It says “the 7F simulation”. The wider context being that section is comparing the Skyflash SuperTEMP to the AIM-7F.
they do not clip the landing gear. if they did, then bombs would clip it as well, which they do not.
you can change the type of mount thats on a pylon(and even take them off completely, minus the itspl of course)
but also, the AHDERU has the 30" lug spacing in addition to the 14" lug spacing which is what the ALDERU has(both standard sizes)
the missiles are longer than bombs lol
If im not mistaken, are these not the same mounts that they attach storm shadow too? Or have I got the wrong mount? and so isn’t Storm shadow bigger than ASRAAM?
you missed the point. plus, there is like at least 30cm of space behind the bomb
also:
GBU-48: 3.7m
Meteor: 3.65m
AIM-120C-5: 3.65m
R73 will be fine, Gaijin can’t tune a PID to save their lives so nobody will have a reason to complain, since the missile will just freak out and over compensate
its possible DA3 has a different cleared config to other typhoons, however there is no mention of AHDERU being able to carry MFRL, and there are no images showing missiles carried on the inner or centre pylons either.
Two MFRL can be attached to the OWP via an
ALDERU by means of 14 inc. spaced bail lugs and
hard points to interface with relevant crutch arms.
The MFRL is able to carry AIM-9L, ASRAAM and
AMRAAM missiles within the required flight
envelope and it has been designed following the
modular concept. The main modules of the MFRL
are the following:
2 on the outboard wing pylons, yes. OUTBOARD wing pylons. there’s only 2 of those so obviously you’ll only be able to attach 2
I get that it is ACMI AIM-7F simulation and that a large section of the manual compared the two manuals, but I still don’t see where they explicitly stated AIM-7Fs no escape range. It doesn’t is my understanding. That excerpt proves the SuperTEMP is slightly underperforming as it can currently be notched/chaffed in time. I tested that scenario about 1-2 months ago.
If a reduced notch sector doesn’t fix this, it may be evidence that the SuperTEMP is missing a time-to-gain table which reduces time to target.
Can you clarify the pylon naming scheme your using to me? Centre pylon doesn’t make much sense when there are 4 pylons
This is under the MRFL heading, only 2 MRFL can be carried, and thats on the two OWP. Not on the inner or centre pylons, in fact it distintcly says that the maximum missile carriage is 10 missiles, 4 on the belly, 2 on the ITSPL’s, and 4, 2 with the TMC on each OWP.
ITSPL’s are not counted amongst the “wing pylons”. So there is 3 wing pylons, inner, centre, outer, and then the ITSPL’s which sit on near the end of the wing, since they are sraam only, they arent really multi-role pylons.
– Four underfuselage stations dedicated to the
Medium Range Air to Air Missiles (4 AMRAAM)
and configured to a low drag missile installations
(stations No. 2 and 3) on ejector launchers.
– One center underfuselage station where either
pylon equipped with one AHDERU (station No.1) or the 1000 l Supersonic Fuel Tank (SFT)
equipped with the Tank Ejector Unit (TEU) can
be fitted.
– Six underwing stations (station 4, 5, 6 left and
right). Stations 4 carry the inboard wing pylons
equipped with ALDERUs and it is also possible
to install the Twin Store Carrier (TSC). Stations
5 carry either the centre wing pylons equipped
with AHDERUs or the 1000 lt Supersonic Fuel
Tanks (SFT) equipped with Tank Ejecting Unit
(TEU). Stations 5 are the wet stations when fuel
tanks (1000 lt or 1500 lt) are fitted. Stations 6
carry the outboard wing pylons equipped with
ALDERUs and it is also possible to install the
Twin Missile Carrier (TMC).
– Two underwing Integrated Tip Stub Pylon
Launchers (ITSPL) (station 7) are dedicated for
carrying ASRAAM/AIM-9L or AISPOD.
It talks about the no-escape range of the SuperTEMP being 6 nm. Then states that the simulated AIM-7F will produce a kill at 9 nm. The implication is that the conditions for the two values are the same (otherwise what’s the point in giving a value for the AIM-7F). In which case it is reasonable to concluded AIM-7F NEZ is 9 mn, if the SuperTEMP’s NEZ is 6 nm.
But as I said NEZ is a bit of a meaningless term because there are so many different definitions for it.
1 Like
The varying definitions of NEZ to seem to all refer to the missile’s kinematic properties, rather than the seeker’s capability.
I am gonna drop some pictures here about loadouts they are in german though and the book is from around 2003 so its most likely outdated by a lot.
I’m not sure where that comes from, but it can’t be recent as Typhoon lacks the CW illuminator needed for Aspide and Skyflash.
That is what it is yes. Rne.
Ye this is wrong, amraam can be carried on the outboard wing pylon, potentially with the TMC.