Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Share
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  ahmedfire on Mon May 16, 2011 9:17 am

    This is from April 2004 and apparently it was an interview with the SD-10 designer. The original SD-10 was superior to the R-77 and the AIM-120 A/B and was very close to the AIM-120C. So the fact that the SD-10A is superior to AIM-120C should be no suprise!!

    Also note that for ALL THE MISSILES the the targets are approaching at greather than Mach 1.2. So for a missile with a max speed of Mach 4, the target will be hit at about 70% of the given max range. I say 70% because the missile does not travel at Mach 4, the average speed for it flight is a lot less.

    Some translations and points discovered by Hyperwarp in the AFM concerning an magazine published article of an interview with the designer of the SD-10.

    "Efective combat altitude 0-25Km.
    Ability to engage target 10kms higher or lower than launch altitude.
    Range at 10Km altitude at M1.2 target at same altitude =70Km.
    No escape zone for F-16 type target = 35-45km
    Max overload=38G, Speed =4M
    Plans to be also used as SAM system."

    "Designer was asked at end to rate BVR AAMs. He rated Meteor as best BVR AAM, then AIM-120C, then his SD-10, then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Skyflash at equal fourth, then Derby, and last of all, MICA."

    avatar
    nightcrawler

    Posts : 535
    Points : 651
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  nightcrawler on Tue May 17, 2011 10:53 am


    "Designer was asked at end to rate BVR AAMs. He rated Meteor as best BVR AAM, then AIM-120C, then his SD-10, then AIM-120A/B, R-77, Skyflash at equal fourth, then Derby, and last of all, MICA."

    I don't know whether he spoke some sanity because at our defence forum notable people calibrated SD-10 at 70% to that of AiM-120!!
    ...& because AiM-120 & R-77 are close match SD-10 will also be 70% to the performance of the latter

    As a further note I must mention that for SEAD operations we have successfully integrated Brazilian MAR-1 with our JF-17

    http://www.geo.tv/12-3-2008/29986.htm

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 18, 2011 5:19 am

    This is from April 2004 and apparently it was an interview with the SD-10 designer. The original SD-10 was superior to the R-77 and the AIM-120 A/B and was very close to the AIM-120C. So the fact that the SD-10A is superior to AIM-120C should be no suprise!!

    The current in service R-77 is actually the analog RVV-AE.

    I would expect the designer of the SD-10 to claim superiority over otherwise largely unknown weapons.
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  ahmedfire on Fri May 20, 2011 11:24 am

    take this;

    Besides TVC and an IIR seeker, this last point is the main difference between the Mica IR and its russian cousin, the R-27 T/ET. Indeed, the lack of data link prevents the R-27 T to be locked after launch and therefore limit its effective firing range to the range of its IR seeker. That the reason why, unlike the Mica IR, it's not a truly BVR IR missile but rather a long endurance FOX 2 intended to catch up fleeing targets at 10-15 km range.

    Despite all those qualities that make it one the most dangerous air defense missile on the battlefield today, the Mica has some drawbacks :

    It's small and light, which is good, but that limited size also prevents the Mica to compete with the last versions of the larger AIM-120C7/D amraam when it comes to raw effective range.
    It is very expensive due to the rather limited number of units produced, compared to the amraam
    It has a one way datalink whereas up&down datalinks are becoming the norm for BVR missiles.

    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/2010/11/mica-replacement-into-question.html


    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  ahmedfire on Fri May 20, 2011 11:32 am

    what is the disadvantage of being one way datalink ?

    may be more dependable on AWACS ..

    so i see that Gripen data link is better than Rafale !

    Rafale will be equipped with a less capable version of METEOR, because Rafale lacks a 2-way missile guidance link ( i think that )


    Last edited by ahmedfire on Fri May 20, 2011 12:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 20, 2011 12:08 pm

    First of all the R-27T and R-27ET don't have data links because they don't need them.

