French MICA (EM&IR) Missile vs Israeli Derby (EM) & Python 5 (IR) Missile

[p2prada]

it has
i quote

AIM-120 AMRAAM Slammer

Only C-7 and above have it. C-5 and below do not. Please learn about the different variants in the same missile family. This quote is being general.

no it has same mach 4 speed but with larger motor for increased range .
The AIM-120C-5 is a C-4 with a slightly larger motor in the new WPU-16/B propulsion section and a new shorter WCU-28/B control section with compressed electronics and ECCM upgrades.

And it gives a Mach speed of 3.5 at 30000 feet and 0.9 mach. Derby and Mica give Mach 4 at similar specs. C-7 gives Mach 4.

that may be for IR variant not EM variant in bvr range but not at the same BVR range of RF version of MICA

Nope. This is for both RF and IR variants. Both variants are essentially the same thing, but with different seekers. Seekers are replaceable on MICA.

but amraam is the most combat proven BVR in history do u have any doubt on that

So? AMRAAM has never been used against a capable enemy. Quite like Rafale's awesome capability in Libya. Let's see them go hit China or, heck, eachother. Then we will see how the claim stands. You don't beat up a cripple and claim you are the strongest in the world.

Anyway, put me in a F-22 and you choose the most proven 4th gen fighter in the world, F-16. Let's see who wins. There is a certain level of reliability after which battle proven or not does not equate to overall superiority.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Only C-7 and above have it. C-5 and below do not. Please learn about the different variants in the same missile family. This quote is being general.

how do u know C5 doent have it ????

And it gives a Mach speed of 3.5 at 30000 feet and 0.9 mach. Derby and Mica give Mach 4 at similar specs. C-7 gives Mach 4.

same thing here also ???
plz provide links to justify ur POV

Nope. This is for both RF and IR variants. Both variants are essentially the same thing, but with different seekers. Seekers are replaceable on MICA.

yes i know but u should clearly point out at which range the mock aerial combat happen ??? But usually RF variants cant manuveur / dont work well at short range thats why i stated IR variant . The RF variants can do high G manuveurs at comparitively long range than IR guided missiles .
Also AIMRAAM 's G manuverabilty at same range of MICA is lesser or greater that i am not sure .

So? AMRAAM has never been used against a capable enemy. Quite like Rafale's awesome capability in Libya. Let's see them go hit China or, heck, eachother. Then we will see how the claim stands. You don't beat up a cripple and claim you are the strongest in the world.

Anyway, put me in a F-22 and you choose the most proven 4th gen fighter in the world, F-16. Let's see who wins. There is a certain level of reliability after which battle proven or not does not equate to overall superiority.

well rafale 's air to air capabilty is also not proven in LIBYA becoz hardly i know any air to air combat happened in LIBYA .
AIMRAAM is the benchmark for BVR though .One may say whatever

 

[p2prada]

how do u know C5 doent have it ????

Because the Americans said it does not. C-5's development started in 1996 against C-7s in 1998. It is the C-7 with home on jam. I had already mentioned it earlier as jamming detection.

same thing here also ???
plz provide links to justify ur POV

I made a mistake here. Even the Aim-120D has a max speed of mach 3.5. Anyway, here is something interesting from Grisha.
Grisha's Missile \xc2\xabShoot-Off\xc2\xbb

AIM-120D rocket second pulse burning push speed up to about Mach 3.5.

So, it seems the speed has remained the same since the C-5.

There are other interesting points, like the claim that R-74 with it's combo IR and RF seekers(different versions like MICA) can take out the Aim-120D in flight. So, the claim is quite similar to how it was claimed the R-77 can take out the Aim-120 as well.

France, Israel and US haven't claimed the same for their own BVR missiles.

yes i know but u should clearly point out at which range the mock aerial combat happen ???

Janes mentioned BVR range, so that should go anywhere above 20Km.

But usually RF variants cant manuveur / dont work well at short range thats why i stated IR variant . The RF variants can do high G manuveurs at comparitively long range than IR guided missiles .

No. It all depends on the missile design. A MICA IR and MICA RF have little to no difference. Quite the same with R-74 IR or RF. R-27 with the IR and RF have similar performance.

You are comparing the Aim-9 and Aim-120 combo. Both are missiles for different purposes. One is a short range missile with IR seeker while Aim-120 is a BVR weapon with a RF seeker. The IR guided Aim-9 can handle higher Gs than the Aim-120.

With powered flight and all the extra fuel, an Aim-120 is deadly in close combat. So, are all other RF and IR missiles.

