missile update??

[eatthis]

any truth to this? 

 

[Comstedt86]

Yes there was some changes. Currently two active threads covering it.

 

One here (patch feedback one) & and in Bugs section.

[eatthis]

rgr

[ASW]

The rocket began to fly almost at 2!!! twice slower, and I watched the flight of the rocket, as in the picture. The rocket flew over the Su-33 from above, turned around and tried to attack the Su-33 in the ass.

Edited January 30, 2022 by ASW

[Swordsman422]

The flight model was updated to be more accurate, but the guidance is still broken. From my understanding, we're waiting for ED to complete the guidance programming to be more accurate. It's gonna be in an interrim format for a while.

[ASW]

This morning I was flying online on the 4 YA server. I fired 2 AIM-54 missiles at the Su-33. It was just a bot.One in TWS mode from 50 miles, the second from about 20 miles in STT. Both missed and he killed me. Waiting for the patch...

[eatthis]

whats the reason for not waiting till guidance is fixed?

 

[Comstedt86]

15 minutes ago, eatthis said:

whats the reason for not waiting till guidance is fixed?

 

It was overperforming in a straight line / cold chase. 

[ASW]

2 часа назад, eatthis сказал:

whats the reason for not waiting till guidance is fixed?

 

Because for the entire existence of the F-14 and AIM-54, I learned how to use it the way it worked. But, in two... years they tell me that it, this weapon works absolutely differently. And now the AIM-54, which cost $ 1,000,000 apiece, are not effective and in the fight against the Su-33 I have to use a machine gun masterfully leaving all his missiles (over the sea), go to him for 6 hours and kill.)))I wonder if the developers shot these logs themselves before releasing the patch?

[ASW]

To summarize. At the moment, the F-14 has no weapons other than a machine gun and useless missiles against modern aircraft. It remains to train in landing on an aircraft carrier, which is also interesting.)

[near_blind]

27 minutes ago, ASW said:

To summarize. At the moment, the F-14 has no weapons other than a machine gun and useless missiles against modern aircraft.

Sounds like a golden opportunity for you to hone your skills with the AIM-7 and AIM-9.

[9thHunt]

37 minutes ago, ASW said:

To summarize. At the moment, the F-14 has no weapons other than a machine gun and useless missiles against modern aircraft. It remains to train in landing on an aircraft carrier, which is also interesting.)

The AIM-7M and AIM-9M are far from useless.  The Tomcat is still plenty deadly with out the Phoenix.  I get most of my kills with the Sparrow.

Edited January 31, 2022 by 9thHunt

[Callsign JoNay]

45 minutes ago, ASW said:

Because for the entire existence of the F-14 and AIM-54, I learned how to use it the way it worked. But, in two... years they tell me that it, this weapon works absolutely differently. And now the AIM-54, which cost $ 1,000,000 apiece, are not effective and in the fight against the Su-33 I have to use a machine gun masterfully leaving all his missiles (over the sea), go to him for 6 hours and kill.)))I wonder if the developers shot these logs themselves before releasing the patch?

Looks like it's still pretty effective to me.

 

[Spurts]

It's hard to take these "Feenix Sux!" posts seriously when we have already been looking at dozens of well structured tests (from users not devs) of the three variants under differing conditions.  The mk60 seems to be doing great right now.  The C has serious guidance issues.

[Zaphael]

The long range shot capability is still effective provided you can get the missile to loft high enough. 

The problem is that now, under 30,000ft, the missile is an absolute slug. In my 20,000ft tests, 40 mile shots were very iffy.  Sometimes the missile sail past the target without damage since there is no proximity fuse.

[ASW]

I completely agree with you. But I like to fly over the sea, and the Su-33 use the P-27 E R and they have a full plane of these missiles. And they also have R-27 ET missiles.)

[eatthis]

we flew w mission last night and 1 thing that jumped out at me was how slow the phoenix now is on the deck and just how much speed it bleeds compared to the amraam in a straight line  its pretty brutal! 
is the phoenix accurate now or not? 
if thats the case does that mean the amraam is too slippery? or is that accurate too?
another thing i noticed is 3 double tws launches (by 2 different people) all resulted in the 2nd missile going stupid early/instantly, obviously its way too small a sample size to draw any concrete conclusions from (looking at you people who say the phoenix was junk because 2 out of 3 fired by the us failed) but i found it interesting to see

 

[Dragon1-1]

AMRAAM is a smaller, slimmer missile with tiny fins. Of course it's less draggy. Phoenix was always meant to be used at high altitudes, so its low altitude performance might not be that great. That said, I do hope they improve the guidance logic soon. I'm not a huge fan of the Sparrow, especially since Russian Fox 1s are faster, which gets you killed in a head-on duel. 

[IronMike]

On 2/1/2022 at 4:21 AM, ASW said:

I completely agree with you. But I like to fly over the sea, and the Su-33 use the P-27 E R and they have a full plane of these missiles. And they also have R-27 ET missiles.)

