No, no. The only time this is accurate is when you fire at targets more than 16km away. In that case the launch platform would guide the missile until the missile gets close enough to go active on it’s own. However, this is not what we’re discussing.
When firing at targets within 16km, the missile will go active the instant it leaves the rail. So within those parameters, AMRAAM SPAA don’t need their own radar. Unless Gaijin gives these vehicles radar trailers, this is the only situation that is relevant.
Not strictly true. Have you seen how the AMRAAM handles on the Dev server? It has excellent maneuverability the moment it leaves the rail, on par with many IR missiles. This is not a sluggish missile like AIM-54 Phoenix.
Besides, even if your statement was true (it’s not)… then so what? It’s still a good SPAA that can reach out and touch targets well outside the current maximum range of NATO AA like Roland.
This is the most promising SPAA option for many nations, that could finally bring them up to par with USSR.
It doesn’t “need” to be guided in, it has radar built in, it can be radar guided to increase its range from further than 20km out which is the main argument, and hey since you want it to have its 60-80km range lets counter the argument, just add a trailer like they added to many of these hmvees, strykers etc, etc, ez pz fixed. We already have a trailered vehicle in the game so boom.
Its just the classic Russain main mentality, something good coming for another nation (USA, Sweden, Germany, France, Italy maybe Isreal/Japan)? Nah cant have that.
It has a radar inside the missile, and since on a plane it has to be communicated with there is no reason to suggest that there wasn’t an in-vehicle method of communicating with the missiles. You’re splitting hairs.
AFAIK the ground launched AMRAAM is identical to the airborne one, so this mode should be available to the SPAA. Hence, no radar needed.
Just like the LAV-AD player does - with Mk1 Eyeball. Obviously this isn’t as good as search radar, but still not a valid reason for why we can’t have it.
To make myself clear, I think it would be preferable to add AMRAAM SPAA with the radar trailer. I’m just saying that, if Gaijin refuses to do so, the radar-less option would also be acceptable.
I cant even understand what your saying, at least Apollo makes sense. As for Apollo can we have a source on the ‘boresight’ mode?
How is the AMRAAM going to be able to see aircraft 12+ km away?
I still think that the MML even with the AIM-9X would be more suitable. As for the range the Air Force says over 10 miles and the Navy says its classified so I cant share more.
You and Speclist both make no sense to me anymore. Can we got more people like Apollo who add something to the argument? I understand how ARH works. You still need to lock without it unless Apollo’s ‘boresight’ is real and im mistaken.
Ok just like how for example, the MIM-72E has an IR seeker that can be thrown off by flares because it detects the first thing it sees (dont get lost here), the AIM-120 would act the same, but with a radar target. You fire it in the direction it sees a target it hits or misses. Like talking to a 5 year old at this point
Yeah but get this IR and radar are different! I know its hard to understand but they are. Which means they don’t work the exact same way! Post a declassified source about bore sight and I will be convinced.
Once the missile closes on a target, its active radar guides it to intercept. It does not need to have a radar lock beforehand it can lock onto whatever is infront of it
It needs a radar lock to fire thats it. Unless you can provide proof that the missile can guide itself with no external radar before leaving the rail then it cant work without a trailer.
“It incorporates active radar with an inertial reference unit and micro-computer system, which makes the missile less dependent upon the fire-control system of the aircraft.”
Huh contradicts this but whatever carry on
