Why did Americans let themselves fall so far behind in A2A missile technology.

Why did Americans let themselves fall so far behind in A2A missile technology. R-37, Meteor, PL15 and PL17 are all better than the Aim-120, some significantly so.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The aim-120 is battle proven, unlike the other missiles listed

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    how are they better?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Longer range and more energy within the same range, which is a pretty huge advantage if stealth isn't a factor.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Wait...you actually believe their bullshit propaganda numbers? The R-37 is a Phoenix at home. Anon, how many times does Russian shit have to underperform before you learn they make shit up? Knowing Russia, its probably worse than the AIM-54, a missile retired 20 years ago, in every way.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >its probably worse than the AIM-54, a missile retired 20 years ago!

          Does the US have the AIM-54 now?

          > Well, no but....

          Does the US have any deployed missile with the range of the AIM-54?

          > Not as such.

          Then something beats nothing.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >AIM-260 is already in production

            Cool! How many do we have deployed?

            > Well....

            How many are we buying in the 2025 Budget?

            > I'll have to get back to you about that.

            honest to god adding this before I go to bed. you have the gayest, gaygiest, most troony tier typing I have seen in a minute. have a nice day.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >AIM-260 is already in production

            Cool! How many do we have deployed?

            > Well....

            How many are we buying in the 2025 Budget?

            > I'll have to get back to you about that.

            This homosexual types like a dobson cartoon, putting up a strawman, which he wittily cuts off mid-sentence with a smug grin, while tipping his fedora/adjusting his glasses.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            LMAO I didn't think such cope was possible.
            >w...we're better because we have a missile worse than an obsolete one you retired 2 decades ago!
            Keep seething gay.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >AIM-260 is already in production

            Cool! How many do we have deployed?

            > Well....

            How many are we buying in the 2025 Budget?

            > I'll have to get back to you about that.

            What the shills do not want to admit is that many US R&D programs fail due to institutional incompetence or are set up as pure milking of DoD money without the intent to deliver workable product, aka corruption.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Does the US have any deployed missile with the range of the AIM-54?
            Yes. The AIM-120D3 is capable of out ranging even the AIM-54. Please educate yourself. You seem to be stuck in 1995. The AIM-120D3 updates the guidance software to allow the missile to choose the most energy efficient flight path to the target. Brute force (Russian way) will only get you so far, and will be unreliable on today's battlefield.
            https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40184/f-15-eagle-scores-longest-known-air-to-air-missile-shot-during-u-s-air-force-test

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Yes. The AIM-120D3 my beloved!

              > The range of the AIM-120D is classified

              How convenient. For you.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I have reasons to believe the US, as they haven't lied about any of their weapons capabilities yet. Usually, we find out that the actual capabilities of the weapons are much better than the US says, or allows the MIC to say. Russia and China on the other hand have been caught lying so many times about their weapons, I would never trust anything they say. Furthermore, the US usually releases quite detailed reports along with video of their weapons systems tests. Something neither Russia nor China does.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I imagine this credibility will lend itself as a deterrent the one time they do overstate the capability of a weapon. I just don't think the AIM-120 is the one they're lying about. I think the Star Wars missile defense system was the one time we just bullshitted a weapon and it helped kill the fricking Soviet Union.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's weird because they don't particularly overstate basically anything, anon. Anything really secret they tend to understate then hint at superiority, but you never get shit like what comes out of Russia or China.

