How does the Pl-9’s IRCCM compare to others? Since its multi-element is it like a Python 4 ish equivalent?
1 Like
To my understanding, multi-element would just make it like R-73 and Magic 2 with seeker fov reduction. However, the manufacturer stated two-color multi-element. The two-color part is the problematic part to my limited understanding.
1 Like
It has better IRCCM than the R-73/ Magic 2 we have currently in game.
It should have a reduced FOV (aound 0.5°) compared to the 0.75 of the R-73
Iirc it doesn’t have any kind of seeker shut off like the AIM-9M or the Python 4.
1 Like
Two-color refers to things like: TV-IR, IR-UV or things like LWIR-MWIR, MWIR-SWIR, LWIR-SWIR. Basically more than one detector.
Yes, that part is what would give it an even more enhanced IRCCM over the current R-73 for example. Gaijin could just implement the multi-element part and then say “we’re still investigating the two-color part”.
I’d imagine it is IR-UV, which would make it on par with Strela or Type 91.
2 Likes
All IR missiles with two-color multi-element IRCCM in-game also feature seeker shut off. So there’s no reason to omit that.
Both the Magic-II and R-73 should have smaller FoVs than they currently do. IIRC they should be about half of the current 0.75, but are “game limitations”
1 Like
According to Stepanovich.
I’m not arguing that it hasn’t been said or isn’t the case. I just feel it’s a rather strange limitation to run into.
My point is that it isn’t true and the dude has lied on multiple occasions about various game mechanics. I suppose it is to appease us, or they don’t think it is feasible because of some other reason. It could even be their opinion that it is bad for gameplay and that is all there is to it.
2 Likes
0.42 FOV Magic 2 pleeeeeeeaaaaase gaijin
If it got that I wouldn’t even be mad about it not getting its tracking suspension
I have a feeling that would be too small for the game, and it would cause the seeker to “over correct” making it lose the target.
Nah it has a really high track rate, it would kinda suck if gaijin messed it up like that though
I don’t know if this has already been posted here before.
Here’s a comparison between the seekers of the Python 5, the ASRAAM and the AIM-9X, respectively.
4 Likes
I predict that AIM-9X (Blk I) is basic of 5th gen IR Air-to-Air missile, and it’s the first 5th gen IR missile for USA & nato 4th gen fighter aircraft
Guidance Type like AIM-9M
This infrared Air-to-Air Missile is basic of 5th gen IR missile same AIM-9X (Blk I)
The first 5th gen IR missile for russian 4th gen & 4.5 gen fighter aircraft
The first 5th gen IR missile for JASDF 4th gen & 4.5 gen fighter aircraft
But no datalink and LOAL (Lock On After Launch) capability ?
Both AAM-5 and AAM-5B are LOBA, LOAL, and INS. No data link.
Both the AAM-5 and 5B 256x256 for their seeker head. This being said, the AAM-5B was specifically said to exceed the capabilities of the Python-5 and ASRAAM in IRCCM by post upgrade analysis. This is likely due to how it’s signal processing works, which is a bit different to other IIR missiles.
Instead of using contrast edge detection to look for either a general outline or the shape of a specific target, it instead finds a target then tries to search for what it was locked onto. This means unlike other IIR missiles, which lock effectiveness is aspect dependent, the AAM-5B can effectively maintain a lock even against smart flares regardless of aspect.
1 Like