Literally not what I said, I said its unclear at the moment. As I mentioned, there’s nothing apparently unique about the ASRAAM’s body, so saying it “acts like a wing” isn’t accurate, since there’s no clear explanation as to exactly what “body lift technology” implies.
As a missile? Absolutely. In aerodynamic maneuverability? Maybe, maybe not.
That seems to be the case for Mythics pov…
The ASRAAM (like the AMRAAM) has body lift incorporated into it’s guidance. With body lift and a relaxed stability the missile can have fairly tight turn radius and a high maneuverability while also having less drag than other designs. To make a missile as maneuverable as ASRAAM with traditional layouts would essentially result in a Python 4/5.
It stems from research in the early 80s of wingless missile designs - the AMRAAM competitors from almost all other companies (Ford, Northrop, etc) had no mid-body wings which reduced drag.
Now in the context that I was discussing, the MICA has the ASRAAM beat in turn radius, rate, but also in range simply because it has a much higher impulse motor… it is a longer ranged missile benefiting from some more complex design features such as TVC and strakes.
Apologies if this isn’t on topic for the Eurofighter. In regards to the aircraft, I believe both missiles will perform quite well in the current war thunder meta and what I would consider the foreseeable future.
I’m curious how you come to that conclusion when ASRAAM’s motor is about 25% larger in volume than MICA’s motor.
Obviously these a rough maths:
Using this diagram from an official RAF manual you can determine the motor section of ASRAAM to be 1.39 m x 0.166 m, giving a volume of 0.030083 m3.
Meanwhile using these two diagrams of the MICA from different MBDA documents you can determine the motor to be about 1.2 m x 0.16 m, giving a volume of 0.024127 m3.
That means the ASRAAM motor has approximately 25% more volume than the MICA motor.
I expect ASRAAM and MICA will both be very capable missiles in game; I agree that MICA will probably be the better option for dogfights (if Gaijin ever get thrust vectoring to work right). But ASRAAM will almost certainly have better time to target.
It likely results in lower drag if nothing else.
I don’t think anyone is particularly arguing that ASRAAM’s dogfight ability will be better than MICA or IRIS-T, just that the range will be better than IRIS-T, and the speed better than both. The main design concept for ASRAAM is that the missile should be exceptionally quick so it can hit the enemy before the enemy has a chance to fire their shorter range missile against you. The official reason Germany gave for withdrawing from the programme was budget constraints; although they evidently also valued better dogfight capability over raw speed and range, resulting in IRIS-T.
As I’ve mentioned before the ASRAAM will beat MICA in average velocity. I’ve been researching ASRAAM and in one described intercept the average velocity required to achieve it is higher than the MICA’s peak velocity when tested under the same conditions in game.
If you don’t mind me asking, how did you test this?
Custom MICA IR or using the in-game MICA EM?
It is possible for MICA IR to achieve a higher peak velocity than MICA EM while still having a lower range due to not having loft. The loft on MICA EM trades velocity for altitude (reducing peak velocity). It is also worth mentioning that the MICA EM’s peak velocity could increase with reduction in wobbliness, so in-game testing is also faulty for that same reasoning.
Are there known metrics for ASRAAM?
This is from standstill. In game if you launch R-27ER from slow speed (or R-60), both missiles feel very agile and quick to turn, but at higher speeds they suffer. With TVC, missile can more efficiently turn and not gain speed much due to thrust pointing in oposite direction of turn, hence the missile is slow at longer times and being in “slow” but agile state.
However: MICA TVC ON vs OFF currently (will change in next major update I hope)
How I see it going will be like this:
IRIS-T
Gunna be the most deadly at very close range 5-10km. You wont want to be in a dogfight with something like a Typhoon within those ranges with them equipped. A Typhoon with them will want to close the range after exiting the BVR phase as rapidly as possible and be practically trying to gunfight targets. It will be built for the Furball.
ASRAAM
Gunna be the best in a joust and for medium range. It is by far the fastest off the rails. But wont be unusable up close and personal. But a Typhoon with them will want to circle the furball and fire off ASRAAMs, especially as the RAF Typhoons will have the PIRATE as well.
MICA IR
Gunna be good for a dogfight at both short and medium range. Will be a good all rounder providing that TVC isnt buggy as hell (which lets face it… it will). MICA I think will have the longest theoretical range, but after its out of fuel, the lack of TVC will affect its performance, and its no escape zone would shrink quite a bit
In the medium range ASRAAM vs MICA, The ASRAAM will have a larger no escape zone at its max range compared to the MICA at its limit of its range respectively. But honestly, at around 20km. I think they’d both have a similar no escape zone. regardless of the TVC.
