I’m not asking that it was off topic I was only wondering if the Super Etendard can carry more than one i know why they only carry 1 irl im wondering if it can simple. The 2000-5f being brought up was a miscommunication he was talking about the mirage 5f not the 2000-5f which i didnt realize.
From what i’ve seen:
It never was possible to use 2 AM.39, only one pod recieved the wiring
Super Étendard should recieve Night googles referenced as CN2H-AA
2 Likes
Hello, can anyone here explain to me how the Magic 2 IRCCM works? Because I don’t know how to shoot it in the best conditions.
after you shoot the missile the fov of the missile goes down so it has a harder time getting fooled by chaff there really is no right way to launch it rn the irccm is completely dependent on the other players reaction time tbh
1 Like
You just want to launch them as close to the enemy so they dont have enough time to react or is too close to flare. The problem with that is the long fuse time of the missile.
It comes down to feeling really, too many situations for one simple answer.
1 Like
Currently in game, it works the same way as the r73. When launched, the detector of the missile will reduce its field of view (FOV), meaning that it will less easily detect enemy flares as they are outside of its FOV. That is mostly effective at close ranges (1.5km and below), as above that it is flared like every other missiles. In under 1.5km, the only way to flare it is by trying to put flares between you and the missile and hope it tracks the flares and not you.
In real life, from my understanding, in addition to this IRCCM mechanic, it should also have a flare filtering systems quite similar to the one on the AIM9L, that is, if a flare manage to get in the FOV of the missile, the missile will temporarily stop tracking and continue its intercept using an inertial navigation system until the flares moves out of the FOV and the missile hopefully tracks the plane again.
All in all, consider the magic 2 as an unflappable missile at really short distances for now, unless it is buffed once again in the future (but we’ll see).
1 Like
Hmm, I think they passed the similar flare filtering systems of the AIM-9M for the Magic II as a suggestion forwarded to devs. I guess all we can do is wait now.
1 Like
From my understanding once again and others we’ll obviously correct me, the thing is that the Magic 2 (and in some ways the r73s) should have a similar IRCCM as the AIM9L, but using different mechanics. The r73 and magic 2 use a 2 and a 4 array sensor respectively, which allow them to scan at different IR bands, thus allowing them to detect and filter things like different flares, engines, the sun… However, as far as I know, in game, all heat sources are the same, just with different intensities, meaning that they can’t be filtered out, so it would require some major changes in the way the game handles heat sources
2 Likes
Okay so the optimal launch is around 1.5 km. This explains the fact that for the moment I have not seen any difference with the IRCCM. To be honest I have a little difficulty playing it in RB (probably a lack of “strategy”) on the other hand in SB the missile is rather effective.
I will therefore try to shoot only in the 1.5km zone.
Thank you for all your explanations which will help me improve
1 Like
When the enemy is coming towards you, shooting from further away is better, the distance will close very quickly and the fuse of the missile may not activate in time before it flies near the enemy.
1 Like
1.5km is an estimation as well. Hot targets will have a harder time to flare (f14s for exemple) so you can probably fire from further away. Rear aspect are also harder to flare so 2-3km is totally possible as well, but here the problem is the range of the magic 2. Complete side aspect , 1.5 might be the upper limit tho, and front aspect will also depend on the arming fuze so its not that easy to get kills that way
1 Like
The AIM-9L doesn’t have IRCCM.
If you’re talking about the AIM-9M which has one, it’s weird to say they have the similar IRCCM.
The AIM-9M uses suspended tracking which means that when it sees a flare(or 2 heat sources (= a plane and a flare) moving apart from each other) then the seeker “shut off” and the missile use INS (inertial navigation) until the seeker doesn’t see the flare anymore. It’s very effective if the target doesn’t maneuvers even after at long range and side and front aspect.
The R-73 and the MAGIC 2 (rn) are using a multi-element crossed array seeker (also called pseudo-imaging seeker). The R-73 has 2 elements while the MAGIC 2 has 4. This multi-element seeker reduced significatly the missile FOV after the shot (called IFOV). With the 4 element , the Magic 2 should have a IFOV of a bit under 0.5° (rn it’s 0.75) while the R-73 have the righ value at 0.75°.
Reducing the Field Of View of a missile make the missile only see the plane and not the Flare if close enought, the smaller it is, the best it is to reject flare. It’s very effective for rear aspect shot or side aspect at close range but it’s useless at longuer range since the FOV even reduced will see the flare and go toward it instead of the target (except on rear aspect if the target is afterburning).
The MAGIC 2 is also supposed to get the same kind of IRCCM as the 9M: suspended tracking.
So it will be very efficient at close AND long range if the target doesn’t maneuvers.
There is also another kind of IRCCM: DUAL BAND seeker, which some missile in game uses (R-27(E)T, PYTHON 4, Late version of a STINGER). For now this kind of IRCCM is not implemented in game.
Dual band mostly uses a IR as well as an UV seeker to distingish flare that only have IR radiation. Old flare being single spectral were mostly useless against those kind of seeker. Nowadays flares are all dual/multi spectral. Gaijin has just modeled reduced FOV or suspended tracking for those missile to give them IRCCM without giving them their true capabilities (positive and negative).
There’s also Imaging Seeker that litteray see the target so flaring them is even harder. But this is not for now in the game. Those missile are the AIM-9X/IRIS-T/MICA IR/ ASRAAM/ …)
For more information:
2 Likes
It doesn’t use inertial navigation, rather continues direction and looks in the last known vector of target. No dedicated INS.
The reduced FoV from crossed array has to do with the manufacturing quality of materials which allows for a smaller (thinner) detector material and other parts. Any type of seeker could have reduced FoV due to this.
Instead, the crossed array design allows multiple elements and better sampling for the signal processor. That’s all. It allows more accurate and faster track data afaik.
Magic 2 FoV should be around 0.46 iirc.
It should also be able to use the multiple elements to better see the aircraft even when blinded by the contrast of the bright flare. This should reduce the likelihood of it choosing the flare, alternatively it will notice the sharp increase / decrease in contrast and suspend tracking sooner (and recover sooner) than the AIM-9M. It’s quite a complex issue that is hard to model in the game currently.
This will confuse people, dual band generally refers to UV + IR seekers… Multi element does the same thing but focuses on different bands of IR. Magic 2 in this sense is multi-element.
The R-73 and Magic 2 have 4 elements for tracking the target, but the R-73s have two separate materials whereas the Magic 2 has four.
Forgive any simplifications… Trying to make this more legible for people not well read on the subject.
10 Likes
did anyone know about the ROC Mirage2000? i just know that ROC has the Mirage2000 but not sure which type it is
It’s the Mirage 2000-5Ei. Purely air-to-air, with MICA and Magic 2s
2 Likes
thx
To be precise only MICA-EM missile
Has anyone checked the turn avility of Super-Etendard, it’s seems too low.
What is it with the targeting pod carried by Mirage 2000D-R1? Thermal or no thermal?
Thermal.