the AIM9X is a great leap forward to the aim9m that we will be getting. Considering that if we really are US best frined and strong ally we must have tried for AIM9X indeed.
here is some description from not so authentic source, that is, wikipedia but trust me it is fine enough when it comes to such less detiled description of systems. i mean no one bothers to edit such harmless info....
so here you go!!
regards!
These newer and improved IR missiles have flare-rejection logic built in. Reducing your heat signature is huge. Still, the best answer is to not get shot at in the first place.
The Pk (probability of kill) is high. All I can say is to look to the Falklands, where 24 missiles were fired, and 22 kills resulted. And that was the AIM-9L. Now we have the M and the X --the latter is said to be formidable -- meaning if we get these then it will provide a HUGE boost to our offensive/defensive capabilities
In the 1980's, the AMRAAM had a little brother, the ASRAAM. The ASRAAM program was killed when they realized that there was little to improve upon with the AIM-9 series.
Best answer of all - kill them first or get killed. That comes from good radar methodology and a longer-ranged missile like AMRAAM.
You could put a AIM-9 on a jeep if you wanted, and it'll work, if you can get the seeker pointed at the heat source. It's an IR missile, no radar required.
Still, for optimum results on any platform, there needs to be an indication of where the seeker is looking, the seeker field of view, or FOV. The FOV is narrow. You can't just roughly point it and shoot, it'll go ''bonkers''