Forum: F-16 Armament & Stores

AIM-132, this weapon was tested on an F-16 at Eglin. RAAF and RAF use it and it is in the plan for the RAF JSF-STOVL.

This page gives one a good overview of it's public consumption ability.

http://www.ausairpower.net/API-ASRAAM-Analysis.html

F-16.net Sponsor

Thanks for the info Smile

.

Now, which would you take - the ASRAAM or an AIM-9X ?

I'm happy with either, thank you. But I'm biased for the 9X though. OK, I'll admit it...the Python 5 too.

parrothead wrote:

Thanks for the info Smile

.

Now, which would you take - the ASRAAM or an AIM-9X ?

Heck if I know. Which can you get more for on E-Bay? Laughing

Perhaps not such a difficult choice. AIM-9X - 5inch motor, not much faster than a AIM-9M and a TVC pack that does nothing for you after the motor has burnt out. ASRAAM - 6.5inch motor, low drag, looks to me like it would get the first shot first kill that you need. Python 5 must have very high drag – just how many wings and fin can you fit on a missile??

IRIS-T for me Very Happy

I was the lead engineer on ASRAAM from 1993 to 1998 for the F-16 and I spent a lot of time at Eglin. Here is the a pic of me (In the Yellow hat, & now close shaved..lol), guy next to me was the FTE, the USAF guy was the weapons toad at Eglin, and then my British BAe buddies who worked the program.

This is the first ASRAAM (Instrumented) fired from an F-16.

Cheers,

ViperDude

Very cool! Thanks for sharing. Smile

Boman wrote:

IRIS-T for me Very Happy

Same here

Iris-T doesn't really "do it" for me, all it really is is a Aim-9 merged with an R-73 Smile

Between ASRAAM and 9X, ASRAAM every time, can pull a full 180 as it leaves the rail, 100% engagement envelope in relation to launch aircraft, loal, BVR capability. Couple it to the sensor suite on something like Typhoon or JSF (eg. capable of accurately tracking aircraft immediately behind it), no need for rearward pointing missiles, just fire it and the missile will go after the target itself pulling a 180 off the rail!

Then again they are built to two different doctrines....
9X = High terminal manouveurability.
ASRAAM = Awesome initial manouveurability, unrivalled speed, and good terminal manouveurability.

Andy

Does anyone have cost figures for any of these?

Last edited by donk14N on Oct 29, 2007 - 03:29 PM; edited 1 time in total

Python 5 would eat both for lunch. But considering the Python 5 cost a heck of alot more, I guess it should be better.

I've seen video of both missiles at work, supposedly Python 5 can make a 180% turn, but on their own website they show it on a grainy hud film shooting a low flying uav (wow) without any discernable changes in degrees of the shot. Then take a look at aim-9x video, I don't think there is any comparison. www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g4_jzqBJnA

Isn't the IRIS-T a much more radical upgrade over the AIM-9M than the AIM-9X?

The Python 5 has the same maneuvering characteristics as it's predecessor, the Python 4. Where the difference is, is in the seeker. The Python 5's seeker is awesome. It has an IIR seeker, that can identify the type of aircraft. Unlike other IR missiles which go after engine exhaust heat (or other sources of heat from an all aspect missile), the Python seeker (after identifying the target) locks on to the most vulnerable areas (i.e. cockpit). It also does not depend on thrust vectoring to achieve it's super maneuverability (that is why it has 18 different control surfaces). It has a two stage motor, one for initial thrust and one for chase. There is so much more to this missile (than what I had time to type) it is sick. But again look at how much a Python 5 cost compared to the cost of an AIM-132 or an AIM-9x. I would hope that it would be a better missile.