Know what you are talking about before you challenge Mough. He at least has some credibility here.

 

The only similarity between the missiles is that they are both heat seekers. In fact, the AIM9X is playing catchup to the Iris-t in terms of performance.

 

IIR seeker, tail control, and about the same size?

IIRC, the IRIS-T was developed after the Germans pulled out of ASRAMM (intended to be AIM-132) when they found out about the agility of the missiles fitted to the Mig 29s they acquired from East Germany. Since ASRAAM predates the AIM-9X (the US pulled out of ASRAAM for similar reasons, but later), doesn't that mean that the AIM-9X is a clone of the IRIS-T?

...when IRIS-T stood for InfraRed Improved Sidewinder?

(have to dig out a late 1980s/early 1990s All the Worlds' Aircraft to be sure whether the -T back then stood for Tail-controlled or Thrust-vector-controlled...)

 

An AIM-9 clone, no.

But the ancestry is there,

even if in current inception it is a completely different beast.

hey heorot i guess somebody forgot to tell you that the IRIS-T was  designed on specs that were to be an improvement on the AIM-9(m i think).The company that made IRIS-T, BGT, would build upon their involvement with AIM-9 sidewinder production.Also, its important to note how many times both missiles have been used in anger, with the sidewinder coming away the clear winner. It's also important to note that for 50 years NO missile has done the job better or cheaper in combat, than the sidewinder. 

  The IRIS-T does have thrust vectoring the nozzle was built by a Canadian company.

Yes the IRIS-T was designed to replace the Sidewinder's, but a clone mean's it contains most if not all similar part's  or has a close resemblence to it's orginal, neither of which the I-T has, the only real similarity is that they both fly through the air

I refer you to Moughs post above. Try reading and learning before you demonstrate your ignorance again.

 

Anyone can be ignorant of facts: stupidity is when you refuse to learn.