    When they entered service BVR was a dream and no one in their right mind would fire on a long range target without properly checking it out first by closing to visual range.

    The purpose of the IR guided R-27s was to allow low level launches against receeding targets.

    The tracking and lock on range of most radars in fighter aircraft is limited by a number of factors and a low level target flying directly away from you is a particularly difficult target to get a lock on, let alone engage with an SARH missile.

    The effective range of a SPARROW for instance against a low flying F-111 would probably be no better than 15-20km.

    An R-27ET could probably double that range because of the extra fuel and the fact that the F-111 in AB presents an excellent IR target.

    An SR-71 could also be engaged at long range because of its IR signature but most of the time the R-27T and R-27ET are carried as chase down weapons.

    Now to the two way datalink... the effectiveness of any radar is effected by distance to the target. Having a two way datalink is like having a video pod for the Kh-59M (AS-18 Kazoo). It means that when the missile gets to the target area it can send back data so that the launch aircraft might decide to change the designated target for the missile.
    For instance if fired a a radar return... as the missile closed with the target it detect within it field of view the weak IR signature of an F-22 shaped aircraft.

    Imaging IR missiles store 3D IR signatures and can identify a range of aircraft based on this database.

    If you fire a missile at what you think is an F-16 and on its way to the target it sees to its side what clearly appears to be an F-22 then using a 2 way datalink you could command the missile to turn and engage the F-22... which is a higher priority target.

    It is really mainly useful for ramjet or scramjet powered missiles that can throttle up or down because a rocket powered missile is just coasting and trying not to burn up too much energy on the way to its target area.
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  ahmedfire on Sun May 22, 2011 6:17 pm

    Garry:

    so,it's not abig advantage (2 way data link)...


    Rafale will be equipped with a less capable version of METEOR, because Rafale lacks a 2-way missile guidance link

    think that could be true ?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 23, 2011 3:24 am

    The Meteor is the exception because of its propulsion.

    With a ramjet it is possible to throttle the power, so after the initial boost given by the rocket booster the ramjet kicks in... now for a long range shot the rocket booster and the initial ramjet burn could be used to gain altitude and then level off with a medium level throttle on the ramjet to cruise to the target area.

    The lower throttle setting means it takes longer to get to the target area but it also means it will get there with fuel to burn to sustain turns and change targets.

    With this performance and using an IIR seeker this means that after getting to the target area 3 minutes later the IIR seeker can scan the area up close and find targets and send information about those targets back to the launch aircraft and the launch aircraft can select the target to attack.

    If the Russians develop this sort of technology for their ramjet or scramjet powered R-77 missile they are working on this would mean that in combat the slightest hint that a stealth target is present... ie no X band AESA return but hints of L band AESA returns and the odd Link datalink signal he could fire a long range scramjet powered missile in a direction to look for targets... the ultimate UCAV with its own built in warhead payload.


    So yes, a two way datalink makes sense for a ramjet powered AAM, but for rocket powered missiles that burn and reach top speed and then coast the rest of the way finding a new target in a different location is a risk because the missile might not have enough energy left to get the new target and so if you retarget you will likely hit neither.

    I don't see why Rafale could not be fitted with a two way datalink if it was considered worth it.

    Sounds like the makers of Typhoon trying to put down Rafale to me.

    The integration of Meteor should include datalinks so it comes down to whether you want to pay for the two way or to buy the cheaper missile model.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Tue Nov 08, 2011 4:15 pm

    Some update on PAK-FA A2A missile from yefim gordon new book , Russian Airpower New Edition.

    Several advanced air to air missile is under development for PAK-FA, at ranges up to 250 km medium range AAM designated 180-PD and powered by Ramjet engine may be used.

    A shortrange of this weapon designated K-77M derivative of R-77 having a solid fuel motor is used up to ranges of 110-140 km , it has active/passive seeker head allowing missile to home on seeker source.

