this is a literal example of effective range? target reacts to the missile with a 3G break and the missile chases.
Cool, but how do you define effective range?
That firing envelope shows the effective range of the AMRAAM against a russian bomber which evades at 3 g shortly before the missile impacts. And it is a realistic scenario (IIRC there was one report noting that the weakest RWRs used by Russia at the time would only detect an AMRAAM’s radar at something like 4 km range).
Obviously the effective range of the missile against a fighter which evades at a higher g, or longer range, or lower altitude would be different.
You can make the effective range of a missile be whatever you want depending on how you define effective range.
Battery life is 80 seconds.
1 Like
it does?
reaches an altitude of just over 15km(the target altitude), i.e doesnt loft to the target at all. Doesnt even get close to the target either. It does however loft for other situations, so to mythicpi’s credit, the loft profile for aim-54 definitely seems cheesed.
@DirectSupport did the missile not reach correct altitudes and ranges for the long range test or am I remembering incorrectly?
It does, people stating it does not reach the correct altitudes are mistaken. They can reference this post:
The excerpt in particular:
Long story short, the missile reached 100,000 feet in his test. I also spent half an hour testing it and it reached the correct altitude as well in the scenario.
well this shows it doesnt at all, maybe thats different in game but it shouldnt be?
okay there is a chance the software doesnt run for the AIM-54 because it uses the old loft style, if this is tested in game then i’ll accept that as valid.
I don’t have any sources on the 54C motor except that it should be low smoke @Gunjob said he nudged the report recently.
The motor was in production since 1983 so presumably uses similar impulse low smoke HTPB as the AIM-9M which would put it at equal performance to the AIM-54A (in terms of efficiency). On the flip side, the Fuji marines yellow book claims the 54C uses a heavier motor section so additional propellant may have been added making it more similar in impulse to the I-HAWK motor (but boost-only)…
We won’t know until sources are declassified or FOIA’d.
1 Like
Or the software dertava made is just as unreliable as all the others made to test missiles in-game.
I learned this the hard way, but corrected myself. In-game tests are valid, anything else is just supporting.
it’s worked for every other scenario but this, im willing to afford it a blip this time
I would not recommend jumping to conclusions based on the software if it is erroneous even once. It needs to be validated in-game regardless and isn’t usable for reports.
First of all, a 3G turn can hardly be called a “break” , second of all it maneuvers 1 mile before the missile hits it… Which is a fraction of a second… Might as well keep going straight…
The effective range is usually between 1/2 and 1/3 of a missile’s max range. This is to avoid wasting missiles and in turn, having to return to base earlier which in turn fucks with cyclic ops in an AO
Now on the bomber example, idk what kind of RWR you are talking about but the Russian bombers of that era are carrying some significant electronic hardware so I dont think a 3G turn 1 mile before impact is a realistic scenario to consider.
Uh? When did I ever said the 54 doesnt get similar penalties? The 54 cant even work properly on its deadliest “under 20nm” shots let alone the normal 40-60nm shots or the extreme shots you are refairing to… I dont get your point.
The effective range (meaning pK higher than 90% imo) is the NEZ limit.
Nez is golden but often unatainable. I understand however that it is subjective to personal preference. From the few talks I have had with air force pilots, they confirm that its up to the flight or section lead but the general rule and training is that (depending on mission parameters) they shouldnt take shots with less than 60% pK.
Also doctrine varies from country to country and even squadron to squadron, so its all up to debate.
So take of this what you will, I cant really confirm anything, since im not a pilot myself. I am just going with what has been entrusted to me by retired aviators that happen to be family friends as long as it makes a logical sense.
No, as you can see there is a graph where it manoeuvres at 15nm.