AIM-9X Performance
-
So many inaccurate data. For ex. the most widely used MiG-21 variant was the PF in Vietnam. Without gun…They achieved AA kills with R-3S because they did not have anything else. I can upload for you the most accurate kill list if you need.
-The F13 has a GSH-23L with only 30 rounds of ammunition and was used by Vietnam.
-The PF/PFM yes has no gun which I did not realize.- The MF variants arrived in the early 70’s and this variant and these have a GSH-23L.
So it’s not that I was completely wrong there were mig-21’s with only 30 rounds but they were limited in number compared to the PFM. Beyond the mig-21 what else is inaccurate? Additionally lets not loose to much focus here the main point of this thread is that the 9X is immune to all pyrotechnic and pyrophoric flares and this is not represented in BMS right now.
-
-The F13 has a GSH-23L with only 30 rounds of ammunition and was used by Vietnam.
-The PF/PFM yes has no gun which I did not realize.- The MF variants arrived in the early 70’s and this variant and these have a GSH-23L.
So it’s not that I was completely wrong there were mig-21’s with only 30 rounds but they were limited in number compared to the PFM. Beyond the mig-21 what else is inaccurate? Additionally lets not loose to much focus here the main point of this thread is that the 9X is immune to all pyrotechnic and pyrophoric flares and this is not represented in BMS right now.
MF never reached the combat. Only F-13 and PF. Chinese J-6 could carry AAM as I can remember but Soviet MiG-17 did not. Oh, BTW were not MiG-19, MiG-17s fought and J-6.
Between 1964-65 only MiG-15UTI, MiG-17F and PF were shipped to Vietnam and a small amount of J-5 in total about 150. First MiG-21F–13 arrived in spring or 1966. In 1968 arrived the first MiG-21PF/PFL and in 169 the MiG-19P copy the J-6 (56 pcs) and finally PFM in 1972. In total was shipped 150 different MiG-21 variants.
In total MiG-17s gained 28 kills, J-6s 5 kills and 57 with MiG-21s in most of cases AAM.
I have explained my standpoint about the case.
-
Ok thanks for the chart i’ll make sure to save that one. I did not realize that the “mig-19’s” were J-6’s as they were called MIG-19’s in Osprey’s “MIG-21 Units of the Vietnam War” and in Osprey’s “F4 phantom II vs Mig-21” although considering their essentially the same it’s more semantics than anything. Additionally in both books they do say that the MF did see combat during operation linebacker I and II.
-
Be aware that when uncaged , the tone of the missile gives you an indication of the seeker might be flared or not
The flared tone is a scratching tone
This is new feature in 4.34
Been a long time since I’ve flown.
There use to be a part of Falcon where you could listen to all the tones and identify what was making them. Does that still exist?
Thanks.
-
The f16net is strong in this one…
-
I’m with thereisnotime here.
Is 9X operationally proven? No. There are theory, calculations, tests, and statements.
But it wasn’t used in big numbers against peer opponent. With no operational experience, basically, everything is based on assumptions so far. And whatever technology is, history has proven many times that assumptions may be catastrophically wrong. If someone doesn’t want look back and consult history, so it be. But USAF has been blamed for its over-reliance on technology many times for reason.
Bottom line is - we have seen a lot of wunderwaffe so far. Not all of them lived to promise. So why to assume that 9X is holy invincible weapon?
Anyway, prudent pilots, who one day may use those weapons in real combat, aren’t thinking of modern short range missiles as unbeatable ones, because it’s them, who will put their life on line at the end. And they are much more conservative in such thing than us, virtual pilots.
-
It’s not an assumption its based off of all the available data. Yes its not operationally proven but you don’t need to test it operationally to predict its performance. The 9M performance in ODS is easily predictable as the seeker used by the 9M fundamentally is susceptible to flares. It can be made highly resistant but if the assumptions about flare performance are off the seeker will miss 10/10 times. The FPA doesn’t need to do this, they fundamentally can not be fooled by simple balls of heat being shot out of the back of a jet that is just how they work. We have the
at a very high rate for the whole time the seeker is tracking the target. I mean this alone should help give credence to these seekers being immune to flares. We are flying in a public domain level sim, and that sim can only simulate what we can find out with publicly available data. And that data indicates that the 9X is immune to pyrotechnic flares and immune to pyrophoric except in very specific circumstances (direct and full LOS blocked) -
…immune to pyrophoric except in very specific circumstances (direct and full LOS blocked)
Thats not incredibly specific circumstances…
EDIT: Actually I just want to comment on this situation, from what must be the developers perspective. That being, that you cant please everyone. In 4.33, there were complaints that the AIM-9X was immune to flares, “holy weapon”, unrealistic… And now in 4.34 there are complaints that the AIM-9X is suspectible to flares, unrealistic, etc etc…
You just cant win!
