Meteor vs AIM-120D

[Craigkn]

Given the massive changes to the game's AAW model, with changes to how missiles work, I felt this could be a good discussion topic.

I am playtesting a scenario that makes extensive use of both USAF/USMC aircraft equipped with AIM-120D's and Eurofighters with Meteor's, and I do feel that the Meteor is the superior missile at BVR engagements, due to its longer range and improved kinematics. The -120D's often peter out very early (well before their listed range in the database), but the Meteors seem to have more oomph at the end. Maybe I am being naïve, but the -120D's database entry seems to be total fiction, in terms of NEZ range, while the Meteor seems to perform more in line with expectations. I also feel (but its difficult to test) that the Meteor has a wider DLZ, I do not encounter "out of DLZ" failure to fires as often with the Eurofighters as I do with the USAF aircraft. Reading The War Zone article below, which discusses the Meteor's propulsion system (ramjet vs rocket), I wonder if this is modeled in game?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... -the-world

[thewood1]

In game, the ramjet is modeled as a longer burning engine. The 120's issue is the short burn time of the motor (6-8s). The long range is all about lofting. One source estimated that Meteor's NEZ is at least twice that of the 120 and the Meteor's NEZ is 32 nm. Compare that 32 nm to the totals range of 200 nm and you see the ratio even for a long-burn missile.

[thewood1]

https://sameerjoshi73.medium.com/east-v ... d2a1cb1323

If you search through this article, there is a good contrast of the Meteor and AIM-120.

[Tcao]

but the -120D's database entry seems to be total fiction, in terms of NEZ range,

120D can hit non maneuverable target at max range as advertised.
you can try to build a scenario, make the target as a hovering V-22 at 25000ft

[bsq]

https://sameerjoshi73.medium.com/east-v ... d2a1cb1323

If you search through this article, there is a good contrast of the Meteor and AIM-120.

Interesting photo around 2/3rd into the article. Clear distinction between the firery plume of the solid fuel rocket just after launch from the Rafael and the end game photo that shows the ramjet still burning... Not sure if this is or can be modelled in the game, but it might explain why there are so many complaints about it.

Although the (down)range that the B/W photo was taken is not mentioned and cannot be known, it is still clear that the motor is burning IRL, long after the game would have it coasting.

[thewood1]

My understanding from various articles is the Meteor has the short-burn rocket motor but the ram jet burns almost the full flight due to its air breathing capability making fuel less of an issue. The short burn is only 1-2 seconds. I think one of the profiles shows there is also mush less lofting involved.

I also wnat to re-point out that a ram-jet powered missile with an estimated 200 nm range only has an NEZ of 32 nm. That means even in powered-all-the-way flight, the NEZ is just over 15% of the full theoretical range. The recent change by the devs might have actually over estimated the NEZ of a lot of missiles if this is true.

[Craigkn]

Concerning NEZ - I am finding (at least with AIM-120D) that the setting is not useful vs. 4th ++ gen fighters who are supported by AEW&C (A-50 Mainstays). The targets identify the inbound missile early, and turn and burn. I have had to set the auto launch setting way way down, to almost 15nm, which seems to improve success. Another factor is strategy - splitting a flight and having one aircraft attack while the second circles around for a rear-aspect shot on the fleeting targets helps quite a bit as well. So much more to do in AAW now!

[thewood1]

Based on looking at NEZs for modern rocket-only missiles like the 120C/D, 15-20 nm is not too far off. But so many people complained about the short NEZ, that I think the devs overcorrected.

And a 4+++ gen fighter with AWACS support is a worst case scenario for an NEZ. I think some of this might come down to how far can a pilot expect to see a modern AAW missile launch and be able to react to it? Then it might come down to proficiency and OODA.

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

My understanding from various articles is the Meteor has the short-burn rocket motor but the ram jet burns almost the full flight due to its air breathing capability making fuel less of an issue. The short burn is only 1-2 seconds. I think one of the profiles shows there is also mush less lofting involved.

I also wnat to re-point out that a ram-jet powered missile with an estimated 200 nm range only has an NEZ of 32 nm. That means even in powered-all-the-way flight, the NEZ is just over 15% of the full theoretical range. The recent change by the devs might have actually over estimated the NEZ of a lot of missiles if this is true.

Sorry but IIRC that was 100nm in game? The officially claimed value is actually 100km, I kinda can't find any source that claims meteor has a range of 200nm. Also I would like to say meteor is kinda a different missile because of it's ramjet engine - this provides longer burning time but slower acceleration, also that mean the missile is gonna decelerate faster than other missiles after it's out of fuel.

