Both would get it, on F-16s. France already has an AMRAAM carrier, and China should have one.
LMFAO the cope is real.
that was my point
and that wont change even with later variants of the aim120
hi can somone help me
so they wont
totally forgot the f-16AM evexists bc nobody plays that thing
C version starts track time is shorter and it can pull more G giving limited HOB capability
it is only 5gs more, so 35gs to 40gs, so 5 more gs wont help you that much against micas and r77s, if you want a fox 3 that pulls more just play with the sukhois or the rafale, again, it is a different playstyle, if the EF doesn’t suit you, change it
for example, i don’t really like doing BVR, I usually try to hold my missiles until people are 15km away or less and i don’t really fly that high, (i fly at 5000m max, to avoid contrails and gain some speed, the most i do is shoot 3 R77-1 at targets 20-25km away to put some pressure and not let them fly without anything to worry about), i prefer to be more aggressive and that fits sukhois and/or the rafale more.
so yeah, pick the planes that fits the way you want to play.
They did get the M2K and MICAs, I think a modern F-16 is likely after that being added. It at least shows their top tier won’t be exclusively PLAAF.
I’m fairly certain gaijin has as well, as it’s radar is almost never added to RWRs so it almost always shows up as a “?”.
5G and it tracks faster.
120A/B in game has a delay
Of course it wont be a MICA close range
It’s funny you say that because Typhoon is the exact opposite, you cannot be aggressive because the Radar and payload wont allow it.
The absolute IRL Alpha mac daddy of Gen 4.5 airframes and you are forced to play passively
Su-35 is the nail in the coffin of Typhoon when it gets added
I mean you can also just keep complaining, but it won’t change anything but if you just change planes, that might help with your “suffering” :D
It isn’t just the Gs, it is the flight control restrictions. Part of the reason the AIM-120 is so restricted in close is it takes much longer for its controls to unlock.
It’s like the old PL-5B “arrow” where you basically have to leas the target you want to hit if it is too close.
120Cs should at least bring this closer in line with every other missile available in game, and prior to C-5 will not really affect maximum range.
4 Likes
I do im really enjoying the Su-33 R-27ER is amazing :)
Yeah i get that, but it is still “only” 5 more gs, the way he talks, it looks like he will be able to fight r77s and micas at super close range with the 5 extra gs
What the c5 actually offers more than the others? More range? speed? Longer booster?
It will as the missile tracks straight off the rail
And an additonal 5G.
https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/s/Cptu4erAiW
Its DCS but gives you an idea…its tracking straight off the rail and pulling more G
Its got a 60 degree gimbal limit
F/A-18 pilot who splashed that Su-22 described the kill within “reading distance” which again sugests 120C is pretty agile.
The C-5 will have more range, maneuverability, and better time to target. Instead of the boost sustain setup, it’s just all boost for the entire ~7 second burn time.
It has the better maneuverability due to stronger actuators for its flight controls, allowing them to expand it envelope despite the clipped wings of the C models.
Adding it right now would just be too much IMHO. It still wouldn’t beat any of the close range m, except in having an insane time to target.
1 Like
Less G but accelerate faster so can turn quicker at close range than the AIM-120
It’s the same IRCCM as AAM-3 right? That works perfectly fine. In fact AAM-3 is my favorite IR missile in most situations, and its basically a copy paste AIM-9M… or dose having lower drag and better energy retention going to count when we are not talking about the AIM-120s?
in anything but a high AoA turn fight, yes. But I’m not comparing IR missiles against other IR missiles, I’m talking about using the right missile in the kit of the plane you are flying for the situation you are in.
Again I am not making a tier list of IR missiles, I am saying that by refusing to use IRs and relying solely on ARHs you are putting yourself at a disadvantage, you either need to not put yourself in a position that you missiles cannot handle (such as close range dogfighting with AIM-120s) or carry a more flexible loadout and that goes for all planes.
Refusing to use 9Ms at close range because you think other IR missiles are better and instead insisting on using 120s that are even worse at close range (and especially low alt) is just asking to suffer.
4 Likes
You’re one of those people that want their toy to be the best at everything in order for you to deem it playable.
Sounds like UK main if I had to guess.
1 Like
Not really. I would like the 9M to have it’s improved IRCCM in front aspect and greater lock range.
Failing that I’m just looking forward to ASRAAM and having a missile that can pull G :)
Limited compared to what it should have IRL.
I haven’t used the AAM-3 and you hardly see it. my favourite IR missile is probably the Magic 2 that thing is great especially at lower BRs with the Mirage 2000.
That’s fair it’s tough when you are forced into a knife fight and your missiles cannot be used offensively.
I know it’s a mistake on my end but you would expect something like a Typhoon to be able to fight back. Sadly 9M in that envelope cant.
Look I don’t think the 9M is bad, when you get players from above who are not paying attention it’s great to ripple off. But when you close the distance or come face to face with an opponent that has R-73 or Magic 2/MICA it can put you in a bind.
I am guilty of playing the Typhoon too aggressively (coming from the Gripen) when really it should be flown more like a Tornado F.3
The Typhoon should be able to be played hyper aggressively, but it’s radar is severely limiting it.