Talk:AIM-120 AMRAAM
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
AIM-120D is not in servise, it is just a planned upgrade, then why is it mentioned as a variant, With range pointed out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.46.37 (talk) 22:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Flags in Infobox
The use of flag icons is not recommended by both WP:AIR and WP:MILHIST. In addition, the Infobox is not intended as a detailed list, merely an overview. Therefore, I propose ammending the "Launch platform" field to only list the aricraft, not the individial users. This information would then be moved to the operators list in the text, which currently only lists the countries. - BillCJ 16:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. - Aerobird 18:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fox Three
Text states: brevity code Fox Three in radio communication. Is this correct? Even if it is, we need a verifiable source. Thanks. - BillCJ 01:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- The Fox 3 call was originated with Phoenix and has been in use for 3 decades or more. AMRAAM has better range than Sparrow and terminal active capability like Phoenix so it qualified to also use the "Fox 3" radio call. Haven't seen it written down though, but I'll keep my eyes open for it. Cheers, HJ HJ 06:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I know I had read that the Phoenix was given "Fox 3", that's why I wanted confirmation on it now being used by the Amraam. Your word is good enough for me, but we still have to have weitten source. I'll check around and see if I can find anything also. - BillCJ 07:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Fox Three signifies an ARH guidance system, so Phoenix, and now AMRAAM both can use the reference. 141.213.198.251 08:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry guys but I pulled this off: When an AMRAAM missile is being launched, NATO pilots use the brevity code Fox Three in radio communication.[citation needed] My understanding was that 'Fox Three' was for guns. Suggest that until a citation can be given, may be better to leave it off entirely. BlakJakNZ 11:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
You can hear them using "Fox Three" when firing the AIM-120 in this sound clip by the way: http://www.flight-level.com/dogfight/splash.mp3 A MiG-29 was destroyed in this sound clip. From here: http://www.flight-level.com/dogfight/dirk.html Zeroyon 05:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I have attached the following screen shot of a PDF file of the AFTTP 3-1 Volume 1 Attachment 1 - The Air Force Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures, 3-1 Volume 1 - Tactical Employment, General Planning and Employment Considerations. While the main manual is classified, the Attachment 1 is unclassified, as you can see in the graphic.
Dougsnow 20:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Yugoslavia, Irak etc. etc.
Not compares in AMRAAM page.. Combat results are far less than the 95% claimed --Stefanomencarelli 15:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Range?
searching thru the article, i could not find the actual range of the missile, which is a VERY IMPORTANT info of a missile (missile range, missile dimensions and weight, warhead weight, effective range...) 80.31.103.68 21:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
- It's the main Infobox at the top-right, "General characteristics" section, right after "Speed", and before "Warhead". - BillCJ 23:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lot of empty boasting
> Once in its terminal mode, the missile's advanced electronic counter countermeasures (ECCM) support and good maneuverability mean that the chance of it hitting or exploding close to the target is high (on the order of 90%) <
This is probably bogus. The size of AIM-120's radar dish is that of an ashtray. The size of its radar chip package is the size of a food tin can. Modern fighters have built-in jammers, plus they can carry underwing ECM pods, which add up to half-ton of equally advanced electronics. The airplane's jammer defence will win, simply because it has an incomparably larger number of transistors and EM emitters onboard to fool the Amraam.
AIM-120's reputation is based on kills against 1960's era former yugoslav Galeb light jets, which had no electronics whatsoever and old soviet / french jetfighters ran by incompetent arabs in Iraq. It is very unlikely the AMRAAM could hit a 4 or 4.5 gen fighter, if it is properly loaded with extra ECM pods.
Also, latest Sukhoi variants will reportedly feature a very rapid Gatling rotary cannon instead of a single barreled one and they will have a last ditch "kamikaze" defence mode, where the incoming amraam is aimed at by intercepting its radar signal, then the plane automatically turns head-on and evaporates the missile by autocannon fire (the method is based on the Kashtan close-in defence system for naval ships). 82.131.210.162 (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
- I forgot to mention that home-on-jamming is useless, because all modern fighters use towed jammers, which hang on a very long rope, so the explosion will not hurt the aircraft, even if the AMRAAM hits the jammer directly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.210.162 (talk) 10:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)