More like an updated (?) Phoenix body with MIM23 engine… however speculations and wikipedia level sources (or even worse) are not describing how the missile actually behaves. Seeker , in game AIM-54A/C and F90 , i think they got the same. RL i can’t even find what F90 uses , there are…no data or name. Others say it may be a 54s seeker upgrade (54As that is) others say it may have an improved /bastardized HAWK seeker. Even about the specifications you’ll find…claims. ^Trust me bro^ sources .
Ofc not, they rely on their data . However their computer ^tries^ to pick the optimum path to intercept analyzing the data. Even a better proccessor can make differencies.
Now in the game …many times you’ll see missiles picking the crappiest path to do their job.
All of missiles are artificially nerfed and they are not even close to their RL specs, but in some cases they don’t even try.
Yes, but i don’t see the problem… they need to be different. That’s the point of different version.
Is still missing it’s range & and range rate filters that it should have.
The AIM-7E’s issue with ground clutter is Proximity fuse related not seeker related (seeker is good down to 500ft, and even then is rated for attacking surface targets).
No. Chaff fails a coherent return check and so will not be tracked(will still have an effect on guidance if within the seeker’s IFoV), see “Para. 16” of the following excerpt.
Btw, instead of putting ^^ around your words, you can put one star * around words to italize them, or 2 ** to bold them. You can also put 2 ~~ to cross
The wildcards need to be right at the beginning and at the end of a word to work. You can do it on multiple words at a time
interesting. does look more like 1.97 or 1.98 though. however most F-15C’s have the PW-220’s which do have better thrust at speed iirc, and of course the same would apply to PW-229 and GE-129 Eagles, so i dont know if the PW-100 F-15 graphs are good enough for a 20 something % nerf across the board
the main improvement of the 220 was reliability but its static thrust is very slightly worse and at speed it is better. its not a huge difference but should still be considered
and also importantly these do not show the absolute maximum top speed, just the speed at which acceleration slows to a set rate, as such in game testing should show slightly faster
as above its not, stop using information for a plane with different engines
I can tell you put next to no effort into this because if you had you would pull numbers for an F15E with -220s because they are aerodynamically similar
edit: before you say something about the charts being AIM-7 and not AIM-120 amraams have a drag index of 1.3 vs 1.8 for AIM-7 both on fuselage stations
