I’d assume pre launch
Edit: nevermind, I don’t really know, it’s not directly said if it’s pre launch (and afaik 25 degrees limit for the 9b is post launch), it’s 1am on Christmas so I’m going to think this through later
So then the later versions of the Bravo had a gimbal? And why don’t we have it in game?
It doesn’t say that.
It clearly says that aim9e introduced the ability of uncage the seeker before launch.
And that the gimbal limits were improved from 25 degrees to 40 degrees.
It does not mention the pre launch gimbal limits for either missile.
Still not implemented.
The F-5E manuals indicate the AIM-9B-3 and AIM-9B-4 had a gimbal that could be un-caged before launch.
These missiles were developed later into the AIM-9E, so there really isn’t a point in adding them. There were multiple blocks of each variant of AIM-9 with some getting re-named after the fact.
1 Like
If push ahead was modeled properly it would allow the AIM-9M to track flares and chase the flares ejected in direction of target vector… This would make shoulder mounted flares extremely useful against it and buff the Russian planes further against the US munitions. It’s not a buff.
1 Like
Shoulder mounted flares would still exit the FoV faster than with the current seeker lock position.
More so, the 9M can discriminate flare from aircraft, allowing the suspended tracking loop to continue.
Not necessarily, they may exit FoV later from a slightly rear / side aspect shot for longer. This will just make the AIM-9M really OP to things that deploy the flares down and behind them.
The discrimination is not the same as dual-element seeker types… and the only thing that does for us is increase the airframe to flare detection ratio in the rangeBands from 1:1 to 1.1:1 or whatever
1 Like
For WTs purposes the FoV position change would be a straight buff, it would have the same near perfect flare rejection with none of the oddity involved in Russian dirty flare low rise time.
Side aspect shots would be nearly unavoidable and depending on target vector so would front and rear shots, shoulder mounted or not if you are turning at any rate of speed the flare will exit the FoV fast enough to make the suspended tracking highly effective.
That’s not what I said, the flare would be ejected forward of direction of travel in most instances. This would exacerbate the issue wherein the flare would be given more time to “rise” than those ejected rearward or under the aircraft due to the “push-ahead” placing the reticle almost squarely by the shoulder mounts and since they deploy them up and into the direction of travel during banking maneuvers… I don’t see how you’re not seeing the issue here.
Anyhow, currently it ignores all flares and turns seeker off briefly. Has no inertial drift, re-gains lock of target before flares have even properly exited FoV, etc… it’s performing better than it should currently. Fixing it so that it tracks the hot target forward most in direction of travel would be a nerf and allow people to flare them in side aspect shots just by maneuvering a certain way rather than having to blind it by flaring and hoping it doesn’t re-lock in a split second as it does now.
1 Like
Are you stalling out xD
No amount of hope will make shoulder mounted flares fire forward, they fire up, which relative to motion will in most cases be closer to the seeker for a brief second before falling behind the aircraft and lost.
As far as the games representation of flares and IRCCM it is lacking in nuance, which I do not blame Gaijin for as there is very little in the way of hard values or %s to form the in game function around. We will have to settle for simplified version of whatever is irl.
- You are coming at me frontally, I bank left slightly and flare… to the missile the flare is being ejected in the direction of travel.
- You are coming at me from the rear, I bank to the left slightly and flare… the flare is ejected in the direction of travel.
- You are coming at me from my direct left… I turn either toward or away from you and eject a flare… to the missile the flare is ejected in the direction of travel.
Shoulder mounted flares solve the issue of “push-ahead” in spite of the slow rise time. Other flare rejection methods are necessary because “push-ahead” does not defeat flares that are ejected from a more forward section of the aircraft into the direction of travel.
The only way of avoiding having the shoulder mounted flares in the FoV is by having a FoV reduction, or launching from the belly side of the fighter with the shoulder mounted launchers.
1 Like
In all the above circumstances the FoV shuts off, making the maneuver irrelevant for in game purposes. If your aircraft is still in the seeker FoV when it opens again the missile will resume tracking.
As far as developing more advanced IRCCM, very little specific information is available for the improvements made through the WGU-4A/C/E variants, possibly FoV shrinking was incorporated at some point, possibly not. Information security is a lot tighter in the west, we wont know for many decades to come, if ever. IIR is all thats left and the AIM-9R or AIM-9X are both far in the future.
what about uv5-08 ?
If shoulder mounted flares were so effective, the uv5-08 system would not have been developed.
Yes, currently in-game it is not as useful. That is my point. Correctly modeling push-ahead will nerf the missile and not buff it as you want it to… at least against Russian stuff specifically. There are some exceptions like the Gripen which have odd flare placement and can be used much in the same way.
I think it probably was, or multiple elements were used in the seeker. You can see there are a large number of physical hardware changes to the AIM-9M as opposed to the AIM-9L.
I believe those are supposed to fit spectral flares among other things that would mask the engines’ heat signature better against more modern multi-element seekers and would want to be ejected closer to the engines.
9B cant be physically uncaged, its designed so it cant be due to too sensitive seeker in case of ground and cloud IR clutter. F5E manual is only stating uncaging for sidewinder because it talks about another 3 Aim9 variants that can be uncaged 9E/J/P, they are not present in detail in manual but are approved to be carried and mentioned. This issue was brought up many times in DCS and many times proven US 9Bs cant be uncaged. Sadly module still can do that. Main difference between 9B models are engines, warheads and fuzes.
2 Likes
You’re right, and that is also stated in the weapons delivery manual. I’ll rescind the statement that the AIM-9B can be uncaged.
According to the 1984 F-5E weapons delivery manual;
2 Likes
IF they would get detected, it would suspend tracking and use last target rates to guide ahead and reacquire as it does now but incorrectly because it seems, its using its own rates and not rates of target, then flare rate bias and push ahead comes in where they reduce that time in memory as it comes out of it the moment flare exits its narrow FOV, both of these systems are there to reduce that time as much as possible. 9M IRCCM in fact severely underperforms due to these issues.
- missing 2 MAJOR features
- most likely using own rates due to how it acts in game.
- seems like it detects flares OUTSIDE of its IFOV of 3,6° as it often goes dumb after someone in the area drops flares. They wouldnt be an issue even if in FOV unless really close to target because there is 2band IR filter around seekers edges and spatial filtering detection of IR source size to compare - hence far away (colder, smaller flare than target) would not trigger IRCCM circuit.
- with track suspension, it wiggles around instead of flying steadily based on targets rates, perfectly visible in case of rear hemisphere launches where it jiggles and literally loses all of its energy.
- Due to IR filter and Spatial filtering, target running on afterburner shouldnt trigger IRCCM circuit if dropping flares as comparison of flares to full AB would be insufficient to trigger it,
3 Likes
They do talk about uncaging prior to launch, but noone really believes its talking about 9B because it would be ONLY jet and manual where its stated. If they talked in it only about B, yea but considering mention of all other 9s that can be uncaged. Not fully impossible but highly unlikely due to nature how trash that seeker was. Initially it was supposed to be uncaged but they found out really fast, it pretty much never tracked what they wanted to track.
On the other hand uncaging ability mentions 26° FOV of seeker and thats the part where its not certain as thats 9B limits.
Do you have information showing it has a dual band IR filter?
If so, are they IR+UV, or two different bands of IR?
Also, I have already described how shoulder mounted flares will negate the ability for push-ahead to reduce flare time in FoV.