| Zephyr Net http://jkpeterson.net/forum/ |
|
| Will someone please resolve the "fox" issue for me http://jkpeterson.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1381 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | DukeB-120th [ Mon Oct 11, 2004 16:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Will someone please resolve the "fox" issue for me |
It has been eating at me as to when you say Fox, Fox One, etc. I have seen a partial explanation, but key word Partial... There has to be some logic behind it. |
|
| Author: | Centurian57_369th [ Mon Oct 11, 2004 16:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fox One: SARH guided (AIM-7) Fox Two: IR guided (AIM-9) Fox Three: AR guided (AIM-120) |
|
| Author: | DukeB-120th [ Mon Oct 11, 2004 20:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
hehh... that simple... I can remember that... Thanks cent |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Wed Oct 13, 2004 16:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually that isnt all of it... There has been a variation lately in usage... Fox... Fox...2 is two Fox 2 launches, associated with the new AIM-9X... Fox..... Fox-Fox... is a Fox 1 and a Fox 2 launch back to back, associated with the new AIM-9X... Fox 3 ..... Fox-Fox... is a Fox 3 and a Fox 2 launch back to back, again associated with the new AIM-9X missile... These new codes have been verififed in new F-15 luanches of these missiles on various audio and videos recently released... CAG out... |
|
| Author: | DukeB-120th [ Thu Oct 14, 2004 22:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
oooohh uhhhhh head is spinning... Also what does the new sidewinder x variant have to do with the fox codes? |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Fri Oct 15, 2004 17:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I dont know... Ihave no idea why they have used the code variations... perhaps it has to do with its wider engagement cone to give more warnign to othere friendly aircraft in the immediate combat area... And that area is larger now with its higher rnage... CAG out... |
|
| Author: | Centurian57_369th [ Fri Oct 15, 2004 17:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The AIM-9X is IIR guided though. Does that mean it can still go after something that it isn't trained on? I imagine the AIM-9L/M can if you get in its way and present a much larger heat-signature (i.e. AB on). |
|
| Author: | DukeB-120th [ Sat Oct 16, 2004 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, I suppose thats the whole idea of how flares work, no? But otherwise the modified fox code isnt used when using the older sidewinder variants? |
|
| Author: | Centurian57_369th [ Sat Oct 16, 2004 23:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes flares do, but on IIR they have no effect so I don't see why the threat unless you just happened to be so wrong and got tagged directly by getting in the flight way. |
|
| Author: | CAG Hotshot [ Tue Oct 19, 2004 02:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The reason the AIM-9X rejects flares is due to its logic in its counter measure rejections. Flares rapidly decelerate and are thus easy to reject... the IIR sensor on the AIM-9X is designed to track heat in specific wavelengths... Those wavelengths are on all aircraft... even your buddies... Also the AIM-9X uses Israeli reaquire technology to try to re-engage targets... CAG out... |
|
| Author: | DukeB-120th [ Tue Oct 19, 2004 21:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
hmmm sounds pretty fancy... What is "IIR"? |
|
| Author: | Centurian57_369th [ Tue Oct 19, 2004 23:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Imaging Infrared. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|