The F-16 and F-18 lost head-on launch capability using AIM-9L

When the F-16 and F-18 use AIM-9L, the AIM-9L can't lock the target during the whole process of the enemy's head-to-head approach. After being launched, it becomes a direct rocket, but AI's aim-9l can still attack head to head.

up to ed

I can confirm. Does it work differently with other aircraft, like F-15? The Lima is supposed to be very similar to the Mike.

Can confirm the Aim-9L works just fine head-on in the F-15.

Yep its been known for a while, 9Ls are useless in the F-16/18 rn. The 9L should be all aspect like the 9M. From the AIM-9L SMC:

The M is behaving in a funny way too. It will give tone way out at 8nm head-on, then go silent at about 6nm, and reacquire at 2.5nm.

Maybe the bandit went into AB, then dropped to mil?

Is this a sim feature because newer aircrafts like F16 and F18 no longer have cooling capability for the old missiles? I did try to turn on the IR COOL switch on F18 but it doesn't seem to affect anything.

If that were the case 9Ms would cool either

F-14/15, A-10A/C/C2 have all-aspect lock with 9L.

Noticed the same.

AIM-9L is all-aspect on all planes except the F-16C and F/A-18C.

On 8/20/2020 at 10:40 PM, dundun92 said:

Yep its been known for a while, 9Ls are useless in the F-16/18 rn. The 9L should be all aspect like the 9M. From the AIM-9L SMC:

Does it actually not track bellow the min seeker range? In DCS I mean.

7 hours ago, Cmptohocah said:

Does it actually not track bellow the min seeker range? In DCS I mean.

 

AFAIK no, id guess this is some sort of LOS rate limit but I really dont know, its pretty close to Rmin though, so its probably related to some pre-launch constraint.

On 2/2/2021 at 6:00 AM, Cmptohocah said:

Does it actually not track bellow the min seeker range? In DCS I mean.

No, this part has to do with fuze arming and the missile's ability to physically steer to the target.   So you have minimum time of flight for arming plus maneuvering constraints.

On 09/02/2021 at 3:14 PM, GGTharos said:

 

No, this part has to do with fuze arming and the missile's ability to physically steer to the target.   So you have minimum time of flight for arming plus maneuvering constraints.

On the graph above it says: "minimum seeker tracking range".

Dunno if they meant minimum range in general.

Like someone suggested it might be a gimbal rate thing, but this makes no sense vs. a tail-on, non-maneuvering target.  Minimum and maximum ranges are a combination of things, usually not a single thing.

2 hours ago, GGTharos said:

Like someone suggested it might be a gimbal rate thing, but this makes no sense vs. a tail-on, non-maneuvering target.  Minimum and maximum ranges are a combination of things, usually not a single thing.

Not really an expert on the subject at all, so pardon the ignorance, but is there a possibility of the seeker being oversaturated at below min distances?

IMHO if this was the case it would be a lot easier to avoid a heat seeking missile IRL as it would lose guidance for a significant TOF in the beam for example.  Also consider that it will happily track the sun or extended targets like clouds etc.