BW, regarding MICA acceleration and range v. other missiles, here are some observations.  First, eveyone here understands that MICA boosts up to very high speed, quicker than does other longer-ranged radar-guided missiles (e.g., AMRAAM).  We've agreed with/told you that for years now.  That is not in dispute.

 

Look at Prof. Fleeman's (a former Raytheon employee, by the way, gee I wonder how Herald knew to find that briefing excerpted from Fleeman's book?  ;-)  ) briefing.  Never mind the exact numbers for now, let's just learn from the general principles.  On Slide 42, that's the shape of the typical boost + sustain motor in missiles such as AMRAAM.  MICA's motor is all boost, and only has the first vertical rectangle.  Now look on Slide 46, that's the shape of the typical velocity curve of a boost + sustain missile like AMRAAM.  MICA's would be just the boost portion immediately followed by the coast portion.  Then Slide 47 is one way to show how that velocity over time translates into distance flown.  One problem with defining the "range" of an air-to-air missile is defining the conditions at which the missile's flight is determined to be "over."  Personally, I'm wondering if the missile in the briefing is trying to maintain 20,000ft altitude (i.e., tracking a co-altitude target), because it seems more like it's just flying ballistically and is actually ending its flight by impacting the ground, but I'll press on.

 

Now to stick in some estimated numbers, and to try to point out what they mean.  Frankly I couldn't care less if you believe the numbers, they are what they are.  These numbers are all approximate, and assume the same initial starting conditions, including no lofting flight profile.  MICA will boost for a few seconds and peak at M4+, maybe about M4.5.  After that it is coasting toward its target.  AMRAAM will boost for a few seconds up to M3.5+, and then sustain for another ten seconds or so, and get up to maybe at most M4.  After that it is coasting toward its target.  If the AMRAAM curves look like the ones in the briefing, then the MICA curves will peak higher during the boost phase, then proceed to taper off during the coast phase.  What will happen if overlayed on Slides 42 and 47 is that the MICA curve initially peak higher than the AMRAAM curve, but then because the AMRAAM is still boosting while MICA is already coasting, MICA will at some point cross over the AMRAAM curve.  Translation:  MICA can get to the target faster than AMRAAM if the target is relatively close (say maybe out to 5 to 10 miles away at time of launch), but AMRAAM will actually get to the target first if the target is relatively far away at time of launch, and also actually have a longer range overall than MICA.  This will still be true if both follow a lofted profile v. a longer-range target (see Slide 16), but I suspect MICA doesn't even do that, and if not then AMRAAM far and away outranges MICA.

 

Summation:  Fired side by side at the same target, MICA will get to it first if it is relatively near, but AMRAAM will get to it first if relatively far, and go much further in total.  I am certain Dwightlooi, Herald, Phaid, and Leroy would all back me up on this, and if you had any rational common-sense, that would be enough for you to accept it's true, regardless of whether you think it should be true or not.