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.
As Ziggy says,
And the Phoenix can fire in a truly semi-active mode kinda like how the AIM-7s work. That semi-active mode is what this chart shows.
As far as I know the TWS mode is identical, however instead of using the radar reflections it uses purely the datalink data.
1 Like
The more you guys share on the aim54.
Reminding me that this missile should be extremely accurate with amount of targeting technologies it has besides its own radar to guide.
Kinda upsetting to think about how it is in game rn.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/lgkcgpsdiqmnq7d/20070014861.pdf/file
Another possibly interesting source related to aim-54
Here it actually discusses it
It uses data from the Datalink to point its active radar seeker at the enemy aircraft (without actually transmitting its own radar signal), where it then guides based on the launching aircraft’s reflected radar signal.
Spoiler
I think this would make it much less susceptible to sidelobe interference because of the directional antenna but idk I’m just talking out my rear.
This doesn’t confirm, but points strongly in the direction that the Phoenix should be much faster than it is in-game.
While the document is somewhat interesting, the performance of the test missiles differ from real phoenix due to removed and/or changed components