Project Reality Forums

It seems to me like these missles were a bit useless, each time I see a F16 crossing my path i can't lock him, even if he is about 200 m away from me.
Frogfoot and Mig carry the same "Sidewinder" rockets right? But it seems that the range of the Mig's is much bigger than the Frogfoot's one.
If you sit in Frog/A10 it's more about luck to shoot down enemy Jets.


How's your opinion experience about that.

As far as I know, there are two different AA missiles. Short Range and Long Range if I'm not mistaken.

You just have to get lucky and catch the opposing fighter jet slowing down or something or if you know exactly where he/she is, try to come down on top of them.


Ground attack jets are not meant to kill fighter jets as they are less agile and are alot slower.

IMO, SRMs are bullshit in PR, they should be able to lock on as soon as the target is visual. The SU-25 and MiG-29 use the AA-11, or R-73 Archer in game, which is pretty much coded the same as the AIM-9 Sidewinder.
Plus if your in a attack jet, and you encounter a dedicated fighter like a F-16, doctrine dictates you get the hell out of there, cause you don't stand a chance.

Drunkenup wrote:...they should be able to lock on as soon as the target is visual.

Thats the Point.

Long Range are the AIM-9 (Sidewinder) and short range are eeer AIM-120 right, but A10 and Frog are armed with the long range missles aren't they?

Gammlgandalf13 wrote:Thats the Point.

Long Range are the AIM-9 (Sidewinder) and short range are eeer AIM-120 right, but A10 and Frog are armed with the long range missles aren't they?

AIM-120 = MRM
AIM-9M = SRM

no

AIM-9 Sidewinder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Short range AA missile
AIM-120 AMRAAM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Medium range AA missile

All planes carry AIM9 or the equivalent, but only MiG29 and F16 carry 2 additional AIM120 (or russian equivalent) of that missile

I was able to shoot down a good pilot in a F16 with a frogfoot back in 0.85, if nothing to these missiles has been changed your argument is invalid. It took great amount of concentration but you can pull it off.

CAS aircraft a very agile the A-10 especially as it was designed to turn withing a small radius and the lower speed makes them more agile.

I also have noticed that at the same ranges where my AIM-9s or equivalent would lock onto the target with a Fighter jet, the Aim-9s or equivalent on the ground attack planes won't show the heat signature until I am in a lot closer than I normally would have to be. I find with this very small range of the short range AAs, I have had better luck with only cannons just putting a wall of lead into their flight direction and you only need to score a few hits for them to blow up.

Remember, it's for gameplay's sake. If you'd portray their ranges realistically even the AIM9 could lock onto planes on the other side of the map.
AIM9 or equivalent is a short range missile, that's why you have to get close to your target. If you can destroy enemy jet from longer range with cannon that's even better for you, since he won't even know you have him in your crosshairs.

masterceo wrote:Remember, it's for gameplay's sake. If you'd portray their ranges realistically even the AIM9 could lock onto planes on the other side of the map.
AIM9 or equivalent is a short range missile, that's why you have to get close to your target. If you can destroy enemy jet from longer range with cannon that's even better for you, since he won't even know you have him in your crosshairs.

Thats very well but I think the point was the cas aim9s having a smaller range than the fighter aim9s (and opfor equivalents).

Alex is correct in what I meant, I realize all weapon ranges need to be scaled down from their RL capabilities or we wouldn't see our enemy because of the view distance.

Alex6714 wrote:Thats very well but I think the point was the cas aim9s having a smaller range than the fighter aim9s (and opfor equivalents).

Thats it! The Ranges are much smaller as it seems to me.

In my humble opinion, if the short range missiles actually had their speed decreased and first began moving to their targets after 1 or 2 sec, the whole idea of CAS planes having a less radius wouldnt matter. What the short radius means is that u cant just snap shoot at the F-16 / Mig-29. Hell, even Ace Combat 3 has prevented this ( I was bored and found a cool PS-1 game )

The decreased speed would mean that you have to be within a certain angle and speed to make your missile find way to its target. Also isn't a single missile meaning instant death abit bad too? I remember that in Falcon 4.0 Allied Forces I always had around 5 sec to eject after taking a hit. This would also mean alot more cool female voice sounds -> Warning Warning - Pull up - Chaff flare out, and lots more

@Topic:

The point is, that MiG-29/J-10 and F-16/Typhoon have an active radar system. CAS bombers like A-10 and Su-25 only have passive radar, or even only a RWR system (Frogfoot).
You cant lock at the same distances as fighters because the AIM-9/R-60 only work heat-seeking for bombers (although you get a lock warning , but thats another issue).

Zoddom wrote:@Topic:

The point is, that MiG-29/J-10 and F-16/Typhoon have an active radar system. CAS bombers like A-10 and Su-25 only have passive radar, or even only a RWR system (Frogfoot).
You cant lock at the same distances as fighters because the AIM-9/R-60 only work heat-seeking for bombers (although you get a lock warning , but thats another issue).

You ussually spot your target with radar before you go in for a heat seaking missile. But in PR you will spot him 100% with the power of the eye.

Zoddom wrote:@Topic:

The point is, that MiG-29/J-10 and F-16/Typhoon have an active radar system. CAS bombers like A-10 and Su-25 only have passive radar, or even only a RWR system (Frogfoot).
You cant lock at the same distances as fighters because the AIM-9/R-60 only work heat-seeking for bombers (although you get a lock warning , but thats another issue).

They are Heat-Seeking the whole time. Regardless of aquisition mode. The advantage radar gives you is that it automatically slaves the seeker head to the target and provides you with a range ring as well as velocity/alt information. The downside ofcourse is that if the E/A has an RWR if can tell its being locked, unless a mode such as RWS-SAM is used.

Using radar for aquisition purposes does not increase the range of the missile whatsoever.

Zoddom wrote:@Topic:

The point is, that MiG-29/J-10 and F-16/Typhoon have an active radar system. CAS bombers like A-10 and Su-25 only have passive radar, or even only a RWR system (Frogfoot).
You cant lock at the same distances as fighters because the AIM-9/R-60 only work heat-seeking for bombers (although you get a lock warning , but thats another issue).

Sorry if I missunderstood you, but from my limited knowledge, the short range AAs on fighters and attack jets would both have the exact same range since their guidance, tracking, and weapon are the exact same except for the aircraft carrying them.

the shorter range with bombers simulates the shorter range of IR sensor in comparison to radar systems in fighters.
You all should know that radar has a much bigger FOV than heat seeking systems (EOS).
furthermore i think that heatseeking missiles are passively radar guided with active radar.

Allow me to clear up some falsehoods on this topic.

The A-10 and Frogfoot are both armed with heat-seeking missiles. The air superiority/multi-role aircraft also have the EXACT same missiles. However, the multi-role aircraft also should have BVR missiles, either the R-73 or AIM-120 AMRAAM.

In theory there should be no difference in range between an AIM-9X fired by an F-16 and one fired by an A-10. However, the difference is that A-10s fly slower. This means that the AIM-9X would be imparted with less velocity from the start, thus it has reduced range.

If PR had more realistic AA missiles heatseekers would lock on as soon as something within boresight enters view distance, and BVR missiles would lock up aircraft at up to 2 KM away in game.

Zoddom wrote:furthermore i think that heatseeking missiles are passively radar guided with active radar.

Pilots can use radar, a helmet mounted sight, an optical sight, or just point the aircrafts nose towards its target, this allows the seeker to recognize the target and once the missile has been uncaged, it will track its target by the emissions of electromagnetic radiation in the IR part of the spectrum.

It will in most cases take time for the missile to move on a right track as it has to wait for its motor to kick in and make the fins control direction. This is why SRMs in PR are way too fast at hitting their target in my oppinion.

EDIT:

If PR had more realistic AA missiles heatseekers would lock on as soon as something within boresight enters view distance.

Indeed, problem is that hitting a target 12 degrees from you while comming at more than 2000km/h straight towards you might be abit too unrealistic.