Talk:ASRAAM

message: I'm almost sure that the ASRAAM is tail-aspect only.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.168.182 (talk) 02:32, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Tail Aspect Only

message: Does the Swiss Air Force really use the ASRAAM? I was under the impression they used AIM-9P and AIM-120B and were currently replacing the Sidewinders with the AIM-9X model. RKloti 19:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes from this link  it would appear you are correct. Riddley 00:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Swiss usage

message: Why does this missile have a US designation when it's not in U.S. service? I understand the development history, but it's still odd, is AIM-132 the RAF designation?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.150.48.194 (talk) 02:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Although it's not totally clear in the text, both the AIM-120 and AIM-132 were part of a program by some NATO nations to produce new medium- and short-range missiles. The US developed the AMRAAM, while the UK anf Germany were to develop the ASRAAM. All partners, and hopefully the other NATO nations as well, were to buy both missiles. In the 1990s, the US decided to develop its own short-range missile, as did Germany. THe UK continued development of the ASRAAM, and the designation seems to have stuck. - BillCJ (talk) 02:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: US designation?

message: Are the indians still planning on using it? Can't find any new information with that respect. 87.194.223.183 (talk) 23:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  indian usage? 

message: I see this was mooted about 4 years ago. I'd like to raise it again - Why does the page name include the US designation for a weapon system they don't use, have never used and were only peripherally involved in?  --Narson ~ Talk •  18:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Move? 

message: Germany left the program in July 1989? Then this cannot have been motivated by R-73, for R-73's performance was understood only after the German reunification of 1990. Lastdingo (talk) 13:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reunification and German exit 

message: Suddenly Youtube is an acceptabble source to define it's range?Cantab1985 (talk) 06:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly it's a professional video.  ASRAAM has the same Roxel rocket motor as CAMM and that manages >25km from a ground launch. (http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/uk-complex-weapons/common-anti-air-modular-missile/, http://www.mbda-systems.com/camm-solution/camm/), despite being heavier than ASRAAM.  VL MICA, which is literally a ground-launched MICA only manages 20km, meanwhile MICA is rated at 50km when air launched.http://www.mbda-systems.com/ground-based-air-defence/vl-mica/  I therefore think it's fundamentally obvious that a lighter missile with the same motor does way, way, way in excess of 25km when air launched.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.181.164 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

text: Range 25km or 50km? This article mentioned both of them. One of the information should use.Nafis Fuad Ayon (talk) 06:50, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

text: I have given the official information from official website. The actual range is 25km. Nafis Fuad Ayon (talk) 07:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Range 

message: Second paragraph/third sentence at New ASRAAM. I can't tell if the 'RAF' is a typo or not. It starts out talking about Germans but the following sentences talks about the Brits. 50.64.119.38 (talk) 01:59, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  G or R? 

message: "carry a larger warhead to meet the requirements expressed by the AIM-9X program"
The ASRAAM has a larger warhead than the AIM-9R (formerly known as X), 22 lb to 21 in the X. Its larger size also offers more capacity for upgrading it. This statement seems suspect. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable statement 

message: The Fighter Mafia and self proclaimed Reformers are individuals who have had no actual effect on influencing US fighter or weapons design from their inception. They always claim to be a larger part of the design process than they are and references to them do not contribute anything to this article. A full removal of mentions of them in this article would not negatively impact it 51.7.108.179 (talk) 20:22, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to reformers and fighter mafia 

message: On the wiki page for the Tornado ADV it says it could carry ASRAAMs but under launch platforms there is only mentions the Typhoon and the Lightning, and the history section doesn't mention Tornado ADV but Tornado GR4
I'm assuming the ”launch platforms” is only planes currently in service but why is the ADV not mentioned in the history? 81.231.117.7 (talk) 20:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tornado ADV