What is band mask 4? Sun,IRCM,Flare?
Countermeasures it seems
1 Like
Found this cool video showing the AIM-9X thrust vectoring just after launch:
1 Like
Worth noting AIM-9M should have somewhere between 9 and 12% less ISP (thrust) than AIM-9L due to HTPB based propellant. (Reduced smoke propellant).
Wait, how did you find that out, I’m curious? Also, do you know if this change (when it worked) extends to or was meant to extend to IRSTs?
I have to revise my statement after further research. I dug into the topic more and found out the the AIM-9L’s specific impulse lacks in comparison to other CTPB fuel binders of the time period, as such, would not suffer from performance loss during the move to HTPB propellants.
2 Likes
I have a question, since devs denied 23G overload for AIM-9D and G on the basis that they couldn’t actually reach that overload (despite technically being capable), wouldn’t that mean the AIM-9H would be able to reach 23G to due its stronger actuators making the missile turn more?
1 Like
The missiles are tuned to their firing envelopes, as such neither missile has an envelope that would require ~23G to hit the target. I have raised my own concerns with this as British documents cover that firing envelopes are only showing data where a high Pk% is possible, and doesn’t account for the full performance of the missile where the chance to hit is lower but certainly not zero.
3 Likes
Has Gaijin made any comment at all about the flare resistance issues with the 9L?
Still incredibly frustrating to be sat within 1 mile on the 6 of an afterburning target, for it to pop one flare and the 9L be defeated. No re locks, or anything. 1 flare, bam, done.
earlier, worse AIM-9 models perform better than the L at close ranges against afterburning targets.
I’ve lost count the amount of times i’ve had an F5 on my 6, fire a 9E, ive popped 2, maybe 3 sots of reinforced flares, watched the missile get decoyed…then re lock me…my non afterburning Sea Harrier.
2 Likes
For some reason Harrier is a really warm target even though it doesn’t have afterburner.It probably has something to do with those vtol nozzles.I can easily lock a harrier from 4+ km using AIM-9D/G.
Didn’t pay attention but I think when the engine is in wep and overheating, it’s somewhere between 700-800c.
But I don’t run the harrier in wep as it overheats easily, throttle is max 83%. Only go above if absolutely required.
F5s are a pain to lock.
But I have no issue with other jets, I can lock an F4 or tornado at a good range. But even in close range, in the rear aspect, the 9L is easily defeated by a flare.
1 Like
It should manage around 15 minutes on MIL power, youre right about max continuous being around 83% though.
1 Like
Even at MCT the Shar in game produces a better heat signature than an F5 using afterburner. Surely that’s not right?
As I’ve previously mentioned, 9Ls are tricky in the rear aspect. But against F5s it’s even more so.
F5s have a better chance at hitting my Shar in the rear aspect with 9Es than my 9Ls against them in full burner.
1 Like
Don’t get me started on the stupid “stealth” heat signature on the F-5C…
2 Likes
Genuinely though, why are the F5s a pain to lock? Compared to anything else?
I haven’t delved into that rabbit hole.
basically heat is determined by a value of code called thrustmax0 which is the baseline thrust value since the F-5C has 2 hair dryer engines it has a extremely small heat signature as a result even while on AB
2 Likes
Really low engine temps compared to other aircraft even while in reheat;
Spoiler
In MIL power;
Spoiler
2 Likes
Fair.
I much prefer my chances against an F4 than the F5 when dropping in on their 6.
yup locking that thing from 1+ km is really hard
After the update in my experience its been pretty inconsistent
Some times the 9L manages to ignore all flares in front aspect Or hit a flaring target from 3km easily
Other times ive had it fail to track from 0.5km in rear aspect
Its really weird