Also AIMRAAM 's G manuverabilty at same range of MICA is lesser or greater that i am not sure .

No. Aim-120 is restricted to 30G. R-77 is at 40G. Astra is at 40G. MICA does so at 50G. Python V is at 100G. R-74 at 90G.

well rafale 's air to air capabilty is also not proven in LIBYA becoz hardly i know any air to air combat happened in LIBYA .
AIMRAAM is the benchmark for BVR though .One may say whatever

I wasn't talking about air to air capability. I was differentiating between proven and not proven and it's role as a benchmark for proving much more advanced systems.

The day we take delivery of the MICA for our Mirage-2000s, we have pretty much nullified the capability of the PAF's AIM 120C-5.

 

[pack leader]

Nothing is 'all Israeli' ... The missile for the David's Sling system is called 'Stunner' it is co-developed by Rafael and Raytheon. As for free cash, you have it backward Rafael paid Raytheon to develop this missile for them.



Raytheon Awarded $30 Million for New Missile Defense Interceptor - Jan 9, 2012


You seem to suggest Israel does not need the US, that is great to hear. The US can put all the 'free cash' (my tax dollars) Israel does not need to better use.

arrogant American learn some respect
my company made the first western ashm and ecm pod
this is my work we are talking about
the missile is fully made in Israel
the launcher is made by rayteon and payed thru American fmf cash

 

[p2prada]

boy learn some respect
this is my work we are talking about
the missile is fully made in Israel
the launcher is made by rayteon and payed thru American fmf cash

She is a lady sir.

 

[Armand2REP]

arrogant American learn some respect
my company made the first western ashm and ecm pod
this is my work we are talking about
the missile is fully made in Israel
the launcher is made by rayteon and payed thru American fmf cash

Pretty sure the propulsion is made by Raytheon. I don't know any Israeli company of the likes of Roxel or Microturbo.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

arrogant American learn some respect
my company made the first western ashm and ecm pod
this is my work we are talking about
the missile is fully made in Israel
the launcher is made by rayteon and payed thru American fmf cash

Respect for you? I have none

Your company made the 'first western AsHM'? - you may want to think about this one.
The 'Fritz X' made by Nazi Germany was the first western AsHM.


And a piece of friendly advise, try not to 'attract' too much attention on the internet. (post #12)

 

[asianobserve]

Israelis and Americans these days seem not be seeing eye-to-eye on a lot of issues... (just look at Bibi and Barak) :cool2:

 

[Drsomnath999]

Because the Americans said it does not. C-5's development started in 1996 against C-7s in 1998. It is the C-7 with home on jam. I had already mentioned it earlier as jamming detection.

but u didnt post the link buddy not only me but the readers should also see the fact that C5 doesnt have that.

I made a mistake here. Even the Aim-120D has a max speed of mach 3.5. Anyway, here is something interesting from Grisha.
Grisha's Missile \xc2\xabShoot-Off\xc2\xbb


So, it seems the speed has remained the same since the C-5

no incorrect it has MACH 4 speed ,kaapo citations should be taken with a pinch of salt.
see everywhere it is written mach 4 in it's specifications
.AIM-120C AMRAAM
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article3.html
Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM

There are other interesting points, like the claim that R-74 with it's combo IR and RF seekers(different versions like MICA) can take out the Aim-120D in flight. So, the claim is quite similar to how it was claimed the R-77 can take out the Aim-120 as well.

France, Israel and US haven't claimed the same for their own BVR missiles.

buddy to claim something & to achieve that same thing are 2 different things ,I am not saying it is impossible but it is still to be proven. .

Janes mentioned BVR range, so that should go anywhere above 20Km.



No. It all depends on the missile design. A MICA IR and MICA RF have little to no difference. Quite the same with R-74 IR or RF. R-27 with the IR and RF have similar performance.

well thats an advantage of MICA missiles u see they both have TVC motor which gives them amazing manuverabilty advantage compare to AIMRAAM

You are comparing the Aim-9 and Aim-120 combo. Both are missiles for different purposes. One is a short range missile with IR seeker while Aim-120 is a BVR weapon with a RF seeker. The IR guided Aim-9 can handle higher Gs than the Aim-120.

With powered flight and all the extra fuel, an Aim-120 is deadly in close combat. So, are all other RF and IR missiles.

no u r wrong RF missiles are nt effective in close combat like less than <10km especially aim 120 .no way .

