It doesn’t hurt to maintain the lock, even if it’s gone active, it can sometimes help
it’s a bit iffy ingame rn but the general idea is the missile doesn’t stop receiving DL updates, at all.
Two way datalink baby.
(But also, it helps when the missile doesn’t drift off to narnia when it loses lock, so it’s probably 0 IOG drift (which the Meteor doesn’t or won’t have since it doesn’t have GPS) more than two way datalink)
Anyways, we’re drifting off the topic:
What will save America top tier is either:
- AIM-174B of which you can only carry 4; or
- AIM-260, of which we know next to nothing about except the dual pulse propulsion it’ll have
- At an extreme minimum, F-15EX with 12-16 AIM-120D-3 (move aside, Su-30SM/SM2, it’s USA’s turn to delete your entire missile load and still have missiles left over)
(Tbh, they’re doing ok even with just the F-15C GE. I just wish the weirdos stopped shooting down missiles in sim (and recently RB) )
This topic has drifted off topic alot of times now
How would 120D-3 help?
Yeah on the slow as hell fa18e which is useless
1 Like
Yep. and I think they were pre-Aim-120Ds as well.
Meta, no. But perfectly competitive. (though to most US mains, not being meta usually means that they think they are DOA)
1 Like
Honestly? No idea, but I’m hoping for something similar to R-77 → R-77-1
Going on starshark, giving AIM-120D AIM-120B thrust while keeping the 7.75 second (though really we have no idea what changed besides software or smaller electronics, FUUUU vague post Raytheon) and it has much better flight performance for BVR
Again, this is just me coping. It probably won’t happen and the best we can hope for is either a slightly higher impulse or slightly longer burn time
F-14A IRIAF is also slow and the Fakour can still whack people from 70 km away
I’d like to think RIM-174 based missile >>>> Hawk based missile
1 Like
Is the dual-pulse actually even known?
Idk but it would make sense for it to have dual-pulse since it is being made to counter PL-15
Honestly, no idea. It’s just cope at this point.
The general mood for the US, from my POV is “whatever China does, try and do it better/more expensive”. Not too far fetched they’d choose dual pulse over just another bigger booster and muh software.
What’s with their aversion to ramjets anyway? 🤣
1 Like
Either it is due to cost or they wanted AIM-260 to fit inside F-22 and F-35, however second reason makes no sense considering meteor can fit into F-35’s IWB by clipping their wings
Its probably akin to the decision to go with the Aim-9X over the ASRAAM.
They have a lot of time, money, resources, etc etc sunk into developing Dual-pulse motors and dont want to pivot to ramjet.
I mean the us hasnt really copied china yet(navy should take some tips) not enough time has passed, aim120d ingame is nothing like real life, it might have ballmark kinematic range right but thats likely it. Aim120d-3 seems to be well liked and the aim120 platform seems to still be seen very favourably despite its age, so much so that RTX is still investing their own money on internal projects for upgrades to the missile.
or buffing late model AIM-120’s. the D should be added more widely and the D-3 should become US exclusive for everything else and only on F-35’s for other trees
form factor, cost, complexity, weight, and who knows maybe the latest dual pulse rockets are more favorable for an AMRAAM type missile than the latest ramjets. there is still the USAF’s other long range missile program which is still getting funded quietly, maybe it will use a ramjet
1 Like
This is fine, most other nations will get Meteor at the same time
that would not be good for balance. you cant bring that many meteor on EFT or Rafale though thankfully
maybe
but might be something even more interesting like rotary detonation
or just a really big solid rocket with a bunch of pulses
F-15E Mach climb to 10km (~1:17min):
EFT Mach climb to 10km (~1:20min):
Rafale Mach climb to 10km (~1:19min):
So among the 3, they’re all roughly tied for time required to mach climb to 10km (plus minus a bit for human error on each). Nothing that’d really make any sort of difference in a match.
Its also just about tied with the F-15E in a race from M1.0 → M2.0 @ 10km (the EFT isnt even competing due to its abysmal in-game thrust curve compared to basically all other “M2.0 capable” top tier jets)
F-15E M1.0 -> M2.0 @10km alt (~1:19s):
EFT M1.0 -> M2.0 @10km alt (~1:52s):
Rafale M1.0 -> M2.0 @10km alt (~1:21s):
Oh wait…
Rafale matches or exceeds the other 2 while missing 4 performance mods that affect climb rate and acceleration…
6 Likes
Half gajin half the war thunder community that request nerf
1 Like
Why wouldn’t it be? Only GB, Germany, Italy and Sweden would get Meteor as it is clearly a 14.7+ missile and not 13.7, so Gripen C’s or 14.3 Captor-M Eurofighters shouldn’t get it even though they can for balance sake.
GB/Italy can carry 6 Meteor, France 4 and Sweden 7.
1 Like
Something like this was what I was looking for initially, but luckily Alpha ended up providing the evidence as well.