Altough there is an accepted bug report for it to also be the case for tracking suspension, altough im not sure if it’s just for the aim9m or every missile
Well the seeker even in it’s already nerfed state it still several times better than the any other ir missile in game on aircrafts… the fov of the magic 2 is already 3 times larger not to mention that all irccm missiles in air rb only uses one type of irccm.
There is simply no reason for other nations to get it equivalents at the same time, since all other IIR missiles shares the same seeker the only difference would be the FM of the missiles, which at the end of the day would be far more balanced.
1 Like
that would just mean the missile can’t see anything off-launch no?
basically meaning it just flies straight
There is an MBDA presentation in which they state ASRAAM’s body experiences over 1,000°C of aerodynamic heating for “a few tens of seconds”. As far as I could work out from different research papers, the only way it is possible for a missile to achieve such extreme aerodynamic heating as if it is going over Mach 5.
In addition it is confirmed that ASRAAM has an AVERAGE velocity somewhere in the region of Mach 2.7-3.4 for a Mach 0.9 launch at 3,000 m altitude. Considering the peak velocity will be a fair bit higher than the average velocity, a peak velocity exceeding Mach 5 seems very likely for a higher altitude/ higher speed launch.
3 Likes
which ir missiles have 8-10 inch diameters? other than r-27et, I can’t think of one, most are 5-7 inch
I mean that could be the case, however there is quite a lot of variables that are simply unkown on the quote and the missile itself, so i not sure if that would be enough of an argument to gaijin, just the altitude of the test would have played quite a role on the skin temperature, if that was tested at sea level that could have increase the temperature by several houndreds of degrees
While if it was tested at higher altitudes that temperature very much could be over mach 5
Granted this paper has nothing to do with the asraam at the end of the day as there are quite a lot of material properties that could change this.
Idk, but it would basically quickly stop if it sees flares
Yea no the AIM9M is insanely gimped, do they work? yea 50/50
no but there is a lot of video of the testing of the AIM-9X that gives us the general knowledge of how many degrees of AOA it has due to its dual thrust vectoring, as well as the technical nerf to the 9X that’s already in game due to them downgrading the seeker from thermal imaging camera to a basic dual IRCCM seeker
Yep. I think that the R73 is actually the worst IRCCM missile simply because it’s so slow to get inside unflarable range. It also gives a lot of time for the person flaring to flare a lot and put them flared between the engine and the seeker
2 Likes
The MICA unit cost has been estimated at around 600K to a maximum 1 mil euros per unit, so roughly 700K-1.5Mil dollars (depending on eur-dollar conversion). This doesn’t match up to your numbers (about 3 to 6x more expensive, quite a lot different from the 9X 8x), or maybe it’s simply that the 9X in 2017 are all brand new missiles instead of converted 9M ?
I sometimes do miss their TVC when im in situation where i cant just get my nose around on the enemy at knifefighting distance but i run full PL8B loadout on MKK even if i could theoretically take R73s
1 Like
R-73 is basically only good for <1km HOBs shots
same, the rare occasion I need the TVC isn’t worth all the times the raw acceleration and speed of the 8B gets it up their exhaust before they can flare, sure you can take a mixed loadout, but I just end up trying to shoot the wrong missile when I do that
2 Likes
IRCCM missiles will come and it’s going to be a TERROR for jets without BOL pods and low CMs
The monkey paw curls.
My brain doest have brain capacity neccesary to handle multiple types of short range IRs on same airframe.
1 Like
War thunder secondary armement selection is also pretty pisspoor.
First, it doesn’t go in any logical order, jumping from AGM, IR missiles, radar missiles without any logic (could at least go up->down on the weapon indicator on the top left of the screen). It can also switch IR missiles → AGM → radar missile → guided bomb, which makes things even more confusing
Second, there’s no « local » setting to only switch between AA armement, guided armement and dumb munitions, which would also be very beneficial when using a very mixed loadout.
There’s no real point most of the time anyways.
You’re better off just sticking with one type and working with that
It’s once converted to a similar currency and account for year over year inflation, it creeps up a little.
The French source has some issues :
- it’s considering the entire program cost, not the product cost of the missiles
- it’s only considering the purchases up to 2013. The missile is still in production up to today (tho, probably under the new MICA NG standard since it’s due to enter service very soon)
These 2 factors artificially inflate the « production » price that you are comparing to the Aim9X. Of course, the Aim9X, being so vastly produced, will have a lower portion of the price of each missiles be of the « development cost ».
Many French media are claiming a current unit cost of 600-1000K euros, some claiming the 600K euros as a DGA value, but I honestly can’t find the original document for that
That’s how you figure out how much an AUR costs, it includes a fraction of the money spent on R&D
The -9X was only purchased by the USN in lots between '03 & '17, so it also has a fixed timeframe. It’s still procured by FMS clients and existing Sidewinders can be turned in for some quantity of FMS credits, which count towards offsetting Defense Spending allotments that the US makes (Often FMA Funds are transfer to a virtual account, that can only be spent on US offerings so it remains within the US MIC ecosystem).
Similarly the AIM-9X also has later subvariants that are priced differently. Technically the cutting edge service missile is the “-9X-2”, where the -3 & -4 implement changes that fix issues with parts obsolescence & reliability. Which were tabulated in the linked comment.
Which is the entire advantage of retaining the Sidewinder airframe instead of a clean sheet design, which is not something that will apear in War Thunder, even if all eligible airframe were conferred access. There is still a massive gulf in actual performance considering the baseline missile shares the motor with the -9M; so we’ve seen how it performs at range.
I doubt that the US Tree would be arbitrarily conferred the, AIM-95, AIM-132 (ASRAAM) or AIM-2000(IRIS-T) either. So it’s not an option for the most part
It’s likely the cost of materials and labor for an additional AUR, without factoring in the cost of R&D as it’s already been recouped Which would be relevant for newly ordered missile Lots.
1 Like