I found multiple source for the mica from miltary websites to technical files saying its 60 to 80km effective range, not 20/25. If you shoot and non moving ai at 26km the missile wont hit. I think they should buff every fox 3 but usa with real range.
1 Like
Lmao
5 Likes
Beside the fakour its the only country with real fox 3. why this priviledge when the reality is something else? you can give aim 120 real range i dont mind, but dont nerf the others it makes no sens.
The AAM-4 and PL-12 are pretty close to the AMRAAM’s range.
1 Like
a missiles max theoretical range is not the kinda range you get in a real low attitude combat situation vs a moving target or aim120 would be killing you from 80km on the deck and aim54s would be hitting 150km shots i thought this was common knowledge but i guess not
3 Likes
By this do you mean AMRAAM?
And thus do you also include Britain, Sweden, Italy, Germany, Israel, Japan and France as well? Because they all use AMRAAM.
If you have a primary source for the effective range of MICA EMs are too low, Submit a bug report:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder
BUT…
Missile ranges often need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Usually they are fired at targets at altitude (20-30k ft) not sea level like is common in WT and there is a difference between hitting a target flying in a steady straight line and one actively defending/turning.
AMRAAM have a listed launch range of 80km, but I rarely fire past 25-30km. Usually more like 15-20km when the target is within the LSZ
3 Likes
I told you about a barely moving ai, micas are well documented its not theoretical, 60 to 80 is a big range, and a udge gap from 20. The fact that at 150km a missile loose momentum and another that loose thrust at 20 is not the same ting.
mica can only reach 3 miles IRL, I saw the classified docs trust bro.
I totally agree with you, again i can hit thing at 25km but 27 no hit on non moving ai. And there is no salt in here, micas are verry good overhall, i just dont understand why aim 120 was given 80% of their “theoretical” real range and micas and others barely 40%
1 Like
Link because i know pple from the compagny that made them and i can link plenty of tech files you can find by your own on google.
Though both of them should be slightly superior compared to AIM-120A and B in terms of range irl.
There are already some bug reports active
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/OoskoLXRLTgx
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/eBoYz36PxnO5
Including one for max range:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/alf1Hlrk1Ap6
So all you can do is wait. Bug reports for many nations take a while to go through. But stil dont expect to be firing them off at 80km and hit targets reliably. They arent Meteors
(for the record. There are a number of bug reports open for Aim-120 too, they are underpforming quite a bit as well)
1 Like
cant is secrect you must trust
Correct
Thats just PL-12 and AAM-4 being reduced down to Aim-120B level performance so they could be added alongside other Fox-3s. They should be more like Aim-120Cs but they didnt want to leap frog too far ahead. The question is gunna be what they do when Aim-120Cs are added
Buff the missiles and keep them in line with the Aim-120C
Thats too sensible for Gaijin
Get ready for PL-12(M) and AAM-4(M) variants
They can either buff both of them, and give lower BR Chinese fighters SD-10 instead.
Or they can give China PL-12A with claimed 120km of range
Japan can get theoretical AAM-4 variant that has AAM-4B rocket motor but no AESA.
After all nothing has stopped Gaijin from making things up.
1 Like
If they are feeling generous, maybe Gaijin will give AAM-4B outright when F-2 eventually comes to the game.
Effective against what though?
Big difference between hitting a Tu95 flying straight, level and slow up at 35,000ft from 80km away, vs hitting a maneuvering Fighter jet who’s cranking your missile down into dense air, at Mach 1.5, from 80km away.
Always take listed ranges with a mountain of salt. Just because something is effective against ‘x’ doesn’t mean it has the energy to be effective against ‘y’.
1 Like