yeah but with broken aim4f i mean that it literalyl doesnt track and its useless. is flight perfomance realistic?
some say yes some say no (but the speed seems to match SMC)
for the AIM-4F, it suffers from an issue that was reported 5 months ago, apparently pulse SARHs lose lock 150m from the target and go dead, in a head-on this is not a problem for even the AIM-4F, but it really explains why the 4F can be so unreliable in a rear aspect shot, since it can easily miss at that point with the 150m cutoff
1 Like
it’s either a D or a C with the smaller frame and F-101B carriage, I’m leaning toward D because the Cs I’ve seen have more orange, but that could be false
Well in terms of straight line speed, it’s not too far off where it should be; using the graph i posted earlier for comparison,
Top speed is off by 5% (mach 2.61 vs 2.55), meaning so does the distance travelled after a certain time (covers an extra 50 meters after travelling 1 km, for example); even if it were correct, it would still be one of the slowest AAM in the game.
It should however turn a lot tighter than it does currently, even if it were nerfed to not have dual plane manoeuvring like it should have, it would turn with a r550 magic 2.
There’s also an issue with the PID values that potentially are making it bounce over the target when it shouldn’t, but the biggest issue in terms of making them competitive is the seeker really underperforming.
It’s clearly an aim-4d. The seeker has the longer, reflective purple cover unlike the shorter transparent cover in the aim-4C, but it has canards unlike the aim-4g. Plus it’s partly painted in white as opposed to pure orange.
3 Likes
Once you see it, you cannot unsee it…
I remember arguing with someone that the missile wasn’t being guided by the center of the radar box but it was actually tracking the 3d model, but i was clearly too naive. It’s ridiculous how the ir guided missile tracks thin air to perfectly miss the giant 6 engined bomber yet manages to hit a flying wing, and deserves a bug report.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/heSC9eAY5PAL
Until this is fixed, I would suggest the best course of action is to avoid using an aim 4 on a target unless it’s flying at an 30º angle relative to you or more, knowing that the reference point it’s homing towards is probably above the fuselage because of the vertical stabilizer.
6 Likes
Oh yeah. I’ve noticed this several times before. Good that there’s finally a report out for it.
this makes aim-4s only usable when your 30 degrees above or below a target
this is just incase anybody was wondering from where they got the info: the info is pulled from the international f-104 society’s magazine “zipper,”, Tho not all of them are digitized and i do not know which edition it was pulled from
more stuff on the AIM-4H
Robert Talley – SBRC-SBRS History
it seems the aim-4h is the same length as the aim-4d unless i read it wrong
and there were 9 tests in total of the aim-4h and they fitted a bigger warhead
also
AIM-4D-8 is a variant of the falcon
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATE : US Senate : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
1 Like
If the aim-4d-8 is a variant, then I would guess it’s the version that was able to resupply it’s coolant from the wing pylon to extend it’s operational lifetime after it was activated, like it was implemented in the aim-9d and sucessors. From “The hughes falcon missile family”
AIM-4D Success
The AIM-4D finally achieved a confirmed kill in late 1967. On 26 October, a flight of four F-4Ds, Ford flight, escorted two RF-4Cs on a reconnaissance mission near Phuc Yen AB and encountered six MiG-17s. Ford 03 fired an AIM-4D at a MiG-17 in a head-on pass, but was unable to observe the missile’s performance as the pilot broke off to avoid another incoming MiG-17. The crew observed a parachute in the area of the potential intercept, but could not confirm an AIM-4D kill.
Ford 04, acting as Ford 03’s wingman during the engagement, had far better luck, firing an AIM-4D at a range of 6,000 feet in a tail-chase engagement of an additional MiG-17. This time, the crew watched as the AIM-4D flew directly up the MiG-17’s jetpipe and detonated. The NVAF pilot ejected for the AIM-4D’s first confirmed kill.
The AIM-4D would go on to score three additional confirmed kills in early 1968. AIM-4Ds destroyed MiG-21s on 3 January and 5 February, with a MiG-17 kill occurring on 8 January. With the cessation of Operation ROLLING THUNDER on 1 April, the AIM-4D lost any chance of improving its reputation. Further use in combat may have resulted in a greater success rate, as the 8th TFW received 274 extended-cooling AIM-4Ds around this time. By the time the air war resumed in earnest in 1972, the F-4D possessed AIM-9 capability, replacing the AIM-4D. The AIM-4D remained on hand with F-4D units until earlier in 1972, however, formally withdrawn from the theater on 22 April.
3 Likes
A picture of the XAIM-4H
The US war machine : an illustrated encyclopedia of American military equipment and strategy : Dornan, James E : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
(same image but flipped so you can read it)
you can see the lasers at the back of the missile(the two dots) they were later implemented on the AIM-9L (probably as the DSU-15/B AOTD ) according to the Robert Talley - SBRC-SBRS history link (scroll up a bit)
the F-4D and the F-4E should both be able to carry the missile
It seems the XAIM-4H is practically identical to the AIM-4D aside from the IRCCRM , better electronics and proximity fuze so you only have to find the weight to get the performance
6 Likes
Holy smokes, never did I think I’d see the day where I could actually see a photo of the XAIM-4H lol. Fantastic find!
This is just how much i asume the thing weighs and is probably not ture
the DSU-15/B AOTD(the one on the 9l which is based on the one on the XAIM-4H) weighs around 9lb
ADA070975.pdf page 31 (it seems i forgot to note that the source for the aim-9 claim was this link Robert Talley – SBRC-SBRS History)
this is just asuming they used the warhead on the aim-4G
which weighed 2.25 lb more than the on the AIM-4D
so it would weigh in at around 145.25 lb pre launch and 114.25 lb at burnout
the only other figure for how much this thing weighs (160lb from an illustrated guide to modern airborne missiles) is likely false since it also gets the guidance wrong
1 Like