I mean, at this point its largely pointless in even bothering to argue. We KNOW radar missiles are underperforming in-game, particularly in the low altitude intercept capacity, with multiple sources stating improvements in low latitude target intercepts for things like the AIM-7M (which I’ve submitted a bug report on regarding its actual min altitude of 5m irl, while in-game its min altitude is 95m for the missile to have little enough error vs a non-maneuvering target to pass within the proxy fuse range).
There are some rather basic and clearly problematic modelling issues with the AIM-54C. The smokeless motor being omitted when it was not only added to the new AIM-9M, but retroactively added to the AGM-65D is tantamount to spitting in the F-14 communities face, the admittance that the modelling decision behind the 17G max pull on the AIM-54C is intentional is another egregious situation, both of which would have a major positive affect on the missile.
The low altitude intercept problem is just a widespread modelling problem for radar missiles which at this point is just outright horrendous, particularly when we’ve entered an era of high performance and flare resistant IR missiles for only a handful of planes putting all other planes at a notable disadvantage in close range without any real way to provide effective spacing using radar missiles as a credible threat as multipath is HIGHLY abusable in WT, not only due to how high the multipath effect is, but also from the simple reality that 3rd person flying makes abusing ground hugging tactics easy, safe and reliable. Contrails are also modelled excessively, making abusing spotting mechanics by low altitude flying even more advantageous.
Of this list:
for which @k_stepanovich argues almost all points of, 3 are substantial issues well within the ability of the devs to correct with little work (max G-load, low alt intercept, smokeless motor). Arguing NCTR capability, beam target tracking in lock down scenarios, stream raid ability, etc… although interesting, and possibly helpful are all things that could/would take more time to fix and are more debatable.
Fixing simple issues such as max G load and the lack of smokeless motor should be prioritized as first steps for the AIM-54C specifically, with low altitude intercept ability of late radar missiles using PD/monopulse seekers being something that should just be fixed across the board at this point. The AIM-7F has been in-game for just under 2 years at this point and remains the “baseline” for radar missiles at top tier, with the 7M being a copy paste, and radar mechanics flip flopping widely ever since, to the point where relatively low performance radar missiles such as the AIM-7E/E-2 were more reliable weapons than current top missiles are now.
Even IF we want to sit on the argument of “we dont have enough info to ascertain exact capabilities o X radar missile” which is going to become more and more of an issue as the game progresses, gameplay very much SHOULD take priority over that. As it stands, there’s no reason to believe the upcoming AIM-120/R-77 and other ARH’s will be any functionally better radar-wise to things such as the AIM-7M/R-27ER, since the multipath effect will still be highly abusable, and the missiles themselves dont offer particularly game changing kinematic performances either.
Radar missiles at top tier should be a credible threat, not a dice roll at best and a completely irrelevant threat at worse as they are currently.
