40KM is definitely a low ball, PIRATE has visual identification capabilities out to 50km so i’d consider that the lowest probable detection range (keep in mind the system is using software to enhance an IR image of the plane and present it to the pilot for visual identification in this mode detection should be happening way earlier).
Second point would be that aircraft with RCS reductions in the form of RAM generate more skin friction than those without, thus more heat, this implies a higher detection range than against regular targets. Additionally, most of these aircraft also feature IR suppression measures for the exhaust, which is an advantage against older systems, but due to the way PIRATE functions this leaves a ‘black hole’ of colder than average air behind the aircraft, which the system can pick up and evaluate many thousands of times a second to confirm its not a false alarm. This actually means that aircraft with either or both of these measures would be easier for PIRATE to detect than other aircraft.
As @Metaltank1990 has linked you my comments on PIRATE which summoned me here, I do highly recommend you read them if you’re interested in the topic.
In Warthunder? Everyone comes from the same place.
In real life? Datalink.
If 160km doesn’t cut it for BVR in your twisted definition I don’t know what to tell you.
Lack of Reading Comprehension or Horrendously bad faith argument. Call it.
There are no j-11s at 14.3, I forgot the SM and SM2 are at the same BR, that’s on me, and the 15C GE very much can. There are no other hornets at 14.3.
Have you? It is not outrunning a BVRAAM with just Mil Thrust. The speedloss just in the turn alone would doom it from the start.
As good as an argument this sounds, there’s a good number of flaws that aren’t accounted for. Like how the F-15E which is the premier american BVR aircraft currently is 14.0 while the GE with significantly weaker engines is 14.3, its also incredibly wrong to assume that just because something isn’t 14.3, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be at 14.3. like the gripen E or strike eagle, both of which are very strong aircraft that have somehow escaped “true” top tier status.
Yes i have, and i have seen it done by German and British typhoons, i have also seen someone do it live, i have also done it myself when i was doing a favor for a friend who had the British typhoon and wanted me to see the flight disparity between it and the flanker-H.
I simply said the raptor has no capable weapon for BVR, you saying this magically does not make my point irrelevant considering i never said 160km was insufficient for BVR.
that’s the numbers for most missile tests, how do you think the French achieved a 100km test shot with MICA?
No. People (provided they are not base bombing bot accounts) will go separate paths, will they clump up in a certain area? Sure, but I’m not expecting all of my team to go left or go right, they could spread out across the map in one match or concentrate in the middle the next. These are individual people making individual decisions.
I quite frankly don’t care for the “well the missile can just be guided with datalink” argument because you are playing a videogame that prioritizes fast and unrewarding gameplay, gaijin as good as they are at modeling many things, will not go through the complicated process of analyzing and attempting to implement integrated information channels to literally every top tier, which then rewards gameplay that is unengaging and takes an agonizingly long time to play, I personally don’t have an issue with this but there are many people that don’t want this gameplay and they have already voiced these sentiments earlier in this very thread.
Hopefully you can provide sufficient argument instead of deflecting mine so we can continue this discussion.
My favourite tactic at the moment in the Typhoon is flanking a bit and then turning in hot from the direction of their own AFs, catches them out every single time as they are running back to base for more missile only to find me firing C5s at Mach 1.5+
Because it has less missiles and worse radar by quite a bit. And I wouldn’t call the engine difference significant. The 15C GE is about as good as the Su-30SM2 when it comes to speed and climbrate. That’s servicable for AirRB
I mainly used 14.3 because it’s easier than listing out each plane.
I’ll take the anecdotal evidence because I don’t really care about this point tbh.
?
Yeah but for BVR people will always be in front of you. Sure they can be a couple degrees off to the side or something but they’ll always be in front you.
Not talking about guiding in missiles. Just DL showing where people are in general.
People haven’t realize how missile count and radar performance already changed 14.3 quite bit. A good F15GE/SU30SM2 player could force a Rafale into disadvantage with their logn range missiles+AESA.
I could buy that the SM2 can keep a rafale away but there is no way the F-15 Golden Shower is going to realistically keep a rafale at bay. Whats going to happen is it’s going to spam the aim-120 garbage rods, the rafale notches all of them and gets closer, and the Golden Shower gets to cope bc LARP BVR doesn’t work in this game.
Really now? So can you produce a source for the 120D NEZ from raytheon? Can you produce their weapon tests for the 120D? I would love to be enlightened as to how you have these figures.
It imparts significantly more energy onto the missile increasing its probability of kill, a significant advantage that will see more consistent missile hits.
No? As a matter of fact how do you know any of this? I took the liberty of looking at your account and quite frankly I’m baffled that you’re making assumptions and interpretations on aircraft you have never flown or even flown early models of.
You want evidence? Sure man here’s gunjob just outrunning R-77-1’s at high altitude, he chaffs but the missiles keep lock and track while he just out runs them https://youtu.be/n9FVOSwkp6o?si=3evTfaL0UDAeEr29
What? Are you going to say anything productive or continue to try to stifle my arguments and points because you have no real informed counter?
