hard to say unless we know the test conditions.
Not sure about IRIS-T tbf, but ASRAAM, MICA, bozdogan and A-Darter have airframes to do that.
All missiles have newer, better airframes and are superior to the AIM-9X shit bus, Python 4/5 frontal fins and R-74 that uses R-73 airframe.
It’s the maximum overload for the missile to still be intact while turning. But ye, Denel said 100g structural functional limit, real numba is probably 50.
And AAM-5
tbf max theoritical range is mostly battery life, has little to do with actual motor performance.
like for example r-74m has 10km more range than r-73 but that’s only cause it has almost double the battery life.
9X block 1 yeah, but block 2 is a lot better, going off in game implementations the 9X blk2 would be a solid dogfighting missile and not terrible in range since it can use DL to get actual ranges
Aren’t these “functional limits” usually within some period of time like 1s or smaller?
1 Like
the is not the guidance, but the airframe of the sidewinder, small and not enough fuel. Good dogfight missile, no range.
the block 2 9X is not the same as the 9x-1 or 9m in its airframe
It’s still an AIM-9, doesn’t have much weight difference. Not more fuel or anything. All of the other missiles have waaay more range, MICA IR is near BVR with 60km of effective range. ASRAAM has way better acceleration and sustains Mach 3 very well, so time to target within 20km is probably better.
Anyway, AIM-9X is not even close to them in range, maybe better in AoA pull, but there’s A-Darter, IRIS-T, AAM-5 for that.
idk the estimates says blk 2 has around 16 to 40 km range
much better than the p5 which is 20 km
here it comes one of ur experts in russian planes.
ok and? range is basically useless in WT, everything happens below 20km.
the fact that AIM-54C has 150km of range doesn’t mean it’s a good missile.
MICA-EM looking at this exageratly LOW number:
could u explain me how an IRCCM missile with TVC that’s limited to like 3/4km can “balance” a Fox-3 without TVC that can kinetically travel 120km? and btw idk if what i’m going to say it’s true but AIM-9X uses the same BS seeker as the AIM-9M, so it’s not anything special compared to other IRCCM that use gatewidth.
only AIM-9X, AIM-120 is still just dead-weight due to how much Gaijin nerfed it’s performance.
wtf am i reading?
as i said R-77-1 doesn’t have TVC, it has exageratly high G overload, but it doesn’t have TVC, the only Fox-3 with TVC (carried by a plane) ingame is the MICA-EM.
i have already noticed, u don’t even know which missiles have TVC or not, and u overreact to their capabilities based on the statcard.
- from what i have seen, it’s an anti-ship/anti-S/DEAD hypersonic missile, not designed to take down planes.
- if it would be somehow added to the game, it would be too much to have some kind of hypersonic Fox-3 for USA only.
ur stats of Statshark show that
- u suck at ARB
- u don’t own a single jet that isn’t from USA apart from the event MiG-25PD (in which u also suck)
and to make it worse
- u don’t know about military weaponry and their roles
- again from Statshark, u have negative K/D and WR in the T58, one of the most abusive tanks in the game
this post can be already closed
1 Like
Aim-9X-2’s max range is probably more like 30km. But in reality, you probably arent firing often past 10-15km
Yeah you’re right
From my testing in user missions, its effective range is around 8km, using its stats currently in game.
It can hit farther, but anything past 12-14 its running dry enough its unlikely to hit any aware target.
so what you are saying is that its significantly under preforming
because according to the navy even the AIM-9M can hit well past that and the 9X has significantly reduced drag
https://www.navair.navy.mil/product/AIM-9M-Sidewinder
and the US air force puts it as “more than 10 miles” which is ~16km
https://www.af.mil/News/Art/igphoto/2000420237/
Though if CAMM is any indication, I would not be surprised if the Aim-9X needed some buffs too, though also not overally surprising that its quite short ranged
TBF, the USAF also says the 7M has 70km of range, but I dont see anyone lobbing it off in game past 30. Or the R-77-1 claiming 120, but not being used past like 35 at most in game
Maximum range is not effective engagement range, something made even more apparent in WT by the very high levels of situational awareness. Further compacted by warthunder’s match density further increasing how much targets manuever.
I know, but it should still be able to hit the maximum range in ideal conditions
it being nowhere near close to hitting the maximum in ideal conditions shows that it is likely significantly under preforming in motor impulse
and as per the navy source (the only one that gives an upper bound) the maximum kinematic range of the 9x (when launched by a super hornet or maybe F35) would be roughly in the 30-40km range at least and yet in game it is nowhere near that
that would probably be at something like 10km+ altitude at mach 2 +.
Also might just be a battery life increase, like r-73 to r-74m going from 30 to 40km range cause of battery life increase. and max range almost means nothing because its for a head on mach 2 target at 10km alt