A light bullet will deplete much more kinetic energy from air drag than the heavier one.
Regardless of your understanding of physics, just shoot both guns and you will see the 30mm has better range. It’s not that deep
idk man the vulcan just feels better
1 Like
My argument of it should remain at 9.7 instead of moving up or down is a joke? That we should prioritise decompression rather than the adjustment of BR’s on a singular vehicle basis?
I’m both a British main and a Brit irl, why would I be shilling for Russia? I don’t even have anything above 9.0 in the USSR TT lol.
I hope you do realise that the AIM-9J is directly derived from the AIM-9B/E? My statement that the AIM-9P is just a AIM-9B with lipstick on quite literally is true as the AIM-9B/E was the basis for the missile, and differences between both were limited (or at least when translated into WT)…
The peak G-load of the R-60 here was 19.6 whilst the peak for the AIM-9P and AIM-9B were both 13.0 and 7.7
Again, in this test the peak G-load of the R-60 was 20.8 verse the 14.2 of the AIM-9P and 8.2 of the AIM-9B
Whilst the AIM-9P is 37% on average faster than the R-60, it also has 49% less maneuverability on average at the same time. I’d personally take the R-60 simply because the maneuverability is far greater (my opinion).
With the R-3S and AIM-9B being near identical, that statement is entirely untrue. The performance gap between the AIM-9P and AIM-9B is smaller than the gap between the R-60 and R-3S (range vs maneuverability).
I specifically said the ‘AIM-9P isn’t a phenomenal missile’, do you wish to argue against or for? Because according to the Oxford Dictionary, phenomenal means something which is exceptionally impressive, which the AIM-9P isn’t. The missile is decent with pros and cons, but it very much isn’t ‘phenomenal’.
The ‘minor degradation in agility’ being 49% less maneuverability on average? The R-60 is fundamentally in a different class when it comes to maneuverability whilst having significantly less range.
Regarding flare resistance, both are simply horrible at it lol
1 Like
The M16A1 feels significantly better than the Type 30-1 and it’s not even close. The 30-1 has very weird kinematics, you need to lead a lot but it has high velocity? It hits incredibly hard but you barely have much ammo? Honestly just a riddle when it comes to using it and especially when compared to the 16A1…
TLDR; I agree with your post
The trigger time for the F-6C isn’t any different from the MiG-19PT iirc, the additional gun fires at the exact same time as the rest, it’s mostly just a illusion. If it had a offset fire rate then I’d totally agree, but the technical ‘additional ammo’ does help somewhat - especially if you’re good at reserving ammo.
yeah try using the 104A
9.7 is a good BR selection yet not a good BR range itself. Compression. Next!
It has one of the easiest kinematics to deal with since it is one of the fastest and most accurate rounds out there at range. You need to lead the vulcan gun a lot more
2 Likes
Well everything is up to preference when it comes to cannons at the end of the day, just like how most people don’t like the GSh-23L but I personally do. Speaking for myself, I just personally prefer the M16A1 over the Type 30-1.
When it comes to damage I don’t think much come close to the 30-1 however, it’s disgusting at times
1 Like
I love it when the charts I remember and used for my take show up.
The chart also refutes your posts’ claims, which is great.
It’s why the end of my post is:
Final boss of just chatting rubbish
The image you quoted is a screenshot I took, not something you’ve posted beforehand. Additionally, my averages for maneuverability were taken from those screenshots, and on average, the R-60 performed 49% better than the AIM-9P.
So no, it doesn’t ‘refute’ my claim, but actually strengthens it
Preference only matters in certain circumstances, but almost all carriers of the R-60 are MiG-21 derivatives (e.g., MiG-21 SPS-K) which are fast enough to negate the con of the R-60. That being short range.
You know my original statement was correct and are now trying to take sentences or messages out of context, or just straight up lie
Guys, this article was published before I developed the load suit and missiles. I didn’t have much experience flying high-tier vehicles before. Now that I have the load suit and missiles, I find the flying experience really great now.
1 Like
oh yeah, can we bring attention to this absolute wackjob of a matchup in air simulator?
1 Like
how the hell is the f-6c the same br as the normal f-6/mig-19 lmao.
I mean if the ariete is at 9.0 and if the sag 2 is at 8.0 and the venom at 8.3 its not allat surprising
1 Like
Except you know, that’s not how any of this works
1 Like
uhhuh
bro saying best 9.3 other than the starfighter is bad with missiles from a 11.3 son im cryin
“starfighter” son im crine
starfighters basically untouchable if played right if you maintain a speed of mach 1.5 you cant be hit and BNZ in the F104C is easy