Are you going to make a counterpoint?
No this was almost certainly in relation to missile guidance considering you had previously stated that a raptor could attack without being detected, and when i asked how it knew where the opposing aircraft was you backed into datalink, and when i continued to press the issue you have now decided to entirely change it back to missiles. Of which my point still stands,. Gaijin, as good as they are at modeling will most likely not go through the very intensive process of modeling datalink for a multitude of aircraft and the variations of how it will work.
Yes, that’s how you maximize your kill probability. You shoot the enemy in front of you. Can you make a rebuttal that proves my own interpretation of how teams spread out in battle wrong? I am very willing to talk with you on this but quite frankly I’m not seeing anything that contradicts my statements that you have said other than a growing pile of logical fallacies.
That’s how some tests are done, its a fact that companies do perform tests on non maneuvering targets to say it has the capability to do such a long ranged kill while not stating its real NEZ directly.
Bringing the topic back onto the thread, there’s several things that can save top tier, but I will go through the issues that these fixes/additions bring (my opinions)
Fixing the AIM-120s
There’s several reports that detail the AIM-120A/B lacking terminal maneuverability and also lacking range against non-maneuvering targets. This could make the US top tier more competitive at the top battle-rating, but it presents the developers several problems. Namely that the AIM-120s are proliferated among different aircraft throughout different tech trees.
Why does it matter that the AIM-120s are proliferated among different aircraft in different tech trees? Because buffs to missiles that have already been proliferated typically would mean those platforms need to go up in battle-ratings. For Gaijin, several AMRAAM carriers are suitably placed in a battle-rating convenient to their plans. They wish to pigeon-hole aircraft into fitting their preconceived notions of where it should fall in terms of battle-ratings.
Missiles in this game are held back by the lowest denominator.
Adding the F-15EX
The F-15EX could be an addition where the developers finally allow for what could be a worse TWR F-15E with AESA radar as well.
This addition could finally bring an American aircraft with spherical coverage, potentially MAWS, and 16 missiles. The problem with this aircraft is that it heavily relies on Gaijin fixing AIM-120A/B (see #1) and there’s no guarantee they’ll add MAWS to it.
I dont think there is actually a single AMRAAM carrier that doesnt either need buffs for its current BR or needs buffs to move to a more appropriate BR (FA2 and F3 Late are examples of both)
The bigger issue in the context in this thread is that buffs to AMRAAM buff the competition just as much as it buffs aircraft like the F-15
Buff AMRAAM? buffs the Typhoon
Fix BOL? buffs the Typhoon
Fix Aim-9M? buffs the Typhoon
and even adding new stuff simply cant be added in a vacuum. Like EW, new CMs, IIR missiles, etc etc so its not just that Gaijin artificially nerf things so they perform as desired (which goes against every tenant they preach) but that there simply isnt a single buff for the existing F-15s that doesnt directly buff the competition. Though, they all need to be done to better balance the AMRAAM carriers vs non-AMRAAM carriers.
Isn’t that last part what is a matter of perspective? In Gaijin’s eyes, their current BR is what they may have wanted for it and intended for it, and increasing their battle-rating disrupts their intentions.
Eh… if they truly intend such radically different performance vehicles to the same BR then this entire thread is pointless and we might as well just wait for the death of the game. Like there is no way the FA2 and F3 Late are equal in performance currently and the Premium Su-30s are only 0.3 better.
Its just gaijin has compressed themselves into a complete and utter mess
So what you’re asserting is that the F-15C and Su-30SM2 don’t climb and gain speed similarly in the AirRB gameplay loop?
Not once was milpower used in this video. You’re problem in this discussion is misrepresenting things. Even things I let you have lol.
You contradicted yourself.
There’s no counterpoint. I was making a comment not even towards you necessarily. Do you know what the topic is here?
Okay, so #1, this is borderline schizo. Never did I have this back and forth with you… #2 Gaijin really isn’t that great at modeling stuff man. It’s basically all an illusion. They really don’t have a clue for most things they do especially balance-wise.
Can’t believe I have to explain this to someone that apparently plays the same game I do… Players always spawn in front of you. BVR only happens at the start of the game. Players only spawn at the start of the game.
You take the substance out of my arguments and spin up your own. You don’t see any contradictions because you maliciously or accidentally break down my points, take away context or integral info, and then present it as something else? Whatever you do it’s weird man.
Your proposed changes would do little to help American top tier air. Everybody knows that the real reason amraams suck is they have the worst turn off the rail of any ARH missile nor do they have a particularly fast time to impact at close range. Your proposed changes aren’t nothing, but the most you can do is kill the single father of 5 that just came back from their 12-hour shift a little further away than before because they have no idea how to notch.
Are there any sources that would point to better close-range turn for the amraam?