No. Aim-120 is restricted to 30G. R-77 is at 40G. Astra is at 40G. MICA does so at 50G. Python V is at 100G. R-74 at 90G.

thanks for the info though but can u cite the sources for all of these i would really appreciate that ???

I wasn't talking about air to air capability. I was differentiating between proven and not proven and it's role as a benchmark for proving much more advanced systems.

well isint the aimraam proven????

The day we take delivery of the MICA for our Mirage-2000s, we have pretty much nullified the capability of the PAF's AIM 120C-5.

DUDE plz dont get me wrong
1st of all MIRAGE 2000 has to survive the AIM 120c5 before firing it's own mica missiles as u very well know the range of AIM 120c5.Well mica RF / IR is
effective until & unless it covers head on range about 60-70 km range .Regarding shooting down of AIMRAAM through MICA is yet to be proven.But i
think python 5 can do that job better in shooting down AIMraam due to it's better manuverabilty & IR seeker.

She is a lady sir.

LLOLLZ she is a wild cat & she pawns

 

[p2prada]

but u didnt post the link buddy not only me but the readers should also see the fact that C5 doesnt have that.

You won't find a single link which will say C-5 does not have Home on Jam. Quite the same as how you won't find a single link which will say LCA does not have two engines. It was never a design parameter to begin with. Some things can be proven on the internet and some cannot. The only way to find out is by reading and discerning information.

no incorrect it has MACH 4 speed ,kaapo citations should be taken with a pinch of salt.
see everywhere it is written mach 4 in it's specifications
.AIM-120C AMRAAM
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article3.html
Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM

Don't follow such articles for speed. Speed differs at different altitudes, so you never know where they have picked up such information. The most accepted speed is Mach 3.5.

buddy to claim something & to achieve that same thing are 2 different things ,I am not saying it is impossible but it is still to be proven. .

It was a FYI. you wanted a link for Aim-120s speed and I gave it. The rest of it was just part of the article.

Another FYI, the Russians have claimed new missiles which can take out incoming BVR missiles for PAKFA.

well thats an advantage of MICA missiles u see they both have TVC motor which gives them amazing manuverabilty advantage compare to AIMRAAM

Hence, better than the Aim 120C-5 in maneuverability as well.

no u r wrong RF missiles are nt effective in close combat like less than <10km especially aim 120 .no way .

RF is better than IR anyday, in any environment, against any target and any circumstance.

MICA RF is better than MICA IR from any range.

thanks for the info though but can u cite the sources for all of these i would really appreciate that ???

Eh! Just google. All of this was over the top of my head.

well isint the aimraam proven????

Against what? Even R-77 can do the same against those enemies.

DUDE plz dont get me wrong
1st of all MIRAGE 2000 has to survive the AIM 120c5 before firing it's own mica missiles as u very well know the range of AIM 120c5.

Not necessary. Like I said. A missile is only as deadly as the platform firing it. Only a squadron of Block 52s match the Mirage-2000-5 in capability. Rafale, forget it.

Well mica RF / IR is
effective until & unless it covers head on range about 60-70 km range .

The F-16s need to be able to seek a Mirage-2000 or Rafale at Aim-120C-5s range in order to engage first. AWACS may help, but there is only so much an AWACS can do when there are only a few around. Other than that we have other air assets and only improving.

F-16 is passe and so is the C-5 in some ways.

Regarding shooting down of AIMRAAM through MICA is yet to be proven.But i
think python 5 can do that job better in shooting down AIMraam due to it's better manuverabilty & IR seeker.

Maybe so. But as of today, neither the MICA nor the Python designers have claimed they can shoot down an AMRAAM.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Don't follow such articles for speed. Speed differs at different altitudes, so you never know where they have picked up such information. The most accepted speed is Mach 3.5.

WELL same can also be said for all BVR missiles like they all claim mach 4 speed

It was a FYI. you wanted a link for Aim-120s speed and I gave it. The rest of it was just part of the article.

Another FYI, the Russians have claimed new missiles which can take out incoming BVR missiles for PAKFA.

lolllz

Hence, better than the Aim 120C-5 in maneuverability as well.

yes why not

RF is better than IR anyday, in any environment, against any target and any circumstance.

MICA RF is better than MICA IR from any range.

u should see the missile kill probabilty history u would see majority of air kills has been within visual range from IR missiles , Well i admit that Now active radar guided seeker has improved the Kill probabilty of RF missiles but defeintely IR missiles are more difficult to evade

Eh! Just google. All of this was over the top of my head.

haaa.haa never mind

Against what? Even R-77 can do the same against those enemies

but how many kills has R 77 registered .

