Source stating the Fakour 90 is equivalent.
It is probably better I would say.
My phone is more advanced
At doing what over the Awg9 and Aim54 exactly, kid?
didn’t say it a more advanced missile but in general-
My fist is more advanced than your phone.
Did not say at what, but many things.
Your point?
Why is this even necessary?
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 ask daddy all the questions in the world and attempt to trip up.
Who said ANYTHING about vacum tubes, miniaturization of radars or datalink???
The fact remains the Aim54 has a capability that many nations do not have today and those who do, only recently obtained it recently.
It does not matter how old.
You are the one acting like a child with your insults
@Ziggy1989 Are you bipolar my man?
VS
Being aggressive toward other and saying one thing and its contrary isn’t going to advance the discussion
9 Likes
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
5 Likes
What ae you hurt about? I am not even talking to you.
Being agressive toward other and saying one thing?
and its contrary isn’t going to advance the discussion?
Are you attempting to say what I said in one comment is contradiction to another?
@_Adrien94 Appears that there are multiple models of the Fakour, the initial ones being essentially a Shalamcheh shoved into the AIM-54A frame. At least, according to the Iranian news sources.
https://iranpress.com/content/35720/fakour-air-to-air-missile-achievement-iranian-creativity
A later iteration was supposed to be fully actively radar guided. Not sure if it’s in production or not.
1 Like
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.
interesting I will look more into it and change my opinion if be the case
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.
1 Like
4 Likes
When the aim7P Will come to f14?
The AIM-7P will only come to F-14D, if fired from earlier models it must be fired as “AIM-7MH” configuration which doesn’t support it with datalink or inertial guidance… so would do nothing more than AIM-7M.
Was comparing loft profiles of missiles in-game and noticed the AIM-54 still has an atrocious “target elevation” value of -7.5deg, which seems to largely invalidate its lofting unless its manually lofted and TWS guidance is forfeited in exchange for hoping inertial guidance will be enough.
Reason I looked into this is the new Spike ER, which if none of you have seen fired, lofts AGGRESSIVELY, unlike all other missiles in-game that “loft”.
AIM-54 loft values:
PARS 3 LR (blue) and Spiker ER (red):
AGM-114 Hellfire (all are the same):
From my understanding, the “Target Elevation” is the max angular separation between the missile and the target. This is why the Spike ER drops on the heads of targets (-40 deg) as does the PARS 3 LR (to a lesser degree) (-25 deg), but the Hellfire and AIM-54 all loft rather meekly before ducking down and taking a quasi direct trajectory (-15 deg and -7.75 deg respectively).
Itd be interesting to see how the Hellfire and AIM-54’s perform in their respective roles if they lofted more aggressively instead.
The loft issue with the AIM-54 also poses an interesting conundrum, do you;
a) Guide the missile to target as much as possible using TWS, sacrificing loft, and therefore speed, range and energy in exchange for being able to more accurately account for target maneuvers?
or
b) Free launch the missile at an optimal 45 deg manual loft with little to no TWS guidance to maximize kinetic energy while relying entirely on the target not changing course substantially enough for the the missile to miss?