You cant get the TWS to lock properly at all, and the actual PD lock breaks far, far too easily, teh gripen is far, far better for BVR in my experience than the typhoon.
I wouldn’t say mach 1.04 isn’t fast, it aint meta fast, but its still fast enough to sling off an amraam.
No it shouldn’t and I wont even argue that it should be on their level, but bear in mind not a year ago we barely had the F15A introduced, never mind all these fancy new toys. they really need to crank the BR limit up
Maybe I’m getting lucky, but I didn’t have that much trouble with the EFT tws locking. It surely has problems with updating, but I usually found it at least managable.
It’s slow as shit at 14.0, because most jets will be doing mach 1.2 or higher at that BR.
And sure you can still sling amraams off at that speed, but they will be the easiest thing in the world to defeat. I can’t remember that last time I died to a Hornet in BVR.
no its Snail’s pace as far as slinging fox 3s goes.
Its got teh single worst top tier radar, Hell most 13.7 radars are better.
even teh gripen has a better locking radar especailly for TWS.
I cant remember the last time I died doing BVR, cause at the end of the day regardless if its a hornet or not, if you keep your speed at about mach 0.95- 1.05 you can effectively notch almost if not every missile in a long range situation.
Hardly.
I will take the EFT with an iffy radar over the Hornet with a less iffy radar every day of the week.
You can keep thinking (coping) that the hornet is not mediocre at bvr, but I think you’ll be in for a rude awakening later down the line.
The 120c5 performs very poorly in the current game. It cannot utilize its full 35G overload capability due to its terrible AOA and rudder effectiveness. Fighters can easily evade this missile with simple maneuvers. At this point, it feels more like a long-range guided rocket than an actual missile.
i used statshark to fire a aim120a at a target going mach 1 at 5000 meters of altitude(both) and i got a time of 41.1 seconds to target. doing the same at mach 1.4 gave me a TTG of 37.3.
in the same conditions aim120c-5 had a mach 1 ttg of 39.4 and a mach 1.4 ttg of 35.8. speed is so important that if you fire a aim120a from a faster aircraft it will outperfom a aim120c-5 from a slower aircraft.
Considerign the F18C can sit at mach 1.10 try it at that.
also Ill say this once
as per the devs on the russian forums, stat shark is not reliable for discerning any form of FM or missile capabilities
As well as this, the F18C has ten AMRAAM’s. so it can fire more than once and crank out. its radar is better pretty good as well.
It’s radar is pretty average. Similar level as the F-15 but still miles behind the different esa radars like all the other mechanical radars at top tier.
I guess if we strap 10 amraams to an F-100 and give it the Hornet radar it would also be a good bvr plane at 14.0?
This “muh 10 amraams” is legit the number 1 cope point that people use to proof that the F/A-18C is supposedly a good bvr plane. If missile evasion would give rewards than the Hornet would have at least 1 benefit in bvr: giving the enemy free sl and rp.
You compared it to the EFT, the EFT radar is statistically the worst top tier radar ingame RN
The F100, is no where near as manueverable, or as fast.
You sound far, far too emotional over it mate.
Considering its the next top tier im actively working into right now, skipping over the F15C just to see how it ismyself.
I seriously doubt the 18C is that bad, people here just like to be extremely dramatic over it.
Like that comparisson with an F100 with a hornets loadout?
thats bull n u know it is xDD it may not reach mach 1.2 but itll still do fine at top tier, considering most the time im not flying past mach 1.14 anyways.
so yeah. I’m gonna stop here and move on mate.
I just hate it when people use bad logic. It is statistically the worst 14.0 and those statistics reflect reality. It’s incredibly mediocre when compared to the actual 14.0 aircraft.
But yeah this is just something you’ll have to find out for yourself.
EDIT: yeah the F-100 was a bit of a overreaction. Something more realistic would be the F-4F ICE, which has a similar radar and has a similar flight performance.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/3EJG7s3lbGMe
I’m pretty sure that the AIM-120C-5 will remain as it is now
They’re basically asking for classified/somewhat sensitive information.
Just the classic gatekeep Gaijin applies whenever they think something is settled.
CC @Beeschurger @Morvran @SPANISH_AVENGER
“PLEASE DO NOT GIVE US SEKRIT DOCUMENTS!!”
and then beg for them. The duality of man is unbeatable
I suppose the 9X will have a worse turn performance than the AIM-9M and a full on smoke motor. Best method to get your racoon hands on American state classified info
funny
would have to sit with missile worser than R-77-1. as did before
but that time with different model
I dont wanna say that bug report is AI generated but it certainly has that energy.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Imagine it wont change the results much.
Statshark has the numbers, now you cant judge a missiles capabilities off a simulated shot. But thats not what i was doing. I was trying to put into nunbers the raw impact speed has on perfomance.
I think theres misunderstanding. I didnt miss a thing.
All i said that was that bug report feels generated, not written.
Wouldnt be the first time bug report manager was doing their job horribly.
Sorry, but i just dont understand where this hostility is coming from.
I never even denied that current implementation of C5 is a 120A/B reskin.
But unless im not mistaken, dev server usually runs for at least two weeks, no? So it is still possible that it can change again.
It has been clear enough how they want the 120C5 to perform, it’s more than likely they will just leave the missile as is. Its your headstrong attitude on not understanding how they work that tends to lead some hostility.
So what’s it gonna be? Do I have to tag you again when the dev server closes and, suprise, they didn’t touched a thing after this couple of weeks?