Aim120
-
@Mav-jp - no. I’m not talking about Range or Acq…I’m talking about your commentary on midcourse.
While one aspect may have gotten more “realistic” others have suffered…and frankly, the number of reports of discontent surprises me quite a bit, because they are almost all about things other than what I am thinking of.
-
-
@Mav-jp - It’s inside baseball stuff…about all I can say is that the 4.35 model was more “correct” before the change, as you described the change.
-
@Mav-jp - It’s inside baseball stuff…about all I can say is that the 4.35 model was more “correct” before the change, as you described the change.
no it was not, PG was 100% whereas the real has a PG between 20% and 90% depending on conditions
denying this just means you have absolutly no idea of what the real performances of the AIM120 are.
-
@Mav-jp - Nope. You’re not getting me because I’m not saying what I’m getting at. Because I can’t.
-
-
@VIPER-0 - I think I’d have to kill both of us…
-
-
@drtbkj ok. Do you have a link? Is the ammram range realistic?
https://forum.falcon-bms.com/topic/24600/ofmkto-1-6-for-bms-4-37
Plus, our other Theaters are on the way. As for your question… We took the best data we could find, and were very fortunate to have someone really good to “crunch the numbers” . Personally, I am very proud of this missile. We tried to make it as realistic as possible. We specifically made it to NOT be a magic bullet. During testing I was getting kills at 55 miles against fighters… But, it could be defeated. To me, that indicates realism. However, get inside a 45-46 mile NEZ and watch the fun begin.
How, realistic? You tell me. The more feedback we get, the better we can make it. There is one current bug we’re working on , and think we’ve fixed. We had a guidance issue, and in fixing that we got a “Go STT” message on the HUD. In other words the HUD thinks it’s a SARH missile, even though it’s not. That fix will be released soon, we hope -
@drtbkj ok thanks I’ll check it out. Kills on fighters at 55nmi if the conditions are right sounds realistic. Idk I was just shocked that I couldn’t get a kill literally 10m ago with the aim120c5 on a su35 when I was 10nmi or so fired and he went cold. I only let him get that close to me bc I knew he fired off all his fox3s.
-
@airtex2019 Lol! That Raytheon marketing dude sounds like a real schmuck on wheels.
-
@drtbkj ok. Do you have a link? Is the ammram range realistic?
https://forum.falcon-bms.com/topic/24600/ofmkto-1-6-for-bms-4-37
How, realistic? You tell me. The more feedback we get, the better we can make it.
If you need some feedback it’s scary !
If you had the data you won’t need feedback.
I have never investigated the aim120d , but if you changed aim120 c or b , that means it’s not correct
edit : ok i’ve seen you didnt changed the C or B , thank you
-
@drtbkj ok. Do you have a link? Is the ammram range realistic?
https://forum.falcon-bms.com/topic/24600/ofmkto-1-6-for-bms-4-37
Plus, our other Theaters are on the way. As for your question… We took the best data we could find, and were very fortunate to have someone really good to “crunch the numbers” . Personally, I am very proud of this missile. We tried to make it as realistic as possible. We specifically made it to NOT be a magic bullet. During testing I was getting kills at 55 miles against fighters… But, it could be defeated. To me, that indicates realism. However, get inside a 45-46 mile NEZ and watch the fun begin.
How, realistic? You tell me. The more feedback we get, the better we can make it. There is one current bug we’re working on , and think we’ve fixed. We had a guidance issue, and in fixing that we got a “Go STT” message on the HUD. In other words the HUD thinks it’s a SARH missile, even though it’s not. That fix will be released soon, we hopeokay i downloaded OFMKTO , and looked at the AIM120D data .
I’m sorry guys but i think you are in the wrong direction here
FIRST :
When you change the motor data, you absolutly need to compute the integrated impulse data and set it up in the fileTHEN:
Let’s now talk about your modelingThe AIM120B impulse data is 23800 Lbs -sec.
The AIM120C impulse data is 26842 Lbs -sec.
Your AIM120D impulse data i 49684 Lbs - sec.
You realize that with the same weight of propelant , you just found one that provides 85% more energy ? i would be surprise to know how ?
For me this is totally unrealistic impulse data, with this kind of properlant weight and missile size, the AIM120 CANNOT get this kind of impulse, that’s absolutly impossible, no matter what marketing manager says
-
apprentice sorcerer…
-
please consider this:
-
Are we ever going to get the aim120d or even the c7? Also is there a way to modify the range on the aim120c5? It’s range is 57nmi and it definitely can’t hit targets even 50 nmi away…
-
Missiles have engagement zone and not a single “range” value.
-
The zone depends on the speed and alt of the launch, and the speed, heading altitude and changing of these factors in any moment.
This is R-77 considering the following parameters.
- M0.9 launch speed.
- M0.9 target speed
- same launch and target altitude
- non maneuvering target
Can you see the huge range differences?
The case is the same of EVERY AAMs.The reality is far more complex than your very, very…
It is hard to find words on that what you posted… -
-
Is it only me that doesn’t feel very comfortable discussing about how realistic is one the most classified missiles in the western world?
Let’s accept the new data for the missile, adapt and try to employ new tactics based on this envelope. Let’s imagine that this is a new missile and try not to compare with the real one.
For those who develop other versions of the missile and employ other tactics based on that, have in mind that in TvT event with the ordinary default missile envelope things can go really wrong.
-
@molnibalage said in Aim120:
Are we ever going to get the aim120d or even the c7? Also is there a way to modify the range on the aim120c5? It’s range is 57nmi and it definitely can’t hit targets even 50 nmi away…
The reality is far more complex what your very, very…
It is hard to find words on that…LOL
-
Is it only me that doesn’t feel very comfortable discussing about how realistic is one the most classified missiles in the western world?
Let’s accept the new data for the missile, adapt and try to employ new tactics based on this envelope. Let’s imagine that this is a new missile and try not to compare with the real one.
we cannot accept data that are not physically correct.
It is not THAT difficult to estimate a ballpark figure for missile kinematics
please read this :
https://forum.falcon-bms.com/post/369385 -