    For close range engagement T-50 may use K-74M2 short range AAM , the missile has a matrix IR seeker head capable of discerning real targets from decoy and having twice the lock on range of R-73 AAM.

    The K-74M2 has thrust vectoring control , making it agile enough to nail not only manouverable modern fighter but even incoming AAM



    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Nov 08, 2011 11:27 pm

    Austin wrote:Some update on PAK-FA A2A missile from yefim gordon new book , Russian Airpower New Edition.

    Several advanced air to air missile is under development for PAK-FA, at ranges up to 250 km medium range AAM designated 180-PD and powered by Ramjet engine may be used.

    A shortrange of this weapon designated K-77M derivative of R-77 having a solid fuel motor is used up to ranges of 110-140 km , it has active/passive seeker head allowing missile to home on seeker source.

    For close range engagement T-50 may use K-74M2 short range AAM , the missile has a matrix IR seeker head capable of discerning real targets from decoy and having twice the lock on range of R-73 AAM.

    The K-74M2 has thrust vectoring control , making it agile enough to nail not only manouverable modern fighter but even incoming AAM





    Gret news Austin, very thanks !!

    I too have ordered the book, but have still not received it (i hope only that it will not arrive within two weeks when work will absorb me completely for a while...).



    The K-74M2 has thrust vectoring control , making it agile enough to nail not only manouverable modern fighter but even incoming AAM

    If that information will reveal itself true and with reasonably good Pk , this weapon will become quickly very,very VERY popular in Russian Air Force Laughing Laughing , it would be one of those game changer capabilities


    Several advanced air to air missile is under development for PAK-FA, at ranges up to 250 km medium range AAM designated 180-PD and powered by Ramjet engine may be used.

    Like GarryB has noted this ramjet propeled weapon,if completed and introduced in service, will almost blend the boundaries between medium range and long range AAMs and with all the advantages now offered by Meteor ....simply fearful !!
    I think that ,likely, the domestic version of RVV-BD ,with ranges ostensibly between 300-350 km (a derivative of the R-37M now operative with Mig-31BM ), will no become a common weapon mounted on SU PAKFA/ HAL FGFA except for extreme missions , infact "izdelie 180-PD" will be capable to carry out almost any operational task of medium-long range missiles but much more efficiently.

    R-77 having a solid fuel motor is used up to ranges of 110-140 km , it has active/passive seeker head allowing missile to home on seeker source.


    The seeker of this missile is very interesting probably ,this seeker from Agat showed last year







    It will likely become a true "must" also for new generation of ground and ,even more, naval based SAM systems .

    Capability to home on seeker source ,moreover, allude propably to capability to intercept enemy AAM when their radar become active ....seem that between this izdelie 180 and K-74M2 has been opened a new front foreseeing active war against enemy AAM !!
    A very, very interesting development.


    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Wed Nov 09, 2011 6:52 am

    What Yefim Gordon confirms is that the RVV-PD and R-77M program is alive.

    I think it would be waste of resources to shut off a ramjet program after having done the groundwork and displayed in early 90's , probably the newer one will take advantage of more modern solid fuel and seeker.

    The K-74M program is very interesting , its agile and sensitive enough to hit a AAM would mean to me that it would be used as a primary weapon against BVR missile , for WVR weapon depending on the engagement zone it would have too short a time to intercept it but BVR missile most likely.

    If K-74M even ends up having a range of R-73 i.e. ~30 km then the anti-missile missile is possible , with two way datalink a LOAL is on the cards as well.

    I wonder what kind of AAM are under development we will have to wait and see.

    Mindstorm the new book Russian Airpower New Edition is a much better book then the older one and has good details on every major program and upgrade with excellent photograph , certainly its worth having it.

    The new book does not mention more information on PAK-DA , perhaps the agency would have told him to not revel more , he has given good details on PAK-DA in his book Russian Strategic Aviation as too what are the requirements.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:54 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    I think that ,likely, the domestic version of RVV-BD ,with ranges ostensibly between 300-350 km (a derivative of the R-37M now operative with Mig-31BM )

    The book mentions R-37M maximum "kill" range at 280 km and along with modernised Mig-31BM can intercept target with maximum speed of Mach 6.

