Well R-77-1 can pull a lot more than 50G, upward of 65, similarly MICA can also pull a lot more Gs. Also it doesn’t matter to any extent, they don’t need to, and it doesn’t make a difference. It’s like why are F16s allowed to have better manoeuvrability than IRL.
1 Like
the r77-1 have grid fans instead of regular fins, so more turn but you also bleed more energy.
1 Like
I don’t believe the f16 is over performing, it’s just the previous meta really fit it, g limiters weren’t added yet and it’s the best rate fighter. also the mig29 is gimped and probably won’t be fixed until mig29k/mig35.
They also track faster off the rail which the 120A/B do not which is why they are absolutely pish short range.
Sorry to say it but the 120 has been superseded and needs help.
It’s poor down low, its poor close range its good long range providing the other player has no brain
it’s so easy to chaff and notch and it’s slow.
120C would at least allow the US/NATO aircraft a limited short/medium range HOB
I mean 35gs isn’t anything to scoff at and the r77-1 is currently only available on the su30sm which is significantly slower than the eurofigher or f15 meaning the missiles have less actually effective range and the ly have more drag unless the target literally flys in a straight line. also they’re not easier to chaff if notch they share the same seeker.
1 Like
Wrong. Them firing from the lower and slower Su-30SM makes them have roughly equivalent range. If they were being carried by EF-2000s or F-15s they would have dramatically more range.
Which implies the target is avoiding the missile, in which case the AIM-120 is not going to hit either, what’s your point.
Meanwhile the R-77-1 maintains better capability to kill a bad player at long range and better capability in close range.
It’s flat out the best missile in the game, with possible exception for the MICA.
Edit: but I’m not saying we need 120C-5, at most 120C-4 for the slightly improved maneuvering but eh, just trying to claim the R-77-1 isn’t flat out the best is pathetic.
1 Like
The G limit combined with the tracking delay makes the 120 pretty poor in the short/medium range
Environment.
The speed is somewhat irrelevant now i sent a 120 from the Typhoon at mach 1.7 at a Su-30 10km away and he turned and chaffed it.
They have the same seeker and R-77-1 can be defeated using chaff and notching
The difference is the R-77 pulling harder makes close range notches possible but harder
1 Like
They are only bad at extreme close ranges and against multipathing targets.
35Gs is a lot, and just because some missiles are better, doesn’t mean the 120 is bad. It’s still a very powerful missile that is deadly at all ranges above 1km.
2 Likes
We shouldn’t get any more better missiles until gaijin can design air RB better. And if they do come, they should be on a lower performance platform.
Right now, top tier is actually pretty balanced and has a lot of parity between all the nations. The only nations that are lacking is China (which could be solved by the J-10B or another flanker variant), Sweden which could get a BOL buff and/or a Gripen E(if that’s possible at this point), and Japan, which can get the F-2.
You do realize you still have AIM9Ms if you absolutely insist on having a knife fight? If you insist on carrying only 1 type of missile it’s nobody elses fault when you get caught in a situation it cant deal with
I haven’t had to many problems with Su-30s in my F-15J(M), its still the orbital F-15Es that cause the issues, but that might be because I’m not dumb enough to just fly straight so the R77-1s dump their energy is short order.
I would agree.
120C-1-4 wouldn’t really be a better missile, just more comparable to every other missile in closer ranges. And unlike every other missile addition would actually benefit every tech tree, except a “‘certain one’” which is why we won’t see it.
China is not lacking in the slightest. J-11B is easily the best Flanker after the Su-30SM, and in some regards better depending on play styles.
Gripen C with RB-99s is still plenty competitive and they also have the F-18C which is as well. HMD is no where near as much of a downside as people make it. I can make F-4F ICE work against 14.0s with worse flight performance, same radar, less missiles, and no HMD.
Which already has the best F-15C, which is still competitive.
AIM-120C-3 & AIM-120C-4 launch range & lock range same AIM-120A/AIM-120B and R-77/RVV-AE but better maneuvering
AIM-120C-5, AIM-120C-6, AIM-120C-7 and AIM-120C-8 (AIM-120D export) launch range & lock range higher AIM-120C early variants (AIM-120C-3 & AIM-120C-4)
Right
MICA EM great maneuvering BVR Air-to-Air Missile
An AIM-120 is not going to hit in that scenario anyway then. You’re not helping your point.
But an R-77-1 maintains being only beaten by the MICA in close range engagements, while being just as effective(and frankly better under all but the most extremes) as an AIM-120 in long range engagements.
But do tell me about your experience with a missile (R-77-1) you don’t have access to yet…
Easily my favorite missile in the game for sure.
Thats an idiotic argument, I don’t need to drive a L2A6 to learn its weak points. AIM-120s hold speed significantly better when they maneuver compared to R-77-1, I can learn that by dodging them.
You can cry all you want to to justify discounting my opinion, it doesn’t change the facts
2 Likes
Like the fact that at the range at which you will defeat an R-77-1, an AIM-120 shouldn’t hit you anyway? Or the fact that within actual effective range the R-77-1 is flat out better than anything that isn’t the MICA?
Or do you want me to keep going?
nope, you have clearly decided to stay ignorantly and claim bias, so I wont waste my time.
LMAO. K bud, actually knowing what I’m talking about is now bias.
only bias here is you lmao, no dude an r77-1 launched at from an su30 doesn’t have the same range as an aim120 launched from an f15 claiming so is utterly bizarre the difference in thrust/drag just isn’t that much different. and your second point is equally bizarre and biased, there are no new players at 14.0 who ignore their rwr lil bro and I don’t understand do you want the aim120 to be the same missile? are you just going to pretend the aim120 doesn’t hold energy better while having more effective range lmao. also go ahead and tell me I don’t have experience with them lol, lmao even.
2 Likes
No.
I’m saying launching either missile outside of roughly their own seeker range (~10-15km) is only going to hit an idiot.
That is effective range, 10-15km.
And launching within that effective range, not only does the R-77-1 have better time to target, it also has a dramatically better firing envelope, which is actually what matters for an ARH missile.
So sure, at the absolute peak of ranged edge cases, the AIM-120 is better at killing idiots, are you happy? I’ll still prefer the one that is actually useful against non-dogshit pilots.
Edit: LMAO they hate the truth
1 Like