Although not shown in the chart, the AIM-9X was rated at over 50g.
1 Like
so let me guess, this is “country”, “name”, “year of development”, “range”, “seeker angle and track rate” and “max g”? if so then i have some objections here
even so, SK chose the IRIS-T lol
ASRAAM, R-73, AAM-5 should be taken with a grain of salt. They referenced websites. AIM-9X, IRIS-T, and Python 5 presumably referenced their own materials and manufacturer’s materials.
IRIS-T is just wrong then lol, particularly the 12km range, diehl themselves stated 25 at some point. the 60G is also debatable… weird little list
1 Like
The range estimate is a more conservative one for all the missile (it’s one they might achieve in a real combat situation) while the max range i putted in my thread (ie the 25km) is really the max kinematic range but not really achivable in real combat.
that 120g figure for the Python 5 is far too high considering aerodynamically its identical to the Python 4 and neither use TVC, even ignoring most secondary sources repeat the same 70g figure, 120g is far too high for a non TVC missile
not to mention years are wrong and the range figures are also wrong so it doesnt make much sense
1 Like
I’ve looked at the link and the reference they use is indeed internet and sometimes just wikipedia.
Multiple problems:
The range
The range they give
-Public figures:
- The 20km for the ASRAAM, claimed >20km on the RAF website but in reality 50km max range)
-Max range estimate for operational (look like max range divided by 2)
- The 9M (7km vs 18km)
- The 9X (17km vs 30km)
- The AA-11/R-73 (15km vs 30km)
- The Python 5 (20km vs 40km)
- The Iris-T (12km vs 25km)
-Max operational range given by the maker:
- The AAM-5 (35km operational max range, 50km theorical max range)
.
The maneuvrability
First of all mesuring the maneuvrability only with G limit is not the best for those generation of AAM.
The real maneuveuring capability of a next gen AAM is more its capability to do a 180° turn very sharply.
Doing 100G at mach 4 you’ll still have a bigger turn radius than a 50g missile going at Mach 2.
That’s why i feel like comparing turn radius is better than max g load.
Anyways,
The 55G for the 9X is possible. I think it’s probably closer to 60G but i’ve not found a primary source on that. It’s more of a consensus on the internet.
The 100G for the ASRAAM is let’s say , really too mutch.
The ASRAAM is probably the least capable for maneuveuring of all the GEN 5 AAM.
I think it’s more a 50G missile than a 100G one. And since it’s optimised for long range shot i think it’s really quick off the rail and so it has one of the biggest turn radius of all gen 5 AAM.
It’s really good for shooting plane 20/30km away in front of the Aircraft but not the most optimised for dogfigth. The plan was always :“First shot , first kill”.
The 55G AA-11 is probably true for ealy gen AA-11 (R-73/74) but it’s probably more 60G for later version sutch as R-73M/74M which manage to have a tigther turn radius. The thing is that they mention 60° gimbal which mean either the MK-8OM/ IMPULS 90 or /MK 2000 seeker which are only present on the R-73M/74M. So a there’s a mistake over there.
The 120G for the Python 5 as @DracoMindC said is far too high and the 70G comonly accepted figure is probably more realist and logic considering it’s turn performance (180° in 3s).
If the missile did 120g while at mach 2 (low speed initialy to turn) it would have a turn radius of 400m! and it would do a 180° in 1.84s which is mutch less than the 3sec given by Rafael.
The math behind:
V=Mach 2= 686 M/S
G=120g = 120*9.81=1177.2 M/S^2
Radius of the turn = V^2 / G = 399M.
Angular displacement = Half a circle = PI rad.
Angular velocity: W= V/R = 686/399 = 1.72 rad/s
Time it take for the missile to do a 180° turn: 3.14/1.72 = 1.84s.
For G=70g:
Turn radius= 685m
Time it take for the missile to do a 180° turn: 3.142s
We found a mutch closer result to the RAFAEL annoucement with 70G
The 60G on the IRIS-T why not, but since it does this at low speed then it reaccelerate it has the smaller turning radius of the gen 5 aam at the cost of range.
1 Like
Added under the Russian section 👍
R=V^2/g*sqrt(G^2-1)
You also could add R-27(E)T, they both have IRCCM irl (same 36T seeker).
2 Likes
Using your formula i end up with :
Turn radius =R =V^2/g*sqrt(G^2-1)= (686^2) / (9.81 * sqrt(120^2 - 1)) = 398.44 m so not far away from the 399 i found.
Anyways the 120G values is too big for the Python 5 missile
The Iris-T is said to have halve the turning rad of an R-73 by manufacturer
Where does the value in 399 m come from?
Yeah you can see it in my thread.
It can do a 180° turn in only 2sec compared to the 4s for the first gen R-73.
R= V^2 / G = 686*686/ 1177.2 = 399m
Massively over performing in track rate then? In game is 30deg/s with the 36T seeker looks to be 15deg/s
1 Like
Also got thoses one:
I’m currently trying to get as mutch info on them before posting it since they got lots and lots of seekers.
For the R-73 family i also found thoses seekers:
Same image as yours but here you can find a focal plane array seeker. So they have developped an Imaging seeker for their missile. they have the tech so i wonder why they don’t use it. Maybe it’s daytime only or something idk.
I think the proposed upgrade is the MK-2000 but not sure since there’s no name on the image.
So your calculation is initially incorrect
I already reported this, they corrected all seeker characteristics except track rate I’m not sure why.