Yes
I think gajin should give all F4Js AIM-9L.It really sucks at uptiers and I think AIM-9L could help it.Even MIG-21s have all aspect missiles.
Question that i’ve not seen asked/answered yet.
How effective is the Aim-9M vs IRCM (like that found on the Su-39)?
Aim-9Ls are totally blocked by it, which is a pain. So was wondering if the Aim-9Ms will fair any better?
They shouldn’t fare better.
Ah damn, thats a shame. encounter a lot of Su-25/Su-39s in the Gr7 in SB. Was hoping to have an easier time taking them out
Front aspect the missile will still be somewhat hard to flare, and iirc the jammer does not work from that angle.
Yep, smokeless should also make it harder to see when to flare. But ultimately, I just need to practice putting a burst of cannon fire up their chuff
1 Like
Has that change Gaijin made to give missiles front aspect capability against afterburning targets been reverted? For the last couple of months I’ve had countless examples of failing to lock an afterburning target in the front aspect (with the afterburner flame clearly visible), even at ranges as low as 1 km.
Come to think about it I can’t recall ever getting a front aspect lock after about a week of the change coming in to affect.
1 Like
I wasn’t aware of this.
Wondered why my 9Ls became harder to lock.
The only aircraft I can easily lock in various aspects at range, is the f4.
Anything else it struggles until I’m within 1.2k.
Don’t think I ever experienced any improvement in all aspect capabilities of rear aspect IR missiles against supersonic/afterburning targets.
I remember getting a couple on the day the patch dropped. Nothing after that though.
New lines for AIM-9M
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/869212849757634560/1153317906126471259/image.png
Worth a shot yeah.
1 Like
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