                Like, for example, did you know they're launching a new infrared missile launch tracking satellite constellation? Did you know it'll be far superior to the current one? Did you know that they're planning to launch these satellites into LEO too, which might allow them to track satellites as they travel to their targets in 3D space without radar?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >It's weird because they don't particularly overstate basically anything, anon. Anything really secret they tend to understate then hint at superiority, but you never get shit like what comes out of Russia or China.
                That's what I'm saying. If the US DOD were to publicly release info on an invisible drone that phases through walls and kills targets with radiation, Xi Jinping would be seen wearing a lead suit every day until he died. The US has set itself up for 100% credibility, which could be exploited exactly once.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Oh yeah, except they do kinda cash it in sometimes. Remember the Navy SEALs in South Korea ready to kill Kim Jong Un meme from 2017? Although I suppose that's not exactly the same as it's not a piece of technology.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I think the Star Wars missile defense system was the one time we just bullshitted a weapon and it helped kill the fricking Soviet Union.
                I'll agree that some programs under SDI (Star Wars) were wishful thinking, but a lot of the programs worked, and could've been taken further to operational systems if they weren't scared of MUH NOOOOOKSS. SDI is where we get PAC-3, THAAD, SM-3, and GBI from. They also had the tech to make Brilliant Pebbles, Neutral Particle Beams for decoy and RV discrimination, along with the possibility of destroying atleast the decoys. Oh, and they made a hit-to-kill version of the mach 10 Sprint missile called HEDI with a cryogenically cooled seeker window. The hit-to-kill vehicle is similar to THAADs seeker. Even some of the tech they use to correct for atmospheric distortion in ground based telescope imaging came for SDIs work on using ground based lasers to bounce off satellite based mirrors to kill ICBMs. They had to find a way to measure the distortion of the beam by the atmosphere, and then find a way to correct it. They use deformable mirrors, LiDAR, and Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor just as they did during SDI. The actual problem is not wanting to upset the balance. The US didn't want to field a complete defense system because it could the opposition to act irrationally. Likewise, they didn't like to introduce a weapons system too far advance compared to the opposition. It might be destabilizing, or cause the opposition to seek that weapon when otherwise they had no desire to, just yet. To me, it's bullshit, and I would've rubber-stamped just about everything straight to production. I'd have those printing presses sounding like a GAU-8. From researching, I have seen that the US has pretty much tried just about anything you can think of.

                https://i.imgur.com/WcohUvX.jpg

                >The AIM-120D3 updates the guidance software to allow the missile to choose the most energy efficient flight path to the target.
                almost every single missile does that. the phoenix did it. lofting is not new.

                >almost every single missile does that.
                They do? Proof?
                >the phoenix did it. lofting is not new.
                It's not basic lofting, ignoramus.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >It might be destabilizing, or cause the opposition to seek that weapon when otherwise they had no desire to, just yet
                F-15 agrees

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The actual problem is not wanting to upset the balance.

                The actual problem is to go from a hand built prototype to serial production.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Just imagine what we could afford without nogs and hispanics consuming 2 Trillion bucks a year and uncountable hours of white men's time. I fricking hate them all so much: libtards, israelites, darkies, they are the worm in my apple. We could conquer the world in a month if not for their constant and consistent interference. We'd have fricking nuclear pulse propulsion lift vehicles for instance if we didn't have the expense of browns and the whining of gayots to deal with. A 2 million ton to orbit lift capacity would me we could do anything. We could just nuclear pulse propulsion to divert any large body we want and hold the whole world hostage it we so pleased.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I have reasons to believe the US, as they haven't lied about any of their weapons capabilities!

                All Pentagon cost and schedule statements are complete lies. But specifically on "capabilities":

                F-35
                KC-46
                LCS
                Zumwalt

                NB4 - "Those don't count!"

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                If the Zumwalt was a Russian or Chinese ship they'd still be claiming that the guns are capable of firing guided projectiles with 150km range with no additional caveats until the day they were mysteriously yanked from the ship.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Found the butthurt thirdie. The difference between the US and you is that when one of our weapons doesn't meet the plans, we announce it immediately, instead of pretending everything's fine.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >The AIM-120D3 updates the guidance software to allow the missile to choose the most energy efficient flight path to the target.
              almost every single missile does that. the phoenix did it. lofting is not new.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >AIM-260 is already in production

            Cool! How many do we have deployed?

            > Well....

            How many are we buying in the 2025 Budget?

            > I'll have to get back to you about that.

