us air force doesnt even use aim174
2 Likes
The F15EX has the ability, not that it wants or currently is operating it. This is proposed to the air force before AIM260 is ready to be in service.
For the introduction of this missile, the electronic warfare mechanics should have been included first, also new, much larger maps, and in addition to aircraft such as the F15EX, the Su 35, modern J10, Jas 39 E / F, as well as counterpart missiles (Meteor, K-37, PL-XX, I-Derby ER, etc.) and the update to aircraft such as the Rafale, EF-2000, F16 / 15 / 14. That is, in a future that I hope is not too far away.
Could someone access the book " The Rocket Scientists: Achievement in Science, Technology and Industry at Atlantic Research Corporation"
ISBN-13. 978-0533127108
It should have some limits for the Frame of the missile an exert from the book
ARC Atlantic Research Corporation made boosters for the sm series of missiles.
Update it was from a conference not the book
F/A-18E Block 3 missile
What?
Sorry, meant to add to that, it’s the only aircraft that can use that weapon. So yeah USAF doesn’t use it.
1 Like
what about the raptor
At this point, I’d rather have Gaijin just make a modification that turns the current F/A-18E into a block 3 because having to grind for another super-fatty is just not gonna do it for me brother.
with the addition of modern ships for better self defense in nuclear thudner, gaijin added the sm-6 to be used by these ships, i deleted the booster stage and corrected the initial mass to be 830,074kg (source)
"174b" compared to fakour
launch conditions: 160km range, 10km alt, mach 1.2 for firing plane and around mach 1 for targeted plane
i also changed the 174b loft to be the same of the fakour
sm-6 compared to buk
conditions: target was about 90km away, mach 1.2 and 10km alt
if they directly converted the sm-6 to aim-174b, the length would be incorrect (4.85m now instead of 5.03m), so maybe the missile isn’t fully ready yet
2 Likes
Kinda disappointed by acceleration but other than that, seems really good
2 Likes
even better than PL-15 seeker, makes sense with the larger antenna diameter allowing for a much tighter beam compared to baseline AIM-120A. its also based on the C-7, which did get a seeker upgrade iirc
might need tweak since the main motor of the missile (not booster) is dual thrust. may also need further FM changes for air launch, like AIM-120 treatment
2 Likes
What band is band 9 again?
Also the receiver RCS is set to 5 vs micas 2 what does this entail?
in some ways, inferior in other ways
in what ways?
Theoretically the only thing that does is decrease the range slightly compared with a range you can expect on a target at 2m^2. If it’s 50km lock range at 5m^2 it should be like 43km for 2m^2, just making it up off the top of my head.
For in-game purposes, allegedly, and I have no proof of this, radars set to a lower RCS is capable of better detection/tracking and harder to decoy while radars with higher RCS to use as a baseline with range has a harder time.
Like the PL-15 has 600 deg/s track rate compared to the SM-2’s seeker having a regular 60 deg/s and also PL-15 has no IOG due to GPS.
2 Likes
i lowkey dont know what a 600°/s track rate would achieve over 60°/s afaik ingame modeling goes
1 Like
my guess would be quicker relock when the missile seeker decides to use angle-gating to ignore chaff?
mayhaps i wouldnt know