Iirc the inital ASRAAM they developped with the german was like 60kgs and quite shite. When the german left, they redesigned it completly making the ASRAAM we know todays.
So the asumption that the actual ASRAAM is less maneuvrable than the R-73 is not neceserally true.
If the missile can start turning very soon of the rail with 50g maneuvrability and can use its body lift and relaxed stability it can indeed turn very sharp. Maybe not as sharp as a MICA/IRIS-T/9X but still very sharp.
I think that @Flame2512 is more or less rigth and that impulse wise, the ASRAAM and the MICA are really similar. The MICA can achieve better range with the use of lofting and the strakes that can act like small wings when the missile is going down.
Something you din’t take into account when measuring the volume of the motor is the thickness of the tube itself. Iirc thanks to the strakes holding the body together, the thickness of the tube for the motor section is very small for the MICA. I don’t know for the ASRAAM.
Do we have proof that the IR doesn’t loft?
The main advantage and disadvantage for ASRAAM is the speed at which it flies off the rails. A slower missile that pulls less Gs can in theory turn in a smaller radius than a faster missile at a higher G. So ASRAAM would have a larger off-the-rails radius. The flip side of that though, is that the ASRAAM is gunna be deadly in a joust
Just want to point out that there are better threads for this conversation of two missiles. There are also not many actual sources being shared RN so not much to discuss.
R-73 is supposed to be 60G and using thrust vectoring while ASRAAM is 50G and does not use thrust vectoring. From what Flame has hinted at, it sounds like ASRAAM has a very higher acceleration which is a detriment to the turn circle.
This is messy to compare especially when you take into the account that ASRAAM is likely using a less efficient fuel type that is completely smokeless while MICA is using a fuel type that is more efficient but generates more smoke.
Also, heavier missiles achieve more range due to higher inertia.
If there’s no proof that it does loft, then we must assume it doesn’t loft. Gaijin will have to take the MICA EM, find a scenario where it does 80km while lofting, and then insert the MICA IR with no loft, and adjust drag so it does 60km in that same scenario with no loft. This will bring it close to MICA EM.
Because if MICA EM does 80km with loft, but 65-70km with no loft, then MICA IR will be very close to it at 60km with no loft.
This is why ASRAAM will have a difficult time right out of the gate in dealing with MICA IR. Because you’ll have an IR missile with the kinetic energy of potentially an AIM-120A or R-77.
Though… At its core, the MICA is a BVR missile. Its like comparing Aim-9M to R-27ET in terms of range. I feel like that at those kinds of ranges (50+km) , you’d not fire an ASRAAM, youd fire an AMRAAM/Meteor.
If we are talking about say 30km. Then the ASRAAM and MICA would be about the same in terms of no escape zone. But ASRAAM would be the faster missle I think. (not sure how the speed would compare after the “transit” but ASRAAM is definetly the faster off the rails)
Then fair enough, it also would depend on ASRAAM’s burn time. A shorter burn time = higher acceleration. This could mean that ASRAAM would lock on first with its seeker due to higher acceleration in a 20-30km scenario.
Unless ASRAAM has a burntime lower than the current 6.75 seconds of MICA, then I don’t see how it would be faster off the rail.
That’s a @Flame2512 question. I dont know specific numbers. But ASRAAM i think has a 2 stage motor
Last id heard it was boost only
Was a while ago I was doing some light reading on it. So could easily have mis-read / mis-remembered or the source was wrong
I think i found the source I read:
To increase its speed and its operating range, the missile has a low-drag design; only tail fins are provided for control purposes; and a new, low-signature, dual-burn, high-impulse solid rocket motor provides the power. Compared to other similar missiles, this new motor improves both the missile’s instantaneous acceleration and its maximum cruise velocity.
I seem to remember there was something special about thr ASRAAM’s motor case as well, something like it having thinner walls or something leading to more propellant than average
Honestly tho, information on these things is so sparse were mostly just guesstimating imo. Theres certain thinga we can have a relative idea of compared to other missiles, but nothing concrete.
Yep, Missile and aircraft. A lot of Guess-timates in our future. As I said above. Which is best will be entirely based upon the situation. No one missile is gunna just be “better” than the others. (except probably for the russian version cause it will be overtuned to hell :P )
