How about old vs new 54C
old aim-54c to new aim-54c should be a bit closer together to each other as the old aim-54c was a bit worse than old aim-54a in performance (about 20kg heavier), but generally the comparisons wouldn’t look too different from the stuff i sent
So the fakour 90, which is based on the continuous wave mim-23 hawk missile gets a distance gate but the aim-54C/C+ that took parts from the development of the amraam doesn’t?
The rocket thrust nerf is also a bit strange, considering it’s very well known to at least last 30 seconds, but overall not that big a deal. Halving the explosive mass also comes from nowhere, the explosive mass is well know at least. Loft elevation is an improvement, but shouldn’t it be 30º ? Raising the proportional navigation multiplier to 6 is also unexpected, but a bigger buff than people might realise.
Overall an improvement, but with some strange decisions still.
6 Likes
90 percent chance of being implemented I would say.
Expect to guide the missile for longer before it goes active only for it to bleed all its airspeed in 1 turn…
2 Likes
It kinda got active range buff too tho
“seeker turn on range from target: 16000 → 18520 m”
From my understanding Fakour doesnt get that
1 Like
So now you have a missile that goes active farther out, while traveling much slower! It’ll give alot of time to maneuver and notch
1 Like
I think in Zenturion video it oulls harder than aim120d
2 Likes
That shouldn’t happen since it got a significant drag buff and also predicts it’s target’s flightpath 2x more now. It’s a good tradeoff.
Eh i wish it didnt get slower it already was fairly slow
1 Like
Yeah I’m trying to get to the bottom of that. The Thurst nerf is completely unwarranted
2 Likes
The drag “buff” doesn’t show. Look at the chart, its getting there slower and in more time
Same 110 shot
The drag buff can only be seen in the green part, as I increase the thrust to the older value
2 Likes
It was taken out of context. Guidance delay for the AIM-54 was removed from that graph.
Why they nerfed the thrust?
2 Likes
i would guess its some hasty “balancing” cause it makes no real sense, it gets less thrust and less burn time.
2 Likes
I think it does not make any sense that they buffed the stat card speed to M 5.7 and now it can’t even reach Mach 4
3 Likes
The numbers they pulled for the motor are straight up nonsense
4 Likes
Statcard is worthless and should never be held as a source of truth.
1 Like
You are misunderstanding the mechanic. That value is a maximum speed limit, not a guaranteed speed the missile can actually reach. The missile still needs enough thrust, burn time, launch conditions, altitude, and drag performance to get there. So it is not directly related to the stat card speed either; it only caps the missile if it somehow reaches that limit.
3 Likes
Something with variable thrust depending on pressure/altitude? So at sealevel (101300 Pa) it has the 1.0 multiplier, but at ~13000+ alttiude or so (16300 Pa), it has around 15.8 kN thrust with the 1.22x multiplier.
9 Likes