I have a feeling that the only plane which will have the AIM-9P-5 (at least in the US TT) will be the F-111F. The dedicated 'winder stations (3A and 6A) could only use up to J/N/P-style fins, mostly due to clearance issues. However, I think the other stations were eventually fitted for 9L/M capability.
Whatever it is, it’s missing the guidance, control, and warhead sections (assuming it’s a guided missile at all)
2 Likes
look at the inner pylons
Oh that thing. Sadly i cant id it. I would expect one of the earlier variants.
Should AIM-9M be better at tracking afterburning targets? It seems that the IRCCM activates every time a flare is fired, which makes the AIM-9L better at rear aspect shots against afterburning targets, as it (mostly) ignores flares, whereas the AIM-9M’s IRCCM activates and a slight turn makes it miss…
That is correct, the IRCCM circuit will always activate in the presence of a flare. Whats missing is the flare rate bias and push ahead features that help to limit the time a flare can spend in the FOV of the missile.
2 Likes
In-game this is the case, it should not be. It should only active the IRCCM circuit when flares are clearly launched behind target lead. A target in head-on or tail-on conditions would fool the IRCCM of he AIM-9M because it cannot tell if flare is target or not due to path of travel. IRCCM is fooled into thinking flare is the target or suspends tracking for too long with no push-ahead direction.
So my 1997 Harrier GR7 Manual has it at 192.2lbs
This my 1999 Harrier GR7 Manual then has it at 189lbs;
The my 2002 Sea Harrier FA.2 has it down to 186lbs
So continuous improvements throughout the years reduced the weight.
6 Likes
Harrier GR7 Stores limit gives 90lb for a LAU-7A with 9L/M + LAU-7A at 276lbs so 186lbs for both by 2010.
3 Likes
The only difference between AIM-9L and AIM-9M initially was the guidance section according to budgeting documentation. Whatever was modified to incorporate IRCCM likely added weight initially and was removed over time.
Solid state components don’t weigh multiple pounds, there would need to be a large increase in volume for that to be the cause of the discrepancy.
I thought it was all already solid state since AIM-9H
Yes, so that has already been accounted for with the changes to the AIM-9G in order to produce AIM-9H, and subsequently the -9L; one theoretical way to have the guidance / IRCCM changes be responsible for the large apparent weight change is to significantly increase the space available to them which obviously did not occur since excess space is already at a premium and would be an externally obvious change.
The other would be to add internal mass simulators for whatever reason to adjust the balance points which would necessitate a significant aerodynamic revision which is obviously not the case.
3 Likes
Imo, if there’s multiple different weights stated for a missile, they should use the one closest in year to the range charts used by Gaijin to model the missile’s aerodynamics for consistency. Usually, there’s weight listed anyway in the same manual as the aerodynamic charts.
I don’t see it. Weight change would mean change in electronics package or other stuff. Most of the changes would be software since the 80s.
I have one from 2006 putting the 9M-1,-3,-4,-6,-8 at 196lbs. Higher than the ‘lower weight throughout years trend’
Perhaps rocket motor?
Either way, 196 is the figure on the majority of the cases.
1 Like
Is there much of a difference between the navy and air force Mikewinders?
Didn’t the USN and USAF standardize on a joint sidewinder with the AIM-9L? I know the launch rails were standardized to carry the same attachments points and coolants.
Only relating to the USAF’s warhead’s / TDD simplifications of minor Navy specific subassemblies to removed weight added to make the USN sidewinder variants certifiable for their specific requirements for shipboard EM / Fire resistance standards.
They would be ever so slightly lighter, not heavier as the new source implies, since we can infer that it was a USAF document considering that the last few pages refer to the A-10, A-7, F-4 F-15 & F-111 which are all USAF airframes. Also the fact that it only otherwise lists USAF Sidewinder variants
1 Like