A. Cuz they’re lazy
B. Cuz they have some weird unexplained and unfounded hatred for the AIM-54 for some reason
C. All of the above
Modifying the AIM-54’s guidance code and including energy management code (something all radar missiles above 12.0 have EXCEPT the AIM-54) and a better loft trajectory doesnt really change time to target much, but substantially improves speed at range, as seen below:
Keep in mind, none of these are the AIM-120 loft trajectory, all of the loft codes tested here were made by me except IMPL, made by Dark_Claw. EM is however the AIM-54C’s in-game guidance and loft code, with the only change being I added the energy management section from the AIM-120A, and it showed a minor improvement right off the bat.
The annoying part being that as can be seen above, improved loft codes dont particularly affect the AIM-54 at any ranges except the long ranges, at which all it does is provide less warning when missile goes pitbull, and more energy for the missile to maneuver at ranges you’d EXPECT the missile to be used… so its not really like improved loft codes would suddenly make the AIM-54C broken, it would just have a larger effective firing envelope. As currently implemented in-game, the AIM-54’s ideal range is in the ballpark of 35-45km, with anything closer being much too visible to be a threat to anyone with eyeballs, and anything further starting to range into “too slow to ba dangerous” considering all its other characteristics. Keep in mind the above test is a M1.2 launch vs M1.2 target at 9000m alt, and that 99% of shots in WT will not occur in such good conditions.
Project W0614 - This program provides performance and reliability improvements to the AIM-54 PHOENIX missile through development of (1) a digital electronics unit with auto-pilot functions; (2) an improved receiver/transmitter; and (3) an improved
Target Detection Device. The digital electronics unit will be software programmable and will provide expanded capabilities against electronic countermeasures, high-altitude targets, maneuvering targets, very low altitude targets and cluster targets.
The improved receiver/transmitter will include a frequency modulated transmitter with a frequency reference system and will provide the capability to track through the target’s beam aspect and to guide on targets in a stream raid. The improved Target Detection Device will be totally solid state and will provide expanded capabilities in adverse environments. These new units will provide a significant increase in missile reliability over the existing AIM-54A.
@David_Bowie@Gunjob The AIM-54 in-game is tailored for the high alt launch test scenario, as you can see at an altitude of ~10km the missile burns for nearly 40s as opposed to the lower estimate given in-game of 30. If we are to correctly adjust the drag and loft profile of the missile it needs to reflect the correct burn time for that launch scenario first.
@sudo_su1 Can you tag @MythicPi about this, he claims to have me blocked (but hasn’t) and is too prideful to admit as much. Though he would be very interested in this burn time data for the Phoenix at those given altitudes.
I sincerely apologize to anyone affected by this emotional roller coaster.
I should’ve gotten the hint from all the test launches being on the first day of consecutive months, or the fact that the detailed test launch data would not be in an unclassified thesis from 1975.
Yes the missile hits the target but by the time this happens I am almost overflying it. It would be more efficient to let it come a bit closer and shoot a sparrow as it would have intercepted the “drone” further away.
The missile goes on its intercept course and as soon as the motor is off it starts turning hard to compensate for the massive reduction in speed. Its as if the missile is having a stroke…
So is there any video or whatever of that max range shot being done in war thunder? Idk if you posted it here or anywhere else but I couldnt find anything. And because I couldnt find anything other than you saying that “the devs tested it”, I am inclined to be highly sceptical of that claim.
Also. I cant wrap my mind around why the engineers in Hughes decided to use other motors when the M112 motor for the hawk is so much better in every way… In 1977 the M112 was available. So why not use that beast instead ?
Weight.
Phoenix was already quite heavy.
While Tomcat could carry 6, it couldn’t land with them on a carrier.
Also there was no need … Even without more propellant, Phoenix out ranged basically every air to air missile for a long time.
The propellants used seem to quite similar, at least for the Aerojet MK 60 motor (both use Polyurethane binder).
Yes we do, the in-game missiles use the Mk47 mod 0, though the AIM-54C should at least receive reduced smoke propellant for the Mk47 mod 1.
The Mk60 mod 0 was produced in small numbers as a risk reduction method (ensure there were always available motors early on - and as competition to reduce prices). They produced somewhere around 200 of them at most. Performance was equal to the Mk47 mod 0 although likely had slightly higher thrust and slightly lower burn time depending on temp and altitude.
No? The NASA source calculates a minimum top speed of mach 5 when launched from 2 mach and some sources or studies indicate a maximum top speed based on the thrust and drag profile of mach 6.1 provided it has the deltaV to get there. When launched from 2.4 mach it is capable of mach 6.1 at altitude.
In-game, drag does not get as low as it should at very high altitudes. The drag profile of the missile is thus adjusted to ensure it reaches the correct ranges. This is also why it overperforms at lower altitudes. (Also because the total impulse and thrust is adjusted to the high alt launch scenario, which is going to be higher than sea level conditions naturally).
What are you talking about man? How is it “overperforming” when its going so slow that you overfly it in a 22nm head on shot ? “the drag profile is adjusted to ensure it reaches the correct ranges” But you disregard the energy state it reaches those ranges… Your “adjustments” are napkin math
“The air-launched version of Phoenix was clearly capable of downing
antiship missiles; Friedman reports that “in a 1983 test, Phoenix shot down
eleven of eleven Harpoons.” And with a maximum speed in excess of Mach 4
and an 80-nautical-mile range, the Phoenix had the ability to engage enemy
antiship missiles at a safe distance from the targeted ship.”
What of it, it’s discussing as launched from the F-14 in that excerpt quite clearly. It has less impulse than the I-HAWK by 200m/s, the I-HAWK having a maximum launch range of ~39-40km against incoming sea level targets.
The in-game Phoenix which is draggier and has less impulse somehow has a maximum range in excess of the real world I-HAWK SAM.
No missile in-game reaches correct top speed, even R-27ER is underperforming by at least 100 m/s at all altitudes. The AIM-120, MICA, R-77 all have underperforming top speeds. This is a game limitation for some reason.
In surface launch, yes. The I-HAWK has superior deltaV and lower drag. Reaches top speed sooner and then sustains it.