Not necessary. Like I said. A missile is only as deadly as the platform firing it. Only a squadron of Block 52s match the Mirage-2000-5 in capability. Rafale, forget it.

but thats the important thing , in aerial combat it is not necessary that u would only fire BVR missiles ur enemy would also fire at u .For that u need to have a jet with cutting edge ECM , high manuverabilty & an experienced pilot .

Ofcourse rafale is a separate breed

 

[p2prada]

WELL same can also be said for all BVR missiles like they all claim mach 4 speed

MICA, R-77 and Derby are accepted to be faster.

u should see the missile kill probabilty history u would see majority of air kills has been within visual range from IR missiles , Well i admit that Now active radar guided seeker has improved the Kill probabilty of RF missiles but defeintely IR missiles are more difficult to evade

The past has little bearing to the future if you consider how air warfare has changed.

Too few wars were fought to validate the efficacy of the BVR missiles.

but how many kills has R 77 registered .

That's the thing. If Russia had invaded a country with a piss poor air force and shot down a few old fighters who had no idea they were being painted, then the claim would be the same. Almost every AMRAAM kill was against aircraft without an RWR. Only a few aircraft out of 9 knew they were being targeted, but it was too late. Perhaps they did not know what to do due to inexperience.

 

[Drsomnath999]

MICA, R-77 and Derby are accepted to be faster.

& u have accepted AIMRAAM slower IS INT????

The past has little bearing to the future if you consider how air warfare has changed.

Too few wars were fought to validate the efficacy of the BVR missiles.

well but still some old basic practices/principles are still followed in today & woulld also be followed in future.like DOGFIGHT one may say that dogfight is obsolete but still fighters practice their skills in aerial execrcises in within visual range .

That's the thing. If Russia had invaded a country with a piss poor air force and shot down a few old fighters who had no idea they were being painted, then the claim would be the same. Almost every AMRAAM kill was against aircraft without an RWR. Only a few aircraft out of 9 knew they were being targeted, but it was too late. Perhaps they did not know what to do due to inexperience.

well russia R77 missile seeker was reportedly to have problems in IAF it was also published in net
India reported that the introduction of the Russian R-77 medium-range air to air
14.09.11 Национальный аудитор Индии обращает внимание на ненадежность УР Р-77 - Военный паритет

.Now if it shoots a RPV in air in realtime war in an intense Electronic warfare environment then also i would blindly accept it is proven

 

[Drsomnath999]

double post

 

[p2prada]

& u have accepted AIMRAAM slower IS INT????

Huh? What is "IS INT?"

Btw, go read other international forums. You will see pilots there who continuously refer to the Aim-120 as a Mach 3.5 missile. R-77 is given mach 4 by active pilots as well as scientists who study these.

There are a lot of reasons why speed is controlled on missiles. It has a lot to do with lateral translation and turning speed of missile vs the aircraft. If the Aim-120 goes faster than Mach 3.5, then it won't hit anything while making 30G maneuvers. It will shoot past. Similarly, the missile speed is controlled on R-77 while performing 40G maneuvers at mach 4 at it's peak.

well but still some old basic practices/principles are still followed in today & woulld also be followed in future.like DOGFIGHT one may say that dogfight is obsolete but still fighters practice their skills in aerial execrcises in within visual range .

What has this got to do with BVR?

BVR is not proven. People are hoping with fingers crossed that they have taken the right path.

well russia R77 missile seeker was reportedly to have problems in IAF it was also published in net
India reported that the introduction of the Russian R-77 medium-range air to air
14.09.11 Национальный аудитор Индии обращает внимание на ненадежность УР Р-77 - Военный паритет

There was no problem with Russia's seeker. Those were manufactured using bad quality control which shortened life. Seekers can be replaced very quickly.

R-77 has progressed phenomenally. Agat's seeker is as good as any. The newest ones come with GaAs modules, RVV-SD and newer R-27s as well.

.Now if it shoots a RPV in air in realtime war in an intense Electronic warfare environment then also i would blindly accept it is proven

What is RPV?

