And ?
It may or may not be true. As far as I know, there is no public data on the explosive charge. Some sources say that the entire warhead may contain 41 kg , while others say 39 kg of explosives. It’s complicated, but given what it was designed for, I believe it contains more than 11 kg of explosives.
According to Raytheon itself, the AMRAAM-ER is like a zombie, with the missile head being an AIM-120 and the propeller from the ESSM, which definitely makes them physically different, in my opinion.
(The image is of someone who was there, which helped me avoid having to look for one. )
They are physically different on the top yes, the MOTOR is the same
no no i asked for the weight source of the AMRAAM-ER that reflects the irl weight of it, cause according to you comparing war thunder’s derived in game AMRAAM-ER weight is wrong comparing it to the ESSM…
Now comes the ability to think. There are no clear sources on the weight of the Amraam-er, but I believe that a warhead, thinner than a lighter missile, ultimately makes a difference greater than 1 kg. What I do know is that the ESSM engine alone weighs as much as an AIM-120. But considering the weight of the AIM-120 after burn, around 110 kg, add the 168 kg of the ESSM engine and the 278 kg, which is already a difference of 2 kg, but obviously the AIM-120 warhead does not weigh 110 kg.
If so give us atleast 5 source of the AMRAAM-ER, mass, speed, booster and seeker head
“you believe” means you don’t have a source for it, aka making it up and putting your own opinion as factual by yours standard…
2 Likes
I don’t even know if there is one, but thank you for agreeing with me. What we do know is that it supposedly has 50% more range than the AIM-120C7, according to Raytheon. So we’ve come to the conclusion that we’re all just speculating.
So, don’t stand there post them,
You all believe that the missile should reach Mach 4 without sources.
But I’m only debating with those who think they have sources and proving them wrong based solely on basic physics.
the australian navy is not enough of a source? cool
Then post yours, to see what actual capability they are.
If the missile were the same, it would be, but we’re talking about different missiles.
different by only changing the seeker, retaining the same weight and shape and drag profile and the same exact motor powering both missiles… so how could it not be the same exactly?
I’ve already posted a photo showing how they differ physically.
i am sorry but you have provided 0 sources so far, only 2 pictures which reinforce the points others made, and physics? you havent even considered those as far as i can see, you have made zero attempts to bring those into your agruments, so as far as i can see you are in the wrong
6 Likes
The point doesn’t need to be developed much, because everything falls apart when you say that they are different and not the same missile.
i havent said such thing, you have