Likely not a case of gaijin trying to hide the post, the search function just seems to be a little funky compared to stuff like google, and instead of returning the most relevant/popular return similar to what you typed, it tries to find specifically what you typed regardless of how low the engagement is.
Its probably more just due to the fact that the search system is specific to what you wrote, and not actually to what’s popular.
My usage of the correct notation “Kh-38MT” is likely hurting the searchability of the thread on the forums, because others tend to use the incorrect “kh-38”/“KH-38” or a version without the hyphen.
Using the correct "Kh-38MT" in the search bar returns my thread:
So its not cuz gaijin is actively trying to hide it (I hope) more so than their search engine doesnt work quite the same as googles which is what ppl are used to.
That helps, but with the 45° gimbal limit on the AIM-9L you can lead the missile correctly for almost all launches that offer a decent hit probability. It’s not much of a factor for helicopters unless the user doesn’t know what he’s doing.
The F-15E does not run out of energy remotely as fast as the Su-30SM, and that’s the main weakpoint of that plane. Acceleration and energy retention of those two are very far apart.
Uhh, I see them quite often? Most people just use them for a suicide run into the enemy team.
I did mess around with it a bit and found out most of that myself but I have never really had a problem like this searching for any other individual topic on the forums ever, also its literally just 1 below what shows up without having to click more (which in turn brings up the actual search page instead of the mini one in the top right). I just don’t see how “KH-38” has any more relevant searches than this, it just doesn’t make sense to me.
The AIM-9 has pretty bad short range performance these days (due to increased control surface unlock delay & fairly late proximity fuse arming), and doesn’t have the seeker to actually make use of the good kinematic range that the sidewinder should offer.
Its easy to overcorrect, and pull more lead than is optimal and the poor acceleration and G-loading at lower speeds leads to a largish minimum turn radius during the boost phase compounds the issues, so the Sidewinder is fairly restricted at short and medium ranges due to the seeker not being anywhere near as good as it should be.
Which is where a properly modeled ATAS would be very useful due to the much improved kinematics.
My experience is the opposite, really. In short/medium range engagements I get better results with the AIM-9L/M than with Igla/ATAS (and TY-90), and very comparable ones to the Mistral. The slow acceleration profile (5 seconds booster burn time for the AIM-9L/M, 1.9/1.4 seconds for Igla/Stinger) and lower Delta V (~820 m/s for the AIM-9L/M, ~1300 m/s for Igla/ATAS) helps a lot with the guidance start delay, as the missile will start tracking after much less range travelled. It doesn’t reach it’s optimal overload early, that’s true, but the maximum overload is significantly higher.
As for kinematic performance, the AIM-9L/M offers much less range in practise than both Igla and ATAS. I’ve gotten hits against non/minimally maneuvering planes out to >6 km with those, the AIM-9L/M has no chance to get out that far from a helicopter launch. I’m not sure if it may have drag values that are too high, but with how big the delta V difference is the better range of Igla/ATAS is probably correct.
It is easy to overlead with ATAS/AIM-9/Mistral, but that’s really just experience.
It really would be, even if it would probably lead to some BR adjustments for the lower BR vehicles that use it. With a 22 G overload the ATAS should perform like a slightly shorter ranged TY-90 just judging by Delta V/acceleration and missile mass. In short/medium range engagements it should perform better with 22 G overload.
If 9X is an IIR missile then your comparison is flawed. Currently those missiles would be unflarable and a guaranteed kill.
The IR → IIR upgrade is a meta defining moment, while giving more speed to a missile with already common guidance method really isn’t.
On the other hand, 38MT uses IR + IOG guidance which already is present in the game, with only difference being that it has more speed.
So following this logic, giving 15E a faster 9M wouldn’t be that much of an issue, if plane is found to be lacking in other areas to justify the addition.
Removing an AGM and replacing it with another one that has 2.2x less speed is a noticeable change, especially when speed is, by your own admission, one of the most important aspects of similar AGMs.
That being said, BR is just a numerical representation of vehicle’s overall performance which would definitely drop quiet significantly, so it’s to be expected for BR to drop as well.
Try removing top dart from 120S and give it DM23 as it’s best option. I doubt it would remain at it’s current BR for long.
Sounds fun and glad i missed that.
Last real fun thing i remember was when drones were introduced. I just reached the BR they were implemented to and had no AA to deal with them. It was actually the main reason i bought the 2S38 back then.
Before that i shot down helis with the Shturm.
It is a reskinned, copy-pasted Block 10 with sparrows. There is nothing “fake” about the AJ’s capabilities and it’s missing the one thing that made japan even consider it:
So while its addition is wrong as it was never built, everything written on the brochure had already been built and tested.
wrong the rocket motor of the KH-38 exists the only thing that dosent is the seeker
(similar to the E-100, the hull existed but the turret for it didnt)
and also the f-16aj dosent even look close to the one that was presented (mainly the nose)
and they shouldnt have gotten a f-16a blk 10 but a YF-16 with sparrows instead
The fact that brochure for 38MT is just a mockup tells you sth
i mean they got some fair point japan never really use the AJ but its based of a real plane and real capability that japan is interested in
but its gaijin fault for adding a plane that japan does not officially use and are basically tech demo plane that they copy paste because “muh F-2 not finnish”
That’s literally less parts completed than the F-16AJ. Everything in the F-16AJ brochure had been made and tested already; nobody is disputing the Kh-38MT has no seeker and thus CANNOT function at all and can’t be put together.
That’s my point, while the F-16AJ is a “fake plane” it is STILL more real than the Kh-38MT just by virtue of all the parts needed to make one already existing.
i got the T80UK and ill tell u its pure suffer but sometimes the autoloader ate sum shii or bias armor
except that 38MT capability is unknown and never known and are unrealistic and stupidly OP when E-100 turret is fake and unfinished
and F-16AJ is just gaijin lazy
also you have to realize that slapping IR IOG on an existing platform isnt easy
When i started playing War Thunder, i chose Russia for my first nation because i thought there is Russian Bias for sure.
Glad i did, because i learned it doesn’t exist.
