It depends on many things, such as:
-Target’s angle
-Notch angle
-Target’s speed
In this case Hornet’s speed isnt the only main factor in here.
1 Like
Gajin - uses no source to make a change to aim120 removing a bunch of its maneuverability
Also gajin - you need atleast 2 secondary sources or a primary source if you want us to even think about rebalancing this missile again
Also also gajin - the bug reports we have had accepted for over a year are yet to be implemented ingame because the aim120 is clearly the best top tier missile since it has the best range
2 Likes
amraam didnt stand a chance
5 Likes
hey, does anyone know anything about the ERAAM? Supposedly it was an extended range Aim-120C variant proposed by hughes, but the only thing I’ve found on it is a single image of a mock up posted on some websites article which vaguely mentions it. Is it just an early name for the Aim-120D or?
3 Likes
ERAAM was a competitor against the MBDA meteor. it was essentially a aim120C with a dual pulse motor. you can see the meteor concept above it and the regular aim120B below. it was essentially a stop gap between aim120 and meteor hence its name ERAAM
2 Likes
Yeah that’s more or less all that the one source on it i could find said, I was more wondering if there’s anything else like any planned prototypes for it or?
probably not because it was the more or less ready to go with current technology while some years later and maturity the meteor would enter testing and eventually service. wouldve been cool and maybe that tech wouldve been put into the aim120 C-7, D if its not already in the aim120D
Ironic the technology for dual pulse progressed better and turned out to be superior, not just the best alternative to the ramjet propulsion options.
If they had dual pulse back then, why AIM-260 is taking so long to tape out? I mean, it looks to be the hardest thing to do, they know how to make a low drag body and all other components, recent RTX partner successfully tested a HLG motor…
In my unqualified opinion, I’m betting that it’s issues pertaining to mass production.
After all, making a low-production prototype is “easy”, but all sorts of things can go wrong when trying to ramp up production.
They need to convince old people in office of the need for modern weaponry and that task alone is far more difficult than any engineering or mass production challenges they may have faced.
1 Like
I believe that. China made quick advancement in 5th gen fighters, engines (WS-15 with allegedly 180kn thrust), missiles, hypersonics and yatta yatta yatta without having the US knowledge, it seems a burocracy problem and even “not using properly” the huge budget they have
When something is “good enough” and also cheap (or profitable), it is hard to convince them to spend more money on something new to keep doing the same job.
I won’t get into the whole Chinese thing but a lot of what they have done prior to 2020 was off stolen knowledge and acquiring retired engineers etc, not new research or developments.
1 Like
would be very funny if they pulled a mig-25 2.0 on their new stuff
china can spend about as much money as it wants to achieve anything and no one in china can say anything about it + they have the knowledge, manpower and infinite funds with literally no real process to govern government spending, that whilst having proved incredibly succesful at “borrowing” foreign technology.
the reason european countries band up to make something like GCAP, is not because they cannot make a 6th gen fighter necessarily, but because they themselves cannot or are not willing to purchase enough aircraft to bring the costs to acceptable levels, china and the us dont have that issue
what the hell is this
wall of text
because AIM260 is fielding new technology. it has 3 different seekers within the front end i believe the side arrays are for DL and decoy discrimination just my guess. its also believed to have a directional warhead which to my knowledge also isn’t fielded. they also have to fit a lot of requirements as a example they need to be shipped and maybe filled while on a carrier deck and a too unstable fuel leads to random explosions which needs to be tested for. which to my knowledge the russians and chinese have no care for especially since they aren’t heavily carrier based. also according to some reports they are having problems integrating it on 5th gens which is ironed out by now. they also were developing new propellants which enable 1.5x greater range over current stuff and testing ramjet configurations according to a 2023 NAWCWD fact sheet. apparently this is a accurate image of aim260. they also could’ve tested throttleable rockets which was tested by the japanese with unknown results.
according to what?
1 Like
Didn’t it have two seeker head. One being IIR seeker and other being AESA seeker?