What would be the problem if Aim-120's get added?



It will be undermodeled and the R-77 will be the rod from god with complete fantasy features and performance that makes the 27ER look balanced


or gaijin will decide that the R-27EA is the equivalent to early 120s…

well its the same outcome


^ What he said.

AMRAAM is one very nasty missile with a very large no-escape-zone. Combine that with Western radar/sensor performance and you have a package that is far too capable for the tiny maps and games of Air Quake War Thunder seems to be aiming for.

Of course, that’s unless Gaijin do their ‘Stinger Routine’. After all a Medieval Arrow looks VERY similar to an AIM-120 so according to Oleg from the Tomsk Tractor Plant - they must be virtually identical.


It’s only funny because it’s true…


not the early ones tho


Better never take Gaijin’s word for it, their balance = Russian balance, will forcibly weaken NATO

1 Like

The only issue is that it’s not a nice an easy thing to add equivalent to all nations. Aim-120, MICA, PL-12, R-77, R-Darter, etc. are all on different levels. Most I believe are more akin to Aim-120C level.

So they either add Aim-120A/Bs to some nations and then add no ARH to others (R-27ER I think was designed to be so stupidly fast so that it would hit the target before the AMRAAM went active). But then several nations including the USSR would complain. Or they skip those early ones and add later AMRAAM to all nations and then equivalents. Though I’m sure there will be assymetrical nerfing targeting the AMRAAM.

The big concern for me is aircraft like the Sea Harrier FA2 that ran Aim120Bs. Taking on something like an F15 with SARH is going to be hard enough as it is. But if that F15 gets Aim120Cs then it would be a totally 1 sided fight and would be unfair (think the difference between 9Ls and 9Ms)


You’re still looking at a faster, smarter, harder to evade Sparrow that has the ability to be hurled towards your opponents in TWS mode with only the very latest of RWR warnings as they go active. In DCS they’re known as SPAMRAAMs for a reason.

I can’t remember off the top of my head what the NEZ is for the A model but I’m pretty sure it was equal to or greater than the most potent SARH offerings in the NATO inventory at the time.*

*In fact I’m not even sure the NEZ for AMRRAM is even public knowledge. Just a few guestimates based on people getting malleted in DCS…

The main thing is they’re fire-and-forget weapons. They have a lot of other advantages over Sparrows (range, speed, acceleration, mass, g pull) but in general what makes Fox-3s so good compared to Fox-1s is that fire-and-forget capability.

If you play top tier, I’m sure you know how firing a Fox-1 generally works

  • Lock a target
  • Launch on target from let’s say 20km
  • Follow in missile to keep lock
  • Missile hits or misses, by that point you’re <10km from the target and very vulnerable to return fire, including IR missiles

You can only launch on a single target at a time, and because of radar slaving you can’t even use Fox-2s against other targets.

Now with something like an AMRAAM or R-77, it’d go something like this

  • Lock target
  • Launch on target from let’s say 30km
  • Repeat steps 1 and 2 up to 7 times
  • Skedaddle

You can launch all of your Fox-3s at once compared to a single Fox-1. Also, instead of having to follow the missile in, you can turn and run or completely focus on evasive maneuvers, making it far more difficult for your target to return fire. In addition, even if you are shot down, your missiles will continue guidance as normal and are likely to still hit the target. Whereas with Fox-1s destroying your opponent in a joust might give you just enough time to turn out of the way of the (now unguided) Fox-1.

In essence, the comparison of AMRAAMs and Sparrows is a lot like comparing the AIM-9D to the AIM-9L. They may be largely similar kinematically and can in theory be countered identically, but one offers much, much better versatility, allowing longer-range fire, a significantly more expansive engagement envelope, and much freer launch and post-launch situations.

1 Like

oh its easy, lets say you are a netz, with 6 python 3, IR missile, at 12.3, against plane with missile that can be launch 30 km away, you have less than 4-5 km of maximum range, what will you do ? now lets say that you have a F15 with amraam, too bad its stock, same stock ir missile against plane that can throw missile from 30km away, you can’t do shit, top tier is already pain adding skilless missile will be even worst.

well realistically the maps and game modes, if they decide to bring EC in ARB that would fix many issues.

Even the early AMRAAMs have noticeably better range than the AIM-7F/M

1 Like

because they loft. doesnt help the no escape zone. R-27ER will remain the king there for a long time.
the early amraams just had a booster which got them fast quickly but it doesnt sustain that for long

Or they could just add the AIM7 with data-link that is comparable to the current 27ER meta and I think we’d be fine with it.

AIM-7MH has data link, but was not used on the F-16C (it didn’t use the other AIM-7s either) because it immediately began to use AIM-120s. But the AIM-120 pylons can accommodate AIM-7. There’s precedence to Gaijin giving planes weapons it was never equipped with “because it could”, so there’s a strong reason to give the 16C AIM-7MH with data-link tbh.


The MH Is the M with LOFT only the P has datalink.

1 Like

What bias? R-77s never exceed AIM-120C-4 in capabilities until R-77M which has only been tested on Su-57 so far.

@_31420124242011 Calm down, Russia fan.

AIM-120C-6+ have no-escape zones.
I know you prefer to believe R-77s are better, but they aren’t.
R-77s are AIM-120B equivalent, and R-77-1s are AIM-120C-1 through C-4 equivalent.


Bro, reality is reality and games are games. In the next few version updates, you will find that R-77 is much stronger than Aim-120C5 in WT.

Gaijin says the AIM-7M is equivalent to the R27-ER so he is likely correct.

1 Like

Back on thread (awaits furious false-flagging)…

Early AMRAAMs were quite a jump in capability over the last Sparrow models - that’s why the AIM-7 development pretty much just petered out after Gulf War 1. Shots were being taken and landed on targets that Sparrows simply couldn’t have done.

In War Thunder however even the later-model Sparrows are still broken and unreliable - so the above might well be a moot point.