            I for one, am demoralized and sent a message to my governor to ally with russia which is not weak but strong

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Better on paper? Which one has more AA kills?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Better on paper? Which one has more AA kills?
          Let me guess, you think F-16 is better than F-22 because it has more air kills?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Except for the meteor they're not.
      Amraam has better low altitude performance than the meteor though afaik

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    He doesn't know about the Department of Energy Special Access Programs kek

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      didn't they try that shit from Reagan's "star wars" program? has tech really advanced that much in 40 years

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The DoD has like half a dozen novel A2A missile designs in development right now, including the big dick aim260 which is in the midst of starting low rate production

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah but they aren't ready yet or in any actual numbers, usually America is way ahead of the competition.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >usually America is way ahead of the competition.
        And whenever they're not, they wind up gaining capability that leaves their competition decades behind.
        What's the problem?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I guess I'm listening to Talking Heads today, thanks anon.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No problem, just doing my part

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      which ones are those? i only know JDRADM (canceled) and AIM-260 (LRIP, not much is known about it)

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Aim-120 is really good. AIM-260 is under development and expected to be completed this year.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >AIM-260
      Its still only supposed to be about 120 miles though, chinese PL-20's are rumored to go out to 190 miles, though I can only imagine how much lofting that requires, damn things must goto near space to go the distance.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Americans always understate performance. The longest A2A shot ever is still with an AIM-120D despite the stated range being, like, 90 miles

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >R-37
    >PL-17
    Both are +2 times heavier than the AIM-120, Meteor, PL-15. Stop comparing missiles of different weight class.
    For some reason ($ and all those 5th gen fighters) the US cancelled a lot of extended range missiles and the development of propellants based on CL-20, that's why the range is limited.

    The Japanese variant of the Meteor is the best Meteor btw.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The Japanese variant of the Meteor is the best Meteor btw
      hate to break it to you but JNAAM will never enter production and the scheduled test firing never happened, the studies were "concluded" and Japan is moving forward with their own design

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    May I see it?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Internal weapons bays on the F-22, they couldn't make significant energy improvements in the same form factor so didn't bother with developing a new missile for a decade.
    The Pentagon will do stupid shit to hide the stupid shit the Pentagon did like approve a fighter for serial production with no plans for future weapons.

    The reason they are finally getting serious abbout a new missile now is they can make them fit the F-35 and not get a lot of questions from congress about why it doesn't fit the F-22.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The Pentagon doesn’t do "stupid shit", it does thoroughly researched and scientific acquisition programs. Congressional and other government requirements often do change which places a large burden on those acquisition programs but that’s not the Pentagon’s fault.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >approve a fighter for serial production with no plans for future weapons
      If for whatever reason the F-22 was ever going to shoot at a manned aircraft, it wouldn't need to outrange future weapons.
      Much fabled long range missiles still require mid course updates.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Internal weapons bays on the F-22, they couldn't make significant energy improvements in the same form factor
      The Meteor fits inside an F35 so that's a load of nonsense.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Read the rest of their post before replying.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Read what he said, moron.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The reason they are finally getting serious abbout a new missile now is they can make them fit the F-35 and not get a lot of questions from congress about why it doesn't fit the F-22.
      Well, that's bullshit because the AIM-260 JATM has the same form size as the AIM-120D. They never needed an extremely long range missile with an acceptable Pk until now. THAT is the actual reason. Why spend money on something you don't need? Continue research to stay current or ahead, and use the funds instead to buy more AIM-120Ds or put it into other, more important programs. Hell, AIm-120D3s are out ranging anything other countries have right now. No, paper stats are worthless, show me some actual test data. I want to see it working; not have to imagine it while taking known liars words as gospel.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >muh russia and china are ... LYING
        ok what about the meteor. Are the Uk, Germany etc all secretly lying about it

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >ok what about the meteor
          What about it? Does it introduce a capability so much better than the AIM-120D3, that the DoD/Congress see the logic in diverting funds into it instead of other, more important programs? You do know the US helped them design it, right? The US had built, and tested, just about every type of missile you can imagine. If the

