if he goes around giving his opinions on different weapon systems then i don’t see a problem with it here
DSA
equivalent could be hawk for usa. don’t see a reason for them to not add equivalents when it is timely. datamine does not mean we will not get counterpart for when the time is for it
im pretty sure this is for a SEAD mode
thats better then
Equivalent? No. HAWK was good but it is comparatively short range and a large sparrow instead of a command guided missile. Nike would be comparable.
Data mines state that this is event related.
not really a mockup
oh yeah arent those prototype racks? or are they finished and just not in production?
if so thats even more real than mock up
thats to ferry the amraams iirc
The only real issue I see with the 38MT being left in game is how do we know it is modeled correctly?
Don’t get me wrong I am fine if it stays but where does Gaijin get their number for it’s zoom strength? How do we know it is the correct generation of thermal?
I think it’s reasonable to assume that it uses a staring focal plane array rather than scanning. But zoom level and sensor resolution are questions that we don’t have answers to.
Modeling is out the window at this point, in my opinion. The F-18 has no such “AoA limiter,” yet it was added anyway. It was a G limiter only.
like that.
Theres some programs ongoing about that
ferry amraams… with ability to launch them
ofc.
The picture of a missile with imager provided before is labeled as “Х-38МЭ” - it’s another general purpose mockup, I doubt any of on-board electronics is even operational. Here’s a photo without conveniently blurred label.
thats a heat signature…
thats a thermal silhouette.
difference being
Aim-9X seeker is built for thermal signature tracking.
IR-AGMs are built for thermal silhouette tracking.
basically one can be imagined as a point, while the other is a bigger polygonal target
uhh, havent read the thread?
the seeker is outlined in red
I’m not arguing with you on 9X because I don’t particularly have the energy to explain in detail why you’re wrong here. I highly recommend watching test videos of 9X with seeker video telemetry. It locks on to a silhouette in no small part for countermeasure rejection purposes.
As for the seeker, I already mentioned that I didn’t see any higher resolution images when I scrolled through last night. All I saw was internal reflections. That was my mistake and I’ve already admitted that and adjusted my opinion of what’s going on here.
you mean electro optical assisted by infrared? its pretty common on IR missiles nowday, they dont filter out a shape, there is no missile that does this, it just compare background to the target and try to keep the target by using this and if there is some interference they go back to IR guidance only wich ofc can be abused by going low and using stuff like volumetric flares
No, I mean imaging infrared. IIR. It does that. 9X uses a staring focal plane array. No scanning is involved.
silhouettes change with relative aspect. and with the new wide-band wide-spread flares, silhouette tracking is probably not what the american top IR missile would rely on
although you have caused me to try searching for those videos but i couldnt find any of much relevance (may be restricted by keywords however)
It’s not a TV contrast seeker. It’s not forced to track at a single angle. It dynamically identifies the target. It’s not the only CCM feature in 9X, far from it. But it is very helpful.
ah that, yeah that is pretty new, but this sensors need a huge ammount of components specially a good sensor to get a better quality image if not it may be counterproductive in certain areas so i dont think stuff like the KH-38 MT having an IIR sensor would require a LOT of FOV and ofc a LOT of components and way of producing a high quality image at that distance would be too heavy, i think they might be using something else by that case, thinking about it the seeker would really require a lot of stuff to work properly with good enough quality
Almost all IR air to ground munitions use focal plane arrays of some kind. I can buy a cheap one with USB on AliExpress for like $200 USD (before tariffs).
Before they used staring arrays which began in the 90s/early 2000s, scanning FPAs were used. Like the one in AGM-65D. It used a linear detector with a rotating mirror. That used a contrast detection type system as far as I know.
