Not to mention the flare rejection of R60 at any range outside point blank is dubious, at best. Complete fantasy on most counts.
But mate insists that a 20g missile that should have chaff rejection, according to a myriad of documents, is a bad missile. So who knows.
no person has a problem dodging a 20g missile if they try, especially from front. if they dont try to dodge they also aren’t going to be dropping chaff so youd hit it with the current model too. there will be no increase in effectiveness.
That seems like an incredibly bad idea.
I was not discussing its BR, but I was asking about it’s RWR in order to see if the claim that it’s worse than the Mig-23s is true. Then you come and say that IFF isn’t important and then claim that RWR isn’t helpful.
So you should have no issue bringing the missile up to parity with available documentation.
Its not the same logic. One’s at a lower BR, doesn’t require a constant radar lock, doesn’t set off any RWRs, and is at 10.7, and doesn’t include IRCCM
One of them is at 12.0, methods to filter chaff, pulls less, requires a radar lock. Of course 530F should have SOME chaff res, R60M has nothing to do with that
“rwr is helpful” i can lock you and scare you and make you change your plans but a person who ignores rwr wont have that problem
Wow, this guy will be astounded when he learns of the concept of situational awareness.
are you actually joking
it doesn’t matter any of this if you can just press a single button to make the missile go away
so suddenly you will be ignoring the rwr and not caring about it. “so useful”
Fun fact: That’s historical accuracy for you.
We should bring things up to parity with documentation, when it can be done. If that means the missile has issues such as poor flare rejection, oh well. That’s the way the cookie crumbles.
Reread what I said, slowly.
exactly so you will be ignoring rwr and you agree with me that you will instead be using your eyeballs for situational awaraness because the rwr isnt actually reliable. fun fact you cant actually know whether a person is just pinging you for fun or intending to attack you from looking at the rwr. you have to rely on your eyes and ignore what the rwr says.
Yeah and I’ll kill you from an angle that you can’t see since you aren’t paying attention to your RWR.
My original point is, is that not having IFF RWR is a decrease to your situational awareness since you are unable to determine exactly what is locking you and from where.
A person who ignores rwr at 11.7 will just get slapped my a SARH or ARH.
no you wont because i can look 360 around my aircraft. and the more funny thing is RWR is actually limited in its angles, i can come from a funny angle and kill you, rwr will say nothing.
ever heard of eyes?
Sunshine, you realise all the tools available contribute to situational awareness? Rwr, visual ID, and your radar? Neglecting these things leads to bad decisions, not matter how grand you think your eyes are. If they’re anywhere close to your comprehension skills, I can only assume woe be to you.
does rwr contribute to situational awaraness when you believe someone is tracking you but in reality they are doing it only to fool you? no it contributes to decrease in situaational awaraness. neglecting the fact that rwr is not trustable is foolish
End of day, R60M was brought into the topic for no reason
530F has been proven to have Chaff filtering, so they should give it that, and it will have 2 great missiles + 2 good missiles at 12.0, with an okay flight model, and would thus be perfect if they just did that
Your RWR is trustworthy. It can alert you to possible threats. POSSIBLE threats. You can then verify this, either through checking the direction visually or validating the type of emission if your RWR presents that information. And if these 2 are not enough for you, you can then check with your radar.
Is this written plainly enough for you to grasp?
and the aim-9x has flare filtering yet it was flared by a su-22 and the navy hornet had to use an amraam to kill it. just because you say it on paper that the missile is resistant to something does not mean it will always work that way. F/A-18 Super Hornet Missed Syrian Su-22 With Its First Sidewinder Missile
people really can’t grasp that just because you have something on paper does not mean that it will actually work that way. just because a jet is designed to be an air superiority fighter jet it does not mean that jet will always be able to shoot down everything else and gain air superiority.
you just want everything to have perfect filtering while in reality things aren’t perfectly resistant to counter measures even when designed so.
Just wait until mate finds out chaff and IR countermeasures work differently, and one is significantly easier to filter.