AIM-9L motor is the same as the AIM-9D motor, AIM-9M motor matches ISP but has reduced smoke properties and longer shelf life.
The AIM-9X motor is a new designation, block 1 is roughly identical to the Mk36 mod 11 whereas the block 2 uses an updated motor designation with seemingly no physical changes - likely using a newer propellant with higher energy density already.
The AIM-9X block 3 proposal was not just for a newer propellant but an entirely new motor section and would have re-vamped the missile entirely. It may as well have been a new missile.
Missiles in development;
Lockheed Martin’s JATM (AIM-260) - AMRAAM replacement in AMRAAM form factor.
Raytheon’s LREW (Long range engagement weapon) - Larger missile, very long range.
Boeing’s MAM (Modular advanced missile) - stackable propulsion units, potential replacement for AIM-9X
Raytheon’s Peregrine - AMRAAM performance, half the size.
Lockheed Martin’s CUDA - Small form factor missile, gas powered steering
The only thing anyone has shown me that has relevance to the Eurofighter are enhancements being made to ASRAAM and Meteor.
Show me how the AIM-9X is lower drag compared to the AIM-9M
The only change is slightly smaller fins, they no longer move at the front. The rest of the missile has rings, parts that stick out more than AIM-9M, and it uses TVC for the enhanced agility. There are no visible improvements to drag over the AIM-9M except for smaller fins.
Compared to the ASRAAM which has a very smooth overall exterior and no forward fins.
Does anyone know if those two circles near the front are the target detection device? I thought ASRAAM had an RF based TDD and not an IR based one but a second look seems to indicate it has one or two sets of IR windows on the side… which may indicate the missile needs roll stabilization to ensure those are facing the target. This would not bode well for multi-plane maneuverability.
Those fins especially when maneuvering will have a lot more drag. So you have already shown it yourself. If there is anything beyond that with nose difference i won’t be able to measure it cause I don’t have 1.
The ASRAAM uses an active laser proximity fuse. There are three sets of windows spaced 120° apart round the missile, and each set of windows emits two independent laser beams. The end result is that the ASRAAM proximity fuse consists of 6 independent laser beams each covering a 60° sector.
Unsurprisingly there really isn’t that much public information on ASRAAM, particularly the more detailed workings. This video includes a couple of seconds of an ASRAAM seeker on a test rig, which does seem to suggest that the missile is cable of rolling in flight, but it’s hardly conclusive or much to go on:
The windows are tandem because one transmits and the other receives iirc. This type of system is present on most IR SRAAM’s with few exceptions.
The downsides are detection against very small or very fast targets, where IRIS-T for example is designed with a radio-proximity fuse that can detect these types of targets such as missiles or drones and reliably fuse on them.
I doubt that the asraam emits a laser from each window, rather the first set emits two pulses at a time and the rear window need only receive one of the sets to fire the warhead. This would imply that it uses a directional warhead of some kind or at least a expanding rod type.
-edit-
It indeed has a directional blast fragmentation warhead
how does this suggest it is directional, narrow beam, much like the later part in that section would be about the fact the missile is intended to be accurate enough that it makes direct collision with the target and thus a narrow warhead will cause the most devastating damage.
• The latest air target warheads are designed to emit a narrow beam of high-velocity
fragments. This type of warhead, called an annular Blast Fragmentation warhead
(ABF), has a fragmentation pattern that propagates out in the form of a ring with
tremendous destructive potential. A newer type of fragmentation warhead is the
Selectively Aimable Warhead (SAW). This “smart” warhead is designed to aim its
fragment density at the target. This is accomplished by the fuzing system telling the
warhead where the target is located and causing it to detonate so as to maximize the
energy density on the target.
-Otter Notes- Narrow-beam does not necessarily mean directional. It might be just a case that within a certain cone of the blast - the density of fragments is greater. You could for example ‘shape the blast pattern’ by pre-scoring/cutting elements of the warhead so they will break up in a certain manner/density within a given zone. None of the literature on the weapon uses the word ‘directional’ - which I would expect to see if it was a critical part of the warhead’s function.
-Otter Notes Part2- Directional would be something like a Claymore - which is lethal in a 90 degree arc but not behind it. This wouldn’t make sense for a short-range ‘dogfight’ missile which might be coming in at a target off-aspect or at an oblique angle.
