I went back and began to reread everything I said. I can’t figure out where you get the notion that I believe the missiles traveling distance was 50+ NM?
I’ve actually done testing in the past to ascertain the AIM-54A will follow a rear aspect target over a distance of approximately 55km before slowing down too much that it couldn’t continue chasing at 0.9 mach.
Someone else just showed such a long distance shot in live gameplay. The recently found data may buff the missile further, but we’re using public data. They’ll model it off what is available.
In that test it was less than 1/2 the missiles maximum launch range in those parameters… 40nm… as evidenced by the radar scope on the right. You can’t even see the maximum range bar on the distance setting I had selected.
The test was relevant, you claimed the AIM-54 couldn’t hit something at those ranges even when fired from a supersonic launch platform.
I’m still waiting on a source regarding “most launches aren’t supersonic”.
Also, you asked for my findings. You stated the Phoenix could not do 40NM in reference to the scenario I tested the AIM-120. So… I tested the AIM-54 and it absolutely can hit that target. It has much much much further than 40NM range in that scenario so yes… it can. You said it couldn’t.
Now if you think it’s not performing as it should, provide a source. If you don’t have one… then let’s stop that line of discussion until there is something to actually talk about.
No, nor did I directly assert this. I simply took the opposite opinion and would have liked to see some reliable information before I change my stance. Burden of proof doesn’t lay with me.
Without understanding aviation history or physics clearly demonstrated by my dear friend. Almost every single engagement in the history of aerial combat have been subsonic.
He thinks that because a missile is “BVR” you must go past the speed of sound just to sling it farther than the eye can see.
He has no idea of the difficulties, failure rates and inherent risk of launching a missile off a rail flying the speed of sound and forces applied to it especially while maneuvering. He has no comprehension that many missile SOP dictate that high Mach number launches are to be avoided.
Missiles are highly sensitive to the speed at which they are launched especially while maneuvering. GJ had removed physics related to this in order to maintain an arcade like ease of gaming.
He wants a document saying, “Things do not usually fly that well when rocketed from an airplane already going over the speed of sound.”
This actually kinda goes well with my theory of why grid fins like on the R-77 arent used on air to air missiles, nor are they used on the newest R-77 variants.
Grid fins suffer greatly from subsonic or transonic launches as their fins become airbrakes until around M1.3, if not a bit higher. This explains to some degree why a ground launched R-77 has a max range of 12km while a comparably sized AIM-7M attains around 26km ground launched.
Its a bit idiotic to design a missile with a substantial aerodynamic downside in the transonic range if missiles are often shot in subsonic/transonic conditions.
Now we just have to hope gaijin will actually model this design issue, though I’m not holding my breath…
I would say its a mix, here you can see the firing envelopes for Skyflash SuperTEMP, there is a mix of all firing types.
I don’t think you can say they’re mostly subsonic launches, performance at high supersonic speeds for BVR combat was absolutely something that is tested for as are all regimes of flight. To say its “mostly subsonic” isn’t correct at all. Altitude seems to play more of a role on if a launch from the launching fighter is super or subsonic.
Target and Fighter subsonic(Pink)
Target and Fighter supersonic (Yellow)
Target supersonic and Fighter subsonic (Blue)
Mostly semantics at this point, all regimes of flight are tested, be that the target or fighter being super or subsonic. For the maximum range supersonic will always be king.
If lattice fins were so much better, every other nations would be using them, but they arent… Even the russians arent. The only air to air missiles with lattice fins are the R-77 and R-77-1.
Missiles also dont spend most of their time at high supersonic speeds, which is defined by NASA as 3 < M < 5, though I have seen some documents state the drag advantage of lattice fins could be as low as M2.5. The vast majority of a missiles flight is spent at speeds below high supersonic speeds, and kneecapping your missile in subsonic/transonic launches doesn’t help.
Think about it this way. A surface launched R-77 has the same max range of 12km as the IRIS-T SLS, and less than half the range of its closest analogue in terms of dimensions (AIM-7M). Theres clearly an extreme price to pay in the transonic regime to using lattice fins, and honestly, considering this, id be surprised if the R-77 can even achieve high supersonic speeds for any noticeable length of time if launched at any subsonic/transonic speeds. At all other speeds, the drag of lattice fins and planar fins are roughly equivalent.
Its not semantics though? There isnt a single aircraft currently in-game capable of super cruise, and unlike in WT where everyone flies with full afterburners and their head cut off, irl, planes had to fly for extended period of time and long distances. It is unlikely that the aircrafts we currently operate ingame would fire their missiles in supersonic conditions at all times, and the fact that 2/3 of the tests were subsonic launches supports that logic.
Its also notable that they did not test supersonic launch on subsonic target, so they did not test all regimes of flight. The tests most likely reflected likely launch scenarios for 2/3 of the tests, and ideal scenario for 1/3.
Supersonic launches are more likely now, where radars are more capable at long ranges and aircrafts commonly can supercruise, but that doesnt represent WT conditions at all, nor does it represent the realities of the 70-90’s.
Does anyone know what happened to the TWS interface?
On release, every track used to have a cornered square around it. Once you put the radar cursor over a desired target, the corners would increase in size, while all other contacts still had the cornered squared.
Now, it is almost always that no contact is visually highlighted, except for the one the cursor has selected.
Spoiler
However, sometimes when there is only one contact, it will look like it used to (cornered square around it even if not selected).
Spoiler
Pantsir-S1 still has the same view as the on-release TWS:
The 12km limit is seeker related, or the intercept point of target from launch. It’s not a valid figure to go throwing around in comparison to the maximum target distance at launch for RIM-7M…
