I know right
3 Likes
I really hope this is some kind of advanced sarcasm or humour i’m not getting
Techmods, mig, devs have been wrong regarding stuff quite alot of times. I’ve been, you’ve been we’ve all been. Them being them does not give them divine intellect.
You know, you are falling to the (2nd) lowest of the low resorting to ad hominem in argumentation.
You really can’t track a target during a beam with CW alone. Even then with HPRF/FMed CW the target needs to be really really close but it doesn’t even matter as using these waveforms you don’t generally see range through the time(but in frequency if FMd) it takes for the pulse to travel. Thats why you got MPRF to see velocity AND range. Tracking through beam is not just doing memory and moving antenna on the opposite side of the MLC where the target is expected to be if hes turning 180.
And by all means having all shit done digitally is just processing time thing. A specific trajectory to this emgagement geometry or close, another trajectory when target’s geometry changes, another trajectory when shooter changes, another when velocity increase, another when is just a high fast flies, another and anothwr and another and so on.
And I’m quite sure stuff of AI radars went to the missile, Hughes after all made the APG 63 which was the basis for apg 65, 70, 71, 73(and successors) and they did aswell the awg 9 and amraam, sparrow
5 Likes
Aim54 modes:
Sample Data Active - outside of 30 miles
Most feared capability
Continues Semi Active - when used in PD single target track mode 25-10 miles
Missile never goes active, only one phoenix is able to be fired at a time in this mode.
ACM Active - dogfighting mode under 5 miles Aim54 is active immediately off rail.
A very lethal mode (As stated by actual F-14 RIO).
This mode is not modelled in game, its performance is greatly held back.
The Iranians used ACM active to great effect. Be advised that when war had broken out with Iraq in 1988 The United States had not yet integrated the Sparrow and Aim9s and deliveries where halted.
The Iranians Tomcats only weapons against the Iraqis for the majority of the war was Aim54As and M61 cannon.
The Aim54 was designed to kill targets of all range’s shapes and sizes. The F-14 is not just in interceptor for one type of target like the Mig25. It was an air superiority fleet defense fighter. The Aim54 was designed be able to perform in all aspects in the event sidewinders and sparrows were not equipped.
The Aim54A has killed more fighters than all R27 variants ever produced combined.
1 Like
I directly quoted that portion of your post. So you knew your data and testing was pointless.
This doesn’t do anything for us but double dip in the sense that the given thrust and ISP are already for high altitudes. They would not have made the nozzle to perform most efficiently at sea level, that’s absurd.
The dates are not as important as the point being made. Do you think the AIM-54 somehow overcame the guidance limitations that all AIM-120s had until the mid 2010s?
They are made with these assumptions.
The AIM-54A’s guidance system was practically unchanged from 1963-1973.
You’re right, total impulse increases slightly as well but isn’t nearly as big of a change as implied due to assumptions made about the basic variables involved on your part.
Again, applying this assumes it was optimized for sea level to begin with.
Applying AAT would only reduce thrust from current numbers.
You should read more into flow separation at the nozzle.
You doubt me, but if the math is sound… Make a report. Ask for the thrust of the AIM-54 be adjusted based on AATs to match the medium alt configurations as Gaijin does with all current SARH / ARH missiles.
Should add that you can use this mode with the PAL/VSL search modes beyond 5 miles as both the AWG and the 54’s seeker can see out beyond that in said modes.
Its effective pretty much out to the max acquisition range of said PAL/VSL modes which is 15NM.
The fact that we still don’t have the actual PAL modes for the F-14s is also a travesty since they are way better than the sad 6 mile ACM mode we have now.
3 Likes
That’s basically why I made this suggestion post actually:
Also, not even gonna bother replying to MiG_23M again, if hes gonna just keep lying as his sole argument, I see no reason to give him the time of day. Back to banned he goes xD
4 Likes
I noticed your biggest argument you stated multiple times is “its old.”
Keep in mind no other country on earth has been able to achieve the capability of the AWG9 and Aim-54 until the turn of the century. All active missile design can be traced back to the mighty Aim54.
Your “its old argument” has really no weight. The SR71/A-12 is older than the Aim54 and yet there is not a single nation on earth that can replicate its performance.
The Iranians for years turned down sales of newer Chinese/Russian fighters in favor of the F-14A and still tile this day rather go through the insane cost of research and development to build upon the Aim54 and keep their Tomcats airborne.
Even the Soviet Union modeled their long range active missiles in effort to copy the US Aim54 and still could not replicate its performances without the AWG9
R33 barely went into service in the 80s and was still inferior to the Aim54A of the 1960s-70s.
4 Likes
??? R-37
1989
1 Like
Great find! Even has the trajectory it follows (which is very far from the one in-game), ill have to dig around in this later and maybe test some of those shots!
2 Likes
The R-33s were of different series, which ones are you talking about? The initial episodes were not very good.The later ones are better
1 Like
Just mentioning in regard to time of entering service. Because his argument is how old something is determines how good it is.
Even you mention early R33 were not as good from the beginning and those came a decade after aim54A.
Yes the series has taken off since then while the US took a step back in favor of stealth. But I digress.
Yes, and the Soviet Union did not try to copy the AIM-54, on the R-33, yes, it was made under the impression of the AiM-54. But the concept of a heavy interceptor was conceived back in 1968 before the appearance of the F-14 and the Phoenix missile
1 Like
Yes I think the Soviet Union makes the best interceptors as well out of necessity in the Cold War. The had to combat the US’s strategic bomber force and the insane SR71.
I am only speaking in regards to migs argument that time of service means anything.
The rocket entered service together with the carrier. Since the MiG-31 was not ready by the time the missile was already developed
1 Like
This and AIM-54 have motor ratings for high alt as I’ve been saying.
No offence, but do you guys mind getting back on topic with the AIM-54? This isnt the R-33 thread, nor the R-27 thread, drawing comparisons is fine but we seem to be getting rapidly off topic
4 Likes
Nice! You probably can offer a valuable perspective on the aim54 too because of it. Yeah the R33 definitely got better.
Again, to be clear I was just making the point that the aim54 being a decade older was better than the first version of the R33. Which you agree. But of course the Americans took a break in long range active development in favor or medium range and stealth. Now they are the ones playing catch up.
For sure our bad.
1 Like
It’s an eternal swing
The study of the aerodynamics of the AiM-54 was carried out by the HB from DCS
However, their models are worse in quality and 3M cells, and I have 9
2 Likes