Let’s hope it would actually work as intended then.
Again, conjecture until the booster is added.
The Python 3 may not have been intended for range but the PL-8B was specifically modified for it. The PLAAF wanted a longer range IR missile, they did the upgrade knowing they were sacrificing OBS capabilities. The entire purpose was to be able to get the missile to 4+km fast.
The Tracking suspension is better for this kind of work, that’s why it should be added. Just because the PL-8B is supposedly good at XYZ specific scenario doesn’t mean we should limit its capabilities to only be good at that scenario. For every 1 headon where gatewidth is useful there will be 10 range shots where it is a massive nerf. There is no need to artificially hold back it’s capabilities just because it’s good in 1 specific aspect.
I agree with the velocity and propulsion, but that would mean within 2km launch, any off axis launch or even no off axis will result in a miss cause it over runs. I’d still prefer R73 cause it just requires u to turn less especially against significantly better turning opponents like trying to out turn a SU30 with a mirage is painful, but I managed any how with MICA, not that this is IR but without TVC, range isn’t gonna help that much especially as NATO jets can spam flares.
How exactly can you do this on the site?
Go to any comment, click the dots > Report
Thanks.
Do you have any books or sources on the gatewidth IRCCM? The only thing close to FoV reduction I’ve heard about is this:
FoV Effects
But that has the seekers FoV smaller as a hard stop, it is not adjustable. The seeker is able to gimbal on it’s mechanism but the FoV is the same. To change the FoV, that requires a change to the optical system inside the missile, the seeker construction I’ve seen have no way of adjusting the that, they are fixed components.
I could be wrong, which is why I would like some sources to read about it.
gateWidth is the instantaneous FoV of the seeker without stuff like the sidewinders expanded acquisition mode, which is more or less a rapid area search more than a widened FoV. Other ordnance has the ability to increase or decrease FoV, some just has a very small FoV to begin with.
Ultimately the concept is simple, a smaller FoV and discriminatory wavelength detection to focus on that closer to airframe emissions.
1 Like
2 Likes
This is a response to (AFAIK) the largest player organized poll on the forums.
They seem to miss the critical element of the poll, which is that both are equally ahistorical, but one is a direct nerf.
Do we have any sources to show that the PL-8B’s multi-element is closer to Seeker Shutoff as opposed to Gatewidth or is it just all for nothing?
This is poll btw IRCCM type on the PL-8B [Poll]
1 Like
You can try to use some Patent/Research paper regarding multi element seeker as source
I have been trying to find one that specifies the PL-8B’s capabilities. I may try to get into contact with a technical university soon to ask if they have any papers that aren’t available on the internet.
1 Like
There’s a paper called Simulation and Analysis of 4-unit Infrared Guiding-head’s Anti-jamming Principle. One of the author came from the Eighth Institute of Airforce so it’s reliable.
Spoiler
Section 2.1 of the paper outlines the 4-unit infrared guiding-head’s anti-jamming principle. It have both seeker shutoff （main） and gatewidth (about 1°)
4 Likes
you can use this to fold details
Spoiler
This text will be hidden
1 Like
My bad
1 Like
i love how everyone wants objectively worse IRCCM on a good missile this makes no sense
1 Like
Thank you, I’ll be using this in the report.
seeker shutoff is better for longer range IR missiles which PL-8B (if it gets the upgraded booster) will benefit greatly from it.
4 Likes
How is gate width the better IRCCM in the game? If you pre-flare, it just kills the gate-width IRCCM missile.