IDK about amraam, but both mica and R-77 use J band because of the very reason of j band being more precise (IRL not in game)
in what sense though, AMRAAM seems perfectly accurate IRL to me
idk what band amraam is irl, i wouldnt be surprised if its j band though. Just that all fox 3 seekerheads that I know of use j band irl
J band is better in terms of precision because it has a narrower beam and operates in high frequencies which help with target resolution
amraam use I band and is a lower frequency but is better at longer ranges
reading our conversation
it really seems like GJ04 uses ai to get his data
i understand the radar resolution is more precise, but how much does this actually help it? the AIM-120 is perfectly capable of precisely hitting targets IRL
Well, I use the same AI as the GJ and so did you.
Anyway, it’s perfectly fine to make calculations, so it’s the same whether AI made calculations or I did manually.
The results wouldn’t change. Physics is physics, so what exactly is your point?
Does AI somehow disqualify radar formula, or something?
It says Xband ie. 8-12GHz. I used 10GHz as it complies with the 12° FoV report and the 178mm antenna diameter.
also weather doesnt affect the AD4A as much as people think
First, the seeker only activates in the terminal phase at relatively short range, so the signal path through weather is short. Second, the pulse-Doppler architecture helps here too — rain produces its own clutter return, but because rain moves differently from an aircraft, the Doppler filtering that rejects ground clutter also largely rejects rain clutter, allowing the target to be discriminated from the weather background.
you’re giving gaijin too little credit imo, they’re better than that
how do you know amraam uses i band and not j band?
No, they’re not. Took me some time to find which one exactly do they use, but I finally found it…and not unexpected one.
Ok, but then the missile should fly blind for more time, if the Rafale is forced to defend and cut the DL, than it does now, which gives a huge window of opportunity to defeat it.
Here’s the attenuation table for 10 and 20GHz in various conditions.
Attenuation at 10 GHz (AIM120);
Sea Level (high humidity) ~0.01 dB/km
10,000 ft (medium) ~0.005 dB/km
30,000 ft (dry) ~0.002 dB/km
Attenuation at 20 GHz (MICA);
Sea Level (high humidity) ~0.2–0.3 dB/km
10,000 ft (medium) ~0.07 dB/km
30,000 ft (dry) ~0.02 dB/km
So, filtering hardly matters since the attenuation of these two different frequencies is almost an order of magnitude in 120’s favor.
Here’s a thing, if Jband was a panacea, then Brimstone would be an AIM, not an AG missile.
I band is pretty standard among fox 3
2 Likes
Don’t forget significantly less maneuverability due to only having rear fins.
Why are we arguing over what radar band the missiles use?
AMRAAM has higher sustained AoA capability and superior mobility post-burn than the MICA. TVC is useful only early in the launch IRL.
2 Likes
i hope you realize that the AD4A hops between frequencies and doesnt stay at the highest frequency
am tired though so you can look that up yourself
not gonna spend my time explaining it
Ok, within what bandwidth? We can put it into calculator, no problem.
However, you do realize that changing frequency also changes beamwidth?
Still, I’m even perfectly fine with that too, as long as the FoV gets appropriately adjusted.
So, you can lower the freq. to gain range, but you also make chaffing the MICA easier, as a consequence.
You see, you can’t use the benefits of a variable frequency without administering the drawbacks that the freq. change produces. I mean you can, but then you get a mess called War Thunder.
Can i get full pic?
No, stealth decreases lock range thats it, once you have a lock you are pretty good to go because then you have a ridiculously high target dwell time, allowing a much longer range
1 Like
Rain still attenuates the radar return from targets though, reducing the range at which the seeker can see them. Regardless of any clutter it causes and whether that can be filtered out.
A seeker operating at 14GHz has 3x the attenuation in rain as a seeker operating at 10 GHz.
1 Like
3 times is unrealistic
From what ive researched it would be around 1.5 to 2.5 time if the seeker operates at 14 ghz
3 times would make it inoperable
Also this amount of attenuation would only happen in an extreme downpour which rarely happens in Europe
“No the orange is actually slightly less orange than you say it is”
1 Like