Difference between the AIM120B&C and all the differents AIM9 missiles

[cmbaviator]

Hello guys.

 

I was wondering the difference between the FOX 3 missiles 120 B and 120 C ?

 

Same thing for all the different AIM 9 missiles like L,M,X.... ?

 

thanks

[F-2]

Aim-120B is an older AMRAAM. C has longer range, a better warhead, and less draggy “clipped” fins. Our Aim-120c is a C5

AIM-9l and AIM-9M as all aspect sidewinders. M is just a slight overall improvement to L. X is a high off boresight missile that can be fired with a helmet mounted sight and has a much more advanced seeker. Our aim-9x is a block 1

 

 

[cmbaviator]

1 minute ago, F-2 said:

Aim-120B is an older AMRAAM. C has longer range, a better warhead, and less draggy “clipped” fins. Our Aim-120c is a C5

AIM-9l and AIM-9M as all aspect sidewinders. M is just a slight overall improvement to L. X is a high off boresight missile that can be fired with a helmet mounted sight and has a much more advanced seeker. Our aim-9x is a block 1

 

 

Thanks for the information, so there is no point taking missles other than the 120C and AIM9x then

[F-2]

2 minutes ago, cmbaviator said:

Thanks for the information, so there is no point taking missles other than the 120C and AIM9x then

Some people like the challenge. Sometimes so older senarios before such missiles where operational. Other like to Use the Aim-120b as it’s more of a match for R-77. 

[Viciam1]

18 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

Thanks for the information, so there is no point taking missles other than the 120C and AIM9x then

Yes I always use 120C and Aim9x. 

[QuiGon]

20 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

Thanks for the information, so there is no point taking missles other than the 120C and AIM9x then

If they're available yes. They might not be available on scenarios taking place somewhere in the past.

[F-2]

Their is a lot of public information on AIM-120a that’s applicable to the B. In theory we could probably build an extremely realistic AIM-120b including ECM and the like. Charts GAO reports etc. all hypothetical of course.

[skywalker22]

4 hours ago, Viciam1 said:

Yes I always use 120C and Aim9x. 

Why not? It's more challenging if nothing else using older variants. 

[Viciam1]

3 hours ago, skywalker22 said:

Why not? It's more challenging if nothing else using older variants. 

I guess I'll try it some day. 

[henshao]

Don't quote me on this but I think the AIM-120B with its big fins though it has shorter range it has better maneuverability than the 120C. Specifically turning performance below corner speed. IE if you had to use one at dogfight distance the 120B would be better. But I could be wrong.

[Exorcet]

2 minutes ago, henshao said:

Don't quote me on this but I think the AIM-120B with its big fins though it has shorter range it has better maneuverability than the 120C. Specifically turning performance below corner speed. IE if you had to use one at dogfight distance the 120B would be better. But I could be wrong.

In a dogfight situation, the rocket motors would likely still be burning at impact. The fins won't matter.

[henshao]

4 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

In a dogfight situation, the rocket motors would likely still be burning at impact. The fins won't matter.

AMRAAM is not a thrust vectoring missile

[Exorcet]

1 minute ago, henshao said:

AMRAAM is not a thrust vectoring missile

Technically, any missile is a thrust vectoring missile. Pull any AoA and the thrust gains a component in the lift direction. But that's not why I said the fins won't matter, it's because the missile will have likely accelerated to Mach 2+.

[henshao]

1 minute ago, Exorcet said:

Technically, any missile is a thrust vectoring missile. Pull any AoA and the thrust gains a component in the lift direction. But that's not why I said the fins won't matter, it's because the missile will have likely accelerated to Mach 2+.

Ok I mean a hard turning within-2-miles dogfight situation where the missile has to maneuver hard (150+ degree turn) right off the rack and starts out at the jet's speed of maybe 300 knots, the big fin 120B might be better than the 120c. It would require testing in game though

[Exorcet]

I don't have a comparison, but the 120C doesn't really have an issue in a dogfight. Found this random screenshot in my screenshots folder:

[henshao]

I've made some ridiculous WVR shots with the 120C as well, shots I never expected to connect.

 

This isn't me:

AIM-120c trying it’s best to be dogfight missile. : hoggit

[F-2]

IRL Aim-120a made some shots Aim-9m couldn’t. It might not be a 9x but it’s not terrible up close.

[cmbaviator]

1 hour ago, henshao said:

I've made some ridiculous WVR shots with the 120C as well, shots I never expected to connect.

 

This isn't me:

AIM-120c trying it’s best to be dogfight missile. : hoggit

not surprising, the AIM-120c can sustain like 60G

[TEOMOOSE]

I have read somewhere the amraam has good hobs capabilities that you can compare to aim-9x ish at ranges between 10 - 5 nmi.

Edited August 10, 2022 by TEOMOOSE

[F-2]

6 hours ago, TEOMOOSE said:

I have read somewhere the amraam has good hobs capabilities that you can compare to aim-9x ish at ranges between 10 - 5 nmi.

 

Not surprised by this. Ive actually heard this is a big reason the USAF dragged their feet replacing AIM-9m.

[TEOMOOSE]

On 8/9/2022 at 10:54 AM, F-2 said:

Aim-120B is an older AMRAAM. C has longer range, a better warhead, and less draggy “clipped” fins. Our Aim-120c is a C5

AIM-9l and AIM-9M as all aspect sidewinders. M is just a slight overall improvement to L. X is a high off boresight missile that can be fired with a helmet mounted sight and has a much more advanced seeker. Our aim-9x is a block 1

 

 

Not the subject of this topic, but i was wondering if ED could go on the ladder and make us the updated amraams, C6, C7. if we are talking about a specific year like 2007.

Edited August 11, 2022 by TEOMOOSE

[opps]

31 minutes ago, TEOMOOSE said:

Not the subject of this topic, but i was wondering if ED could go on the ladder and make us the updated amraams, C6, C7. if we are talking about a specific year like 2007.

 

I wonder how to emphasize "improvement" of C6 or C7. Kinetic part like bigger motar is relatively easy I think. Heatbluer has already been struggling over years about AIM-54C improvement over A  and still long way to go.

[TEOMOOSE]

On 8/11/2022 at 2:31 AM, opps said:

I wonder how to emphasize "improvement" of C6 or C7. Kinetic part like bigger motar is relatively easy I think. Heatbluer has already been struggling over years about AIM-54C improvement over A  and still long way to go.

i think for sake of simplicity. Take the amraam that is currently modelled and "just" make it better. In terms of reliability.  Better guidance, better intercept, better target track, better ecm, etc.

[Cathnan]

1 hour ago, TEOMOOSE said:

i think for sake of simplicity. Take the amraam that is currently modelled and "just" make it better. In terms of reliability.  Better guidance, better intercept, better target track, better ecm, etc.

I feel that wouldn't be in the spirit of DCS if you mean by that ED should simply do an educated guess on what their performance probably is without hard data to back that up. Would be dangerous territory for ED as well. I've seen people here complain about the sensor of the AIM 9X not move as many degrees/second as it apparently is supposed to be. If I were ED I wouldn't touch that with pliars while wearing a hazmat suite until I had data to back up my work.

[Aquorys]

1 hour ago, Cathnan said:

ED should simply do an educated guess on what their performance probably is without hard data to back that up

That is pretty much all you can do anyway with missiles, because you're not getting much hard data on anything, since it's all classified. Not even the people who work for the company that makes them know that data, unless they are directly involved in missile development.