It’s British, so it doesn’t get overhyped as much as German kit I guess.
I’ve met a few RAF and USAF personnel who all said the ASRAAM was the best IR missile they’ve seen. Obviously anecdotes don’t mean much, but it has to be at least competitive for members of both services to say that.
I don’t know whether its true, but I read IRIS first uses thrust vectoring and a weak 1st stage rocket drive to maneuver the missile head towards the supposed target, just then the main thruster starts burning. Means IRIS doen’t waste energy for intial high G / high drag maneuvering towards the enemy. It also means - dunno whether it true - thats its possible to shot targets on your six. Maybe someone might find reliable sources.
Would be nice for the Tornado, you wouldn’t need to risk wing rip offs with this mechanic.
Yes because its OLD
Also kinda weird to pull out python 4
Abusing the new firum flagging system? Pls dont. Thx.
Do tell how exactly? Cuz last i checked AIM-132 is the shortest ranged of the bunch.
Its also the same missile the US and the rest of the EU abandoned during development.
Im very curious to hear where and how it beat the competition. Especially missiles that are half a decade newer that it.
It’s old??
Freaking ****ass are arguing about thread name. what a pointless it is?
Dose anyone have disclaim about name, go and bury it in your mind.
This thread is not a comparison of Air-to-Air missiles.
Where does that come from? ASRAAM’s range is 25+km(25-50km).
I’ve heard that too. Such a design does not seem to be unique to the IRIS-T though.
Edit: As an example here is the Pyhon 5 thrust curve. There’s an initial burst of power to get it moving off the rail. Then thrust drops off so it can do a tight turn after launch, then builds up again to give the missile good speed after the turn.
Where on earth did you hear that? The main selling point of the ASRAAM is that it has superior range to the other IR missiles. The AIM-9X has the same 5 inch diameter Mk 36 rocket motor as the AIM-9M (which is essentially the same as that used on the AIM-9D - with reduced smoke). The IRIS-T also uses a 5 inch diameter rocket motor.
By comparison the ASRAAM uses a much larger 6.5 inch diameter rocket motor, specifically to give it significantly improved range. Infact that is what caused Germany to break off from the programme. The UK wanted a longer range IR missile, while Germany wanted a shorter range, but more manoeuvrable IR missile.
Nammo produces the rocket motor for the IRIS-T but information like this is literally impossible to find
Yeah the Python 5 datasheet is the most detailed I’ve seen compared to any other modern missile:
Asraam is so good the RAF fired off a shit ton of them so they can get rid of them All at once
What point are you trying to make? The RAF fired some ASRAAMs in a training exercise, therefore the ASRAAM is bad? If so your argument makes absolutely no sense.
jesus…man
also look at users of IRIS-T and users of ASRAAM (its only 1)
It’s hard to tell, you seem pretty desperate to convince everyone that the IRIS-T is the best IR missile ever created and everything else sucks in comparison.
If you want to make a comparaison then IRIS-T is better at short range thanks to better fligth surface and but the ASRAAM is better at medium range thanks to it’s bigger motor and less drag induced by it’s control surface.
The ASRAAM is still really good at close range but not as mutch as the IRIS-T.
The number of user of a said missile is not only about the capabilities of the missile, politics, economics and capabilities in production are also really big factors in the buy of A-A missile.
If you want to compare it to other missile: (obviously it’s all supossed on the tech of the country and the size of the missile)
R74, worse seeker , worse range , same maneuvrability
Pl-10 , Really similar but almost no info on the missile
Mica IR, Different kind of seeker (witch one is the best depends on the situation) , better range ++, , worse maneuvrability
Mica IR-NG , Better seeker ( new one and improved one), better range+++, worse maneuvrability as close range but with better maneuvrability at medium range thank to it’s longer range.
Python 5, better seeker (newer) , worse range , same maneuvrability
Aim-9X block 2, Similar capability seeker , better range, worse maneuvrability
because it is lmao
Care to cite any evidence. All you’ve said so far in this thread is “it’s better” without ever saying why or linking to anything to back up what you say.