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >If the
            If the what?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              OH, I was going to say: If the missile induced a capability that made the AIM-120D3 obsolete, they would fund and field it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >ok what about the meteor. Are the Uk, Germany etc all secretly lying about it
          you are BROWN

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >They never needed an extremely long range missile with an acceptable Pk until now
        True but the US has also never needed a dozen carriers or thousands of nukes yet they have them.
        Having a huge advanced military as a political stick is the US stratergy, an actual physical requirement for the arms is secondary.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    AIM-120 is vastly superior to PL-17 as a real A2A weapon. AIM-120 terminal flight performance will simply be much greater due to its large weight and size advantage. Something like the PL-17 and R-37 are meant for attacking large targets like AWACS, tankers, etc, from outside enemy-contested airspace; they don’t have the terminal flight performance to hit a fast agile target. There’s a reason why they didn’t continue upgrading the AIM-54 and the AIM-120 has been updated several times, 14k built and operated by over 30 countries; the AIM-120 actually shoots down other planes in the real world and it’s been basically uncontested in that role.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Correct.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Americans let themselves fall so far behind in A2A missile technol ... ACK!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >a drawing

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How are they better? Outside the AIM-120 and R-37 the other missiles are virtually untested and the R-37 is basically a different class of weapons since it's 3x the size of an AIM-120.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >R-37
      >tested
      Lobbing a bunch at a target that immediately successfully evades is not testing, Ivan.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Lobbing a bunch at a target that immediately successfully evades is not testing, Ivan.

        R-37 has seen operational use in Ukraine with several shootdowns of ukie jets doing low level zoom and boom runs along the front line.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's a test, just not a successful one.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    America will use the meteor if it wants to. F35 can:
    https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/60744963

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >R-37
    >PL17
    both are over 4x the weight of an aim-120 yet are barely twice the range, what the frick are their chemical industries even doing?

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Stealth renders missiles worthless, the future is stealth dogfighting.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You clearly don't understand "stealth"...

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The US should just buy Meteor. It's already being integrated with F-35 by the Italians and Brits. But America suffers from terminal NIH syndrome.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The aim-260 will be better. Why would america buy the meteor

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        But the Meteor exists now. And could easily fit on most American aircraft given its comparative to AMRAAM (and it can definitely fit on F-35s)

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          What's the use case? As demonstrated by Red Flag, the F-35 can get to point blank range versus F-15s and F-16s undetected.
          The entire reasoning behind a Meteor missile is beating the opponent's BVR timeline and bypassing the silly jousting match. If you're not gonna give the enemy the shot, you don't need to fire outside the AMRAAM's acceptable high Pk parameters.
          And before the F-35 was in the pipeline, Russia and China were much less of a concern so the US wasn't really focused on outranging AIM-54 Phoneixes from Iran running on smuggled parts.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But what about those F-16s and F-15s and F-18s, they are still in service and can benefit from the Meteor
            But even with the F-35 and F-22, that range offers the aircraft an extra level of protection, which is not something that anybody should turn down. Why get into dogfights and risk being detected at all?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              > F-16s and F-15s and F-18s,
              Only the AIM-120 are limited due the bays of 5th gen aircraft, the US tested larger missiles (even SM's) for external pylons with far better kinetics.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I shudder to think of how an F-16 would handle two SM-2s carried externally.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Probably better than they handle mk84s

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Not a problem for a missile bus, less than 2 tons because they don't have boosters

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                This may be a stupid question, but since some A2A missiles and naval SAMs are being used in GBAD roles, has anyone ever thought of attaching the missiles to a bigger booster section to give them more range before activating "properly", and if no, what are the main limitations? Sure, this is a bit of KSP and russian school of making the missile go farther, and I know it has some limits when trying to carry ot on a plane, but from the ground?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Well, that's exactly what they do for the ground based versions. The main limited factor to just slapping additional boosters onto a missile is that it significantly increases the size and weight of the missile, meaning that there's a good chance the plane the missile was originally designed for can't even carry it, or at the very least, in significantly reduced numbers.

