2s38 would like to have a word with you.
Anyway, we will have to look at the news in the next few minthd. MICA NG should enter service by the end of the year, maybe there will be a news post about this
In 2022 the different armies start receiving renovated older MICA, receiving new pyrotechnics so they can last up to the 2030s, so the MICA NG isn’t completely necessary in that aspect :
1 Like
Badger IFV for example is not in service in south african army yet it’s coming it has nothing to do with in service or not. Also a lot of vehicles use mods that gives them an armament they never got in service. Look at Mirage 2000-5F for example or Mirage 2000D RMV. Hell there is even some vehicles in game that never entered active service and stopped at proto stage most blatant example is USSR with all their objects and shit and their unfinished ships.
The bare minimum requirement (unless its soviet) is for evidence of at least one test fire.
For example SRAAM never entered service but was test fired 8 times. Now we have evidence of it being test fired, a Spear-3 Suggestion has been put in. Etc etc.
So just need that evidence and there is nothing stopping it from being suggested.
Though…
Means it would either come with the a MICA EM Seeker just with the better range or not at all until we had equal performance weapons for everyone else.
everyone gets unfinished ships
XM vehicles for the US
what are you arguing lol
In game, I’m not sure it would make that much of a difference aside from a longer range internal radar, I don’t know if the AESA can be used for multi tracking/search when it’s in IOG, and even then it’s probably Gaijin wouldn’t go that far on the modeling.
It is also harder to chaff/notch
that it isnt just russia that gets prototype stuff
he didn’t exclude anything he just used Russia as an example
Give me an unfinished ship in UK or French BW Tree. I’m pretty sure that US also have no unfinished ship in thheir BW tree. Weird how only axis forces get the treatment.
In anyway this is Rafale thread. We should stop this.
bc there arent as many shpis to add and lots of those got bombed while being in construction
AFAIK, in game, all radars notch the same at a set speed, from the broken CAPTOR Mto the AESA RBE2
they have different “notch gates”? I think that is the right term.
MICA EM is already the hardest of all the ARH missiles to notch because it has the only unique seeker and has a smaller “notch gate”
And some radars are extremely hard to notch like the Foxhunter on the F3, but its pretty trivial against other radars like the one in the mig-23.
I imagine that a AESA equipped AAM would be far far harder to notch than one with only a PD radar.
Plus AESA seeker would have LPI so technicaally you may not even detect in on RWR.
Yeah, assuming that was modeled though.
AESA seeker might be harder to jam in the future as well if/when it comes to AESA radars as well as if jamming is added.
Currently no, it’s mostly useful against RWRs (LPI radar), jamming and countermeasures, and to a lesser extent stealth features.
In any case i don’t see this missile coming anytime soon, Current MICA with a fix to its range would already be more than enough (hell it’s already enough in its current state)
As to notching, i can’t really prove it, but signal processing came a long way since the 60s, and i don’t think simply turning 90° will do anything to even a 90s seeker, but it will bleed the missile of its energy
I know many people attribute the notch difficulties of the MICA to the notch angle, but from experience, it’s not harder to notch than before the changes to the seeker. At least the changes are not significant.
The difficulty of notching the MICA mainly lies in its speed, as the faster a missile goes, the better the notch needs to be to make the apparent deltaV inside the notch values of the missiles
MiG 23 doesn’t use the same type of radar as the in game modern radars tho.
1 Like