AIM-9X Sidewinder: Originally designed as an air-to-air missile and has recently been adopted as a ground-to-air interceptor because of its unique capabilities.
Longbow Hellfire: Originally designed as an air-to-ground tank-killing missile and has recently shown success in destroying UAS targets.[6]
Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MHTK): Has no warhead and is designed to intercept and defeat rocket, artillery, and mortar threats with kinetic energy during a direct hit.[7]
Stinger: Originally developed as a man-portable air defense infrared homing surface-to-air missile and has been adapted to fire from a wide variety of ground vehicles.[8]
Tamir: Used by Israel’s Iron Dome to counter rockets, artillery, and mortars.[9]
From a quick search, it doesn’t look like it would fire anything else that could work in warthunder.
If the missile being fired has Data-link. Then yeah, should be able to work like that.
I know the Supacat HVM that the UK is developing with Ukraine at hte moment fires ASRAAM which, whilst hte launch vehicle I think has IRST. Can use other battlefield radars to greatly extend its acquistion range as the ASRAAM has data-link (if im not remembering incorrectly or getting my wires crossed)
There was sufficient sources to disprove Gaijin’s flawed assumptions about the Stinger’s overload performance, but they ignored them completely.
take for example the following excerpt from ADA111769
Viewing collectively the results obtained, it is concluded that the
effect of directing steering control out of the angle-of-attack platte can be
approximated, for the conditions tested, by directing the control-force increments and control-moment increments obtained when 0 = 0’ to the new steering
direction, then resolving these increments back to the non-rolling axes system
used herein. The accuracy of this procedure (exact at zero angle of attack) deteriorates somewhat as angle of attack increases.
Which directly contradicts the underlying assumptions made about Rolling Airframe Missiles in the article.
With a single-channel relay control of a rolling airframe missile
Which by looking at the block diagram of the seeker (combined with the fact that it is also somehow used on a Sidewinder Airframe, which is not a Rolling Airframe design), can be seen to use two channels.
and a further excerpt from the patent
The output pulses of the one-shot multivibrators are used as reference inputs to the linear gates and determine the rate at which the signal information being fed to the gates is being sampled. Also coupled to linear gates 158, 162 is an X position summing network 164. A Y position summing network 166 is connected to linear gates 156, 160.
10km is its max range not its effective range. It’s “effective” range is honestly about 6-7km (going off my experience fighting it) and even then it’s really not that good
Yeah, because “10km” is the range of the missile, which doesn’t include any curves it takes to lead the missile to a target, meaning it is effectively much shorter than 10km if it is remotely moving in any lateral space.
Max effective range on Pantsir is well past that (like 12-14km from my experience playing it). It’s just the majority of your engagements will be in that 8-9 range since you are honestly better off trying pop up tactics closer in so the Pantsir has less time to try and shoot down your missile.
I don’t feel so, it’s like in 8km. it can pull with it’s full mobility, 8-12, about a half, mobilizable but not much, for it’s low air resistance. VT1 is much better in 8km and closer range, but after 8km, it lose mobility quickly.
it seems your standard of mobility is different. mine is more strict.
btw, 9m311 is just same as 9m311m1, m1 just has longer max range
