i think the non-technical idiotic media has made us believe that an active BVR missile can be launched and the fighter locks on and leaves the engagement..there is nothing of this sort in the real world where there are multiple engagements as well as other factors…also the thing about the baby BVR missile i think it is a great capability…i think the p5 cannot be mounted on the wingtips therefore why not carry derby and develop an derby Ir version if it can be made small….i think that is where it is headed….no matter how good the p5 or aim-9x is the dual seeker derby,amraam or mica will still be more flexible then the aim-9x,asraam or p5…the f/a-22 is at a sort of disadvantage with its side weapon bays in that they can only carry the aim-9 and not an amraam size missile however one could always go in for bulging weapon bays etc..and northrop is allready trying that out….the advantage of ABVR’s is still significant although almost every pilot i have talked to seems to want the sparrow to stik around for some time if not for its in your face capability rather then the numerical presence..i think the mica IR is the way to go and other missile manufacters such as raytheon and isreili manuf. will follow soot either now or later.

In fact, that would be possible. Russians claim the R-77 can be fired even from MiG-ATS, which as such does not possess any Doppler radar device. Czechs claim that L-159A can fire AMRAAM. Anyway, we should understand the word *can* as *is theoretically able, but only within the range of the active seeker*. Of course, such tactics of using the thing w/o midcourse updates would impair the effectivity of use of the missile concerned. If any pilot tried to get rid of two or three $800.000 missiles for nothing, he surely can kiss his Air Force carreer goodbye.