be considered significant if all aspects of the motor have improved. Not only the amount of dV it can impart but all aspects including maintenance and storage etc.
that just sounds like overcomplicating it
1 Like
My whole point is its uncertain language. Also as far as implementation its a non starter.
1 Like
I mean we are simply approaching an era of equipment that just has too much classified information still, obviously the manufacturer is not gonna provide specific areas of improvements on documents that rivals can easily search on the internet. Most decisions at this point have to be made through the lens of balance rather than historical accuracy.
Wasn’t it the Aim-120D that hit the 200km shot that almost outranged the Phoenix? Certainly that’s an increase in range, no?
Might be just a battery life increase