also even if they are being picky about that
it should at most (for rail launch) have a guidance delay of when the motor fires to the guidance initiate, which is shown as 0.4 seconds above vs the 0.6 in game
My report is still not resolved yet.
AIM-7F’s snap-up capability is lacking due to missile guidance. // Gaijin.net // Issues
It’s IIR with basically a similar range to ASRAAM, so it is, in fact, also more advanced than 9x.
Not to mention things like datalink on MICA IR (shoot it with radar, no hard lock required). A feature which, afaik, only arrived on AIM9X block II approximately a decade after MICA IR
not how it works lol. i could say the AIM-54 is more advanced since it uses an ARH seeker which IRL is arguably better than IIR and has way more range than either MICA IR or ASRAAM
He was comparing 9x to MICA IR though, so the comparison is relevent (both are IR missiles and are to be used in a similar role)
1 Like
Ingame, 9x has datalink and turns better than Irist, which is pretty good i’d say. Additionally im not sure how modeling would go for IIR, as we aren’t really far off from the real IIR as that can also have noise generated in the background to allow for flaring to work on it(i also do not want a busted missile that you can not do anything about, it just ruins the game) . I think 9x will be still competitive and has good enough range if deployed on jets for america.
Range wont matter if you know how to flare missiles anyway.
I wouldn’t be surprised if rail launch delay is 0 seconds and the delay is only for ejector launches for amraam like r-77 irl
1 Like
The issues are that mounting them on the F-35 breaks stealth due to needing to carry them externally, due to being rail launched.
And the F-22 lacks a HMD so can’t make best use of the TVC capability.
Also due to the lack of a gimbal the radar is limited has a maximum gimbal +/-60, and so without ESM mechanics being modeled (permit Seeker handoff from other sensors like IRST & and RWR) the datalink won’t do anything. and even then these isn’t much of an advantage over the AIM-9M anyway.
The other issue is that the 8" 5th gen missiles will absolutely smoke the Sidewinder in every respect, so it’s not to the US’s advantage.
don’t f-22s have scorpion?
aim 9x from what I understand has ± 90 degree gimbal, which is higher than most other missiles. for example, pl-10 has ±80 gimbal, r-74m2 ±60, mica ir ±60, etc. I don’t think it’s going to be all that bad.
It’s also gets datalink which is pretty unique, only other ir missiles that I think get datalink is the r-74m2 and mica ir.
Only thing I wonder is if it’s able to be fired without a target lock by its seekerhead, like r-74m2 or something
2 Likes
Can promise you we aint getting a raptor without an HMD/HMS. Lol, even rafale got its like late 2024, and it had in game.
You do not need to be cranking when firing them, the best way to dodge other IIR missiles in game is simply roll flare lmao, headon.
Thats where a datalink against enemy airframes whilst roll flaring their Irists can be very effective.
It is one of the few reasons sqb mains fear a claws every now n then because the datalink is quite hard to break.
you’re leaving out the fact that mica IR is the most expensive missile of the bunch and its not by little. the comparison is just nonsense, mica ir is a much larger diameter.
1 Like
it has datalink and iog no? thats what r74m2 and other missile use to achieve that
Block 2 for sure can since it has datalink but idk about og 9x.
Asraam has loal without using datalink and it has the same seekerhead as 9x, but idk if they share the iog component.
2 Likes
if it has IOG it likely can if it doesnt it just doesnt have any way to do it
1 Like
Best we should expect is an “Early” configuration, so no HMD and AIM-9M / -120C-3 to start with.
And with what sensor are you going to slew it with on the F-22? The only source we have on the radar implies that only goes out to +/-60, at best; and with no IRST / EOTS, or HMD it simply cant make use of the extra gimbal (without ESM mechanics that are yet to be implemented). Though good flight performance should save it in a dog fight it won’t be able to use them the same way a MiG-29 can use an R-73 “across the circle”.
“The Raptor Arrives” AIR & SPACE MAGAZINE, November 2005. Carl Hoffman
“In an F-15, you live and die by putting your radar in the right piece of sky to find threats and ID them,” says Cabral. But looking from the ground to 60,000 feet—120 degrees of sky—takes the F-15C’s radar 14 seconds."
“In the Raptor, on the other hand, the radar sweeps 120 degrees of sky instantly”
The -9X, especially the “Block -I” is by far the slowest, and least performant of all of the prospective 5th gen missiles, which is due to being constrained to a 5" diameter (reuses the -9M’s motor, with add on TVC module) while all others move to at least an 8" diameter.
The AIM-95 is legitimately a more competitive missile, a shame that it could only be added to select airframes at lower BRs.
Only with “Block II” missiles, the first tranche won’t, and I wouldn’t expect a jump straight to a later variant immediately. and we know how bad they are since they turn up on the CLAWS / NASAMS III. and some contemporary 5th gens also have a two way datalink too anyway.
considering the implementation of the CLAWS, I think it can, but without a sensor it won’t be able to leverage said capability often due to the lack of the ability of the RWR to handoff contacts.
1 Like
I mean that is only considering worse case scenario in which it doesn’t get hmd, which I sincerely doubt. If they give rafale a hmd it only tested, then I don’t see why f-22 wouldn’t get its hmd.
Unless its hmd is gimbal limited or something
Is this one of those magazines that is “official” so it’s kinda a primary source, or is it just secondary?
So where are the HMS / HMD for the F-5E, F-14A, F-15A, A-7E, F-16A (US) etc. There are ton of airframes that could prospectively receive them (due to being tested) but won’t for one reason or another, least of all being configurational.
The addition of prototype and prospective gear for the US Air Tree is heavily constrained.
it would be classed by gaijin as secondary at best.
It’s literally the only source there is that details anything to do with the radar gimbal so it’s the best we have, also we know that the APG-77 and 81 lack a swashplate or otherwise based on the renders we have of them so the FoR is small.
Just don’t expect it to able maintain a datalink from the Notch like the AESA Typhoon or -SM2.
1 Like
There’s another two secondary* that states 60± as well.
1 Like