I loved the arrogance with their statement “we dont think the west was capable of building something better then the USSR” basically was what they said.
1 Like
Theyve used that argument multiple times as justification for their stance on western tech at this point. It seems to be a genuine core belief at least some of the devs have, if not most.
1 Like
Didnt also one of the devs say something like “The only equivalent to the R-73 are missiles like the IRIS-T and AIM-9X”, along those lines?
Yeah, hes said a lot of highly questionnable or just verifiably wrong things lately. I used to have a lot of respect for him on the old forums as he would bring a lot of documents to discussions and unlike other devs would actually commonly get involved, but lately his takes have mostly just been “Russia GOOOOOD, Westoids BAAAAD. Stalinium rule the world, primary/secondary sources are irrelevant in the face of my mighty preconceived notions based on soviet capabilities during the same time period!”
He also brought up the super common, dumb as rocks “AIM-54 is only good for killing long range strategic bombers and cant hit small nimble fighters!” myth, which is just outright wrong when the vast majority of AIM-54 kills are against fighters, with only like, 6 out of ~54 verified kills being against bomber sized targets…
This isnt really the thread for that though, so we should probs move the convo elsewhere and talk about the Eurofighter instead
1 Like
Yeah I also liked him for actually communicating with us but yeah now not so much.
Anyway Eurofighter, very sexy plane imo.
1 Like
well yeah but only like in terms of maneuverability. thats why iris-t, 9x and asraam were created in the first place
even then though, IRIS-T was created to be strictly superior to the R-73, seeing as the germans literally had the missile on hand, and the initial version of the ASRAAM was not, which lead to the germans leaving the program iirc.
The ASRAAM appears to have become over the shoulder capable since then, though im not 100% sure on that claim, and i’m also not quite clear on what kind of maneuverability the 9X has.
In terms of seeker, its outright no contest. From the sounds of it, only the latest russian ir missiles such as the R-74-M2 actually closes the gap with the ASRAAM/9X/IRIS-T, with even the R-74M only claiming 75 deg off boresight from a quick search…
The Germans left due to a fundamental difference in design philosophy. They wanted the maximum possible maneuverability right off the rail (hence IRIS-T using TVC), while the British were willing to sacrifice a bit of maneuverability in order to gain substantially more range (hence ASRAAM has a larger motor and control surfaces).
The Australians demonstrated ASRAAM’s over the shoulder capability by shooting down a target drone (with a direct hit from the missile) that was being made to chase the launching aircraft.
4 Likes
It depends, but probably somewhat worse than IRIS-T.
AIM-9X uses thrust vectoring, but has a worse motor for that purpose. To be exact, the same Mk 36 Mod.11 already found on the AIM-9M. With a boost only profile, it only has 5.3 seconds of burn (and thus TVC maneuvering) time. IRIS-T with its boost-sustain motor will likely burn much longer, and thus also use its TVC much longer.
AIM-9X Blk.II has the same motor and only adds a datalink and lofted trajectories, but the effect of lofting on a short range AAM seems questionable…
Blk.III got canceled and its replacement still seems some years out
1 Like
Support the theme with an asset
1 Like
This is wrong, only early AIM-9X used the MK36 motor and it was an heavelly upgraded one, not the mod 11.
Even the lastest AIM-9M-10 used the mk36 mod 13.
IIRC, the AIM-9X used the MK36 mod 71 but it was so different to the original name it got renamed to the MK 139
Currently the AIM-9X doesn’t use Mk36, but a derivative of it. It uses an entirely different propellant type that has higher ISP and likely a different grain pattern as well. Totally different besides dimensions and packaging.
From what i found, the AIM-9X currently uses the mk 139 motor with different versions.
The IRIS-T indeed has a better turn radius than the AIM-9X, it’s mostly due to the fact that the IRIS-T start very slow with only a short pulse to turn toward the target before the main impulse.
The burn time for the main impulsion for the IRIS-T is probably not mutch longuer (if any) than the AIM-9X.
It has a low sustainer but since it’s so low thrust, it help less for the TVC.
Anyways we don’t know the burn time of the IRIS-T or the AIM-9X so it’s only supposition. But since the AIM-9X Block 1 has a bit longuer max range than the IRIS-T (25/30 vs 25km), i wouldn’t expect the IRIS-T to have a mutch longer burn time.
It probably still has incremental upgrades for its motor even if its not mentionned.
The datalink also permit the missile to do LOAL, which makes it 360° capable and launchable from the internal weapons bay (F-22 and ground launched from a radar track.
Lofting make a missile gain range at the cost of time on target. With the lofting capabilities, the AIM-9X manage to do 35-40km max range which is a big upgrade in range (good for when you’re against stealth fighter). Every modern medium to long range IR missile loft (ASRAAM/MICA IR) since it’s the easiest way to have a bigger maximum range.
With the capabilities of detection for modern IR seeker , you can lock enemy target 20km away, but if your missile is only 25km max range (ie IRIS-T/AIM-9X Block 1), your missile won’t have the range to destroy the target, while with a missile with 50/60km max range you migth do it.
Yeah it’s sad that it got cancelled , it was supposed to get 60% max range upgrade (=65km) and it would have been very usefull against stleath figther jet.
Who can find information on a purebred German medium-long-range missile hitting targets.
As it says here it was made for German Eurofighters
Nice find, but still as you can see, it state the AIM-9X use a modified version of the MK 36 Mod 11 which probably means an upgraded variant or a more advanced mod.
Tbh, the people that told me about the motor on the AIM-9X are @MiG_23M and @reinshil , they should be more knowlegable than me on that subject.
Much in the same way Mk36 went from AIM-9D to AIM-9M, the motor saw changes. It is no longer called “Mk36” after those modifications done to put it on the AIM-9X.
It also uses a more powerful propellant, it is smokeless high performance propellant likely CL-20 or whatever. ISP has gone from low 230s to nearly 280-300 in recent years, I wouldn’t be surprised if the AIM-9X’s propellant was already around 270s specific impulse.
Basically merged into what would become Meteor
2 Likes
This became Meteor.
Well after merging with S225XR
1 Like
yeah they ended up using the body from the S225XR but the propulsion of Bayern Chemie
I still want there to be a post about the Meteor but information is hilariously sparse and I just dont care enough lol
I think it just is part of the British weapon threat