And that’s in scenarios where it’s only the seeker that’s not working as it should, without the kinetic underperformance compared to the real thing being a factor.
Given their track record with bug reports, i’m only hoping they’ll look at it when they add the aim-4a/aim-4c/aim-4d to the game.
with the YUGE bombers you can test the seeker range
you can compare it to this
Some issues still remain with the FM but this is something people can test and make better for use against bombers
the ir missile can lock at around 3-4km in front aspect in game against the bombers in my experience
Can confirm, but i don’t think that says anything about the aim-4g or aim-4f seeker, it’s just showing that the way gaijin scales IR and radar return is completely off in that it’s making small planes practically stealth aircraft while big planes become flying lighthouses. The tu-95 was notorious for having a huge heat return for a propeller plane, but not to the extent that it would make rear aspect missiles all aspect from that far away.
Yeah i think you are on to something with that
id also like to not to not use the the aim-4G in rear side aspect while above the bomber on the tu-95 they will more often than not miss
this is obvious when you try to engage mig 15s in the testing grounds with weaker radar aircraft
which Aim-4 variant is this (i found this in the delta dart gallery it is aprently located at the Hill Aerospace Museum)
i think have identified the id’s of the F-4Es (it might have also been the the F-4D tho no source states it) which tested the XAIM-4H
66-0301 and 66-0295 which belonged to the 3246th Test Wing at Eglin Air force base(one of the QF-104s location was said to be there (56-747) tho im pretty sure the other one was also there)
AirHistory.net - Unit 3246 Test Wing aircraft photos
55-2969 | This Day in Aviation
183-1031-1040 - International F-104 Society International F-104 Society
Note: Im pretty sure that 66-0295 was the one which fired the missile and not the other one
missile from another perspective
also any clue on to why the seeker is red?
It’s probably either a replica or a repainted training round.
You’ll sometimes come across missile replicas/training rounds in museums that are painted mostly correct (with exception so some slight color variation or different sheens on the paint), or just wildly painted (and even weirdly shaped) “replicas” the look nothing like the real thing lol. It just sorta happens (especially when museums/restoration staff lacks access to the correct paints used on the actual weapon)
Also agree with shin kazama on this. They probably got hold of an unused training round of prototype Gar-4 (that would become the aim-4g) and repainted it to look like a live missile. They might have painted over the seeker head to try to imitate the reflective coating the later missiles had in real life (gar-2a and gar-4 have transparent seeker fairings), or to hide the fact the seeker is missing entirely.
another way to make them hit is be like 30 degrees above the target so they dont just go right above them
I believe those would have to be F-4Cs or F-4Ds as according to this (1970 flight manual for F-4C, D, and E) those are the only ones with 66-four digit serial numbers
is there a higher quality version of this? i can barely read this
it does contain the id of the f-4c (63-7407), also after further reading it couldn’t have been the f-4d as that was transferred after the missile tests
tho i dont see how this rules out the f-4E
More info on the XAIM-4H
i don’t know how acurate it is
from: An illustrated guide to modern airborne missiles
ALH? as in active laser homing or what does it stand for? maybe just a typo
from Jane’s Weapon Systems 1972 to 1973 edition
Yeah i wouldn’t take the values in that table too seriously, there’s weird errors in length, wingspan, weight and speed all over the place, although it does get the right designations and possibly the right production figures. I’d also assume they confused the laser proximity fuse that was added to the xaim-4h for a different homing seeker.
its just screenshots from the 1970 F4C manual, first was zoomed out so it showed both
and here is a later version of the F-4E one
I’ve noticed that AIM-4F is unable to hit large bombers such as B-52 or Tu-95 because it keeps targeting the centre of radar lock box resulting in it passing over the target. It should be aiming at the biggest portion of the radar signature instead
