More performance of the AIM-9L against Flares;
AIM-9G covers using chaff to trigger the radar fuse;
4 Likes
1 Like
Shouldn’t this also impact R-3’s and their respective variants as they are reversed engineered copies? at least without evidence to the contrary.
1 Like
I would believe so.
Did they still utilize that after the Americans found out about it? You are the one person I have seen refer to them on this forum and the last. Pretty cool.
From what I read that discovery gave rise the Aim-9P series missiles with the updated logic. So, I figured the Soviets developed something else in their CM technology.
Another good point was brought up. The AIM-9B has a separate contact and proximity fuze. The contact fuze has an arming delay of 1.2s after leaving the rail and the proximity fuse is 2.3-2.5s after leaving the rail.
In-game they are 0.5s delay for all AIM-9’s.
The AIM-9-D/G/H all have a 1.8s proximity fuse delay in real life as well.
Source
Funny no one reported this until now. Here I was thinking the Magic 2 had some unusually long proximity fuse delay that was a unique disadvantage. Good thing the R-60 series has such a short delay (small warhead).
1 Like
When missiles were first added 0.5 seconds was pretty much universal IIRC; so everyone treated it as one of Gaijin’s simplifications, like the 5 second warm up time 10 second maximum active time.
2 Likes
What’s interesting is that the Magic missiles had 1.8 seconds fuze delay this whole time, and devs presumably had access to these sources detailing fuze delay time for AIM-9D and etc.
So it will be interesting to see what will happen and what they will have to say.
1 Like
It’s not a 100% 1:1 copy, but from what I’ve read most changes involved slight decreases in quality while adapting it to producibility in the Soviet logistics chain, so if it was different it probably wouldn’t be different as in better.
The mechanical / electrical safety and arming device should be simple enough that it operates the exact same way. Other issues like track rate are already inferior to AIM-9B in-game.
nah fuse is different, according to the manual for the R-3S fuse arms in .8 seconds
0.8s after burn (deceleration), so 3s delay total vs 2.3-2.5 for AIM-9B.
Modern flares do burn at different wavelengths, unlike them being “dirty”, they’re now intentionally made that way.
It’s normal to load different types of flares in a bucket to cover multiple threats.
I found a technical description of the AIM-9M’s flare rejection system in the archives:
Also confirmation that the reduced smoke motor did not have any negative impact on performance:
14 Likes
In any of your visits have you found anything related to the AIM-7M?
Not yet. Britain never used the AIM-7M, so I wouldn’t get you hopes up (it’s not impossible that there will be something, but it’s unlikely).
9M has feedback to seeker, mean it shouldn’t track another target like unguided rocket, missile even another plane
1 Like
Reduced smoke* not reduced thrust I think you meant.
But yes, the performance drop expected going from higher performance CTPB fuels to HTPB ones didn’t happen because the earlier AIM-9s had a relatively low ISP for their Mk36 motors to begin with.
Yes, fixed
Looks like all the reports on proximity fuse arm time are going to be implemented.