    The K-37 ( R-37 ) uses inertial midcourse guidance with radio command correction switching to semi-active or active guidance homing during terminal phase.

    The R-33S now has active radar homing with a kill range of 160 km , and kill probability against target pulling 4G is described as 60-80 %.

    Another interesting thing described for modernised Mig-31BM is that it allows support of exotic combat scenario , like attack targets with other fighter missile , i.e take over guidance of AAM launched by other fighters without switching on their radars.

    The Mig-31BM can track 24 targets and can attack 6 priority targets with long range R-37M missile . the maximum target detection range of radar is 240Km , has pictures of cockpit of modernised Mig-31BM

    The R-37 missile is designed to be dynamically unstable and boast of enhanced agility

    It seems in April 1994 the K-37 achieved a "world first" by destroying an aerial target at more than 300 km during a test launch Shocked

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm

    Makes an interesting read

    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/files/2008_RAND_Pacific_View_Air_Combat_Briefing.pdf

    pg 83

    Note: In addition to kills listed above, on 24 March 1999 an F-16AM of the Dutch Air Force damaged a Serb MiG-29 with a single AIM-120A. Also on 24 March another Serb MiG-29 was engaged by 2 or more US fighters and successfully evaded 3 AIM-120Cs.

    U.S. has recorded ten AIM-120 kills

    Four not Beyond Visual Range

    Fired 13 missiles to achieve 6 BVR kills Pk = 0.46*

    Iraqi MiGs were fleeing and non-maneuvering

    Serb J-21 had no radar or Electronic Countermeasures (ECM)

    US Army UH-60 not expecting attack; no radar or ECM

    Serb MiG-29 FULCRUMS had inoperative radars

    No reports of ECM use by any victim

    No victim had comparable BVR weapon

    Fights involved numerical parity or US numerical superiority

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:08 am

    The book mentions R-37M maximum "kill" range at 280 km and along with modernised Mig-31BM can intercept target with maximum speed of Mach 6.


    It refer probably to the maximum range at which, in tests, it achieved an hit ; that has nothing to do with the maximum engagement range of the same missile.




    Makes an interesting read

    Yes this was one of the two studies at which i had made reference.

    Note: The way in which it is expressed can be misleading, the total number of Aim-120 shooted has been 17 (it is specified very well at pag 20 (17 shoot for 10 kills for a Pk of 0,59 , if instead we subtract the 4 missiles employed well WVR , we obtain a Pk of 0,46 - 6 downing for 13 missiles employed - at BVR).

    Even more interesting is that this publication don't take into account the two Mig-25 avoiding 2 AIM-120A in 6 January 1999 over the Souther "no fly zone" (the two 2 MIG-25s in question always the 6 January 1999 avoided also 3 Sparrows from 2 F-15C and 2 Phoenix from 2 F-14s !!! )

    Is important to note that NONE of the aircraft ever downed by AMRAAM - all very old specimen ,often also horribly export downgraded versions ,with radar out of work for embargo or for jamming and outnubered 17:1 by enemies equiped with theirs most advanced fighters and with AWACS- have ever manoeuvered to avoid the incoming missiles except the normal manoeuvres during flight pact ,neither was even only aware to be under missile attack Very Happy Very Happy , (is important to note that ,to the contrary ,anytime a similar aircraft was aware of an attack and attempted any type of avoiding measures BVR missiles have failed to reach theirs targets almost systematically , all of that without any involvement of any ECM system !!

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:38 am

    What Yefim Gordon confirms is that the RVV-PD and R-77M program is alive.

    Well they cancelled the T-95 because of what they described publicly "obsolete" technology.

    The question becomes is ramjet state of the art because Meteor uses it, or will they decide that it is worth the effort and money to go for a scramjet design?

