AIM-9M has better seeker for side-aspects, longer ranges
Two different situations, aim-9M excels in one, where the others are weaker, and visa versa
Actually about the same range, motor’s are almost identical. Fins do deflect a bit more, but in the situations where shutoff IR excels, the difference is very small practically speaking, you use them in the same situations.
Yes, same-ish seeker as the R-73, which only comes into countermeasure resistance at closer ranges. So the longer range is also its downside when it comes to IRCCM
No. Because right now, the AIM-9M is the best missile for side aspect shots, specifically because of it’s IRCCM method. This comes with the drawback of being limited in envelope.
Asking for Python 4 with 9M IRCCM removes that drawback, making it a better missile, and at least in the devs eyes currently, better than they want.
While the AIM-9M isnt a bad missile per se, its not a good missile especially in dog fights or in close encounters where the R-73, Magic 2, etc, perform exponentially better than it. Sure the 9M or LI are better at 4 or 5 km out, but thats the only real advantage.
For Israel, sure the python 4 could be added, and it would solve the problem of the meh IR missile, but balancing the python 4 might prove to be difficult. Compared to other IR missiles its much newer, has a better seeker, and longer range (other than the obvious ET) than the other missiles.
However another elephant in the room is that America, britian, Germany, etc are stuck with the 9M or LI, as no missile could be added that can be effectively balanced w/o adding a whole new gen of missiles or overhauling jet IR signatures and Countermeasures and Missile seekers and IRCCM.
Drag coefficient multiplier (this is not the only value affecting drag, just because it’s higher than another missile’s doesn’t mean it actually has higher drag