The paper details IIR imaging and even says 100W lasers theoretical in 2014 could damage the seeker within 1KM and would surely be made soon.
Imaging Infrared (IIR) is a technology subset of Infrared (IR) type missiles leaving that out doesn’t prove anything. It actually makes it more vague as to the capabilities. Northrup Grumman has not used the word “IIR” on their entire website. Lockheed Martin uses I2R for IIR sensors. Raytheon even calls the aim-9x which uses IIR an “infrared tracking” missile not an IIR missile. The US government says the AIM-9x is an infrared missile, not an IIR missile.
CIRCM also was successful against vehicle launched IR SAMs
talking about the Ni-28NM specifically, yeah why does it have an imaginary force field around itself?
why does the Su-30 have Kh38 when theres no proof of it being able to carry it?
Russian aircraft arent mediocre. they just have their own set of strengths. if you try to use them like NATO aircraft, guess what. ur gonna lose.
its current implementation is fake as heck, not to mention that helis arent supposed to be air superiority platforms.
Z-10ME already has the TY-90 and a gun. so does the Apache E and the Mi-28NM.
why should they receive imaginary invulnerability to missiles that irl CAN defeat them?
and you say LDIRCM is making helis usable then how the hell isnt it on all top Helis in the game?
when a gunless, UHT with poor stingers and PARS which dont even lock anymore faces an aircraft or worse, an Mi-28, Z-10 or Apache, what is it supposed to do?
(its at the same BR as them btw)
even a 10W laser can completely destroy an IIR seeker at 2km if given like an HOUR
but with how fast missiles are irl, and that they have lens filters, these values are outdated against the modern IR/IIR seekers.
not to mention that IIR seekers like on the IRIS-T (which are quite a lot better than anything ANYONE else can produce) have multiple states and sub-sections of the sensor. if one section is under jamming, the others ust work to make the jamming the center focus and fly towards the source of the jamming.
AKA HoJ (home on jam) which is usually a term from ECM and ARH missiles, but this is now a capability of IR/IIR missiles IRIS-T. which reduces overall kinetic range (because the missile no longer flies in an intercept path but a chase path) but allows them to hit the target regardless.
How? Range has a big effect on the power output of the laser.
R = range and the longer range is multiplied then squared for the power requirement.
That math is also 64kw in a 100ns pulse which is 0.0000001 s
2.5s of possible laser time is a long time compared to that.
(1993 research paper) which barely touches on IIR (focal plane array sensors)
(2014 research paper)
Personally I’d side on the more modern paper as it details imaging type IR missiles in the study.
Dude. NATO aircraft are generally better over 80% of the game.
Aim-9m is very potent, especially in Sim.
If you died to a Su-33 and your whole team was getting wiped, they’re bad as hell. It’s a Su-27 but slightly ever so much fancier. Aka better turn time.
Agm65s appear, like others before Russian counterparts.
NATO optics are also usually better than Russian ones.
And R-73’s are much more useful at short ranges, since 30G’s of pull really isn’t much post merge unless they have already lost the fight.
There are no SALH guided missiles in US service before the AGM-65E (and even really the AGM-123 is the only other option use by fixed wing aircraft), and Gaijin’s arbitrary decisions only added airframes that conveniently completely omits the multitude of options (or configurations) that would have had access to Self-Designation capabilities.
Only to then turn around and sell the A-6E TRAM, and later add the F-14B the US’s “first” TGP equipt airframe.
Ok, but neither of those are the AIM-9M, are they? So unless what you are fighting is French or Israeli your up shit creek, at least until either the AIM-95 or AIM-9X turns up.
Or even kill player who launched it, like in the video.
So yeah 9M is better than R-73 just because you can be sure that it will fly where it needs to.
We waiting to devs to fix it since it has been added.
I wish to know what reaction we would see from Russian bias fans if this kind of thing happend to them.
It’s currently a bit more than just “making helis usable”
And it doesn’t adress the overperforming part, or you’ll have to explain to me how 1 laser can point at 2 or 3 missiles simultaneously
Helis should also not be immune to ARH, considering multipath isn’t a thing for modern seekers, and they still don’t have the doppler return modelled from their rotor
What about AH-64E and Z-10. You’re just gonna ignore those?
I’m certain the Kh38 brochure does show that su-30 can carry it.
They are not really on-par with NATO aircraft in the current environment. You cannot deny that. Sure they have their own strengths, but some strengths are worth more than others. And for those valuable strengths, Russian aircraft do not have them.
Ty-90 is about one of the only good things in the Chinese tech tree, the other one would be the BA-11 that would come next update. And did helicopters in real life not carry those weapons? What point are you trying to make?
Very debatable, since information about DIRCM is often highly classified.
Gaijin is working towards adding helis with DIRCM to all trees in the future.
