it doesn’t have TVC sadly. But from what i gathered - it can hit targets maneuvering with up to 12G overload, so it should have very solid maneuverability (at the cost of not being super fast like R-37M)
its even funnier if you realise modern AAMs have GPS, afaik the later AMRAAMs have it.
The aim9x simply inherits the datalink from the aim120d
In a bubble sure, but real life with datalink? Ground radars allied aircraft all can give you the ability to get a solution on somebody outside your own sensors
hm?
could someone group up all the changes they wanna see and are confirmed by multiple people/sources please thank you
Hmm
added r-74m2
1 Like
IRCM, not IRCCM.
IRCM just means InfraRed CounterMeasure, which are just flares, and it would make sense that it had better resistance to flares, like an R-24T would have compared to an R-23T, it’s just an improved seeker with better flare resistance. It never had IRCCM, it’s basically an R-24T seeker, just maybe wider.
afaik its not based on the 24T seeker, besides some states it has an ifov or fov (cant remember what its called) close to 1 if not lower, which would be fov irccm. and it makes some sense time period whise being close to the R-73 and R-27T. but ofc there is not alot of info so who knows. i can say one thing that the lock distance is worng so far
Just because it has a low FOV does not make it IRCCM, the R-24T also has low FOV, for it to be IRCCM, it would require to have a before launch larger FOV, which then shrinks after launch, this is extremely unlikely to be the case, as the R-40TD is still part of the MiG-25 complex, so an anti-bomber/interdictor/cruise missile, missile.
Lock distance also does not always correspond to the statcard I don’t think, if we go by the statcard then the R-24T is also wrong, as it can detect an F-15 going Mach 2.3 in rear aspect at minimum 90km at 10km altitude.
Lock distance just depends on target characteristics, though I’m not saying that it is going to be perfect and is likely wrong in some areas.
as said here the Fov is 0.94*, i did ask the original owner of the post if he had the source but he said it was to long ago and have lost it. but my other argument is:
by looking at the current stats in the game. this post mentions 0.94* which is lower than the other missiles IRCCM field of view (that you can see in the picture) and also some of the other having just Fov IRCCM. so by the GAMES logic it should have it. dont take much of what i am saying seriously kek
@GitGood
the reason why I think rvv-md is r-74m, is cause I can’t think of any other missile that can be it. And it would logically make sense that rvv-md2 = r-74m2, therefore rvv-md = r74m
here’s hud showing r-74m
There is logic behind this, unless RVV-MD and R-74M are different missiles. Russian MoD could’ve just skipped R-74 and went for 74M while Vympel keeps selling R-74 under RVV-MD export name. But i have zero proofs of that obviously, just a guess.
1 Like
@kizvy
https://iz.ru/1177217/2021-06-10/perekhvatchik-mig-31-poluchil-rakety-maloi-dalnosti-r-74m
found this news article from 2021 that confirms your point about 74M being RVV-MD
1 Like
the r-74m has to be fast if its able to reach the sun in 20 seconds
1 Like
Escape velocity R-74M when
It’d have to be faster than light by a significant margin if it could escape the atmosphere while chasing a setting sun over the horizon and cross the 8 light-minutes distance between earth and the sun
1 Like
It doesn’t matter what FOV it has, it can have 0.00001, it still does not employ IRCCM.
Though if it were that small I think it’d be impossible to flare lol, but ofc it’s a hyperbole.
fair fair, one day maybe a primary source will be found
Doubt it, but still don’t get me wrong, I wish it had IRCCM that’d be sick, I just doubt it heavily and it was likely just misinterpreted information.