I don’t believe they accept suggestion reports for air to air missiles even though they should (unless missile is already in the game).
hopefully they do just so devs are aware of it when 5th gen comes
Hopefully by the time 5th gen’s added these new toys will already be in limited production and we’ll already have an idea of how they’d perform but this is good for keeping F-35C unique hehe.
1 Like
I just saw an article and came straight the forums and you chads already made a post LOL.
1 Like
and a bug report
1 Like
Devs naturally would have been aware of the existence of this missile just because there’s quite a bit of tech mods that do report US equipments/aircraft.
maybe, but someone had to do it and if it does eventually come i can say i did my part
One is also a missile designed with a vastly more powerful booster in mind as it is surface launched.
People still wonder why the likes of the Fakour 90 and Sedjil haul soo much ass in game, its because they sport the HAWK motor, a surface launch motor.
AIM-424 is also extremely dense. using its given navy dimensions it is ~1.49 cubic meters while AIM-54 is ~1.77 cubic meters despite weighing 500lb less. for a more modern example R-37 is ~1.84 m^3 and weighs 1120lb
this indicates it has a huge motor even for a missile of its class
Its the same diameter as the AIM-174 yet shortened by 2 feet as already said.
Its either loosing motor length or they are removing other components to retain a AIM-174 like motor.
However, it weighing less is also indicative of a lower motor size / weight as a majority of the weight in a missile comes from it’s propellant in most cases, and loosing almost 200kg of mass cant just be the wing it lost or the 2 inches of length.
Large motor, yes, motor equivalent to a ground launched SAM design like the SM-6, eeehh no, not for the current stats we have, unless the US has found a far more weight efficient way to build boosters and missiles as of late.
AIM-174 is 16.5ft according to USN https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/4580875/aim-174b-gunslinger-sm-6-air-launched-configuration/
AIM-424 is 13.5ft https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/4580867/aim-424-lraam-malice/
little more than 2" dont you think?
new HLG propellants vs the SM-6, which is also an older and likely less space & weight efficient missile
I believe the USAF has the LREW program, but I haven’t seen much about it recently.
1 Like
Misread the " yeah thats a lot less missile length wise.
Uhhh the SM-6 is a 2013 vintage missile, it is anything but old. I would also think such features would have made their way into the likes of the SM-6 too given it is a mainline missile that is still being produced and improved.
with 1983 vintage Mk104 motor. maybe some minor improvements over the years but nothing crazy.
Design wise yeah, but they have been subcontracting propellant changes for it and the booster for a while now, they just did so again a bit ago.
Aerojet was tweaking the motor back in 2009.
point still stands, AIM-424 is way more original and advanced than the SM-6
Its still way less missile. I cant see it outputting a superior range to a ground launch designed missile of a vastly heavier weight class.
On a more direct note, I do wonder if there will be any land attack function like the AIM-174 (more SM-6 in this case) in the AIM-424.
it is more modern, can take advantage of HLG motor technology which the AIM-174B has not, and its fully optimized for air to air instead of surface launched intercept
pretty unlikely but possible
3 Likes
By 9 years for the Block 1 SM-6 the block 1a reached FOC in 2023, so thats only 3 years of difference for the variant that was turned into the AIM-174.
Still at the end of the day, unless aerojet has a true revolution on their hands (HLG is only 20% at the cost of increased mass since you have a higher propellant density), you aren’t getting almost 200KG of lost mass to equate to superior delta V with our current technology including with HLG changes.
Heck, HLG motors commonly have greater mass than their standard counterparts due to their density, I would expect the 424 to have a more comparable total weight in this regard to the 174, but such is not the case.
