hey /k/, what's the best missile ever built and why is it the AIM-9 sidewinder?
Air to air missile thread?
Why not the Harpoon?
>>28079054
>Not the Genie
It's like you don't want to kill a whole bomber formation with one missile.
>>28079423
>F15 w/ Sidewinder
I came before he fired
Why is the AIM-9X better than the ASRAAM?
>>28079441
Its not necessarily. The AIM-9X has a shorter range, but is more maneuverable. The ASRAAM is designed for longer range engagements. They use a common seeker head.
Because the perfect missile was needed for the perfect plane
>>28079441
If anything the 9X and ASRAAM are complimentary.
>>28079054
>>28079363
Those were unguided and only had a 500M blast radius. Good enough for bears, but not likely enough for anything else.
AQM-39
Derp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyLUZuSUTEE
it's a shame that these will never be used to their full potential, that pathetic attempt to down a MIG-25 with one doesn't count.
>>28079054
>sidewinders
>2015
Kh-58, because I need to compensate for something
ASRAAM>AIM-9X>IRIS-T=Phyton 5>R-73>MICA>A-Darter>AIM-9M>PL-12>R-60=AIM-9L-1>AIM-9L
AIM-9 is bare minimum for short range AAM. Anything less (matra magic, AIM-9B/P, K-13...) and you might as well as using a gun
>>28079433
Why was he pointing down?
>>28084805
>AIM-9 is bare minimum for short range AAM. Anything less (matra magic, AIM-9B/P, K-13...) and you might as well as using a gun
Yeah... no. Just, no.
>>28084828
Could be for better visibility or for a better radar picture. Or maybe he's just trying the drone a chance to see him coming.
whats special about the meteor and will the USA use it?
>>28084887
The ramjet is. It's a game-changer, kinematically-speaking (particularly at low altitude).
>>28082511
>never be used to their full potential
>kiowa
Nigga, the Kiowa had such a light practical load that unless you had two minimum height women in it you'd take off with 1x500 rounds.
Kiowas were pretty much exclusively ran to their full potential, and that's why they're going away.
>the best missile ever built
Well, that was a rather easy question.
>>28085059
Didn't help when Turkey shoot down that Su-34 lol
>>28085128
It was an Su-24 and they didnt carry any air to air missiles untill that point.
>>28085059
The R-73 is an amazing missile and triggered a miniature "sputnik crisis" among western military powers in regards to short range AAM's.
>>28085187
>>28085059
>thinking the R73 is good
The missile that missed a Cessna...
>>28085203
>The missile that missed a Cessna...
Do tell me more.
Russians have good propellants and guidance systems. Missiles classified in NATO as long-range, in Russian nomenclature fall into medium-range class.
>>28083193
literally every modern missile that doesn't suck is a sidewinder derivative.
>>28084896
Ramjet is a big thing of it, yes, but to me the real gamechanger with it is that two-way datalink. Opens up ungodly amounts of possibilities for such a missile to exploit.
tfw our jets are only getting the single link version though...
>>28085203
Post proofs.
>>28079054
>>28080652
>>28084902
>2000 + 15
>not bowing to the mighty scud missile
>The most intensive - and less well-known - use of Scud missiles occurred during the civil war in Afghanistan between 1989 and 1992. As compensation for the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989, the USSR agreed to deliver sophisticated weapons to the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA), among which were large quantities of Scud-Bs, and possibly some Scud-Cs as well.
>The only reason the afghan government lasted so long after the soviet withdrawal in 1989 was because of the large number of scuds the soviets handed to the commie government of Afghanistan.
>even the Taliban were horrified of this weapon.
The afghan national army has a couple of them left.
>>28084828
Avoid for the sun to interfere with the missile seeker.
>>28086523
>but to me the real gamechanger with it is that two-way datalink. Opens up ungodly amounts of possibilities for such a missile to exploit.
Can't really say I agree. I mean, how much useful information does the missile really have to offer? The only really valuable things I can think of are notifying the launching aircraft when it reaches Pitbull (something that can be estimated fairly closely with a simple timer), or letting the launching aircraft know it's been trashed. Useful stuff, sure, but not really what I'd call a gamechanger.
>>28091042
It's about identification, is the main thing. It's a huge problem to the modern days crowded skies that you need rules of engagement that cover the eventuality of all sorts of aircraft in the zone. Just look at the clusterfuck over Syria, for example.
That necessitates delays and closer ranges until you know for sure what you're pulling the trigger on.
Meteor on a Typhoon, Gripen or F-35 doesn't have that problem.
The two-way datalink will return information on the target during travel, identify the target and can (if needs be) re-target or even abort the attack entirely if the target is found to be incorrect. This permits Meteor to be launched from MUCH further out, utilising its full range without as much of a worry about "guesstimating" if the target is indeed hostile or not.
Furthermore, the datalink sends back information on what the opposing fighter is, what it's doing, what it did to try and evade, how it evaded if it managed it, how it got caught out. The intel guys can tell a shitload from the type of numbers and logs that the signals get back from the missile and what its target is doing in 3D space.
Not to mention the clear ability to retarget. Getting close but the fighter you targeted has just dumped its load and burned hard to get away? Go after the wingman instead and force him to make decisions now too.
Two-way datalinks are like having a direct hand into completely fucking with your enemy on a very intel based level that simply hasn't been possible until now. You can only imagine the sort of shit they could get back from this when the information starts being made clearer or expanded upon. It's partly why Meteor has been considered to become an anti-radiation missile, because that ramjet and that datalink make it just an insane headfuck of a problem to try and fight against.
>>28091570
I don't think that anyone is actually considering using seeker terminal guidance as a method of PID.
Going pitbull is not a long stage as far as I know. Saying you're going to launch on a target that you're a little unsure of because you can abort when you get terminal guidance data is a little unlikely. If it turned out not to be a valid target chances are you're not pressing abort before splash.
The rest of what you said is perfectly valid, though. Or at least feasible.
>>28091570
>It's about identification, is the main thing. It's a huge problem to the modern days crowded skies that you need rules of engagement that cover the eventuality of all sorts of aircraft in the zone.
How the fuck do you expect a missile to identify something the launching aircraft can't? It has no IFF interrogator.
Moreover, are you seriously fucking suggesting that air forces adopt an RoE that allows for launching a missile on unidentified bogeys, and just hoping the missile "figures it out" on the way? You're out of your goddamn mind.
>The two-way datalink will return information on the target during travel
The only time the missile is going to have ANY direct information on the target is after Pitbull. You get maybe 20 seconds of data, max. Again, useful, but not "game-changing."
>Furthermore, the datalink sends back information on what the opposing fighter is
No... no, it doesn't. Again, missiles don't have their own IFF.
> The intel guys can tell a shitload from the type of numbers and logs that the signals get back from the missile and what its target is doing in 3D space.
Telemetry is valuable, sure. But this is stuff you really ought to be doing in testing, not in combat.
>Not to mention the clear ability to retarget. Getting close but the fighter you targeted has just dumped its load and burned hard to get away? Go after the wingman instead and force him to make decisions now too.
How is this is any less possible with a one-way datalink?
>>28091943
>Telemetry is valuable, sure. But this is stuff you really ought to be doing in testing, not in combat.
No better testing than in combat, especially against aircraft that you don't necessarily have, launching under combat conditions that don't lie, with a missile actually intending to hit a target with a thinking pilot in it.
>>28079281
how much do they weight
>>28092667
Sidewinders weigh a bit more than your average Europoor
AMRAAMs weigh a bit more than your average Murrican
>>28079054
What does /k/ know about Python 5?
>>28092913
Brilliant, just brilliant.
