even on the superhornet its good for longer ranges
SM6 is just a huge missile
1 Like
But super hornet would be extremely slow if it does carry them.
Definetly true, i dont know about the d3 reaching 190 kilometers(mostly cause i have no clue how the motor on it performs), but yeah didnt raytheon literally say they could match and exceed the perfomance requirements for aim260 by upgrading amraam at one point?
yes but from a static launch they are estimated to hit 400-500 km against static targets,
even assuming the launch energy from a superhornet just matches that of the small booster they have in VLS they will be able to hit that with external guidance
but it is more likely that being launched M1.2 and high altitude is more energy then they get from that booster so it could have an even longer range
1 Like
Yeah people saying this forget that the hornet may be slow. But the missile is designed to be fired from the ground, hornet is funcionally the booster to the missile, just at high altitudes.
a similar missile with the same propulsion system (sm-2 mr) has 167km range when fired from a ship, even if the hornet is stalled at a medium altitude it’ll already outrange a lot of other missiles that aren’t even in game yet lol
there have been a number of interesting statements on amraam range
including that 120D (iirc it wasnt even a D3) hit the “longest known missile shot”
in 2021 and since then there have been longer range shots with amraam
even just using US made missiles the longest known missile shot would put it in at least the ~180km range, and was on a subsonic target
Fair enough. But how manuvareble would it be? Would it still be worth taking over AIM-260 in current map size since i don’t think gaijin would be making maps big enough? (Unless they do it with new aerial warfare game mode that they were talking about)
The same super hornet that for some reason can’t break beyond Mach 1.2?
That “small” booster gets it up past that speed easily
60 Gs bro trust
given 9m has a ~30km max range and 9x has significantly less drag its max range would probably ~40-50km or more against a subsonic target
Ok, I trust
That’s good.
It also gets glossed over that the AIM-174B may or may not have the ability to hit more than just airborne targets if open source information is to be believed.
These missiles aren’t meant for fighters really, r37m was used alot in that role but it didnt really perform that well, and that was against targets that couldn’t fire back, these are ideally used against tankers, awacs, bombers etc, if the 60 kilogram warhead wasnt a sign
1 Like
yes but at what altitude?
because that has a huge impact on launch energy
SM-2 without booster
Spoiler
SM-2 with booster
Spoiler
i expect a superhornet at medium - high altitudes to have a similar or better performance than the booster used in this missile, considering the booster only burns for around 5 seconds before it gets ejected
general note: the SM-6 that the aim-174b is based off is slightly heavier than the SM-2s and the ranges are from these missiles being fired from a ship
https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2169011/standard-missile/
I mean there isn’t much mystery, most standard missiles can hit surface targets, im not sure about aim174b though, i doubt they retained the capability.
I doubt the booster gets it much faster than mach 1, the superhornet even going slower can get much higher, and altitude is much more important to missiles like these which burn for a long time, speed would be very important ofc, but comparing im comparing it to a rim174
i think the booster might get the whole stack going a bit faster than mach 1, but i agree, a super hornet can climb a lot higher and even if subsonic the altitude advantage will be better
yeah because even if the booster can get it somewhat faster it needs to climb and is losing a lot of energy to drag at the low altitude, where the 174 just skips the worst of it