Skunkworks comprehensive comparison
-------------C-5 vs C-7
Weight: 355lbs vs 335lbs
Damage: 80hp vs 80hp
Blast Radius: 90ft vs 90ft
MAX Range: 80nm vs 110nm (Divide by 2 for typical range)
Drag: Factor 4 vs 4
Max Alt.: 100,000ft vs 100,000ft
Below is radar data
RWR Gain: 0.85 vs 0.85
BeamWidth: 0.0785 vs 0.0785
Look Dwn Rng: 0.7 vs 0.7
Beam Dist: 0.8 vs 0.8
Azimuth: 0.959 vs 0.698
SweepTime: 0.209 vs 0.209
LockTime: 3000ms vs 3000ms
ECM Range: 1.1 vs 1.1

What does this data tell you? First, it is clear that the C-5 and C-7 have the same warhead and apparently the same guidance system with an azimuth tweak (C-7 band is more narrow). So whats different? I would say the C-7's propulsion system, & possibly the solid state fuel being used...& obviously the housing. Def a lighter housing made of a different materials.
Both of these belong to the AIM-120 family so you cannot expect them to act wildly different. The differences are subtle, but do make a difference.


Maybe the Su-27SM got some special upgrades? Changes weren't only made to the F-16s, or blue side for that matter..but across the board. There is more at work then you know, and I am not going to explain every detail. You saw how long it took to explain ONE weapon. I regret we lost the original change log and we are doing our best to compensate for it.

FWIW .The seaker radar range on C7 was upgraded which affects ECCM and seeker upgrades .

Note to Admins:
Requesting Sticky please.

Note to Members:
Updates are on the way, please be patient. This is the first version post beta. Not everything is perfect. This is v1.2. OF is nearing 4.8, and FF is at 5.51. That should give you an idea on the improvements that still need to be made. I suppose one could suggest we rushed it out.

We at Skunk1 thank you all for your comments and input, and are eager to hear more.

This is a good time to bring up some of changes that went into AF missiles since some question arise from time to time . first here a brief summary of aim120 family

"The major new feature of the basic AIM-120C (P3I Phase 1) are the clipped wings and fins. Although this feature was introduced to allow carriage in the internal weapons bays of the F/A-22 Raptor, the -120C can also be used from other AMRAAM-capable aircraft. The guidance unit of the AIM-120C is upgraded to WGU-44/B standard. The first P3I Phase 2 missile is the AIM-120C-4 (first delivered in 1999), which has an improved WDU-41/B warhead. The AIM-120C-5 is a C-4 with a slightly larger motor in the new WPU-16/B propulsion section and a new shorter WCU-28/B control section with compressed electronics and ECCM upgrades. Deliveries of the AIM-120C-5 began in July 2000. It was followed on the production line by the AIM-120C-6, which features an updated TDD (Target Detection Device). The AIM-120C-7 (P3I Phase 3), development of which has begun in 1998, incorporates improved ECCM with jamming detection, an upgraded seeker, and longer range.
The AIM-120D (P3I Phase 4, formerly known as AIM-120C-8) is a development of the AIM-120C with a two-way data link, more accurate navigation using a GPS-enhanced IMU, an expanded no-escape envelope, improved HOBS (High-Angle Off-Boresight) capability, and a 50% increase in range."

So in AF we modeled most of the features and differences of each version . there are differences in weight (body/frame) fuel , thrust/aero table performance , jamming, and seeker data. Basically whatever we could do within the confines of the sim and available data .

This brings up another issue with weights and fuel . In past versions the weights , fuel weight, thrust to fuel weight were all off which was throwing off kinematics of missile flight . What this meant was the total weight of missile was off and weight of missile with fuel burned off was wrong and didn't match when thrust went to 0 !! .

This took a lot of debug logs to find this and why its hard to tell what missile performs from within the sim without debugging . Anyway this had to be corrected in 99% of all missiles in database and each needed reviewing after for any extra work needed . This took over course of 2 yrs to get done .

here some quick test run on aim120b, C4, C5 and C7 . all fired at same speed and alt , target 0 aspect .
launch data , speed 0.95 mach , alt = 42k , target drone speed 0.95 ,alt 35k .
max range for each
Aim120 B and C4 (both came real close) 44nm .
aim120C5 52nm
aim120C7 63nm
The C7 still had highest terminal speed at target .all were above 900 at target.

When it come to missile performance altitude means everything ,the above test run in that example if you fire from lower altitudes the range goes down pretty drastic , higher altitude better results as far as range goes and terminal speed .

Anyone know if there is a problem with the Stopworks pits like there is with Aeyes? If so does the same workaround "work"?

Hi SW_Viking and Ed_1,

Thanks for your replies. SW_Viking, I hope you don't mind my candid questions. I'm really not trying to criticize your modifications. In fact, I'm looking forward to the new releases as you guys continue.

I understand that the C5 and C7 differences can be subtle. As both of you have pointed out, there are range differences. I loaded the B, C5 and C7, and hard locked and looked at the WEZ of each of the weapons when called up. I saw differences between the B and the C5, but no detectable change in the shape of the WEZ or NEZ in the C5 and C7. So, could it be that the WEZ and NEZ shapes are not reflected in game(or HUD) though the sim-engine might still affect the missiles performance?

I'm very interested in this as I usually shoot my AMRAAMs based on the "confidence" as reflected by the WEZ and NEZ indications (as well as the ASE cue). If the C7's gonna perform better than the WEZ says its gonna, then I gonna try shooting the sucker in front of the WEZ. Vital when trading Fox 3s with Flankers. ;-)

You should see longer hud ranges in DLZ with C7 than C5 , it depends on altitude/aspect angles but across the board C7 is more than C5 .
The largest ranges will be at higher altitude at 0 aspect (target hot) .
The weapon range table is adjusted to give good no escape range too so there many aspects that come into play here, along with bubble issues with long range missiles but yes the missile will probably beat the DLZ . The hud ranges/DLZ is just a approximation of missile performance its not 100% all the time .the missile performance has no direct bearing on the weapon range table that makes up the DLZ data (meaning they are two separate things), the DLZ just is a approximate or the missile performance .

Also my above range test results were on a non maneuvering aircraft (drone) . Don't expect this to work on AI with RWR that can detect active aim120 .
One other thing i will mention just to be sure its known . The DLZ will change its range depending on target aspect/speed and altitude .

You might have good DLZ on a target but after flight the target changed aspect to 180 (running), this makes DLZ show shorter ranges, thats why its "Dynamic" launch zone .

Hmmm I couldn't load any drones. So I bugged a friendly F-4 flying a 60mile CAP pattern instead. I did both a beak to beak and a beak to tail comparison. Didn't see any differences between the C5 and C7 in both occasions.

Is there a readme or manual that we can read without downloading the entire package?

There are no drones in retail AF (that was a test I did with debug ).
Your not going to be able to tell like that , firing on friendly .
Only way for you to test would be in dog fight module find a friend to be target and you fire a various ranges with each missile (him just flying straight an level) .

The C7 has more terminal speed than all other aim120 missiles , its kinematic performance is best of all aim120 family .