the guidance system alone sounds so exxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxpensive
Guess what! Its actually cheaper than patriot.
taking Patriot pac 3 mse unit cost is around $3.7 million to $6 million.
David sling unit cost is around $700,000 to $1.5 million.
If we compare something that have similar capability as david sling we can take S400 for comparison which is still around $3.5 million.
the hell, a quick research showed that AIM-120D-3 are around 3mil each, Stunner costing roughly half of that in the worst case scenarion? Is that right?
They shoulda just adapt these missiles into F-15s and call it a 400km+ A2A range missile 😅
Yea you are abs right, stunner is actually very cheap for something that goes mach 7.5 300km and a very complex guidance system.
Rafael is still working on air stunner variant. (basically removing the booster like what USA did on the aim174.)
One more interesting fact, stunner is actually smaller than aim9x which means its is very possible for f-16 and f-15 to carry even more of them.
i’m truly baffled, what the hell
but i wonder if the booster doesnt play a very important role for that 300km range, it maybe accelerates the missile to a high mach number, being greater than purely being launched from high altitude
quite literally should dominate
Personally i think the main reason IAF haven’t implement it is because removing the booster drastically reduce the range. Consider how small and light stunner is, the booster might be the key how stunner reach mach 7.5.
Still, its gonna be the strongest fox3/fox2 in the world if it was implemented primarily due to the extremely advance seeker and 3 pulse motor.
One thing I am curious about stunner is the manoeuvrability of the missile. Considering how small the fins are and it doesn’t seem to use thrust vectoring.
1 Like
Maybe not the Stunner missile, But we can get the Sky Sting instead, it has a Three-pulse rocket motor and a range of 250KM, it will dominate since it’ll be better than PL-15 and Meteor’s, etc
Also, F-35I has been passed to the devs, and from what i heard, F-35I Uses exactly the Sky Stings.
It should have really good terminal maneuverability, since it will have some fuel for this purpose “A three-pulse motor provides additional acceleration and maneuverability during the terminal phase.”
Regarding speed, it probably cant reach mach 7.5 on its own without the booster, but i can see it reaching mach 5+; ASRAAM is arguably capable of doing that
It will be better if they include the booster(or modified it making it more aerodynamic) for the air launch variant. Consider aim174 and r37m are also huge missile, stunner with booster won’t be that big or heavy. With the booster and the air launch advantage it can easily reach 350km or even 450km and having insane NEZ. Having additional 100km range or even more in modern air to air combat should be the key.
Here’s a AI generate comparison (stats might not be accurate tho its looks accurate to me) between aim174 and r37m.
its correct
i’ve seen weights varying from 400 to 440kg, 70-110kg lighter than R-37M and roughly half the weight of 174B
Sky Sting doesn’t exist functionally yet, I’ve only seen mockups
1 Like
good enough for war thunder devs, cof cof kh-38mt cof cof
2 Likes
Tbf at least the seeker and body exist, I don’t think there’s any functioning part of the Sky Sting that exists (yet)
Please Rafael make a video about sky sting as soon as possible🙏🙏
They already did, but as always its just animations, no real footage.
No they didnt yet.
(oh wait nvm i found it)
Does anyone notice the tail of stunner and skyspear are kind of similar? What’s the purpose of the small fins in front of the tail fins.
Dont the tail part disengage to use the second booster just as space rockets??
