Jump to content

AIM-120C-7?


Terzi
 Share

Recommended Posts

DCS: F-16C is based on 2007. AIM-120C-7 was delivered in 2003. Simple question: Are we going to get it?

 

C7 should have extended range, which is classified but you can have an educated guess.

 

March 2020, a Syrian L-39 was shot down with AIM-120C7, longest AIM-120C kill recorded so far (45km=22nm).

  • Like 2
[CENTER] [/CENTER]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We barely have a working C-5 and its been in development for like 10 years.

  • Like 6

______________________________________________

Specs

 

CPU i9 9900k

GPU RTX 2080TI

MOBO Asus Z390-E

RAM 32GB Trident z RGB 3200MHz

PSU Evga 750w g5

SSD Samsung 860 Evo 500gb/Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1tb

________________________________________________

Setup

Thrustmaster Warthog, Trackir 5 with pro clip, MFG Crosswinds,Thrustmaster MFDs, and 3 Monitor

 

________________________________________________

Modules

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ED isnt gonna "guess" at the improved range. The fact is, theres no real conclusive unclassified reason to why the C-7 has more range. Unlike the C-5 there is no mentioned motor upgrade (though I will grant it could be classified, but usually simply the fact that it has a new motor isnt classified, e.g 9X Block III). Plus, the missile didnt get physically any bigger; you could make the electronics smaller, but again, you are not gonna get like double the range, or anything close to that from the motor alone. Maybe 10-15% more at best, looking at the 120B to C-5 improvement. What we do know is that the 120C-7 "incorporates an upgraded antenna, receiver, signal processor, and new software algorithms to counter new threats." These new software algorithms could easily contain improvements to trajectory shaping, which would extend max range. Having longer battery life is also a way to increase max range.

But that being said, all of the above is speculation (though I think reasonable). And likely, EDs not gonna have much more available info. And they simply arent gonna guesswork it and just like slap 10-15% more "range" (i say "range" because we dont know all the conditions under which range improved).

 

TLDR; dont expect a C-7. If we did get it, it would be either guesswork, or just a C-5 that rejects chaff better.

  • Like 1

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

ED isnt gonna "guess" at the improved range.

When I used the word "guess" you took it serious 🙂 There are ways to make "educated" guess, without doing anything illegal.

[CENTER] [/CENTER]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Terzi said:

When I used the word "guess" you took it serious 🙂 There are ways to make "educated" guess, without doing anything illegal.

I know that, thats not the point. To rephrase the question: why does the 120C-7 have more range than the 120C-5? We know why the C-5 has more than than say the B; it has a well documented motor upgrade. Theres no such publically available info on the 120C-7. Like, what do you even start to "guess" at? Motor improvements? Trajectory shaping improvements? Battery life extensions?

  • Like 2

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The AIM-120C5 and C7 use the same rocket motor.  In fact, it's the same rocket motor all the way through to the AIM-120D.   So, where does the extra range come from?   Like dundun92 I have some guesses and they're educated, but still pretty thin and guesses do not equal information.

 

* The desired +10 inch rocket motor upgrade was assumed to be incorporated into C7 or D, but all evidence points to no new rocket motor.


Edited by GGTharos

[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

4 hours ago, GGTharos said:

The AIM-120C5 and C7 use the same rocket motor.  In fact, it's the same rocket motor all the way through to the AIM-120D.   So, where does the extra range come from?   Like dundun92 I have some guesses and they're educated, but still pretty thin and guesses do not equal information.

 

* The desired +10 inch rocket motor upgrade was assumed to be incorporated into C7 or D, but all evidence points to no new rocket motor.

 

 

Interesting. I have some sources saying smaller electronics, better computing and ecm resistence + slightly larger rocket motor on the C7 as well as D (same principle). But obviously there isn't even any known designation for the motor used so everything is a guess at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did some experiments with this in the past with a missile-flight simulator I made.  Say a C-5 has a default loft of 5 degrees and gets X range.  If I take the same missile, give it a 10 degree loft, call it a C-7 (I know there are actual differences but I am talk kinematics), and it gets 1.5X range.  I chuck it up to 15 degrees loft and it goes to 2X range and I call it a D.  I don't actually have my data on hand, but I took a "short ranged" AMRAAM and drastically improved it's range by increasing loft.  Side effect?  I had to improve my midcourse guidance algorithm to prevent a particularly high/fast AIM-120D shot from simply sailing over the target as the fins couldn't get it down fast enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smaller electronics can also mean larger batteries.

[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

https://www.haf.gr/en/equipment/aim-120-c-5-c-7-amraam/

 

Here is something official. But it states longer ranges than what we have in DCS.

[CENTER] [/CENTER]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Terzi said:

https://www.haf.gr/en/equipment/aim-120-c-5-c-7-amraam/

 

Here is something official. But it states longer ranges than what we have in DCS.

Our AMRAAMs have 60+nm range in DCS, more than the 40 listed here. But contextless range numbers are pretty useless anyway

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For air-launched missiles, "range" numbers are just marketing buzz, anyway. It's highly variable, and in most cases, you're not going to get much of a result launching at Rmax, anyway. I suspect that the range increase of the C-7 is something similar - a best case scenario used to sell the missile. In practical terms, "C-5  that rejects chaff better" is probably a good description.

 

Between lighter electronics, better guidance algorithms and better battery, I suppose one could get an increase in range. However, it won't be that dramatic outside manufacturer's brochure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kunze13 said:

No real reason to get C7s when Redfor is already so ridiculously outranged

There is no solid line between a game and a simulator. Simulation should not care about balance, but be based on real-life facts. Otherwise it is more like a game. This isn't Counter-Strike so DCS in my opinion should not care about Red-Blue balance, and leave the balance issues to mission makers. Redfor missiles should also get what is new. There are tens of variations for Russian missiles so I would be happy if they include eg. an upgraded R-27 too.

  • Like 2
[CENTER] [/CENTER]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Terzi said:

 There are tens of variations for Russian missiles so I would be happy if they include eg. an upgraded R-27 too.

 

Which there are none in service apart from proposals. Best we could do it either the 77-1 (way too new to get any data on) or the chinese PL15. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...