                This is also a particular problem for stealth planes because they need the missile to fit in their internal storage bays.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The main limited factor to just slapping additional boosters onto a missile is that it significantly increases the size and weight of the missile, meaning that there's a good chance the plane the missile was originally designed for can't even carry it, or at the very least, in significantly reduced numbers.

                This part, I have zero issue grasping, I'm more perplexed by the apparent fact that medium range GBAD that uses modified A2A missiles often appears to just have stock missiles with no additional boosters. Like, if an AMRAAM-C can go 100 nautical miles, why not slap an additional booster on it to make it go, say, 50 NM before it switches on its own motor and flies into the Sukhoi? Sure, it might not fit into an F-35 or even onto an F/A-18, but the MAN truck or the HEMTT won't care.

                SM-6s (of pic rel) have a booster to improve range (booster Mk 72). 2 Stages SAMs are rather common.

                I didn't know that. Thanks.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Most of the GBAD that use repurposed A2A missiles are generally systems intended for mid or short range engagements where they don't need to maximize range. Actual long range GBAD systems like S-300 or Patriot use their own purpose built missiles.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                SM-6s (of pic rel) have a booster to improve range (booster Mk 72). 2 Stages SAMs are rather common.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's sort of what the AMRAAM-ER is. After the Air Force retired the AIM-7, the Navy realized the Sea Sparrow no longer needed to have any commonality with the air-launched version, so they beefed up the rocket motor and control surfaces and turned it into the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile. Then Raytheon stuck an AMRAAM seeker head on an ESSM to produce the AMRAAM-ER and sold it as a NASAMS-compatible SAM. It has 50% greater range and a 70% greater engagement altitude than the ground-launched AIM-120 AMRAAM.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Anything's possible with enough cocaine.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Why get into dogfights
              You won't. NEZ range of an AMRAAM depending on variant and launch conditions is around 20 miles, possibly 30.
              Stealth gives you the ability to turn back time and fire radar guided missiles while everyone is still using guns and heaters that get distracted by clouds.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >But America suffers from terminal NIH syndrome.
      Literally adopted the Harrier you gay.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >harrier
      >M240
      >M9
      >Stryker
      >Constellation class
      >AT4
      >M1014
      >Glock 19
      shut the frick up dumbass

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        US failed to develop their own VTOL, desperate move

        >>M240
        >>M9

        US failed to develop their own 8x8, desperate move

        class

        US failed to develop their own frigate, desperate move

        >>AT4

        US failed to develop their own small recoilless rocket launcer, desperate move

        19

        US failed to develop their own pistol, desperate move

        Dont forget Mk110 cannon, US failed to develop their own medium caliber autocannon, desperate move

        USA only adopts foreign weaponry after it fails to develop its own. Excalibur is originally swedish, the US adopted it after Raytheon failed to develop guided shells. America is not a country with an engineering culture, America has a culture of money worshipping where people devote their time and attention to make money with money instead of building machines.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          most moronic post on /k/

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Sorry. Didn't mean for it to seem that way

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Basically, it was the end of the Cold War and the transition to the GWOT that killed any priority to replace the AMRAAM and gave the Chinese a chance to catch up.

    Obviously, the USAF wasn't blind to this. There's already at least 3 different programs to produce next gen long range A2A missiles. The most mature one right now is AIM-260 which aims to pretty much double the AMRAAM's performance while staying the same size. The other two programs are to make a missile half the size of AMRAAM while keeping the same performance and what is essentially the next generation AIM-54.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    AIM-260 is already in production and is probably the longest ranged/smartest air-to-air by now.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Lets not overhype the JATM too much, it still has to conform to both the laws of physics and the F-22 weapons bay. Probably better than PL-15, but it's not PL-21 or R-37 class.

      However I wonder how hard it would be to adapt AARGM-ER into an air-to air role, that thing weighs 500 kilograms and fits in an F-35. If they could mate that to a ramjet motor like meteor than you can probably get a missile that can fly over 200nm.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >R-37 class.
        It's not useless against anything smaller than an airliner so that's correct.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >it still has to conform to the laws of physics
        That's quitter talk.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >AIM-260 is already in production

      Cool! How many do we have deployed?

