Yep. My guess is that they might want to powercreep 5th gen for a while before introducing IIR to everyone as counterbalance, as they probably will be the most effective weapons against stealth vehicles.
But as DS said, whether 5th gen or IIR missiles come, they’ll first introduce more MAW, AESA and maybe EW before introducing IIR, hence why I think next June at best
i personally wouldnt be suprised, i could also imagine gaijin paying homage to ‘Air Supiriority’ by adding the advanced versions of the planes added back then, so F-15EX, Su-35 and Gripen E
I would imagine gaijin adding 5th gens in the summer update and they could call it ‘Invisible’ or something like that, with next gen IR missiles at the latest being added in march
sorry i had to do it
1 Like
The issue being the replacement for the AIM-9M is almost always ridiculous. 9X would be the worst option you could have and still very potent. R-74 in all variants has the potential to be a menace though practical range =/= marketed range
lmao not really. no r-74 has iir seekerhead first of all, and only the latest r-74m2 is really good with loal, datalink, 360 engagement etc (still no iir seekerhead). smin himself has stated that r-74m (rvv-md) is only python 4 level. forget about standard r-74.
Also only iir seekerhead for r-73 was an upgrade for r-73 not r74, and it wasn’t actually mass produced
Huh, fair enough then, I thought it was IIR.
I thought a requirement of 5th gen IR’s was to be IIR, hence why PY-4 wouldn’t be?
in game all iir is modeled as gatewidth+seekershutoff, so it doesnt really matter for wt purposes. and irl r74m2 still gets most the modern features of iir missiles without actually getting an iir seekerhead, and it’s cheaper to not produce an iir seekerhead.
They can still get an iir r-73 (not actually used), but it will probably be one of the worst top tier iir missiles.
r-74m2
iir seekerhead for r-73
9X and IRIS-T would basically be the two worst options in max range and even from ground launch they have ranges similar to air launched AIM9s. I do also think that only adding IIR to a few nations would be stupid. Even more than MICA EM as of now. They would turn better, go further and be basically unflarable compared to any other air launched missiles.
and this is even before micas get their turn rate buffed… so mica ir is straight up going to be best missile in game
Its super sekrit soviet technology. So its clearly superior to IIR
Indeed, but both offer range improvements IRIS-T particularly so (though perhaps not when manoeuvring), and the manoeuvrability improvements cannot be understated even with MICA’s compared to 9M’s, let alone smaller, lighter missiles with higher TVC deflection angles which aren’t making quite the same tradeoffs as MICA.
I think all would be incredibly potent I mean imagine a SRAAM with 5 times the range and twice the manoeuvrability that you also cannot flare…
To be honest i’m not even sure as these missiles are the real cancer.
Wouldn’t like to be one of those people without MAWS.
they have iir, they just don’t use it in production missiles
Indeed, we are saying the same thing
?? Isn’t SRAAM like 50+G already ?
If you are saying that IRIST-T should be pulling 100g, I’d need to see proofs.
Tbf even with a MAW, you are simply warned of your impending death. It’s overall very hard to flare IIR missiles as of now even above 6km from my experience (rear aspect), and a few km head on
I don’t get where people are even getting 100gs even from.
Highest number confirmed I’ve seen was 50gs from a presentation.
And 60 gs from that one swdish presentation
Unless its a Typo he probably means SRAAM as in the missile on the Harrier GR1/ Hunter F6 and not ASRAAM.
based upon "5 times the range " I would guess that is the case. As SRAAM is 3km and IRIS-T is more like 15km. (effective range not absolute max range)
SRAAM is only 20Gs currently. Id assume IRIS-T is around 60Gs. so actually triple
yeah, i was confusing the fact that sources state it has performed a 50 g turn vs its max of 60 gs, 60 gs would make more sense as that would match r73, would be odd for germany to make a missile that didn’t even match its previous missile
Statcard says 35 or something I thought and i’d assumed it would be ballpark and I could’ve sworn i’d seen 70g somewhere, so the same as magic 2, also keep in mind SRAAM manoeuvres purely through TVC, IRIS-T has surface control+TVC.
I may be mistaken.
i dont get why ppl are getting hung up on max G
because the IRIS-T is specifically designed to provide only the necessary thrust to vector to wherever it needs to before starting properly accelerating, so it dosent need stupidly high G loads
2 Likes
yeah, thrust vectoring is really only useful at low speeds, above mach 1.5ish the fins do most of the work anyway
Also its main strength in ultra-CQB is its slow off the rails (relatively speaking). Doesnt need extremely high G to pull very tight turns