Most missiles in-game already score impacts. It’s such a non-issue it’s not even worth bringing up.
2 Likes
+1 especially if it comes with the gunpods.
1 Like
F-106s post Project Six Shooter could replace their Genie bay with a fixed M61A1. This wasn’t done to all of them, but it also added a gunsight.
As for the missiles, we already have aircraft that rely entirely on missiles for combat. The Sea Vixen and all top tier aircraft in 99% of situations will only ever use missiles. The 102 (and 106) would be no different.
2 Likes
Well that’s not an Air to Air Missile, it’s a time-fused, unguided rocket. AIR stands for Air Intercept Rocket.
2 Likes
i dont think the genie could be added into the game, so i think fixed vulcan would do
The Genie wouldn’t be all that effective. No impact or proxmity fuse, so any kills would be down to the pilot’s skill. Against aircraft it was only deadly in a ~600m radius or so, and gaijin won’t add any of the features of its FCS that allowed it to be deployed accurately.
And that’s all for the 106, this suggestion is on the 102 which was never fitted with any guns, aside from one time with the 7.62 gunpods.
1 Like
i mean, imagine people using it in grb to errase the teams there
those gun pods are fine then, its ok with me
1 Like
Trying to nitpick is pointless:
1 Like
It’s still a time-fused rocket with no fragmentation whatsoever. You’d have to be very lucky or very skilled to use it, and its effectiveness would be much lower than against aircraft.
1 Like
1.5kt is 300 times the FAB-5000. Pressure damage alone would be devastating. The FAB has an armour destruction radius of 105m, using the inverse-square law we can approximate the kill radius as 1.8km. Against aircraft even larger.
Dunno where this 300m number is coming from, but 301m sure as hell ain’t safe by any sense of the word. There’s a reason the missile only became armed after burnout at 10km and the 106 had to turn and run the moment of launch to escape the blast.
2 Likes
Yeah things don’t scale up like that, and in any case tanks are far more resistant to nukes.
That’s what I should be asking you, nobody said 300m.
Minimum travel time was 6 seconds, 10km range would be at the upper end of travel time at 8.5s. The Genie was first used from the much slower F-89, so its not like the 106 was cutting it close. Obviously you want to reduce risk to the pilot and aircraft from radiation or flash blindness.
Some basic missile performances for the missiles the 102 carried:
AIM-4A
399m/s dV
17g
M2.7
I-band pulse SARH
https://web.archive.org/web/20171017215154/http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-4A_Falcon_SMC_-_September_1963.pdf
AIM-4B
420m/s dV
17g
M2.7
IR
https://web.archive.org/web/20180820155210/http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/GAR-2_Falcon_SAC_-_1_May_1959.pdf
AIM-4C
392m/s dV
17g
M2.6
IR
https://web.archive.org/web/20171017125437/http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-4C_Falcon_SMC_-_September_1963.pdf
AIM-4D
371m/s dV
16g
M2.6
IR
https://web.archive.org/web/20171017233043/http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-4D_Falcon_SMC_-_September_1963.pdf
I was wondering too to see this figure on wikipedia. Even it is mostly a rather unreliable source the number must have some meaning.
The only explanation i would find somehow comprehensible is that the 300 meters are somehow related to evasive maneuvers of the targeted aircraft.
So an incoming Bomber with 900 kmph has rather limited options to perform radical maneuvers to get out of the blast radius even if the unguided rocket could be detected direct after launch. So the 300 meters might be related to the maximum possible course alteration of the target between firing and the predetermined ignition of the warhead whilst still being lethal.
Have a good one!