[thewood1]

You are right. I mixed my units. Its 200km and 60km. Not nm. But my point stands that 30% NEZ is considered significantly larger than any other AAM. And yes, its going to decelerate faster, but only after its fuel is expended. The 120D only burns for 7-8s, less than 1/3 of the Meteor's burn. If the Meteor powered for 150-200 km, it really doesn't matter how fast it decelerates on motor shut down, compared to even a AIM-120D. I consistently see the NEZ of the Meteor as 3x the NEZ of the AIM-120. That would be 60km vs 20km. Thats al least 3x of the 120D.

I also see the estimated fuel burn for the Meteor as 25s with the ramjet capable of producing 10x the thrust of the AMRAAM's motor. The Meteor's powered flight is around Mach 4 for its flight duration with metered power for efficiency. The Meteor's and the 120D's speed curves look like they cross over pretty early in the flight with the 120D being faster in the 8s lofting phase, but becoming slower than the powered Meteor only a few seconds after peak loft. That obviously means the 120D is slower than the Meteor probably around 20-30km. So in the NEZ range of the 120D, its going to be on average a little faster than the Meteor, but past 30km, the Meteor looks to be faster and steady.

I found these links interesting:
https://globaldefensejournal.blogspot.c ... -west.html
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-met ... e-a-guide/

A quote from the last one.

“This ‘ramjet’ motor provides the missile with thrust all the way to target intercept, providing the largest No-Escape Zone of any air-to-air missile. To ensure total target destruction, the missile is equipped with both impact and proximity fuses and a fragmentation warhead that detonates on impact or at the optimum point of intercept to maximise lethality.”

Again, the point is that the NEZ for a modern fighter opponent is not very big with the expected counter to an AAM being turn and burn. I have found the best tactic with AIM-120C7s and Ds against modern fighters is either space the launches out for a few seconds with a single shooter or shoot from two shooters spaced apart. Against a subsonic opponent, 70% max range does a reasonable job.

[thewood1]

While not detailed, I thought the below graphic from one of the links shows a good representation of the Meteor compared to other AAMs.

1_UBhwWHV-HWIXlRcJ-tY9Yw.jpeg (40.07 KiB) Viewed 3536 times

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

While not detailed, I thought the below graphic from one of the links shows a good representation of the Meteor compared to other AAMs.

1_UBhwWHV-HWIXlRcJ-tY9Yw.jpeg

Haven't looked through all the articles but I have something I would like to say. First, IIRC the officially claimed range for meteor is 100+km with 60+km NEZ. That's to say the NEZ is at least 60km. Given that the estimated range is 100nm, could the NEZ actually be larger? I don't have an answer. Second, you said it's "capable of producing 10x the thrust of the AMRAAM's motor". Sorry but I would doubt that. Cause as you said burning time is 25sec vs 8 sec, then the meteor should actually accelerate faster than the amraam..? Also if you take a calculation, you can see that meteor is not gonna be powered for 150-200km. 150 / 25 = 6, that's 6km/s which is 21600km/h. That's mach 17? Anyway correct me if I made any misunderstanding.

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

Based on looking at NEZs for modern rocket-only missiles like the 120C/D, 15-20 nm is not too far off. But so many people complained about the short NEZ, that I think the devs overcorrected.

And a 4+++ gen fighter with AWACS support is a worst case scenario for an NEZ. I think some of this might come down to how far can a pilot expect to see a modern AAW missile launch and be able to react to it? Then it might come down to proficiency and OODA.

I don't think these conditions affect the NEZ. NEZ should be the distance where missiles will reach and over take target no matter what the aspect angle of it . For NEZ we assume that the target will be alerted.

[thewood1]

While not detailed, I thought the below graphic from one of the links shows a good representation of the Meteor compared to other AAMs.

1_UBhwWHV-HWIXlRcJ-tY9Yw.jpeg

Haven't looked through all the articles but I have something I would like to say. First, IIRC the officially claimed range for meteor is 100+km with 60+km NEZ. That's to say the NEZ is at least 60km. Given that the estimated range is 100nm, could the NEZ actually be larger? I don't have an answer. Second, you said it's "capable of producing 10x the thrust of the AMRAAM's motor". Sorry but I would doubt that. Cause as you said burning time is 25sec vs 8 sec, then the meteor should actually accelerate faster than the amraam..? Also if you take a calculation, you can see that meteor is not gonna be powered for 150-200km. 150 / 25 = 6, that's 6km/s which is 21600km/h. That's mach 17? Anyway correct me if I made any misunderstanding.

You probably should read the articles. Those and others are where I'm making my point from. If you read the articles, you'll see that the thrust is capable of 10x. The whole point is the Meteor is throttled along a wide range of thrust to maintain a set speed. Its average speed is around Mach 4. The average burn is 25s. In a throttled down mode, its longer. The articles lay out fairly well that the 60km NEZ is three times that of the AIM-120D. So the whole point of this thread is that a 20km NEZ for a 120 against a modern fighter is a pretty good guess.