      > Well....

      How many are we buying in the 2025 Budget?

      > I'll have to get back to you about that.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >its probably worse than the AIM-54, a missile retired 20 years ago!

        Does the US have the AIM-54 now?

        > Well, no but....

        Does the US have any deployed missile with the range of the AIM-54?

        > Not as such.

        Then something beats nothing.

        oh shit look at this massive homosexual

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          honest to god adding this before I go to bed. you have the gayest, gaygiest, most troony tier typing I have seen in a minute. have a nice day.

          seethe because you got btfo

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            he's right, you write like a tremendous reddit homosexual

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        None yet, because unlike Russia and China, the US wants their missile to actually perform as advertised - or better than advertised.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The US still has the M2, AIM9, and B52 in service. If the pentagon keeps something in service for a long time, it’s because they perfected until another technological revolution.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hell if I know, outside of AMRAAM itself though we've had a bad track record of cancelling air-to-air missiles the past few decades. I could write a timeline of bad decisions made but here we are anyway.
    AIM-260 introduction should be moving faster than it is but in the interim it has been stupid not to field an improved AIM-120E with a dual-pulse rocket motor.

    Also I really think we should take the current AIM-9X seeker and put it in a slightly larger missile. A lot of the competition now is roughly the same length as Sidewinder but with a 6+ inch diameter versus 5 inch for the Sidewinder. That volume can give you a bigger rocket motor or whatever you might want to add.

    I wouldn't mind seeing a true long-range missile in the spirit of the AIM-54 (though it would probably use ramjet propulsion), but the USAF doesn't really need one and the USN can't even figure out what F/A-XX should be so it probably won't happen.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Also I really think we should take the current AIM-9X seeker and put it in a slightly larger missile.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Thirty years of the peace dividend, twenty years of counter-insurgency in the Middle East.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Doesn't matter that much. F-35 can engage an enemy aircraft before it even knows it's there. The best defense against even a nominally superior A2A missile is to not be visible for that missile to be fired. An enemy plane could be carrying a hypersonic nuke that annihilates everything in a 3km radius and it wouldn't matter. The frick are you going to fire at if you're dead before you can shoot it?

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    R-37M is literally the best air to air missile in the world right now.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >can't even win against Su-24 and basic MiG-29
      Lol

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >AIM-260
    >AIM-260
    >AIM-260
    You're welcome.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Honey, kill probability of bvr missiles drops off with square of distance, effectiveness of such weapon systems beyond 100km against modern military targets (with EW and other self defense capabilities) is questionable at best

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      A missile with a max range of 200km is going to be way more effective at 40km than a missile with a max range of 100km

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You don't know that for sure. Growling Sidewinder videos don't count.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          A missile that can go 200km is going to have 80% of its energy left at 40km compared to 60% energy left for a 100km missile. A 200km missile is still going to have 50% of its energy left at 100km compared to the 100km missile running on fumes at that range.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            95% of statistics on the internet are made up.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >basic percentages math is statistics

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            A missile that can go 200km will have the same amount of energy at 40km as it does at 60km.
            It will have more fuel left, but it will have the same energy.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You do realize it's more complicated than how much fuel you have left right?
            Also
            >Our missile theoretically could travel 300km under ideal unrealistic conditions therefore its maximum range is 300km!
            >What's the effective range? Who cares? It can reach a target 300km away!

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Countries that don't field F-35 holding up a nominally better-performing A2A missile as anything significant is like pointing to one large tree in a copse and saying that tree makes the copse bigger than an entire forest. It literally doesn't matter — it's the same thing as getting your panties tied in a bunch over nominally-superior turn rates or top speeds of an airframe or whatever. It doesn't fricking matter. How are you going to fire that "better" A2A missile if F-35 can see you coming and have missiles away before you even know it's there? How does it matter at all if you can out-turn F-35 if you never fricking see it?

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    ASRAAM completely mogs AIM-9X also

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *