Has a dev commented on the Aim54’s reduced smoke engine being possibly added this patch? It would be nice as with the rwr changes, imo the 54C will be almost useless to carry. At Least with the old rwr the enemy could guess if its the 54 or an aircraft’s radar. Now they will know if its a 54 or not and immediately go defensively.
Worth noting there’s a confirmed 110nm kill against a firebee from an F14A/54A
https://www.navy.mil/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Print.aspx?PortalId=1&ModuleId=724&Article=2168381
1 Like
You’ll notice there is no “AIM-54D” on that list.
You mean succesfully tested, just not further produced.
Clear proof of AIM-54 rolling when maneuvering towards a target. Appears to use bank-to-turn maneuvering (or simply being roll-stabilized in “X” config) which would imply constant combined plane. Overload should be increased to 25G.
6 Likes
The issue with a lot of these kinds of upgrades is they make big differences to IRL problems that aren’t necessarily going to reflect in game. Like outside of rocket motor changes and then if ECM ever becomes modeled the A to ECCM Sealed Phoenix’s will behave the same in game
The bigger issue is that some of these upgrades WOULD make a major impact ingame, but arent modelled by gaijin because they dont feel like it. Kinda like how they dont FEEL like modelling dual plane maneuvrability because its advantageous for Russian planes/missiles for them not to.
1 Like
The biggest thing is that the reliability of these systems is entirely irrelevant. The Phoenix was so good for its time because competing SARH missiles had atrocious reliability. Figures vary, but in testing the Phoenix had a success rate of about 80%. By contrast, Russia was still fielding the R23/24, and the 54C was entering production by the time the initial R27 variants were entering service. And if memory serves, none of the SARH missiles from that time were particularly reliable, especially not the Russian ones.
This might be referencing that test, “Fully upgraded missile” might be a the culmination of all the scattered AIM-54C upgrades
Thats really not an issue imo. 100% reliability is a feature of this game and arguably everything wins from it, there are just some that win a bit more.
Things like intentionally mismodelling missile max pull (a moderator just admitted that the AIM-54 doesn’t pull 25G because gaijin doesn’t model combined plane maneuverability, despite it being the proper and fair way to model missiles), omitting seeker advances (AIM-54C’s digital seeker has multiple noted advantages from target discriminations, beam aspect capabilities and improved low alt attack and even NCTR according to one of my recent sources), those are decisions on gaijins part which have a tangible negative impact on gameplay for certain groups of players only and by extension, are advantageous for other groups (the main losers are the NATO players, the main winners are the russians, surprise surprise)
2 Likes
And the mod in question didn’t have sufficient sources to prove it and still may not be enough. I encourage you to share any further sources you have within the rules gaijin must follow. If you have further proof of combined plane guidance it WILL be modeled.
Do we know if the AIM-4/AIM-47 Falcons used bank-to-turn? AIM-54 is made by the same company, and more than resembles these earlier missiles, so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to say it could use bank-to-turn if they could.
The AIM-54 made some huge advancements in technology, it’s possible it carried over from earlier programs but imo unlikely.
I don’t think it’s appropriate or feasible to make all missiles dual-plane maneuverability, only a very small number of missiles can take advantage of dual-plane maneuverability.
There are limitations based on how the missile works and in most cases it is not available.
To date, only the AIM-54 is the only missile in the WT that we believe can substantially utilize dual-plane maneuverability. All other missiles can only use dual plane maneuverability in limited circumstances.
1 Like
Magic 2 can
No, R.550 Magic can’t utilize dual-plane maneuverability, the tail rotates, but the forward canard does not.
In order to utilize the dual plane maneuverability, it is necessary to rotate to the forward canard too.
Rotating tail is to prevent rolling, similar to AIM-9’s rollerons.
1 Like
In this case, can we expect dual-plane maneuverability for the AIM-54s soon (or ever) ?
Do we know if any of Hughes’ other missiles from the same period could utilize dual plane?
AIM-47 was the Phoenix’s predecessor, both made by Hughes, and the AGM-65 Maverick has a very similar aerodynamic design to it
While hardly conclusive, it would stand to reason if either of these missiles could use this, the Phoenix probably could too
Even Hughes’ AIM-4 was capable of ~27g maximum, and I think it uses a similar tail-steering system as all their future designs.
1 Like
I think it’s possible, but developers may have a different opinion.
1 Like