If you think that's wrong, feel free to bring a few sources.

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

While not detailed, I thought the below graphic from one of the links shows a good representation of the Meteor compared to other AAMs.

1_UBhwWHV-HWIXlRcJ-tY9Yw.jpeg

Haven't looked through all the articles but I have something I would like to say. First, IIRC the officially claimed range for meteor is 100+km with 60+km NEZ. That's to say the NEZ is at least 60km. Given that the estimated range is 100nm, could the NEZ actually be larger? I don't have an answer. Second, you said it's "capable of producing 10x the thrust of the AMRAAM's motor". Sorry but I would doubt that. Cause as you said burning time is 25sec vs 8 sec, then the meteor should actually accelerate faster than the amraam..? Also if you take a calculation, you can see that meteor is not gonna be powered for 150-200km. 150 / 25 = 6, that's 6km/s which is 21600km/h. That's mach 17? Anyway correct me if I made any misunderstanding.

You probably should read the articles. Those and others are where I'm making my point from. If you read the articles, you'll see that the thrust is capable of 10x. The whole point is the Meteor is throttled along a wide range of thrust to maintain a set speed. Its average speed is around Mach 4. The average burn is 25s. In a throttled down mode, its longer. The articles lay out fairly well that the 60km NEZ is three times that of the AIM-120D. So the whole point of this thread is that a 20km NEZ for a 120 against a modern fighter is a pretty good guess.

If you think that's wrong, feel free to bring a few sources.

So first, in your article it says "but triple the no escape zone of the AIM-120 C-7". I don't think that's fair to say it's triple the NEZ of the delta variant. Second, sorry but I can't find where the 10x thrust is mentioned? And if the avg speed is mach 4 and it's powered all the way through it's max range, I think the NEZ against a target with a speed of 1.8-2 mach is actually 90 to 100km, given the max range is 200km - basically you want your missile to be able to catch it up if it's running away from you at a speed of 1.8-2mach. And M1.8 to 2 is already super fast for an aircraft. And also still, it's "above 60", not exactly 60, 70 90 120 they are all above 60. Exact number? I don't have an answer and I don't think we will before 2050 or something. One more thing I would like to say is that how is that 60km NEZ calculated? How fast is the shooter? At what altitude? Target parameter? And what about that 200km max range estimation? There are just so many ambiguities here. I understand your point, but I don't think we have enough proof here. So I kinda can't agree with you.

[thewood1]

I think your point on the speed of the shooter is spot on, but its actually closure rate to the target thats most important. All of these numbers are based on so many variables as to be impossible to have one static number. Coming back to the point of this thread, and several other recent threads, the the effective range of an AIM-120D is far shorter than most people think. An NEZ of 15-30km against a situationally aware modern fighter as a target is probably reasonable.

Here is a chart from one of the articles I found. It has no source so take it with a large grain of salt.

AIM-120-C-estimated-Rmax-blue-Rdef-purple-MAR-red-and-NEZ-green.png (51.33 KiB) Viewed 3442 times

Can't use the absolute numbers without any source, but it gives a good visualization of the relative range listings a various altitudes. All of the variables really can't be graphically presented, but this shows the complexity of what the devs are trying to do with NEZ. Closure rate, altitude, altitude delta, angle of attack, motor burn, loft angle, etc. There are possibly hundreds of variables and dozens of material variables.

[thewood1]

Thinking about the 10x thrust comment, I think it was about thrust/pound of fuel. Since the Meteor fuel doesn't need the oxygenator, that would make sense. I also noted that the UK MoD estimated the Meteor was 5x the cost of the AIM-120. Thats what holds back large purchases and the continued short-term use of the 120 by NATO countries.

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

I think your point on the speed of the shooter is spot on, but its actually closure rate to the target thats most important. All of these numbers are based on so many variables as to be impossible to have one static number. Coming back to the point of this thread, and several other recent threads, the the effective range of an AIM-120D is far shorter than most people think. An NEZ of 15-30km against a situationally aware modern fighter as a target is probably reasonable.

Here is a chart from one of the articles I found. It has no source so take it with a large grain of salt.

AIM-120-C-estimated-Rmax-blue-Rdef-purple-MAR-red-and-NEZ-green.png

Can't use the absolute numbers without any source, but it gives a good visualization of the relative range listings a various altitudes. All of the variables really can't be graphically presented, but this shows the complexity of what the devs are trying to do with NEZ. Closure rate, altitude, altitude delta, angle of attack, motor burn, loft angle, etc. There are possibly hundreds of variables and dozens of material variables.

So as I said, NEZ should be the distance where missiles will reach and over take target no matter what the aspect angle of it . For NEZ we assume that the target will be alerted. IMO situation awareness has nothing to do with it. That's not like you detected the missile and now you run for your life, it should be something like you turn and run right after the missile is fired?