✡︎History, Design, and Performance of Israeli Air-to-Air Missiles

[MiG_23M 1,684]

7 hours ago, ÖL said:

Tell me exactly where did i rearrange your words? And whats with your attitude? 

also i understand that the rangeband values and the fov are identical, im wondering why would they be that? on what do they base their conclusion that the python 3 seeker and the aim 9L seeker has the same abilities in that regard? its not the same seeker obviously since all other stats are different.

Most all aspect missiles are similar in rangebands right now.

 

You stated "temporary fov nerf" wherein I stated "The 3.6 degree field of view is a temporary nerf". What I said before that clearly dictates that I was not referring to the exact statistic that is the FOV as the nerf nor that the FOV was going to change in the future. The FOV nerfs flare resistance right now, and it should not.

 

7 hours ago, ÖL said:

i know he is not a mod, he is Dwight Shrute

There is no need to insult people, if you really cannot figure out what I meant to say or it bothers you the way I speak we can talk in DM.

[DracoMindC 317]

Overhauled thread:

-Python 4 and 5 use same motor

-Python 4 and 5 motor burns for 7-8 seconds, previous motor for Python 4 with 80 second sustainer was nonsensical due to the missile having a battery limit of 40 seconds, kept 80kN figure since multiple sources corroborate this, 80kN total impulse is similar to the R-73 which is of a similar diameter and weight class so its not unrealistic either, however feel free to take that figure with salt as it still comes from secondary sources

-Python 4/5 and Derby no longer specify dual plane and lateral G limits, this is due to these missiles using "roll fins" that control the missiles roll for an optimal trajectory for the fins (essentially always able to perform dual plane overload)

-Python 3 states both 35g and 40g overloads with a note explaining why 2 overload figures are given

-Battery life info is added (only for Python 4 and 5 as of now), previously missing

-Python 4 has INS listed, note attached explained why (TLDR: no it doesn't really do anything like allow LOAL)

-Overall just cleansing specific technical information that was solely stated in "suspect" secondary sources

 

[ofekk213 251]

@DracoMindC

 

Can I get the specific source of where you got the max G of the Python 4, Python 5, Derby and I-Derby ER from?

[ofekk213 251]

On 02/06/2023 at 10:24, panzerv0r said:

As much as I appreciate Pythons being added, the removal of AIM-7s from the Kurnass 2000 is an unjustified travesty. Will take it from the best Phantom to basically unplayable. Wtf.

Thr Kurnass 2000 should've never gotten sparrows. The AN/APG-76 (more specifically, the AN/APQ-173 antenna) is unable to guide FOX-1s due to not having a compatible illuminator. It can only guide FOX-3s (radar originally planned for the canceled A-6F/G so they could use AMRAAMs), but the Kurnass 2000 never carried any BVR missiles as the F-4 in Israeli service got transfeted to strike missions only with the arrival of the F-15 in the 80s.

[DracoMindC 317]

36 minutes ago, ofekk213 said:

@DracoMindC

 

Can I get the specific source of where you got the max G of the Python 4, Python 5, Derby and I-Derby ER from?

For the Pythons the 70g figure primarily comes from Jane's air launched weapons, also can be found in various secondary sources listed in the source tab (they all appear to agree on the 70g figure)

For the Derby, Aviation week describes maneuverability being similar to the Python 3, once again various secondary sources listed in the source tab also list the 50g (which is similar to the dual plane limit of the Python 3) figure aswell as Missilery.info. 

 

Neither of these have primary sources to confirm this but finding a primary source to confirm this is essentially impossible as they are all restricted. However all secondary sources going with the same max G overload figure is a good sign rather than a bunch of random guesses contradicting each other. Especially when some better opensource intelligence sources like Jane's and Aviation week claim these figures.

Basically this is the next best thing to proper primary sources.

[oom1992 649]

@DracoMindC @GeeNo_MS  I wonder for a long time Python 4 as a infrared-homing only or both infrared-homing & BVR AAM ?

 

And Python 4 is a short-range or short to medium-range AAM ?

[MiG_23M 1,684]

5 minutes ago, oom1992 said:

@DracoMindC @GeeNo_MS  I wonder for a long time Python 4 as a infrared-homing only or both infrared-homing & BVR AAM ?

 

And Python 4 is a short-range or short to medium-range AAM ?

That question is highly dependent on what you consider "MRAAM" vs "SRAAM", what are the distances expected of the medium vs short range aam?

[DracoMindC 317]

Kinematically the Python 4/5 are not too much different from other more long legged IRs that we have in game/in the files like the AIM-9L or R-73 but the Python 5 uses LOAL and lofting to achiever further ranges that these missiles would normally be unable to achieve either due to lack of lofting or LOAL or both. But practically speaking they're still SRAAMs.

[BearHasLanded 124]

28 minutes ago, oom1992 said:

@DracoMindC @GeeNo_MS  I wonder for a long time Python 4 as a infrared-homing only or both infrared-homing & BVR AAM ?

 

And Python 4 is a short-range or short to medium-range AAM ?

Python 4 is an IR missile only and is entirely within visual range, long range for a fox 2 but still a short range missile.

The Python 5 on the other hand is a BVR missile, it can use datalink to guide it towards a target and then use its lock on after launch (LOAL) capability and use it IR seeker for terminal guidance similar to how a fox 3 works.

[MiG_23M 1,684]

I don't think it needs lofting unless equipped with the extended range booster.