MBDA seems to undersell it’s attributes for some reason, but I think flame has some docs that work out it to be M4.5, but I’m not sure exactly.
Yeah, them and ECM are the logical next steps
The ground launched IRIS-T makes sense for testing how they plan to model IIR. But Ive always guessed we’d get IRCCM+ rather than IIR just on a metter of gameplay, let alone ease of modeling
None I’m afraid but devil and flame might
4+? I will be honest, i have never seen it claimed to be 4+, can you point me to a source like that?
We got around this source about the MICA mentioning a top speed of Mach 4.5
It’s from a book published by the DGA talking about many French missiles (and a few others, talks about the ASRAAM and IRIS-T program quite quickly, as it’s a pretty old book these were not in service yet).
(Although as usual it’s about the MICA in general, no specification on IR or EM.
Although the IR is less aerodynamic than the EM, I somewhat expect it to at least reach a bit over Mach 4, and eventually lose speed quicker than the EM, hence the 25% decrease in range)
Actually it should be about the MICA IR since the 60km range is explicitent stated. Unless it was published at a time where the MICA performances were understated (because MBDA now claims 80km for the EM)
If its less aerodynamic but has less wieght as well (due to different seeker and IR generally being lighter) then Id expecting to accelerate quicker but not necessarily be any faster than the MICA EM (which is at least modeled as M4 in game) so is there any notable differences other than seeker between the 2?
No. The missiles are rigorously identical beside the seeker. Same warhead, same body, same motor…
So, this being Gaijin, Take a MICA EM and slap an IRCCM IR seeker to it, thats what you’ll get :P
They’ll probably increase the drag as well.
I also would say that the MICA currently has too much drag. I doubt it’s able to reach 80km (even if we don’t count the 50km hard limit it currently has, it’s already barely supersonic at this range) with any energy at all. I would guess either direct drag or wobbling due to TVC, but if this was « fixed », then I guess Mach 4.5 would be fairly achievable without major changes
We’ll have to wait and see.
That is also both the blessing and curse for ASRAAM.
Its the only gen 5 that doesnt use TVC, so should avoid the TVC bugs but… It does use dual-plane, which they refuse to model. So might end up hugely nerfed
They are heavily underselling that shall we say
It is really wierd how much MBDA do that. They short sell both its range and speed by quite a bit
But, would you happen to have any source that corroborates that ?
Not a trick question here. I’m sincerely curious.
I’m used to MBDA underselling stuff. Heck, every time we find something new on French hardware it’s through other primary sources, like the one for the top speed of the MICA
Speed and Time to Intercept have always been the number one thing advertised for ASRAAM, the label of mach 3+ is simply to not give the game away.
Well, if you don’t mind me, that does say a whole lot of not much.
There’s nothing much that can be derived from highest speed and quickest intercept.
Highest speed compared to what ? All AAM ? All MBDA AAM, or all British MBDA AAM ? Max speed ? Average speed ?
Quickest time to intercept, at what ranges ? Compared to what (once again) ?
Even if Mach 3+ is an understatement (which I agree is a given, considering the aerodynamic and size of the missile), I don’t think this source specifically is anywhere close to conclusive enough to derive much about the missile.
Your best bet is asking over in the British Weapon System thread for specific sources. Flame most likely has the most
This is Flame’s Breakdown of the ASRAAM from the sources he has:
Just out of curiosity, why wasn’t there a dev-blog or dev-post on the first flight of the P-47 Thunderbolt on May 6th? No decal or sale or special vehicle yet we’ve had them for the Zero, the Yak, the Spitfire, and so many other aircraft. Just recently we have had…
The FFA P-16 had a whole post on its first flight anniversary on May 2nd.
The A6M5 and A6M2 had a whole post on its first flight anniversary on April 1st.
The He 219 A-7 got one on March 26th.
The German La-5FNs was also on March 26th.
Yet the P-47 didnt despite being like the second most prevalent/copy-and-pasted WW2 fighter (after the P-51, I think) there was nothing.
