That’s almost as bad as saying SARH missiles don’t have a “seeker” and then deleting the comment later.
Additional sources have been used other than dcs (if you actually read).
I will reply to any arguments that are flawed, overall our first points of talk were about the phoenix.
1 Like
Are you trying to deny the fact that missiles can’t reach their max G thresholds at low speeds?
I deleted it because I, as well as the entirety of the community are aware that you do not really know much about anything.
I was trying not to be mean.
Yes semi active missiles do not “seek” or look for signals.
Radio/microwaves are transmitted by transmitters and received by radio receivers. Or for a word you can understand “antenna”.
Radar frequencies sent by a transmitter and received by receivers. The Aim7 is not equipped to send out a signal to seek for a target.
It is armed with only a signal receiver. If the the semi active missile receives no signal, or it is disrupted, It does not guide. Simple as that.
LMFAO!!!
This is a common misconception for people who do not understand radiolocation and only pop culture.
I see that certain users are typing away whom I have blocked and have had a history of derailing these threads. I’d ask for the sources but there already exists a thread for the R-27 that would be far more appropriate in which I have shared most (if not all) available sources on the topic anyhow.
We should circle back to the Phoenix, then. It is okay to compare missiles… but the discussion should not gear itself towards other points of the discussion or continue feeding trolls unless you want to learn the same lesson I did and put 500+ comments not relevant to the thread here arguing with someone who cares nothing for the argument itself.
The person who made the wheel vs fin analogy makes incredulous claims all the time. Such as SARH missiles have no ‘seeker’. (A seeker is anything to looks for a signal… not just something that can produce its’ own signal)…
They often delete these comments later or edit them. This is what I was referring to. I’m on the same page as you regarding the argument I’d just like to push it back on course.
1 Like
It does not “look around” for a signal. It’s an antenna that literally sits there. Once it’s stuck by a specific radio signal it guides to it.
LMFAO.
A seeker is actively looking for something independently. The sparrow can do nothing independently without some midcourse update and definitely needs a signal from the launch aircraft for terminal guidance.
The issue with SARHs is not because their “seeker” (antenna) is limited on receiving a signal lmfao as said below.
It’s because the signal path that travels from the launching aircraft to the target and then off to the missile is easily disrupted.
That is why they are phased out in favor of active radar missiles who have the ability to produce their own radio/microwave signals and bounce back directly to them and cut out the range and duration these signals must stay secure.
Anyway bro, I am not trying to discount you or anything. Get the R27 and let me know your thoughts, ok?
Thank you for reminding me the Aim54 is a lot heavier that the ER, I give credit where credit is due.
My mistake, I did not read this carefully! lol.
Don’t know what I read at first.
More on the aim-54
3 Likes
I will look at it when I get home in a bit.
I wanted to ask you. Do you believe the Aim54 is underperforming in acceleration and top speed in WT through out all altitudes?
I do believe it does not gain much energy even in a dive still burning.
One can test if these proven hits are possible in the game.
1 Like
But this would not help in regard to determining lower altitudes and speeds launched going faster like at Mach 1.10.
Such speeds which we find ourselves flying on average at lower altitudes in game fighting at much closer ranges.
The above maybe absolutely correct in game. But does not necessarily mean that this particular performance means the missiles is not underperforming in other aspects.
The one with a ~110nm launch range I tested in game and it works.
What’s funny is that the radar is hard-coded and can’t actually detect anything beyond that range so the second I picked up the target I had to launch.
2 Likes
oh wow did not know that.
The screenshot that was included is one example of the many tests. There were also low altitude tests.
It is indeed all the bugs of the radar that is holding the phoenixes back, atleast for me.
Tws LOBL logic is nonsense, the tws target tracking logic is not working properly in many situations and the false elevation indicator issues are troubling.
I have lost a large amount of kills due to this issue, sometimes not being able to launch at all at my preferred target/targets.
Max Range
This is the one I tested, its doable
Multipathing
Decent multipathing filtering capability (Better than in-game I think)
G-Pull
I believe the only source on missile manouverability, hitting a target presumably pulling 6g
1 Like
oh ok what are your thoughts? seems ok nah? Unable to pay attention as much rn sorry if Im following too slow.
Does this mean that the missile mid-course corrections are not received by data-link, but rather computed from returns reflected off of the target?
Yes grimm there is other technologies that help sparrows and later guide. Speaking in regard to the reciever attenna being a seeker.
Those updates are still simply transmitted via radio to an attenna on the missile too.