Flares, no. DIRCM, not sure.
If it has enough IR glare to wash out the imager, then maybe
Flares, no. DIRCM, not sure.
If it has enough IR glare to wash out the imager, then maybe
DIRCM does not work against IIR. It is unable to blind the full seeker and so will still track.
Volumetric CMs, multi-spectral CMs, and kinematic CMs are supposedly at least partially effective against IIR systems.
effect of DIRCM on IIR
Which DIRCM was it?
Which produces enough for the IIRs HOJ system to guide it.
thanks, I didn’t realise it was called music, read like a joke caption people had added
The question is how much precision loss for HOJ as it gets closer.
According to what I posted, not enough to result in a defeat.
Large calibre flares in some crazy amount could also help blind the seeker. The game can also model some seeker malfunctions.
Lets not forget a aim 9 x was flared by a su22
Not a lot is known about that, successfully flared or missile system failure
i mean, we can have malfunctions as a way of balance in game then (aim7m looking at the ground rn…)
I doubt we’ll get random failures
seeing we have sparrows and many other SARH missiles without DL randomly going for targets (or ground) from sidelobe reflection, or just explode midair for no reason, we probably can see it.
Sidelobes and pulse repetition frequency are actual mechanics, there’s a deeper simulation there.
with gajinns C5 equipped aircraft, even if we get the 9x it wouldnt even come to the 16c 15c because of “balancing reasons”
its funny how aim120c5 is practically identical to aim120a/b. Rather than actually fixing r77-1, mica, pl12 and aam4, they are supposedly keeping aim120c5 in its nerfed state.
But with no increase is BR, and no ECM yet, its fine…
gajinn’s idea of balancing confuses me more than the ship of theseus, why not give the c5 to all ??? why not fix the freaking R-77-1 and R-77 and giving them to the su27sm that ALSO only meets 14.0 ??? what about the others, why does gajinn love to keep the game in either a “balanced in one nation but a little” state or a “utter destruction from another nation” state
As has been said above, it’s not be concluded that it was successfully or intentionally defeated. It could have been a failure of the missile in another way.