The Mk 60 and Mk47 mod 0 are for all intents and purposes identical… the Mk 47 mod 1 would (in theory) be slightly improved. We don’t have solid data for the Mk47 mod 1 besides the use of low smoke propellant. It is worth noting that at the time of introduction (early 80s)… HTPB propellant had not yet exceeded the ISP of higher efficiency CTPB based propellants such as that used in the AIM-7F or AIM-54. The impulse of these is in the 260-270s range. It is entirely possible that the Mk47 mod 1 has slightly inferior specific impulse (in the 240-250s range)… but again - we have no solid data on it.
The in-game thrust values for the AIM-54 are mostly accurate… the drag is simply too high.
Because the drag yes, over that will basically dont arrive in time to hit, 30km are in the burn time energy, i always do that
Try use Aim54A for long high alt targets and the C for 30km bellow
The monopulse seeker helps look down when high but not necessarily helps defeating ground hugging, that’s a separate problem. Ground hugging is caused by multi pathing, a simple analog is putting a mirror next to a person, at the correct angle, you can see two image of that person. Now imagine entire ground is a mirror and you see two target images, that’s what Gaijin is trying to simulate.
This trick was defeated IRL, since they were often employed by sea skimming anti ship missile or cruise missile. Aim54C was upgraded to defeat anti ship missiles flying like this, but I don’t think Gaijin is willing to model this since they likely consider this as a “balance”. If they do so, then that means any premium bomb trucks will be dead on arrival and upset their customers since they “don’t have any means to defend themselves and getting killed constantly” (because game does not teach them how to defeat missiles).
On the otherhand, if they do make modern ARH missile vulnerable to multi pathing, then meta won’t change. As long as one hug the ground, radar guided missile is useless. Everyone can still enjoy rushing straight to enemy and spam IRCCM IR missile.
If they introduce ground following autopilot, then BVR in this game will be dead.
So developer’s choices are limited, it is very likely they will make ARH vulnerable multipathing forever, until they introduce ECM jammers and make premium aircrafts carry ECM by default.
I have a tatic to do this, i think i bring a video here.
You can simply fire the Phoenix at same time the su27 or mig 29, fire a second at 30km, crank while down your plane and mantain the lock on until a time, you will guide the Phoenix and force flying at strait line for long time, if you see it missile come fly to another direction and turn going away, you force it in defensive position, most of time hit, i have a 40 minute vídeo doing this i you send to you
This video i do with all planes some times work or not, i saw the times that dont worked, its because the missile bug track
But if works just fire 2 Phoenix at diferent range, maybe the guy will evade the first but not prepared for a second
What i understand the monopulse seeker is not a integral method.
But anyway, if they try to reply ground hugging, at least increase the chances in percent to a missile hit and go towards at low level target and the proximity fuze work.
The missile pass close and does not explode side side of target
If the Mk 60 motor has a lower burn time and higher thrust it would be more useful in-game against fighter sized targets at medium ranges I presume… but what I said earlier is true only a hundred or so motors were built and primarily for the AIM-54A models. The AIM-54C came standard with the Mk47 mod 1.
Quick question, are developers aware of too much drag from phoenix and benefit of base drag reduction from long burning motors. Some players had done test in War Thunder and their footage shows Aim54 is pulled behind by enormous drag upon launch but before ignition, where as historical footage shows they don’t suffer from this.
In game footage, Aim-54 moves backwards for half fuselage length of F-14 after launch, until motor ignites and they start accelerating forwards.
Historical footage of Aim54, it does not experience massive drag and does not move backwards significantly after launch and before ignition.
These planes are not accelerating with full burner or 100% throttle, they are cruising so the “missile fall behind” is not due to plane itself accelerating away from missile.
If you look at 2:03 of that video, these Tomcats are clearly cruising at 78% throttle, not accelerating with full AB or 100% power.
The test was meant to eliminate all factors unrelated to the missile, that includes eliminating the acceleration of Tomcat.
I think you misunderstood or did not remember what said previously. You said Tomcats in game were accelerating, and I said the in-game test video clearly shows they are not accelerating, sometimes even decelerating.