-
Thats not incredibly specific circumstances…
In 4.33, there were complaints that the AIM-9X was immune to flares, “holy weapon”, unrealistic…Complaints were mostly about 9M variant which had eyeball (FM?) type of seeker, that seeker is not as good in flare rejection.
As for AIM-9X, that weapon should be much better in rejecting flares, it should reject them preatty well based on thermal energy distribution, obviously nothing is perfect but it should be a lot better than anything with FM thermal seeker.I wonder if real AIM-9X can lock on a flare (when you do uncage). I guess it will, at least from the distace when there is no way to distinguish what is what (just few pixels so you have to wait till missile gets closer). Wonder what gonna happen if you lock it on a flare and then the flare burns out or missile starts to see the proper target, what it gonna do?
-
“mostly” - here we will have to agree to disagree.
-
It’s not an assumption its based off of all the available data. Yes its not operationally proven but you don’t need to test it operationally to predict its performance. The 9M performance in ODS is easily predictable as the seeker used by the 9M fundamentally is susceptible to flares. It can be made highly resistant but if the assumptions about flare performance are off the seeker will miss 10/10 times. The FPA doesn’t need to do this, they fundamentally can not be fooled by simple balls of heat being shot out of the back of a jet that is just how they work. We have the
at a very high rate for the whole time the seeker is tracking the target. I mean this alone should help give credence to these seekers being immune to flares. We are flying in a public domain level sim, and that sim can only simulate what we can find out with publicly available data. And that data indicates that the 9X is immune to pyrotechnic flares and immune to pyrophoric except in very specific circumstances (direct and full LOS blocked)Yes, it was dropped one after each other with 0 smoke.
Just imagine flares with so dense smoke are between the target and the missile where the missile does not have LOS on target because of the smoke…
-
Yes, it was dropped one after each other with 0 smoke.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/3/8/0952837.jpg?v=v40
Just imagine flares with so dense smoke are between the target and the missile where the missile does not have LOS on target because of the smoke…
Is it possible (irl) to launch pyrophoric flares at multiple angles simultaneously? Even ahead of the jet?
-
@Master:
Is it possible (irl) to launch pyrophoric flares at multiple angles simultaneously? Even ahead of the jet?
Yes, it is possible. Thrusted flare is also exist. I saved somewhere about a video it but I cannot find. A Hornet dropped such flare.
-
Here it is, at 5:15
I save the video on my HDD because for a time the video was removed.
-
Yes, it was dropped one after each other with 0 smoke.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/3/8/0952837.jpg?v=v40
Just imagine flares with so dense smoke are between the target and the missile where the missile does not have LOS on target because of the smoke…
The smoke would have no impact even on the older FM seekers so I don’t exactly see how this matters at all? The 9X would still be able to filter out the flares and track the target.
-
I wonder what would happen if flares were obscuring the target. It could make rejection difficult.
-
Its highly dependent on range and aspect and is easier with pyrophoric flares, if you reference this doc:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4783/4ec45f24453d1263b94f633aa6e6bc7e2387.pdf
They go into this in the latter half of the paper, essentially to sum up it can cause a miss but:
range is key.
-
The smoke would have no impact even on the older FM seekers so I don’t exactly see how this matters at all? The 9X would still be able to filter out the flares and track the target.
the 9X is so good that you dont even have to fire it , enemy would eject as soon as they see on their RWR a AIM9X capable AC
-
the 9X is so good that you dont even have to fire it , enemy would eject as soon as they see something on their RWR
I mean there is a reason for the 9XBLKII’s full 360° firing area… a normal dogfight between two HOBS and FPA equipped jets essentially boils down to who fires first and if the second guy can get a shot off. So if you can just blow through the merge or fire behind you and don’t have to do the whole who can fire first dance you will win pretty much every time. Hence why BVR, stealth, and Sensor integration are becoming ever more important. I think a quote from a fighter pilot was that if you get within 10mi you’ve F* up.
-
I mean there is a reason for the 9XBLKII’s full 360° firing area… a normal dogfight between two HOBS and FPA equipped jets essentially boils down to who fires first and if the second guy can get a shot off. So if you can just blow through the merge or fire behind you and don’t have to do the whole who can fire first dance you will win pretty much every time. Hence why BVR, stealth, and Sensor integration are becoming ever more important. I think a quote from a fighter pilot was that if you get within 10mi you’ve F* up.
in any case you would have been hit by a meteor far before