If you are high enough, an Su-33 is like easy fodder. Expectations matter, and perspective does, too. If you are skimming the deck and fire from 60nm, as an example, you set yourself up to fail. If you fly at 40k and fire from 40nm, you eat bandits like warm buns for breakfast.

A hotfix is coming with improvements to the guidance, which everyone will be pleased to see I am sure. But expectations still will have to be adjusted for the more correct FM now. You can still fire 6 phoenixes on 6 bombers at 95nm and they will likely all hit (provided you are high and fast enough), and you will still be able to kill low guys being low close to WVR, but you won't be able to fire a phoenix 15nm on a cold bandit down low anymore and expect a kill. If you are both running super sonic over the deck, in fact you won't be able to kill him from 5nm - because the time it takes the missile to catch up at that distance, is also the time in which it will slow down too much, and the closure rate will be not high enough. Transfer the same scenario to a chase at 40k, and you will likely be able to "catch" him from beyond 5nm and so on and so forth.

It will still be the longest stick in the game, but you need to setup yourself properly to be optimally effective with it. The further you digress, the more you need to adjust range, etc, too.

[IronMike]

1 hour ago, eatthis said:

we flew w mission last night and 1 thing that jumped out at me was how slow the phoenix now is on the deck and just how much speed it bleeds compared to the amraam in a straight line  its pretty brutal! 
is the phoenix accurate now or not? 
if thats the case does that mean the amraam is too slippery? or is that accurate too?
another thing i noticed is 3 double tws launches (by 2 different people) all resulted in the 2nd missile going stupid early/instantly, obviously its way too small a sample size to draw any concrete conclusions from (looking at you people who say the phoenix was junk because 2 out of 3 fired by the us failed) but i found it interesting to see

 

The amraam is smaller and more sleek, the phoenix is huge - naturally down low it slows down much faster. If you want it to be effective down low (what are all the Tomcats doing down low I wonder though..? ), you basically should make sure that you launch it so that the motor burns all the way to the target, which ofc decreases its range significantly.

[cheezit]

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

AMRAAM is a smaller, slimmer missile with tiny fins. Of course it's less draggy. Phoenix was always meant to be used at high altitudes, so its low altitude performance might not be that great. That said, I do hope they improve the guidance logic soon. I'm not a huge fan of the Sparrow, especially since Russian Fox 1s are faster, which gets you killed in a head-on duel. 

To expand on this point, the AMRAAM has a sectional density of ~6.8 at launch whereas the Phoenix is around 4.6 at launch.  After motor burnout it's something lower, of course.  Sectional density is one of the major drivers of a given object's ballistic coefficient, which determines how well it maintains velocity going through a fluid at high speed and low AoA.

 

It should also be noted that there are (engine/API-imposed?) limitations to fidelity on the thrust side of the equation for all missiles.  Eg. ISP is not a constant for a given fuel type IRL, but rather it is also a function of nozzle design and external absolute pressure (and thus, in an atmosphere, altitude).  That being said, probably every air-to-air missile in the world with a solid-fuel motor has a nozzle optimized for low altitude performance, where the change in ISP over the range of realistic altitudes will be minimal.

[Zaphael]

4 hours ago, IronMike said:

The amraam is smaller and more sleek, the phoenix is huge - naturally down low it slows down much faster. If you want it to be effective down low (what are all the Tomcats doing down low I wonder though..? ), you basically should make sure that you launch it so that the motor burns all the way to the target, which ofc decreases its range significantly.

What were we doing down low? Zero fighters.  Thats why. =D

[Jayhawk1971]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb Zaphael:

what are all the Tomcats doing down low I wonder though..?

Circling over a crash site where a certain SEAL team needed to be rescued and had to intercept incoming low-flying Flankers? Turning to intercept incoming medium-altitude Flankers after successfully destroying a certain runway?  

[IronMike]

6 minutes ago, Jayhawk1971 said:

Circling over a crash site where a certain SEAL team needed to be rescued and had to intercept incoming low-flying Flankers? Turning to intercept incoming medium-altitude Flankers after successfully destroying a certain runway?  

Sssht, if I send you there, it is legitimate (although no one ever said that you are not allowed to climb for the shot hehe)

Edited February 2, 2022 by IronMike

[eatthis]

9 hours ago, IronMike said:

The amraam is smaller and more sleek, the phoenix is huge - naturally down low it slows down much faster. If you want it to be effective down low (what are all the Tomcats doing down low I wonder though..? ), you basically should make sure that you launch it so that the motor burns all the way to the target, which ofc decreases its range significantly.

we normally like to operate at 35k, last night we had 8 chinese bombers coming in for a shipping strike at 5k. i DID get tws lock at 170 whcih really surprised me but it was patchy and i really didnt fancy our chances of making those shots from that high. we went down to 10k ish iirc and took 2 head on shots each (long story) from 20 miles or so. thats when i noticed the 2nd shot everybody fired going stupid