The MICA EM in game both with & without loft enabled.
I’ve managed to find more information than I expected given how modern it is. The challenge now is trying to reconcile the claimed performance and known stats, to fill in the gaps and arrive at the likely specifications of the missile. I’m not at a point yet where I feel confident enough to say I know all the stats (plenty more testing to do), but the information I’ve see so far suggests it will be an exceptionally quick missile.
IIRC MICA is 50g with TVC and 30g once the motor burns out. So I took his comment to mean there is a period after burnout when MICA is 30g and ASRAAM is >30g, which seems plausible.
I know ASRAAM definitely changed after the Germans pulled out, but here is the EAP in 1986; the mock ASRAAM it is carrying certainly looks very similar in general design to the present day ASRAAM.
Spoiler
Yes it was only a rough comparison not accounting for wall thickness, the idea was just to show that ASRAAMs motor is larger than MICAs so a claim of it having significantly less total impulse does not seem likely. I don’t know about MICA but ASRAAM uses Steel Strip Laminate (SSL) for it’s motor case which is essentially fibreglass with a layer of ultra high tensile strength steel strips mixed in, allowing for a thin wall thickness.
Yes that is a distinct possibility.
ASRAAM appears to use some form of boost sustain rocket motor. I’m fairly confident that the boost stage lasts for 3.1 seconds, I believe the sustain stage burns for 2.1 seconds, though I’m less confident in that number. So at present I believe total motor burn time is ~5.2 seconds.
The motor size leads me to conclude that ASRAAM as a higher total fuel mass than MICA, and burns it in a shorter time than MICA. Even accounting for a potentially lower would likely mean that ASRAAM produces more thrust than MICA, while being a lighter and less draggy missile. That would logically make it faster off the rail.
Its stability is also impeccable, mainly due to the ultra high acceleration and its design… it was launched in a world first 45 alpha low speed launch.
MICA is still 50G after motor burns out, so long as it has sufficient energy. My proof is that the missile in vertical launch is said to be able to do 50G up to 7km away. If its still burning at 7km with a 6.75 burntime at 0m/s speed launch and 0m altitude, that is insane acceleration, so the only other explanation is that it can do 50G after motor burnout.
Problem is : CAMM (fox 3 and ground launched variant of ASRAAM) have the same speed as MICA : both around Mach 3 (sources stating around 1030 m/s for CAMM and in between 1050 and 1100 m/s for MICA).
CAMM is slightly heavier than ASRAAM (99 kg instead of 88kg), but also more aerodynamic.
The way i see it : MICA IR has the same speed as ASRAAM when air launched, but burns for slightly longer (1 second or so) and has more inertia, making it more dangerous far away (and particularly when diving down)
I also think there’s something about the motor that escapes our comprehension. Either the chemical composition, the “wall” thickness, or something else (charts not being very accurate)
If you want to go off marketing material then VL MICA has an advertised maximum range of “up to 20 km” while CAMM has an advertised maximum range of “>25 km”.
ASRAAM has an advertised maximum speed of “over Mach 3”, and from what I’ve seen it is highly likely that ASRAAM’s maximum speed is quite significantly above Mach 3.
it isn’t necessarily contradictory. in a SAM configuration, the heavier weight of MICA is a disadvantage, which isn’t the case when air launched. CAMM also has a cold launch system, which helps slightly
of course.
But not CAMM. And CAMM is basically an ARH ASRAAM which is ground launched. They share the same motor and everything, but CAMM is slightly heavier. And in such a configuration, what is known would leave to believe that MICA VL is faster, even if very slightly.
Some sources state AMRAAM only as 20+ miles but obviously this lacks context. The truth as you and I know is much higher. The MICA-VL should most definitely exceed 20km and we can test the in-game model as needed in ground launched test conditions.
If you have sufficient information to model the CAMM or ASRAAM in-game we can also do tests of these missiles as well.
camm is probably heavier because it has a turn-over pack as its meant for vertical ground launch applications
the fin folding mechanism probably adds some weight as well but it drops some other shenanigans like the umbilical cord and rail hardware
A good way to make the IRIS-T valuable compared to the much longer ranged ASRAAM and MICA would be to actually model the ability to use it for automated missile protection through the Preatorian DASS.
Thatd be nice, not as much range as the other missiles, but would allow the german and italian eurofighters to be much more aggressive.
I bring news everyone! The ILA 2024 started in germany. There the Eurofighter Tranche 5 is being showcased. And it was confirmed germany will order 20!
