Jump to content

AIM-54A/MK60 vs AIM-54C/MK47


Delta59R

Recommended Posts

Do these two have a difference in accuracy/tracking/reliability IN DCS?

The C/47 has updated digital electronics IRL but is it modeled effectively different in DCS? The A/60 does have 3sec more burn for increased speed/range, also leaves smoke trail from what I have read; but aside from that?

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 512 m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 54A Mk60 appears to be ballistically superior. Personally, since switching from the C Mk47, my pk has probably increased from 30% to 75-80% without changing anything except which variant I was using.

 

2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - G.Skill RJ 32GB (16x2) DDR4 3200 - Ryzen 2700X 4.2Ghz OC - Corsair H100i Pro - Samsung 970 EVO M.2 2TB - TMW HOTAS w Delta Sim - F/A-18C grip - 10cm Sahaj - TrackIR 5 Pro - Rift CV1 - MFG CWind - BuddyFox UFC - DSD RK II - Cougar MFDs w/ LCDs - Foxx Mounts - VPC MongoosT-50CM base

 

- Maps: NTTR, Persian Gulf, Normandy

- Modules: FC3, F-14A/B, F/A-18C, AV-8B, A-10C, F-16C, F-86, KA-50, P-51D, WWII assets, and [insert campaign name]

Dreaming of the F-15E / F-14D / Rhino

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting, while the C rocket should have a higher specific impulse, so it shouldn't be all that behind the Mk60.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would think so. As I said, I was stunned that my hit rate increased so dramatically with the AIM-54A Mk60...

 

 

That's interesting, while the C rocket should have a higher specific impulse, so it shouldn't be all that behind the Mk60.

2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - G.Skill RJ 32GB (16x2) DDR4 3200 - Ryzen 2700X 4.2Ghz OC - Corsair H100i Pro - Samsung 970 EVO M.2 2TB - TMW HOTAS w Delta Sim - F/A-18C grip - 10cm Sahaj - TrackIR 5 Pro - Rift CV1 - MFG CWind - BuddyFox UFC - DSD RK II - Cougar MFDs w/ LCDs - Foxx Mounts - VPC MongoosT-50CM base

 

- Maps: NTTR, Persian Gulf, Normandy

- Modules: FC3, F-14A/B, F/A-18C, AV-8B, A-10C, F-16C, F-86, KA-50, P-51D, WWII assets, and [insert campaign name]

Dreaming of the F-15E / F-14D / Rhino

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though the ISP of the C is higher, the 3 seconds extra burn time on the Mk60 gives it a massive EM advantage over the C Mk47. Within 16nmi, the C is superior. But beyond 20nmi, the Mk60 is the better choice. Against players, the C might be the de facto better choice, simply due to the fact it is smokeless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Anyone know why the C version has worse motor than best A version? Wasn't C developed after both A versions?


Edited by DanielNL
DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone know why the C version has worse motor than best A version? Wasn't X developed after both A versions?

 

 

A slight compromise in burn duration in exchange for smokeless propellant. Nothing comes without a price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A slight compromise in burn duration in exchange for smokeless propellant. Nothing comes without a price.
Ah, that's the compromise they took, okay.

 

sent from Moto G5 using Tapatalk

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I did some tests here: https://flyandwire.com/2019/07/02/aim-54-performance-study/

and I'm now doing even more in-depth tests (but they a lot of time so no ETA atm). For what I've seen so far, the AIM-54C Mk47 is indeed more resistant the chaffs and defensive manoeuvres by the target whereas it suffers much more at low-altitude or longer ranges due to the less powerful rocket motor. This is very evident from my latest tests but I won't go into their details until I have finished.

Although I find interesting that the AWG-9 is completely un-notchable whereas the AIM-54 fails somewhat consistently when the target performs certain manoeuvres in a certain order. I expected the Phoenix to be more resilient.

 

 

Nevertheless, the current implementation of the AIM-54 is incorrect due to a number of reasons so all these tests and discussion may become obsolete at some point.

full_tiny.pngfull_tiny.png
full_tiny.png

"Cogito, ergo RIO"
Virtual Backseaters Volume I: F-14 Radar Intercept Officer - Fifth Public Draft
Virtual Backseaters Volume II: F-4E Weapon Systems Officer - Internal Draft WIP

Phantom Phamiliarisation Video Series | F-4E/F-14 Kneeboard Pack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though the ISP of the C is higher, the 3 seconds extra burn time on the Mk60 gives it a massive EM advantage over the C Mk47. Within 16nmi, the C is superior. But beyond 20nmi, the Mk60 is the better choice. Against players, the C might be the de facto better choice, simply due to the fact it is smokeless.
Based on my experience in MP so far I can confirm this. Use the C if you're gonna anticipating rather close combat below 20 nm as the 60 somehow can be dodge. I could not believe myself untill I saw someone did that. Over 20 nm the 60 far superior than C in PK.

Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power. - Lao Tze

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I did some tests here: https://flyandwire.com/2019/07/02/aim-54-performance-study/

and I'm now doing even more in-depth tests (but they a lot of time so no ETA atm). For what I've seen so far, the AIM-54C Mk47 is indeed more resistant the chaffs and defensive manoeuvres by the target whereas it suffers much more at low-altitude or longer ranges due to the less powerful rocket motor. This is very evident from my latest tests but I won't go into their details until I have finished.

Although I find interesting that the AWG-9 is completely un-notchable whereas the AIM-54 fails somewhat consistently when the target performs certain manoeuvres in a certain order. I expected the Phoenix to be more resilient.

 

 

Nevertheless, the current implementation of the AIM-54 is incorrect due to a number of reasons so all these tests and discussion may become obsolete at some point.

 

 

 

So I found these two posts by Naquaii, apparently the "C" Does have better seeker performance over the "A"

 

 

Our -C already has different flight parameters and range compared to the -A in addition to slightly different seeker performance.

 

If we find reasonably trustworthy data on other paramaters which we could feasably implement we'll ofc do that.

 

 

 

Problem is that both missiles have these systems, they're just implemented differently, and compared to our data on the -A a lot of the -C stuff is conjecture. In any case we're not at a stage where this makes any difference in DCS apart from numbers for countermeasure rejection and seeker performance.

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 512 m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have completed some 1600 tests so far. I have part of the results ready but I'm too busy and tired to fix the grammar and syntax of my articles before publishing them (I accept volunteers lol).

The first big chuck of tests are about low level use (720 AIM-54A Mk60 and AIM-54C Mk47 launched in total in different scenarios), medium and high altitude employment are not completed yet. I have the percentages and numbers ready but it's clear that the two biggest factors are energy and aspect (and the SA of the target, of course). Plan your geometry accordingly and the AIM-54A Mk60 will result in more kills than the AIM-54C Mk47.

full_tiny.pngfull_tiny.png
full_tiny.png

"Cogito, ergo RIO"
Virtual Backseaters Volume I: F-14 Radar Intercept Officer - Fifth Public Draft
Virtual Backseaters Volume II: F-4E Weapon Systems Officer - Internal Draft WIP

Phantom Phamiliarisation Video Series | F-4E/F-14 Kneeboard Pack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 54A Mk60 appears to be ballistically superior. Personally, since switching from the C Mk47, my pk has probably increased from 30% to 75-80% without changing anything except which variant I was using.

 

 

Oh please 80nm 40nm shots behave lol. Aim-54C works best aircraft mach 2 after banzai inside 25nm no escape zone bye bye. :thumbup:


Edited by Coxy_99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have completed some 1600 tests so far. I have part of the results ready but I'm too busy and tired to fix the grammar and syntax of my articles before publishing them (I accept volunteers lol).

The first big chuck of tests are about low level use (720 AIM-54A Mk60 and AIM-54C Mk47 launched in total in different scenarios), medium and high altitude employment are not completed yet. I have the percentages and numbers ready but it's clear that the two biggest factors are energy and aspect (and the SA of the target, of course). Plan your geometry accordingly and the AIM-54A Mk60 will result in more kills than the AIM-54C Mk47.

 

Cool!

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 512 m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I found these two posts by Naquaii, apparently the "C" Does have better seeker performance over the "A"

 

Is that even modeled in game? As far as I know, ED has not given HB access to changing the seeker/guidance yet. I thought the only diff between the versions we have in game is the burn time, smoke, etc.

Modules owned:

 

FC3, M-2000C, Mig-21bis, F-5E, AJS-37 Viggen, F/A-18C, KA-50, Mi-8, F-14A&B, JF-17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that even modeled in game? As far as I know, ED has not given HB access to changing the seeker/guidance yet. I thought the only diff between the versions we have in game is the burn time, smoke, etc.

Well the way I read the comments, I would say yes. Hopefully we hear from Naquaii in this thread to remove all doubt?

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 512 m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright well, I'm going to post the article tomorrow anyway so here are the results for a total or 120 AIM-54A Mk60 and 120 AIM-54C Mk47. This is just an example to explain criterium and the modus operandi of the test (the comparison of multiple tests make more sense than just one scenario) :

 

 

aim54-res-pk-15nm-1000-summary-2.png

 

 

Long long story very very short, as long as both missiles have energy, the AIM-54C Mk47 seems to perform a bit better.

full_tiny.pngfull_tiny.png
full_tiny.png

"Cogito, ergo RIO"
Virtual Backseaters Volume I: F-14 Radar Intercept Officer - Fifth Public Draft
Virtual Backseaters Volume II: F-4E Weapon Systems Officer - Internal Draft WIP

Phantom Phamiliarisation Video Series | F-4E/F-14 Kneeboard Pack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Karon, were the targets using chaff in any of the tests? Naquaii commented that it was a factor with the A vs C. "numbers for counter measure rejection"

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 512 m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Karon, were the targets using chaff in any of the tests? Naquaii commented that it was a factor with the A vs C. "numbers for counter measure rejection"

 

Stats from the last 4 months on the Hoggit Georgia at War server shows the C being the worst vs AI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...