I’d hope it was done via SP cost not hardpoints restrictions because it would infuriating in other gamemodes
1 Like
Yeah, make the 18 brimstone load out cost 2000sp.
Yep, or there or there abouts.
We believe the 50g figure is from dual plane control and the pull in game will be 35g
1 Like
So basically magic 2 manoeuvrability?
You G limits isn’t the turning circle right
I mean aoa/fin angle + thrust vectoring matters, is why r73 has a smaller radius than say an r77 even though r77 has higher g load.
But generally what kind of manoeuvrability can we expect from the asraam? From what I can tell, most people say it’s one of the lesser manoeuvrable modern ir missiles and trades that for range like the 27et
So does speed
Who’s we? Anyway the minimum launch range of ASRAAM in the beam aspect (i.e. a situation where the missile has to start turning after launch) is less than the minimum launch range of AIM-9L. As ASRAAM is a lot faster than AIM-9L (and faster = larger turn radius at same g), I doubt that would be possible if the missile could only pull 3g more than AIM-9L.
3 Likes
It’s biggest strength is also it’s greatest weakness. It’s extremely fast off the rails and accelerates quickly. Which means off the rails it has a larger turning circle to its contemporaries like the MICA or IRIS-T.
But it can and still will engage targets in a 360° envelope around the typhoon, just takes a little longer. But it’s main potency will be in destroying aircraft long before they even get a chance to fire
Its a joke, hes writting what gaijins statement will likely be.
Meet the manpads and dual plane BS
He’s quoting the devs and their ‘we believe this is clear marketing lie’ , misunderstanding/ infamous line.
Well to start with it’s a 50g missile, which is the same as AIM-9X and MICA. A lot of people talk about ASRAAM as being designed for long range, that is partly true, but really range is a side effect of what it was truly designed for - speed. The concept behind ASRAAM can kind of be summarised as something like:
IR missiles are approaching a point where you cannot evade them once they are fired, and so in a dogfight both aircraft are likely to fire a missile and both die to each others missiles; therefore only way to win is to destroy the opponent before they can fire their own missile.
And so ASRAAM was designed to be fast enough that you could fire it and have it impact the enemy aircraft before they were able to lock on and fire their own missile. The downside to that approach is that turning radius is a factor of how many G you are pulling and how fast you are going; as a results despite having the same G pull as MICA and AIM-9X ASRAAM will have a larger turning radius as it is going much faster.
5 Likes
Fair enough
1 Like
To be frank, it is a possibility, as devs might say that 50g is dual plane, so single plane is 35.
In which case I just point to the minimum range requirement and say “good luck achieving that with 35g”.
3 Likes
Im still curious at which would be best, the more defensive approach of the IRIS-T, or the offensive one of the ASRAAM/MICA.
As an AAM, the IRIS-T has been more successful commercially than both the ASRAAM and MICA. MICA has been more commercially successful in its surface launched variants on the other hand, with the ASRAAM generally having pretty poor commercial success overall.
That being said, MICA’s commercial success as an AAM is artificially inflated by it seemingly being the only AAM teh French are willing to integrate on the Rafales and to a lesser degree, the Mirage 2000’s.
ASRAAM was blocked for a long time due to ITAR
2 Likes