Those are AIM-120A/B LSZ’s not AIM-54
Ah I see, was inferring that it was about the AIM-54s given, you know, this is the AIM-54 thread.
The only person here that seems to actually be discussing the missile in question’s performance is MyhticPi and SE_8749236.
4 Likes
I don’t know if this is your passive aggressive way of saying that people are being off-topic, but it should be noted that even Mythic and SE were talking about AIM-120s too because the topic for the last day or so has been whether or not AIM-120s should outrange Phoenix.
No this goes pretty much all the way back to the start of June in this thread, pretty much the moment someone posts about the 54 people come out of the woodwork talking about other ARHes and so on, with the few people within the thread actually talking about the 54 having to deflect comments and statements about said other ARHes on the regular, lest it just becomes a “what missile can we replace the AIM-54 with because it just cant be implemented effectively” thread.
3 Likes
It does seem some people are dead set on making sure the AIM-54C remains as trash as it is in-game forever and actively work against any improvements or effective discussion on the subject.
6 Likes
They’re angry that my points are valid and I can show the AIM-54 is overperforming in the areas that they’re trying to buff it. Best to ignore those types of comments and continue posting the facts.
…
Now you are just telling lies. In every reply of mine to you, I always actively acknowledged that the Sea Phoenix test is valid and in game Phoenix is clearly over performing at sea level.
My point trying to get across is Phoenix’s thrust is underperforming at high altitude above 10,000m, where you constantly refuses and simply repeat “it can hit the 200km target as stated in the doc”, yes everything you’ve said is true (once again, I am not denying), but you are actively ignoring the issue of underperforming thrust at higher altitude above 10,000m.
Yes, I fully understand that your point is totally valid if you ignore all of my points. But if this is what you want, what’s the point of communicating with you?
The other issue you’ve ignored was there are multiple trajectory and speed profile where time to impact can remain the same. The only time you’ve direct responded to this concern was something like assuming Aim-54 Phoenix has better loft profile than modern missile is unreasonable, despite others have already brought up that the battery may be the limiting factor of 200km launch range, which the missile may have more energy left but can no longer function due to dead battery.
You are the one clearly being angry, evasive, ignorant and disrespectful to others comment by not reading carefully. Let alone understanding other’s point of view.
5 Likes
Thrust values are likely for 45,000 feet and are accurate.
The whole idea that the thrust values given are for sea level is absurd. You went on a rant about ignoring points but you keep ignoring that one. Mythics erroneous math based on a metric ton of assumptions doesn’t validify his equally absurd claims.
Your point which you claim I supposedly ignored. This clearly shows you didn’t bother to read my post.
This line is literally in the first post I replied to you two days ago, when this discussion started.
If you don’t like to read my posts, just say TLDR and I’m fine with that. Just don’t pretend you respected others when you didn’t since that generates miscommunication. I’ve spent hours to read your post over and over again to make sure I understand you correctly, I doubt you even finished reading it once.
1 Like
Thank you, that’s the response I’d like to hear.
If we can find information that confirm or denies this then it will be great.
1 Like
All of the long range missiles from Hughes show thrust values at 40k+ feet on their standard characteristics pages. The only ones that show sea level are medium range or shorter. I posted an example above.
Yes, the Phoenix is over performing at sea level.
Yes, it is likely the thrust value is for 45,000ft.
But what about 60,000ft?
If thrust matches 45,000 feet and it is adjusted for that scenario, performance above that altitude will be slightly underperforming and at lower altitudes significantly overperforming. That is why gaijin adjusts most ordnance to 0-5,000m range and performance charts. Meet in the middle.
The Phoenix is adjusted for very high alts, so overperforms in majority of use cases in-game.
1 Like
With current loft profile, yes. Missile doesn’t really goes above 10,000m and tends to dive very quickly even when fired at higher altitude.
But if loft is fixed and missile goes higher, then the missile will spend more time above 45,000ft, right?
It’s a mute point that it climbs during loft because what will end up happening is it will again overperform at low altitude if you fix the extreme high altitude performance. Nothing changes here.
Either it matches the performance at 100,000+ feet and then has double or triple range at low alt, or it is modeled for low to medium alt and underperforms in extreme long range scenarios. The latter is how missiles are modeled currently. The only exception seems to be the AIM-7F which has too much thrust and is capable of exceeding its’ own launch diagrams at both low and medium altitudes. It needs a revision.
The R-27ER for example was adjusted to 0-5km altitude and thus underperforms in high altitude performance. The AIM-54 is no exception to this and complaints about it are honestly tailored or biased in some respect. R-27ER is missing 100 m/s from the top speed, and up to 20% of its’ range in high speed + high altitude scenarios. The AIM-54 is also missing some top speed but meets the correct range figure in the correct time, at least… which suggests overperformance because it carries velocity for too long at a certain distance… thus overperforms in maneuverability for a larger portion of the flight envelope downrange.
I understand the concern.
We all know game does not simulate varying thrust over altitude. Changing loft alone will certainly make Aim54 overperform even more.
However, thrust can be reduced along with the change in loft.
I remember this:
Changing loft gives opportunity to make Phoenix more or less correct both in high alt and at sea level.
Remember the tests done earlier this year? Increasing in loft will increase max speed attained by missile, but it has very little effect on the flight time (TTI differs only by few seconds, which translates to 5% ish difference), since missile flies longer distance despite it flies faster.
If there is a change to Phoenix, I expect it to reduce thrust, but greatly improves lofting so that it actually climbs over 10,000m after launch, so that it can fly faster, thus retain more or less correct number at long range when fired at high speed and high altitude.
There is another thing that concerns me. Current state of Aim-54, even without the change mentioned above, just doesn’t look right. Since, in China, Aim-54 is considered more or less an equal to PL-15E, and less range than PL-15, and PL-15E already superior to any Aim-120 variants in service.
PL-17 > PL-15 > PL-15E ~= Aim54 > PL-12 ~= Aim-120
Aim-54 having less firing range than Aim-120 is just very wrong. Since that means Aim-120 > PL-15E, which we know isn’t true. Otherwise US wouldn’t have started Aim-260 project.
It would be far more effective to adjust the drag based on altitude so that a correct loft profile yields better higher altitude performance while simultaneously correcting the overperforming sea level performance. The thrust can stay roughly the same, or they can adjust the burn time a little bit.
Obviously the most correct method of fixing this issue is to have dynamic thrust and drag conditions.
True, however, I don’t think the game has this system. The only way to affect drag is by sending missile higher, which is what loft does.
We know missile reach correct altitude in game, but there is no data on when it reaches correct altitude. So technically we can make missile climb faster in game, and reach the “correct altitude” sooner. So that it enjoys longer time with reduced drag; thus achieving a similar effect.
But this is something dev has to decide. So, fingers crossed.
That will be even better.
What is the current in game drag and what should the drag be changed to?