Then that explains why the video just looks outlandish to me. I cant see the MICAs turn radius really changing at all
1 Like
Indeed, i would focus more on the kinetics than anything else.
1 Like
Su35s? Yeah that would provide competition. F15ex really wouldn’t though. It’s still a brick with missiles that turn like a brick.
So fix them then.
1 Like
R-77-1 is kinematic ally superior to mica. Aim120c5 is trash.
Mach 4.5-5+ in 3.1 seconds iirc.
Say that to gaijin not to me. The amraam maneuverability nerf was nonsense int eh first place.
A report was made to fix it.
Multiple reports on the amraam have been accepted for months. And besides they made aim120c5 turn worse for no reason
The missile is extremely similar aerodynamically. It also weighs around the same.
I would wager this is about as good as making claims on the range of ASRAAM using the CAMM as base values
I said don’t quote me on that. Also, I decided to check the video to be more clear. First, the missile does not do 100° in 1s from being fired. Rather, it takes about 1.5-2s to do 90°
In the video, the current MICA doesn’t seem to pull more than 35G average, that is at around Mach1.5-Mach1.7 with TVC, which is quite visibly underperforming comapred to the 50G value it should achieve. The « fixed » missile does pull around 50G average (peaks at 55G and 45G), which is more in line with actual TVC performances (most of the turn happens in the 3.5s burntime of the corrected missile)
I think we have the answer with this video : a buff of 2x on the TVC performances far outclass the 2x acceleration, probably because it makes the missile more unstable and the increase in TVC deflection has higher impacts than acceleration on turning radius.
This is also explained by the missile not actually pulling as much as it should in the base MICA (in the test specifically, since MICA is capable of pulling 50G at higher speeds)
if u mean IIRs by HOBs it would only make it worse.
Clipped fins.?
1 Like
CAMM IS an ASRAAM with a different nose cone.
MICA EM and ASTER-30 are 2 different missiles that look “similar”. There is a difference.
Otherwise MCIA VL cant be used to report MICA EM then?
1 Like
Isn’t the mica capable much more than 50gs in the first place irl? Sarcasm is a tvc less missile yet it can pull very hard. Doesn’t seem very weird that mica can pull as much as it without relying on vectored thrust
I disagree aster 30 looks much different
According to Vizender they do.
Yeah… So using ASTER-30 to try and buff the MICA is wierd
Though Meteor looks similar to the AMRAAM… Maybe we can get a range buff for the AMRAAM
They are aerodynamically very similar, of similar dimensions and weight. I’m also not claiming that this proves that the MICA pulls just as much, rather I’m saying that if one can pull 60G, it’s likely the second one can pull 50G, and not just 30G.
It’s as good an example as python and sarcasm. Missiles can pull very hard without needing vectoring and mica can pull harder than 50g irl. Using aster 30 perfomance directly nonsense though, especially cause it uses side thrusters terminally