    A scramjet design, while more complex and needing greater precision in the hot section has the same drawbacks as a ramjet (ie requires volume and solid rocket booster), and also its advantages (lighter and the ability to restart the motor), but it would also have a speed advantage over any rocket... and high speed reduces engagement times which is critical in BVR combat.

    I think it would be waste of resources to shut off a ramjet program after having done the groundwork and displayed in early 90's , probably the newer one will take advantage of more modern solid fuel and seeker.

    I would think the improvements in technology and materials, and the transfer of "ramjet" design efforts to "scramjet" design efforts... if we look at the ramjet designs in Russia... the SA-6 was replaced by the SA-11, then the SA-17 and now a vertical launch model based on the naval VLS variant... they are all solid fuelled rockets.
    The two remaining fields where ramjet missiles are used are the ARM in the form of the Kh-31 and the Anti ship missile in the form of the Kh-31 and Oniks/Yakhont/Brahmos.

    The future directions for the Kh-31 is enlargement to increase range, and in the Oniks/Y/B is scramjet propulsion to increase speed.

    Now if the R-77PD is for internal carriage in a PAK FA then increasing its bulk to add fuel to extend range will be difficult.
    To change from a ramjet to a scramjet will be difficult and expensive, but the result will be a far better BVR missile.

    The K-74M program is very interesting , its agile and sensitive enough to hit a AAM would mean to me that it would be used as a primary weapon against BVR missile , for WVR weapon depending on the engagement zone it would have too short a time to intercept it but BVR missile most likely.

    Keep in mind they are talking about the K-74M2, which is no where near service.
    The K-74M will likely be revealed in the next 2-3 years as the base model Morfei.
    If it can be used as an anti AMRAAM/AIM-9X missile then you would want it to be as small as possible so you could carry more than the enemy currently carries AAMs.

    If you have 8 R-74M2s in your weapon bay and the target F-35 has 4 AMRAAMs, then he will be down to guns and you will be a missile armed fighter... also with guns.

    More important it means that an Su-35S could operate in the vicinity of stealth aircraft as being a thrust vector capable missile with a datalink it should have 360 degree interception capability and of course the Su-35S should be able to carry plenty while its wing mounted array scans for datalink signals from the launch aircraft to the missiles they fire.

    If K-74M even ends up having a range of R-73 i.e. ~30 km then the anti-missile missile is possible , with two way datalink a LOAL is on the cards as well.

    Note it says twice the lock on range of the R-73... it is talking about seeker performance, not flight range.

    To extend flight range simply put the seeker on an R-77M...

    I wonder what kind of AAM are under development we will have to wait and see.

    They have pretty much outlined them as the K-74 to replace the R-73 at short range, R-77M with a more powerful rocket motor to replace the R-77, and R-77PD as a new missile between the R-77 and R-33 class weapons, and of course the R-37M to replace the R-33.

    The next missiles are likely to be fully optimised for internal carriage and will likely not be revealed till the PAK FA is ready for service.

    The book mentions R-37M maximum "kill" range at 280 km and along with modernised Mig-31BM can intercept target with maximum speed of Mach 6.

    That is likely based on that test in the 1990s where the missile flew 300km to hit a target. Clearly they have taken 280km as a conservative figure based on that test result.


    neither was even only aware to be under missile attack Very Happy Very Happy , (is important to note that ,to the contrary ,anytime a similar aircraft was aware of an attack and attempted any type of avoiding measures BVR missiles have failed to reach theirs targets almost systematically , all of that without any involvement of any ECM system !!

    Air combat 101... it is the attack you don't see coming that is the most likely to kill you.

    Imagine it to be a sniper attack... the further away the target the more likely you are to miss if the target is moving... except for most sniper attacks the bullet flight in in the order of 3-5 seconds, whereas BVR missiles can spend minutes getting to their distant targets.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:50 am

    Mindstorm wrote:It refer probably to the maximum range at which, in tests, it achieved an hit ; that has nothing to do with the maximum engagement range of the same missile.

