Yes they integrated it onto F-16 using a new rail which attached to those the sidewinders use, but unfortunately after they started getting export orders the US blocked their integration onto US-made aircraft IIRC.
The actual P3I seems to only exist in that it was proposed and designed and subsequently evaluated having met all target pointers, but then stopped after the US selected the US Sidewinder upgrade.
So it was a repeat of what happened with the AIM-95.
The issue of the RWR on the F-4J UK being wrong
"ASRAAM
In addition to these offerings, Hughes offered an improved variant of the British Aerospace (BAe) Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM).
Tests with ASRAAM focused on the missile’s risk areas: effectiveness of the FPA sensor, image signal processor, warhead effectiveness, rocket engine tests and agility.
The missile would use a TVC to engage targets at wide off-boresight angles, particularly at short range. The sensor would not change and the field of view increased from +/- 90 degrees to +/-105 degrees.
The ASRAAM P3I would incorporate a 165mm warhead, replacing the original DASA explosive/fragmentation sub-caliber warhead, with a Thorn laser proximity fuze. The original British specifications were for a missile with a “system kill” capability, that is, incapacitating the target, which was satisfied with the 8.2kg warhead.
The American requirements were for “structure kill”, which resulted in a 12kg warhead, slightly larger than that of the Sidewinder. DASA tested a new warhead that contained a greater weight of explosive, producing the same number of fragments, but each one larger than that of the previous warhead.
The comparative testing program would end in September 1996. It involved eight tests with the warhead, tests with the aircraft-mounted sensor, four firings, a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) simulation, and the firing of four surface-to-air telemetered missiles.
Three ASRAAMs were launched from the station under the wing of an F-16 at Eglin, and one at China Lake. The first shot made a curve to the right of 30g’s and rising slightly. The second duplicated this maneuver pulling 50g’s.
The third one flew right, left and right and then soared straight up. The fourth was fired from a sled, at a 30-degree angle of attack, at low speed, followed by a dive to simulate a short engagement at a large off-boresight angle. The missile broke up after 4 seconds, despite completing the maneuver it was going to demonstrate.
ASRAAM moved its fins to sense local dynamic pressure as it left the launcher. The fourth shot measured these values incorrectly, resulting in a rapid pitching rotation, which caused structural failure. BAe believed it was a small problem that could be easily remedied.
BAe believed that the missile met, or nearly met, all 22 operational parameters such as agility, lethality, field of view and resistance to countermeasures. One change that would be necessary would be to arrange the fins so that they could be taken into the F/A-22.
A high-thrust engine with a diameter of 165mm, compared to the Sidewinder’s 127mm, would meet the kinematic requirements. TVC would be necessary to increase agility.
The more powerful engine would result in greater final acceleration to optimize the F-Pole, the position between the launcher and the target when it is hit. Initial tests included a frontal engagement from 10km away.
The tests cost the British government US$31.5 million. In a real launch against a QF-106, the missile lost tracking in the final phase, but it was considered a simple problem to solve.
The Pentagon was concerned about the costs and risks of ASRAAM. ASRAAM is designed for high speed, high agility, increased range and improved acquisition. The configuration had low drag and an engine with a low visual signature.
Testing with ASRAAM showed that it would not meet the AIM-9X’s requirements for high launch angles, IR countermeasures, lethality and interoperability."
From what I read, the P3Is were being tested.
AFAIK P3I was a proposal based on the results of US testing in 1995, not the missile as evaluated by the US
In January 1995 British Aerospace Dynamics, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England, was awarded a letter contract with a ceiling amount of $10,933,154 for foreign comparative testing [FCT] of the ASRAAM Missile. The purpose of the testing is to gather data to determine if the missile meets AIM-9X operational requirements. Work was performed in Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England (50%), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida (25%), and China Lake, California (25%), and was completed by June 1996. The tests focused on the risk areas of the ASRAAM: focal plane array effectiveness, seeker signal processing, warhead effectiveness, rocket motor testing, and kinematic/guidance ability to support the lethality requirements of the AIM-9X. After several modifications to the scope of the FCT, the program assessed four ground-to-air sorties, 19 air-to-air captive carry sorties, four programmed missile launches, eight static warhead tests, and four rocket motor case tests. The resulting assessment was that the ASRAAM (as is) could not meet the AIM-9X operational requirements in high off-boresight angle performance, infrared counter-countermeasures robustness, lethality, and interoperability. Subsequently, Hughes and BAe proposed an improved “P3I ASRAAM” using thrust-vectoring to provide increased agility and to carry a heavier warhead.
So is the normal ASRAAM not thrust vectoring?
Yep
Tail controlled and uses a lift body, that allows for a 50G pull without the need for TVC.
What’s a “lift body”? I’ve seen the ASRAAM and it looks like the normal SRAAM but bigger and more aerodynamic.
The missile itself acts like a “wing”
In aerodynamics, to calculate the resulting aerodynamic force you use a reference surface which depend on aerodynamic body.
Since the formula of the resulting aerodynamic force is:
Force= 1/2* air pressure around the object * (speed around the object)^2 (=speed of the object)* Reference surface * Aerodynamic shape efficiency (depend of the Mach number, the Reynold number, the shape of the object and the angle of attack).
Anyways the having a lifing body mean that it uses it’s body as a reference surface which GREATLY increase it’s lift which mean it can achieve greater range.
Gaijin fixed many missiles in this quality update, so redtop and sraam when ?
Never
Yes the TIALD pod was fitted to a buccaneer for testing.
What do you mean?
Oh, that.
So would that come with the S.2B or will we just get the Pave Spike?
That will be up to Gaijin
Whats up?
