Page 1 of 1
Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 1:53 am
by User2
Here's an enthralling article related to the lattest incident.
http://www.combataircraft.net/2017/06/2 ... rn-aim-9x/
Have a nice read.
Upd: Oh, it seems it was already posted in the news thread.
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:57 am
by Dysta
ORIGINAL: User2
Upd: Oh, it seems it was already posted in the news thread.
As it should be.
Maybe I will spend time to replicate this on CMANO, see what conditions will cause AIM-9X missed, and why AIM-120 is used instead.
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 1:52 pm
by ExNusquam
Bad die roll.
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:54 am
by Dimitris
"Is this a known bug?" [:D]
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:19 am
by Cik
defective seekerhead maybe. then again the PK% of every era's military planners is generally revealed as incorrigibly optimistic in the best case.
see: vietnam etc.
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 5:59 pm
by KungPao
it is better to be lucky than good.
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:23 pm
by Gunner98
But lucky has an earlier expiry date [;)]
RE: Article: su-22 vs aim-9x
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:30 pm
by SeaQueen
That's my theory. When something is said to be effective most of the time, you try it once, and it fails, it doesn't mean it's not effective most of the time. It probably means you were unlucky. If he shot 3 and all of them were decoyed, then I'd be more suspicious that there was a systematic problem. None the less, I'm sure some people are going to look into it.
ORIGINAL: ExNusquam
Bad die roll.