    The known maximum range in which a hit is achieved in a test for R-37 is 300 km , I really do not know how R-37 differs from the newer R-37M.

    But in one of his book on Mig-31 Yefim Gordon mentions that the 300 km range is for AWACS/JSTARS of target when it comes to intercepting manouvering targets like fighters its range will be practically reduced to 150 km.

    Even more interesting is that this publication don't take into account the two Mig-25 avoiding 2 AIM-120A in 6 January 1999 over the Souther "no fly zone" (the two 2 MIG-25s in question always the 6 January 1999 avoided also 3 Sparrows from 2 F-15C and 2 Phoenix from 2 F-14s !!! )

    That simply shows the current BVR (and not restricted to American BVR ) can be avioded by manouvering based on pilots pure instinct or eye ball as his Situational Awarness was not good due to lack of sensors

    neither was even only aware to be under missile attack Very Happy Very Happy [/b], (is important to note that ,to the contrary ,anytime a similar aircraft was aware of an attack and attempted any type of avoiding measures BVR missiles have failed to reach theirs targets almost systematically , all of that without any involvement of any ECM system !!

    Awareness being under attack in today fighter comes from the following

    360 * ESM coverage to know he is under attack by RF source like BVR missile ARH/SARH types
    DAS/MAWS for 360 * coverage to cover passive missile like IR guided/R-73 types or Singer types

    then you add to the equation like SP EW suite , Jammers specially modern DRFM types and then finally Chaffs and Flares and finally towed decoys

    A typicaly BVR or WVR missile will have to get through all this plus the target will be manouvering to actually hit the aircraft.

    I would say tough ask Smile

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:25 am

    GarryB wrote:The question becomes is ramjet state of the art because Meteor uses it, or will they decide that it is worth the effort and money to go for a scramjet design?

    Ramjet is preferred choice because for equal range it offers much better NEZ compared to solid fuel missile because of its burn all the way propulsion.

    It offers low weight and low volume. Ramjet is worth having it for BVR missile.

    its a pity that russia having a lead in ramjet propulsion didnt follow through it for what ever reasons.

    designs in Russia... the SA-6 was replaced by the SA-11, then the SA-17 and now a vertical launch model based on the naval VLS variant... they are all solid fuelled rockets.

    Solid fuel offer higher interception altitude beyond much were ramjet is effective , SA-11/SA-17 one of the goal was to intercept Lance type BM , so solid fuel was better due to higher interception altitude.

    The two remaining fields where ramjet missiles are used are the ARM in the form of the Kh-31 and the Anti ship missile in the form of the Kh-31 and Oniks/Yakhont/Brahmos.

    Typically makes sense , they should follow it up with BVR misile with ramjet propulsion , its good choice for intercepting air breathing targets at medium and low altitude with effective NEZ/Energy management in the end game.


    Keep in mind they are talking about the K-74M2, which is no where near service.
    The K-74M will likely be revealed in the next 2-3 years as the base model Morfei.
    If it can be used as an anti AMRAAM/AIM-9X missile then you would want it to be as small as possible so you could carry more than the enemy currently carries AAMs.

    actually the current western missile with similar concept is ASRAAM , it has FPA seeker and uses Thrust Vectoring see no reason why it cant intercept AAM , I think it was advertised as capable of doing so , even the German IRST-T WVR missile.

    Russia is just playing catch up game here.

    Note it says twice the lock on range of the R-73... it is talking about seeker performance, not flight range.

    Yes i am aware of what they are talking about

    To extend flight range simply put the seeker on an R-77M...

    And R-77-PD makes sense , to have the same missile with ARH/SARH and FPA seeker , they used that with R-27 too , not sure why they didnt follow up with R-77.

    Hopefully we are not far from a dual mode seeker made from IIR/ARH.

