AIM-9X has an imaging infrared seeker which basically looks for a picture of a plane similar to the Stinger’s UV/IR seeker or Strela’s photocontrast, it ignores flares completely unless an absurd amount of them is dropped so as to completely mask the plane’s image (which is why BOL pods are considered effective due to the amount of countermeasures they can dispense), so the only logical reason for the AIM-9X to fail would be a mechanical failure.
Even then, its impossible to know what really happened, but failing against older Soviet flares is unlikely.
Does the picture get taken in the visible light spectrum or which part of the spectrum cause the IR imaging and visible imaging as I imagine would be very unclear and perhaps using a different wavelength might help.
I doubt a double fault will be due to mechanical failure otherwise some one has been seriously scammed…
“The latest variant, the PL-5EII, is fitted with a dual band, multi-element detector as well as a laser proximity fuse found on other modern Chinese air-to-air missiles.”
I know the J-10C and CE were equipped with HMDs and the J-10A was equipped with the same HMS as the Soviets, but does the J-10A have an HMD? Also, if the J-10A was equipped with HMD, what kind of display do you think the HMD would be implemented with?
J-10A 's cockpit and HMS sensors.I think that the J-10A have not HMD and still need to install additional aiming devices on the helmet like Russian Fighter.
looks like everything right below the sight is wrong entirely, especially that little box thing in the sight thats a rounded stick in the game. not sure the one pictured here has hms. if you wanna bug report it you can but i find the whole system terrifying.
heres a j10a’s cockpit, it looks like the sight is the same
