Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DanielStarseer" data-source="post: 379883" data-attributes="member: 4021">Problems with Chaparral in general were part and partial to blame on the poorer performance of earlier-model surface-launched Sidewinders. The latest iterations of AIM-9X Blocks are considerably different beasts, only similar in original appearance. But the real improvements inside: newer solid state digital "missile-tronics" replacing older legacy analog-digital crossover era components, motor propellant improvements allowing greater thrust, acceleration, and "burn time" for improved range,improved actuator controls allowing greater maneuverability... there's reason behind AIM-9X still being of the Sidewinder family and still the predominant US close-range AAM, as opposed to a completely new weapon in the AIM-120 AMRAAM when compared to its AIM-7 Sparrow ancestor.US Army experimentation with the Avenger pedestal turret follow-on, leveraging off the "ChapFire" modularity, in addition to the various developmental multi-celled Area Fires SHORAD/C-RAM launcher developments mounted on FMTVs,use the latest AIM-9X derivatives (among other considerations), and would be far more capable in performance and reliability than what the original Chaparral and any perceived upgrades of its day would've allowed.What doesn't help is that the US Army never really had a clear and concise picture of just what envelope it wants a SHORAD SAM system to cover: there's the carry-it-anywhere MANPADS Stinger, but beyond that, advocates suggest "anywhere an AIM-9 can be mounted, for an additional several million $$ more, we can mount Stunner or SL-AMRAAM instead"....  Cycle continues ad infinitum (Iron Dome most likely won't ever evolve into a localized anti-air umbrella in US service) and nothing of note ever gets fielded.Food for thought.</blockquote>

Verification: Name the company which designed the F-117A Stealth Fighter