This is just getting ridiculous. IRL they were a licensed COPY of the Aim-9B. There’s literally 0 reason in the entire world for them to burn longer than Aim-9Bs.
Do they burn longer? If you can show proof thats cool but there are a few versions of RB24’s specifically a few have slightly different fins and lens on them. Im not up to date with all modifications done but many of them were done around the time sweden upgraded their AIM 4/RB27’s.
If they are inaccurate please do make a community bug fix post showing your sources that way it can be corrected.
RB24 burns for 2.2 seconds just like AIM-9B.
4 Likes
You know he’s not gonna believe this right?
I take all posts as sincere even if I suspect otherwise.
Better to help and address the post, than to dismiss it entirely or look down on someone.
Eh, i just told him to show proof, he had nothing to show. I have multiple documents on aircraft just to back up arguments because id rather have some sort of pissing contest be done with before it can start if possible.
When an Aim-9B launched from mach 1 fails to take out a subsonic plane flying in a straight like (e.g A-10) from 2.5 miles, get an RB24 launched from a SAAB-105 can go 3 miles verticle and destroy you then I think some suspicion is to be raised.
You didn’t specify altitude, and you’d need screenshot evidence to prove altitude claims.
Provide a video of you in the exact same conditions with vehicles with matching speed. Then show the results.