Perhaps why there are professionals and then there is you.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Huh? What is "IS INT?"

i mean IS IN IT??? now dont Screw me for my grammar mistake

Btw, go read other international forums. You will see pilots there who continuously refer to the Aim-120 as a Mach 3.5 missile. R-77 is given mach 4 by active pilots as well as scientists who study these.

u mean those cartoon forums where members read some fancy russian blog & post it in a thread & to which gullible readers like u read it & beleive it .
.
I

There are a lot of reasons why speed is controlled on missiles. It has a lot to do with lateral translation and turning speed of missile vs the aircraft. If the Aim-120 goes faster than Mach 3.5, then it won't hit anything while making 30G maneuvers. It will shoot past. Similarly, the missile speed is controlled on R-77 while performing 40G maneuvers at mach 4 at it's peak.

well only manuverabilty doent guarantee a kill
u need to have a powerful seeker along with warhead whose blast radius is sufficient to ensure a kill .

What has this got to do with BVR?

BVR is not proven. People are hoping with fingers crossed that they have taken the right path.

becoz if bvr missiles fail with improving ECM capabilty & manuverabilty on recent fighter jets then dog fight is the only option

pilots would be chanting god's name in their cockpit when BVR missiles would be fired by them hoping them to hit it's target orelze they have to face their enemy within VISUAL range warfare

There was no problem with Russia's seeker. Those were manufactured using bad quality control which shortened life. Seekers can be replaced very quickly.

R-77 has progressed phenomenally. Agat's seeker is as good as any. The newest ones come with GaAs modules, RVV-SD and newer R-27s as well.

even the UKRAINE has advanced a lot in seeker quality

What is RPV?

remotedly piloted vehicle is it so difficult for u to understand .

Perhaps why there are professionals and then there is you.

yes we have arm chair generals here who can accurately predict the missile would hit it's target or not in this forum alone before it is fired from it's platform

 

[p2prada]

i mean IS IN IT??? now dont Screw me for my grammar mistake

If your grammar is bad, then don't use complex words like "isn't it." I still have no idea what you meant though.

u mean those cartoon forums where members read some fancy russian blog & post it in a thread & to which gullible readers like u read it & beleive it .

Hardly any Russians there. All American and British pilots along with American and British researchers. Maybe other countries mixed in it as well.

And you get your information from journalists and a link on the net? Lucky for me I don't.

well only manuverabilty doent guarantee a kill
u need to have a powerful seeker along with warhead whose blast radius is sufficient to ensure a kill .

becoz if bvr missiles fail with improving ECM capabilty & manuverabilty on recent fighter jets then dog fight is the only option

This has nothing to do with what we originally discussed. You don't know how to discuss stuff do you?

pilots would be chanting god's name in their cockpit when BVR missiles would be fired by them hoping them to hit it's target orelze they have to face their enemy within VISUAL range warfare

Sure.

even the UKRAINE has advanced a lot in seeker quality

Russia and Ukraine are supplied seekers from a company called Agat based in Belarus. Please learn the very basics first. It is very obvious you don't know anything. The technology used in the missiles of both countries are similar. Agat supplies to India and China too. Astra and PL-12 have Agat seekers.

remotedly piloted vehicle is it so difficult for u to understand .

Yes.

It was too funny. Haha!

Shooting down target drones and UAVs are much more difficult that what the AMRAAMs did against most of those 9 aircraft. RPVs have a much smaller RCS as compared to a non-maneuvering combat loaded fighter.

RPVs are too general to the point where it can include Chinese made remote controlled toys. Use military terms.

yes we have arm chair generals here who can accurately predict the missile would hit it's target or not in this forum alone before it is fired from it's platform

[/quote]

You don't even understand what I am saying. It is obvious you have come down to posting gibberish. Post something relevant or post nothing at all.

 

[Drsomnath999]

If your grammar is bad, then don't use complex words like "isn't it." I still have no idea what you meant though.

GREAT !!! i wont

I
Hardly any Russians there. All American and British pilots along with American and British researchers. Maybe other countries mixed in it as well.

And you get your information from journalists and a link on the net? Lucky for me I don't.

oh really then post the name of the forum let me also see ,

& u get ur information from forums not even bothering to verifying it

This has nothing to do with what we originally discussed. You don't know how to discuss stuff do you?

well i am discussing what is relevant to ur replies if it is getting over ur head then i cant do anything .

Russia and Ukraine are supplied seekers from a company called Agat based in Belarus. Please learn the very basics first. It is very obvious you don't know anything. The technology used in the missiles of both countries are similar.

what !!! i dont know nothing Actually AGAT has it's main branch in MoSCOW
History

i quote

Ukrainian R-27s displayed by the Artem and Arsenal companies at the Moscow air show in 2011 featured what the makers claimed were upgraded seekers. Arsenal said it had developed a new infra-red seeker for the R-27 extending its detection range from 18 km to 30 km.

