MBDA doesnt mention datalink in any official releases pertaining to ASRAAM (and they do for CAMM, Meteor and basically all other missiles), so it probably doesnt have one.
Still has LOAL though, so you can launch it at targets further away, but not update their position if they are manouvering
Block 6 has DL for sure. When it comes to earlier block it is hard to tell. They state nothing on their offical site, but 50km hit would be hard without it.
Thats not my problem thats yours
Everyone is free to discuss topics… as along as rules are not being broken, there is no issue… if you dont like someone, then you can ignore / block them in your user preferences on your profile, in stead of derailing threads complying about someone…
You should also PM someone if you have a personal dispute with them, in stead of derailing topics as well
I think it would be a lot better to measure altitude coverage since range is basically messy and dependent on a lot of other factors such as battery time, flight path, and how range is measured (complete range traveled or range when target was fired upon?). Altitude would just be shot straight up, and stop when it runs out of energy.
IRIS-T is something like 5km altitude while CAMM should be much more than that.
CAMM is advertised to be effective up to 10 km IIRC.
It is certain though that ASRAAM is longer ranged and faster than IRIS-T.
Ah, I misremembered, the claim compared the IRIS-T SLM vs the CAMM-ER, not the SLS vs CAMM
Itd be interesting to know exactly whats going on in this situation though, as if the CAMM-ER is overstating effective range, who’s to say the CAMM/ASRAAM isnt?
I mean, as far as I can tell, if you dumb it down enough, ASRAAM focusses on killing the enemy at the longest range possible, and IRIS-T focusses on highest lethality at close range. Both are highly flare resistant and have some sort of HMD slaving.
Maybe overstating “effective range” but certainly by design alone the ASRAAM is superior to the IRIS-T. A much larger portion of the body is motor and the aerodynamics are immensely improved. Doesn’t take but a random internet warrior such as myself to identify what is obvious.
Thats pretty much the general assumption I had as well tbf. There just seema to be some oddities to it imo.
Structurally id assume the ASRAAM would outperform the IRIS-T in range/speed, but id also assume the CAMM-ER to outperform the SLM in that regard, which is allegedly not the case.
The CAMM-ER also adopts the strakes seen on the IRIS-T and its variants, and in general adopts more of an IRIS-T shape, also shared to some degree with the MICA.
Then you have the fact that the IRIS-T is (allegedly) more expensive, AND more widely used than the ASRAAM, with effectively the only ASRAAM operator being the Brits (from what I can tell, india is one of those weird outlier nations that uses a bunch of different missiles in smaller numbers), while the IRIS-T is operated by multiple european and some asian countries.
Across the Eurofighter program, the IRIS-T is the selected missile by all nations but britain, and most recently the IRIS-T was selected for integration by the south koreans for the KFX (though idk if the ASRAAM competed?)
All in all, its a bit odd. There seems to be many claims about the ASRAAM’s superiority in both design and capabilties, particularly over the IRIS-T, but it doesnt seem to translate to real world use, with the CAMM-ER adopting the shape of the IRIS-T, and the IRIS-T being significantly more comercially successful.
This could be purely coincidence though, as missiles are chosen for more than just performance, so maybe the ASRAAM is the wonder weapon the brits claim it to be. I think it could also be argued that the ASRAAM is a bad MICA as well though, with the alleged goal of the missile being pre-merge interception, it kinda steps on the toes of BVRAAM’s, but also falls short in the range respect, while seemingly not having any clear notable advantages over the MICA IR in maneuvrability (both are over the shoulder capable).
The MICA is a larger missile though, which could limit how many are carried, but its also noteworthy in being a larger commercial success…
A little odd for such a fantastic missile to be the worst comercially performing 5th gen IR missile of Europe, which is why I think theres more to this than whats being claimed.
The main difference between IRIS-T and ASRAAM is do you want longer range but no TVC or shorter range but with TVC
Also Australia use it on their legacy hornets
It was only recently that ASRAAM wasn’t export restricted
Its been retired and replaced with the 9X, tho that might be more political?
Retired the moment they got super hornets is odd
Like not even integration to use old stocks
I doubt it’s because Hughes grabbed the Australian government by the balls and squeezed so they bought the AIM-9X in lieu of the superior ASSRAAMERS
IIRC it was a cost saving measure because the AIM-9X was already integrated into the Super Hornet.
I’ll reply to you main comment in the morning, but as Mytho said ASRAAM was export restricted until very recently (last couple of years). Because ASRAAM used American components it meant America could veto any export sales (which they would obviously have had an incentive to do in order to weaken the competition and potentially sell more AIM-9Xs).
During the ASRAAM Block 6 upgrade MBDA made a conscious decision to replace every single American component, specifically because America was being such a pain with vetoing exports.
Tbf, the US is downright dirty with weapon sales and integrations. Theyre screwing the europeans atm regarding the Meteor cuz it makes the AMRAAM look like shit
Perhaps BAE needs to return the favour :P
Ah, the ol’ “US screws its allies by using the power of politics because they cant compete with the power of quality” move, despite constantly espousing the wonders of the free market…
Yeah still waiting for meator on F35B
weird that block 4 F-45 keeps getting delayed smh
Thing is that apparently been ready for a while just gov/companies on the US side keep putting roadblocks on the way of it.
