I do, its on this forum, i wont post it on my own as i dont know if its not classified or sharable (only parts of pages) but i will find it and link it.
2 Likes
Push ahead comes into play WHEN flare is outside of FOV, to this point its flare rate bias, from what i understood from text, its pretty much almost same thing, its just pointing seeker head forward so its not tracking too much behind the target. Against some cases of shoulder mounted flares, it woudlnt help but neither would be nerf as it would act like now. If anything, it would come out of memory sooner. There is literally no downside after missile leaves the rail. in all cases, it would force flare sooner outside of FOV even in case of shoulder mount - as of now, they stay in even longer as its locking that plane in the middle.
2 Likes
I believe you saw this already. All these functions if properly implemented will help against normal flare launchers and shoulder ones will either become tad bit less effective to the point of not even noticing it or wont change a thing.
The main part i hate about current 9M is the spatial and IR filtering… where it should ignore flares if enemy is on AB and it should ignore flares launched away from plane because it can compare IR sources so obviously flare 1-2km behind that plane in line, wont affect it.
BTW, it would be a HUGE counter on gripens with continuous dispense running around on AB.
2 Likes
I did not see the use of spectral IR filters in the reticle. This is still a single element seeker, but the processing can account for multiple IR spectrums with these. This is something specific that should be reported to improve tracking of airframe over flare similar to what R-73 and Magic 2 have in-game currently.
Spatial is simply the comparison of the two separated targets while they are still within FoV to try and attempt to determine which one is the flare vs target using a near IR spectral filter (would select the one with lower IR signature).
@MysteriousHonza Thanks, seems it is underperforming… but I do not think it is because of how push-ahead is modeled. I think that this would be a slight nerf, and fixing the spectral issue could re-buff it. Overall, there are a lot of things that need to be changed.
1 Like
Push ahead wont really nerf it, as it still uses that memory flight as of now, it would still detect the flare and track based on memory, it would just come out of it a bit sooner due to flare simply leaving FOV sooner. Even shoulder ones. They would stay longer in current one than in pushed variant anyway.
The 9M is often absolutely terrible, it loves to jiggle around, fly into the moon after spotting random flare, ignoring afterburners… If i compare it to how big of a monster R73 is at like 1-1,2 km… That thing cant be flared at these ranges in rear aspect, 9M just goes away even against AB.
2 Likes
You need an additional source I think.
Then I’m stuck
Does anyone know what the FOV limit is on AIM-9G’s after launch. Seems like it can see flares like half a kilometer behind who you launch at.
same as you launch it
Cheers
1 Like
But arent the rangebands useless when the aim 9M seeker stops tracking as soon as it detects a flare?
HI <3 can anyone please tell me if the AIM-9M actually could pull 40g’s and if yes which variant could do it?
No, irl it pulled maximum of 35Gs
Pretty sure it could reach ?40G? aerodynamically, but was limited electronically.
1 Like
Combined plane figures can reach up to around 45G in theory but it is roll stabilized, 35G is the maximum lateral pull.
So what type of prefromance can we expect from the Aim-9P-4? Will it just be a Aim-9P with a seeker that allows all aspect shots, but is still weaker to flairs than a 9L? Or is it going to be on par with the 9L?
The P4’s seeker is straight up just the 9L’s seeker on a 9P.
4 Likes
No it’s not. The AIM-9L seeker is gas cooled, while the P-4 seeker is peltier cooled, so they are definitely not identical.
1 Like