They don’t what?
can you prove that the Fakour has more than 15G overload?
it’s a MiM-23 seeker so Why should it be any better?
last time i checked the MIM-23 was a SARH so wouldn’t the fakour be a SARH too if it uses the same seeker?
Obviously the performance characteristics of new missiles like this is not gonna be declassified any time soon (if ever, since many countries never declassify or at least publish old stuff).
So with many other examples of recent missiles or systems or … that we already have in the game, the best you can do is a guesstimate based on common sense and what is publicly known.
I just gave you the picture of the Iranian upgraded Hawk SAM (Shalamcheh) seeker and guidance section.
If Iranian Hawk SAMs use an indigenous upgraded seeker and don’t use the original Hawk seeker, there is no reason to think that the even newer AAM would be using the original Hawk guidance section and seeker.
yea but what if I guesstimate that Iraq doesn’t have acess to the amount of research and development that Raytheon, MBDA, Diehl and Wympel have and neither the easy acess to the technology needed to make a missile with a better guidance system?
We are not talking about Iraq
I just showed you the better guidance section
The idea that a guidance section and seeker made in 2010s would be worse than the one that was made in the 60s (and they have access to it as well) is wild to me …
3 Likes
you showed me a picture of a guidance section that is correct
got any stats for this one?
the problem with the phoenix is that it cannot deflect enough air with it’s tiny fins to reach more than 20G overload
Fakour is faster and heavier, unless they changed the fins it should have at most 20G, if they kept the original Actuators it will have less Overload than the Original Phoenix
Yes
The stats are: “Definitely not worse than AIM-54’s seeker and guidance section that was designed with 60s components in the infancy of electronics”
source: trust me bro, can’t be
It’s not that much heavier after the burn out.
Plus, the weight is already taken into account by the game engine in terms of how many Gs it can actually pull aerodynamically at any given time. So there is no reason to impose additional G limitations in the guidance section. (In the game Phoenix guidance unit is limited to 17G while Fakour is limited to 15G, the same as MIM-23B)
Plus, faster doesn’t mean less Gs, it means it can pull more Gs …
No, source: common sense, which seems to be hard to come by these days …
common sense is flawed and easily tricked, thats why we need sources
And I gave you the source: New seeker and guidance section
There is no reason to think that the seeker and guidance section from 2010s would be worse than a seeker and guidance section from 60s …
thr guidance section Isn’t the problem, the Aerodynamic design of the phoenix is
No, in fact the guidance section is the problem, because we are not talking about how much it would be able to aerodynamically pull at any given time … The aerodynamic design is of course still the same as the Phoenix.
We are talking about the overload limitation that is imposed by the guidance section (which is set to 17G for the AIM-54 and 15G for Fakour in the game, and they took that 15G number from the MIM-23B which was limited to 15G IRL)
fxxk90 missile
After 5 seconds of boost, the speed reaches Mach 3.97
The rocket reached Mach 4.08 after the propellant was exhausted.
It takes 58 seconds to hit, and the speed is 2.5 Mach
A terrifying missile
1 Like
I think giving Fakour-90, 15G overload (which is the max load factor of the MIM-23B Hawk) instead of AIM-54’s 17G/25G is unwarranted.
Even Iranian Hawk SAM missiles (Shalamcheh) no longer use the guidance section of the original MIM-23B:
Spoiler
And other Iranian SAM missiles such as Taer-2 also use similarly “modern” seekers and guidance sections that are very different from MIM-23B:
For comparison, this is the original Hawk seeker:
So there is no reason to think that the Fakour-90 with a completely different and much more modern seeker and guidance section, would have the same overload limitation as the original MIM-23B …
Common sense would be that they would try to at least match AIM-54’s overload capability (or surpass it, if it’s supposed to be any use against more modern threats than what AIM-54 was intended for).
Also according to the statement on the IRIB (official broadcast agency) news channel “It’s significantly improved over the Phoenix”.
00:17 to 00:24 in this clip:
Spoiler
So how is it “significantly improved over the Phoenix” if it has worse max load factor than the Phoenix …
Also according to the statement on the IRIB (official broadcast agency) news channel the range and speed of the missile are “160km and Mach 5” respectively (from 00:25 to 00:30 in the clip). Rather than the “110km and Mach 4” values that are used in the game’s statcard.
I made a bug report here:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/7du9UXVUiPkJ
2 Likes
Вut only in energy terms. Turn performance, although not significantly, is worse than that of the 54A. 15G overload is the AIM-7C/D level. IMHO the F90 is an outstanding missile (based on what we see now), but the effectiveness of its use depends 80% on who is being attacked.
1 Like
Thats my takeaway from it. You will likely catch even experienced players out with the TTT (which is very fast), but once people get used to it I doubt even the Tornado’s will struggle to dumpster it.
1 Like