This in itself is a ridiculous assertion and it’s one of a great many in the lengthy paragraphs you wrote earlier… and completely unfounded. The AIM-54A by todays standards would be unremarkable. Nothing about it’s technology is hard to produce, and doing so would be a step back from Iran’s capabilities. The Fakour-90 is upgraded in almost every right, surely.
It’s not worth anyone’s time to discuss with someone who wishes only to personally attack them and not provide any basis for discussion period.
its so old it would be hard to make something that isn’t better with digital components i don’t understand why he thinks the Iranians can’t make better missile to replace it
The Aim54 is old but it is still a very advanced missile in which many nations still cannot meet today. Any nation that has obtained the capability has only done so very recently.
The iranian’s highly competent have proven themselves in many weapon system designs. However they are heavily sanctioned and sharing of intellectual properties as well as materials required is always denied.
That’s a reasonable opinion. The truth is, Iran would HAVE to substitute analogue components with modern digital ones. Their AIM-54 equivalent (Fakour 90) would have to be made with similar or better parts than their upgraded Sedjil missile. Especially considering the upgrades to their MIM-23 equivalent “Shalamcheh”.
In what way, if I may ask? What way is it advanced and no one can make something that competes?
Can you provide an example of a nation that couldn’t produce vacuum tubes and traditional radars small enough to fit in the AIM-54 or a datalink system until recently?
You can just say that:
-The Fakour 90 is an upgrade over the AIM-54A but we don’t really know the capabilities of this missile.
-It wasn’t totally retro-engineered of the AIM-54A which the Iranian used, but is instead a continuous development of Iranian air to air missile starting with the modified MIM-53 HAWC, the Sedjil.
No need to provoke other user to “Man up” as you say.
If I’m wrong, I’ll gradly take criticism to improve my knowledge on Iranian missile. Just try to be constructive with it
Battery life is sufficient. Why would the missile have a hard time hitting a maneuvering target? Its motor has burned out and traveling near Hypersonic when it enters the terminal phase unless launched in ACM Active.
You can perform all the maneuvers in the world if the missile is Pitbull and Mach 4.5 and RWR warns, its already too late to do anything. This was a great fear and reported by the Iraqis.
Additionally, a missile is most maneuverable the period right after its motor burns out. As long as it maintains its energy in which the Aim54 is known to do and designed to do. The missile is most deadly in this phase. The aim54s platform is designed with high-speed maneuverability in mind.
The tracking of the radar and fire control was very good and should be much better in game. You even conceded that.
No, that one is based on the performance of the missile. The maximum limit of 125nm is due to battery life. It still has sufficient energy (albeit already subsonic) to hit a fast high alt and head-on target at around 150nm. It won’t be hitting maneuvering targets from 100nm.
Battery life is what limits range on most early fox-3 missiles.
That simply isn’t true at all. Missile isn’t THAT maneuverable, with sufficient warning it’s very dodge-able. Especially if you’re not in the sweet spot where it’s maneuvering at maximum G forces.
Typically when you state “wrong” you should come prepared with some basis for your rebuttal.
If you have a copy of outsiders view of the awg-9 / Phoenix weapon system it’s a good reference point but has some littered misinformation. Apparently there are some ads from Grumman as well as Hughes discussing the battery life and range figures somewhere.
