Is the AIM-120D AMRAAM really that bad?

[maverick3320]

My F-16M Blk 52 fires an AIM-120D AMRAAM P3.I4 at a range of about 11nm at a non-maneuvering guided missile traveling at 530 kts roughly perpendicular to the F-16. The AMRAAM has traveled approximately 10nm and is already down to 625kts of speed.

The AIM 120D shows a range of 86nm. Why is it losing so much energy at 1/8 of it's max range?

[caelunshun]

You should post a save file so we can see the exact situation. But I do suspect there is something broken with the new missile lofting algorithm that causes some missiles to lose energy too quickly.

[Knightpawn]

This is interesting observation, it clearly needs a save file and recommend to move to tech support section

[FTBSS]

The drag on AAM throughout is way too extreme lofted missiles in decent losing momentum like they are climbing.

A missile with a 230 mile range that drops below aircraft cruise speed within 70 miles.

[thewood1]

The drag on AAM throughout is way too extreme lofted missiles in decent losing momentum like they are climbing.

A missile with a 230 mile range that drops below aircraft cruise speed within 70 miles.

Not saying you're wrong, but what should it be? And how do you know?

[FTBSS]

The drag on AAM throughout is way too extreme lofted missiles in decent losing momentum like they are climbing.

A missile with a 230 mile range that drops below aircraft cruise speed within 70 miles.

Not saying you're wrong, but what should it be? And how do you know?

Was a fire control technician in the navy kinda have to know aerodynamics and drag also common sense why have a proported range of 230 NMI if you can't hit a moving target at 70 miles

[Dimitris]

As we've said a million times, we need save files to investigate reports. We cannot investigate anecdotes.

[thewood1]

The drag on AAM throughout is way too extreme lofted missiles in decent losing momentum like they are climbing.

A missile with a 230 mile range that drops below aircraft cruise speed within 70 miles.

Not saying you're wrong, but what should it be? And how do you know?

Was a fire control technician in the navy kinda have to know aerodynamics and drag also common sense why have a proported range of 230 NMI if you can't hit a moving target at 70 miles

My question remains. Is there any source?

[Tcao]

I would guess your A/C is in low altitude

[Dimitris]

I would guess your A/C is in low altitude

In that provided save, the very low altitude of the targets (and the "behind the curve" starting position of the fighter) is indeed doing you no favors.

Kurt Plummer had described one of the trial firings of the Phoenix that likewise suffered from this:

[...] an F-14, firing at a BQM-34A with an initial [fighter] setup of 10,000ft and Mach .72 vs [target] 50ft and Mach .75 at 22nm separation, showed the weapon intercepted at around 16nm in 54 seconds. DESPITE being a SARH-PDSTT all the way (no firing lag to account for time-share TWS on multiple missiles) in nominally 'snap down' assisted conditions for acceleration, where there was no time spent climbing to the loft. And DESPITE the fact that the missile was indeed /powered throughout the flight/. Average missile Mach was only 1.88.

That said, I'd still like to see a save provided by the OP.

[caelunshun]

The drag on AAM throughout is way too extreme lofted missiles in decent losing momentum like they are climbing.

A missile with a 230 mile range that drops below aircraft cruise speed within 70 miles.

I did some tests and opened a bug report that probably addresses what you mention: https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=411038

[Dimitris]

Still waiting for a save from the OP.....