With the result:
Currently not Possibly to code, maybe in the future :/
honestly, is see asraam being good in the SIM, but why should i ever use asraam in ARB when i can use the AMRAAMs or even in the future meteor.
I would rather have dogfight missles as alternative
1 Like
Clear Marketing lie
3 Likes
Ngl, I can’t wait for the IIR generation to come because of the sheer amount of arguing that will happen when someone’s missile is mismodeled or worse than the other missiles. The amount of chaos will be glorious.
1 Like
ASRAAM still has an notable advantage over MICA in terms of speed / time to target. Also seeker gimbal limits and track rate are better than MICA IR (not that track rate matters too much in game).
3 Likes
If you can maintain any range, then youll have your answer. ASRAAMs sheer speed will make defending even harder as you will have little time to react and the lack of RWR warning means you ll not a see a typhoon coming without your own eyes.
I can see it being a very potent third partier and whilst sure iris-T will do better in ultra close quarters, ASRAAM is no slouch either
Range is entirely dependent on how they choose to model the seekers, both could be equally limited in terms of max lock ranges (especially if no LOAL is modeled) at which point ASRAAMs speed wins and the maneuverability is equal past point blank range.
The better question is how both will fair with Flare resistance at ranges where that advantage would actually matter
It’s also worth mentioning that ASRAAM is the only one that isn’t TVC, and we all know the issues with TVC
I’ve never actually seen track rate or gimbal limit numbers for ASRAAM. As for MICA, I know its gimbal limits are ±60 deg, sort of assumed ASRAAM was the same?
ASRAAM is 90
Ok, that’s a great claim, would it kill you to provide a source for it though? Thats kind of what I was asking for there, seeing as the french were saying the MICA’s gimbal limit was ±120deg when it was actually ±60deg (120deg total).
I dont think the ASRAAM only has 45deg gimbal limits (pretty sure that’s what it has using its analogue bus), but I haven’t actually seen any info stating it has ±90 deg gimbal limits yet, which is what I’m actually curious about.
Nope.
At least i dont think i have any at hand at the current moment.
Flame looks to have the necessary sources
Ty, looks like the MICA IR is lagging hard in that regard then.
Edit: @DevilO6 why remove your comment?
MBDA confirm that the gimbal limit for ASRAAM’s seeker is +/-90°
For close-in combat the aircraft sensors can give target positional data to the missile beyond the seeker off-boresight limits of +/- 90 degrees.
The design requirement for ASRAAM states the seeker must be able to slew to the maximum OBC (Off Boresight Capability) angle in less than 1.0 seconds, with 0.5 seconds being desirable. So that puts the track rate at 90+°/s if the requirement is met.
By comparison the MICA IR seeker datasheet puts the track rate at “higher than 30°/s”, but realistically I expect Gaijin will only give it 30°/s as that’s the best information available (we’ve all seen bug reports turned down because “you need to provide exact values, or specify how much greater than”).
6 Likes
#RIP Leopard 2A7V Gearbox
Ty for the accurate info/sources :)
I wouldn’t be surprised if all got ASRAAM and IRIS-T (see Brimstones)
Luckly we dont talk about GBU-48 )))))
Germany is at least in the process of acquiring Brimstones (and brimstone 1s are just a placeholder for the later brimstones they should all have), the one that somewhat annoyed me more was Paveway IV. That should be a Britain and Saudi Exclusive.
But im hoping we get some uniqueness in terms of A2A fit.
Symmetrical battles are boring