Ukraine on Brink of Missile Deal with India - Media | Defense | RIA Novosti

russia has minor components in ukraine R 27 & it's missiles

Agat supplies to India and China too. Astra and PL-12 have Agat seekers.

LLOLLZ china actually copy & pasted it's seeker technology in PL 12a in (AMR seekers)

yes india's astra is noted to have that but india is also planning to build's it's own seeker

Yes.

It was too funny. Haha!

Shooting down target drones and UAVs are much more difficult that what the AMRAAMs did against most of those 9 aircraft.

u forgot out of those 9 aircraft included a MIG 29 jet

RPVs are too general to the point where it can include Chinese made remote controlled toys. Use military terms.

oh really then all are fools those who report this kind of news

On October 23, 2008, 15:30, at CELM, Biscarosse (Landes), a VL MICA missile successfully performed the last of its 14 test firings meaning it is now ready for mass production. The RPV was flying at low level, on the sea, 12 km away; despite this distance (roughly twice the range of Sea Wolf), MICA (with an active radar seeker) locked on the target and shot it down.

:taunt1:

You don't even understand what I am saying. It is obvious you have come down to posting gibberish. Post something relevant or post nothing at all.

lllollz who is posting garbage let the neutral reader decides .

 

[p2prada]

oh really then post the name of the forum let me also see ,

& u get ur information from forums not even bothering to verifying it

Take any major forum you want. F-16.net, keypub to name a few. There are pilots there, people who have actually fired the missile. They said it has a speed of Mach 3.5. No need to verify that information.

For eg: Do you need to verify what Ray sir says? Mil pros are a source by themselves.

well i am discussing what is relevant to ur replies if it is getting over ur head then i cant do anything .

Yes Yes of course.

what !!! i dont know nothing Actually AGAT has it's main branch in MoSCOW
History

Ok. I will buy it. This means R-27s seeker head comes from Russia.

i quote

Ukraine on Brink of Missile Deal with India - Media | Defense | RIA Novosti

That's the IR seeker. I am talking about RF seekers with new, supposedly active arrays. Why are you so thick? Don't digress.

LLOLLZ china actually copy & pasted it's seeker technology in PL 12a in (AMR seekers)

yes india's astra is noted to have that but india is also planning to build's it's own seeker

The Chinese were supplied. Both countries are making their own seekers. But you are digressing from the topic again. You start talking about completely random aspects which has no link to what we were originally discussing. For eg: When I was talking about lateral translation and turning speeds, you randomly started talking about "powerful seekers," warhead and what not(none of which had any bearing to the discussion since all missiles have those). When we were talking about BVR, then you suddenly talk about going into WVR and the pilot praying and more bullcrap. Stick to one point. Don't digress. It gives the impression you don't understand what I am saying.

u forgot out of those 9 aircraft included a MIG 29 jet

There were 6 Mig-29s. All 6 were clueless. They were flying normally and were shot down, meaning they had no idea the missiles had homed in on their position. In a single mission a Dutch F-16(formation of 4) shot down one Mig from 30Kms. The Migs were 4 in number. During this time a F-15 killed two other Migs from the formation. The Migs had no idea what happened.

Overall actual BVR kill ratio for AMRAAM is 40%. 6 kills out of 15 shots.

oh really then all are fools those who report this kind of news

That was a journo who wrote it, not a technically qualified person.

lllollz who is posting garbage let the neutral reader decides .

Right!

 

[syncro]

There were 6 Mig-29s. All 6 were clueless. They were flying normally and were shot down, meaning they had no idea the missiles had homed in on their position. In a single mission a Dutch F-16(formation of 4) shot down one Mig from 30Kms. The Migs were 4 in number. During this time a F-15 killed two other Migs from the formation. The Migs had no idea what happened.

In that episode (in Kossovo War) only 1 of 4 MiG-29s had the radar working (and was the eyes of serbian formation)... for the other 3 Migs the only functioning sensor was the sekeer of IR missiles under the wings (a big kudos for for the courage of the Serbian pilots to fly in those conditions)

The fact is that in almost all of USA/NATO fighters dueling the enemy aircrafts as well as being technically inferior, they were also in poor condition of maintenance with many systems that do not work (and dont forget the AWACS cover)... none of the 6 mig-29s shot down had systems operating at 100% and in fact the producer officially declares that the Mig-29 is not yet "combat proven".(and under some points of view is right).

And also the claim of a kill ratio for AMRAAM of only 40%.is probably wrong ... in most cases are launched 2 missiles for each target... so a 100% kill ratio duel become a 50% missiles kill ratio