R-73M2 vs AIM-9X Block II

[blackadam]

I have read and come to a conclusion: the two missiles are quite similar parameters as the IIR seeker 2 are capable of all-aspects. However there are a few differences:

 

AIM-9X block II Range: 26km

R-73m2 Range: 40 km

 

AIM-9X block II Speed​​: mach 2.5

R-73m2 Speed​​: Mach 2.5

 

AIM-9X block II FOV: 90 degrees

R-73m2 FOV: 120 degrees

off-boresight AIM-9X block II: 80 degrees

off-boresight R-73m2: 60 degrees (R-74 Off-Boresight 75 degree)

 

AIM-9X block II Lock on after launcher (but has changed with the new version of AIM-9X Block III LOBL)

R-73m2 Lock on beforce launcher

Edited October 19, 2013 by blackadam

[sobek]

Those numbers tell you next to nothing about seeker performance and how sophisticated the guidance is.

[Pilotasso]

Range is measured differently for both missiles. The Russian one is close to the ballistic range.

 

Truth is that they are both close quarter range missile and nothing is going to change that.

 

While using thrust vectoring their effective range will be a fraction of the brochure figures. And lets face it, for longer ranges you need radar missiles.

 

Difficult to choose what is best since you are unlikely to evade either missile once launched.

[blackadam]

Range is measured differently for both missiles. The Russian one is close to the ballistic range.

 

Truth is that they are both close quarter range missile and nothing is going to change that.

 

While using thrust vectoring their effective range will be a fraction of the brochure figures. And lets face it, for longer ranges you need radar missiles.

 

Difficult to choose what is best since you are unlikely to evade either missile once launched.

 

off-boresight mean? and it is more important than FOV !

[maturin]

Can they actually get a lock at that range? IN DCS you're lucky to pick anything up at 4km.

[FanBoy2006.01]

Those numbers tell you next to nothing about seeker performance and how sophisticated the guidance is.

 

Agreed; but remember that previous versions of both missiles were great.

So it is reasonable to expect two exceptional missiles.

 

There are some amazing footage on Youtube of how AIM 9Xs take out maneuvering drones dropping lots of flares.

 

Personally I hope that fighter countermeasure development will be able to keep up with these new missiles

 

Maybe lasers that can track and blind incoming IR missiles? I don't know.

[FoxHoundELite]

Agreed; but remember that previous versions of both missiles were great.

So it is reasonable to expect two exceptional missiles.

 

There are some amazing footage on Youtube of how AIM 9Xs take out maneuvering drones dropping lots of flares.

 

Personally I hope that fighter countermeasure development will be able to keep up with these new missiles

 

Maybe lasers that can track and blind incoming IR missiles? I don't know.

 

Something like the Laser Point Defense in C&C Generals games?Could be :)

[Teknetinium]

Something like the Laser Point Defense in C&C Generals games?Could be :)

 

Im sure there is countermeasures against it,top secret thou. Smoke can do the trick well, cheaper than laser that need a tracking device tracking the incoming missile.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Teknetinium

[Eddie]

There certainly are CM systems that can counter the likes of newer AA-11s, AIM-9X, and ASRAAM. And they are hardly secret, DCS already has a basic inplementaion of an early version of such systems in the form of the IR Jammer on the Frogfoot.

 

Google AIRCM and DIRCM.

 

Such systems are however very costly to deploy, so only the likes of the US, UK, and a few select others have them in operation. And they are the only way to counter the latest gen of IIR AAMs. I can't comment on the AIM-9X or AA-11 with much authority, but I can certainly say that the ASRAAM (UK spec at least) doesn't give two hoots about flare.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Infrared Countermeasure system, PRESIDENT S

 

[FanBoy2006.01]

Something like the Laser Point Defense in C&C Generals games?Could be :)

 

I meant if the develop something like the JT-1 laser suppression system on the Chinese Type 99 MBT but for fighter aircraft against IR guided missiles.

 

@Teknetinium

 

Yes, that sound good. But remember if a missile is on a collision course with your aircraft it will look like it is remaining stationary in regard to you. Also light is extremely fast. This will most likely result in a simpler tracking system that missiles actually use today!

 

But like I said. In my first post. I don't know.

 

@=4c= Hajduk Veljko and Eddie

 

Thanks for the info. Looks like these systems are very mature and extremely effective.

[xxJohnxx]

Infrared Countermeasure system, PRESIDENT S

 

 

I find that they actually fired and missed against a stationary helicotper very impressive.

Obviously I can't judge if that is all real and what the exact conditions where, but if that system works like that in a real war against real enemies, than it's even better!

 

Thanks for posting!

[ENO]

Great vid. Impressive technology at least demonstrated by the folks promoting it. Be interested in seeing some feedback by the folks who know a "thing or two about a thing or two."

[Kaktus29]

i noticed this long ago when i questioned those "refueling holes" of Mi-28 and Ka-52.. they look like refueling holes or something but they are some sort of laser-reflector detector of missiles and jammmer ..

 

this choppers would be pretty much invulnerable today with old Manpads and even modern ones to an extent.. armored to resist small and light caliber, teched up to resist manpads .. god, would feel like a god in those flying tanks now..

[Chizh]

I have read and come to a conclusion: the two missiles are quite similar parameters as the IIR seeker 2 are capable of all-aspects. However there are a few differences:

 

AIM-9X block II Range: 26km

R-73m2 Range: 40 km

 

AIM-9X block II Speed​​: mach 2.5

R-73m2 Speed​​: Mach 2.5

 

AIM-9X block II FOV: 90 degrees

R-73m2 FOV: 120 degrees

off-boresight AIM-9X block II: 80 degrees

off-boresight R-73m2: 60 degrees (R-74 Off-Boresight 75 degree)

 

AIM-9X block II Lock on after launcher (but has changed with the new version of AIM-9X Block III LOBL)

R-73m2 Lock on beforce launcher

 

What is R-73m2?

[GGTharos]

They could be CMs, or they could just be rough-ins for MLW sensors. This has been happening with a lot of helicopters lately ... have a look at the Block III Apaches and newest Cobras.

 

i noticed this long ago when i questioned those "refueling holes" of Mi-28 and Ka-52.. they look like refueling holes or something but they are some sort of laser-reflector detector of missiles and jammmer ..

 

this choppers would be pretty much invulnerable today with old Manpads and even modern ones to an extent.. armored to resist small and light caliber, teched up to resist manpads .. god, would feel like a god in those flying tanks now..

[GGTharos]

It is this wikipedia missile:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-73_%28missile%29

 

What is R-73m2?

[Alfa]

What is R-73m2?

 

Sounds like an early(or bogus) designation for the new RVV-MD version - at least a couple of the stated specs(head-on range of some 40 km and off-boresight seeker actuisition angle of +-60 deg) fit with this.

 

According to Tactical Missiles Corporation JCS there are three versions of the R-73 - two versions of the original R-73(one with radio fuze and another with laser fuze) and the third being the new RVV-MD.

Edited October 23, 2013 by Alfa