And because the current PL-12 is some meta defining wunderwaffe is it?
China has never gotten preferential treatment in the missile department beyond PL-5Bs in the J-7E’s time in the sun 2-3 years ago
J-10 was the second best plane and became best plane in the game for a bit before the eurofighter released after the 15e got nerfed
1 Like
China’s done the exact opposite, scraping together literally any sources about chinese weapons is tough at the best of times, compare that to russia who have millions of MIC related documents and brochures to go off of.
As far as media advertising they are fairly lowkey too, most representation comes from sparse official photography and defense expos
2 Likes
And? The missiles were still worse than the pre-nerf AMRAAM by a good margin
Prenerf amraam only existed for like a month or 2, it wasn’t that insane. And pl-12s since then have been much better
1 Like
In that time PL-12s have remained inferior at relevant ranges than MICA, and now R-77-1s
They’re good missiles but my point is that they’ve never been OP or exaggerated, and neither will the PL-15 by nature of Gaijin, thus disproving @mrkrabbypatty’s claim
1 Like
i think the point is that Gaijin will take more dubious sources for Russian and Chinese stuff, when for NATO you have to have overwhelming proof something is wrong.
6 Likes
i have recently found this news release stating that the AIM-120C-5 has high off-boresight capability through an upgraded software package.
3 Likes
Do the bug report
that means nothing to gaijin
1 Like
yeah it wont mean anything to them but its atleast 1 more source that says it has the capability
1 Like
Gaijin is the same company that refuses to use essm sources to bug report the amraam er, the same company which uses the limitations on the igla missile to keep stinger and mistal nerfed(without even modelling it’s bang bang guidance)
4 Likes
They wouldnt care unless there are specific values
2 Likes
If the aim-120-c5 has high off boresight capability doesn’t that mean the missile starts tracking BEFORE it leaves the rail?
Ahem,
- MICA will never be matched WVR by another ARH missile strictly because of its thrust vectoring (even if the seeker wasn’t fixed)
- MICA is widely known to have a better seeker than its counterparts (including most if not all AMRAAM variants), so the expectation that the less capable AMRAAM should have the same (or nearly the same) seeker performance with 0 proof is quite laughable
- It’s also equally hilarious that a missile with smaller fins somehow outmanoeuvres earlier variant(s) with bigger fins. That being said, A/B variants getting buffed (or reverting the out of nowhere nerf) in the fin AoA department would be welcome
Cough r-77 cough
3 Likes
R-77 needs to get up to speed before it can pull hard. MICA doesn’t need to “pull” hard as its thrusters just point the missile
Irl it doesn’t need to get up to speed. I already put in a bug report for that that’s been sitting on accepted for like a month now
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/t87egJpsGQUk
2 Likes
watch it fall into the box of its close enough after sitting as accepted for two months like the f15 flight model buff lol.
also
1 Like