    They have pretty much outlined them as the K-74 to replace the R-73 at short range, R-77M with a more powerful rocket motor to replace the R-77, and R-77PD as a new missile between the R-77 and R-33 class weapons, and of course the R-37M to replace the R-33.

    To add to that they are working on new LRAAM for PAK-FA as was reveled but that would be the last missile to come , I hope the Ramjet missile news is true.

    I think you are speculating on Morfei , I can bet it will be a new missile with much wider role.


    Air combat 101... it is the attack you don't see coming that is the most likely to kill you.

    Very true , unfortunately that would happen in most scenearios where SA is close to zero for being under attack.

    For IAF ( Indian Air Force ) I can say all aircraft including the old Mig-21Bison has ESM so they wont be surprised by BVR shots involving RF seeker ,but most aircraft lacks MAWS and MKI or the MMRCA would be the first to get it.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:37 am

    actually the current western missile with similar concept is ASRAAM , it has FPA seeker and uses Thrust Vectoring see no reason why it cant intercept AAM , I think it was advertised as capable of doing so , even the German IRST-T WVR missile.

    Russia is just playing catch up game here.


    Austin ,someone lately has designed and produced an outstanding revolutionary missile ,named it ASRAAM, and replaced with it that true abomination having previosly the same denomination name ?


    ASRAAM was initiated in the 1980's by Germany and the United Kingdom, but the two countries were unable to agree on the details of the joint-venture. Germany left the ASRAAM project in the early 1990s, and in the spring of 1995 initiated an improved version of the Sidewinder, the IRIS-T (Infra Red Imagery Sidewinder-Tail controlled) built by Bodensee Geraetetechnik GmBH (BGT). This decision was largely motivated by new insights into the performance of the Russian AA- 11 Archer missile carried by the MiG-29s which Germany inherited during reunification. The Luftwaffe concluded that the AA-11's performance had been seriously underestimated -- the AA-11 turned out to be superior to the Sidewinder AIM-9L in all respects: homing head field of view, acquisition range, maneuverability, ease of designation, and target lock-on. The Germans concluded that the ASRAAM demonstrated a serious lack of agility compared to the Russian Archer.

    In January 1995 British Aerospace Dynamics, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England, was awarded a letter contract with a ceiling amount of $10,933,154 for foreign comparative testing [FCT] of the ASRAAM Missile. After several modifications to the scope of the FCT, the program assessed four ground-to-air sorties, 19 air-to-air captive carry sorties, four programmed missile launches, eight static warhead tests, and four rocket motor case tests. The resulting assessment was that the ASRAAM (as is) could not meet the AIM-9X operational requirements in high off-boresight angle performance, infrared counter-countermeasures robustness, lethality, and interoperability.


    http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-132.htm


    Now i have not time for elaborate , at return from work i will continue...



    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:14 am

    Very Interesting Mindstorm Thanks.

    In some arms magazine that i read it was mentioned ASRAAM was very agile missile but with a short range , since it lacked control surface to generate lift like Python or R-73

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:48 pm

    Lets say hypthetically a PAK-FA meets Su-35S in a one to one combat armed with similar A2A weapon.What advantage would stealth give to PAK-FA ?

    If we consider the average RCS of 0.3-0.4m2 for PAK-FA and 3-5 m2 for Su-35 with weapons then it gives an advantage of early detection for PAK-FA and first launch of BVR missile , ofcourse the ESM of Su-35 will warn of such BVR launch and it would take evasive measure.

    When it comes to Knife Fight WVR combat then all the stealth advantage is negated , so the aircraft with better flying qualities like accleration , turn rate , T/W ratio etc and pilot with better tactics will win the day. In that there is nothing to choose between PAK-FA and Su-35S when it comes to close combat.
    avatar
    SOC

    Posts : 583
    Points : 632
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 39
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  SOC on Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:58 pm

    Austin wrote:Lets say hypthetically a PAK-FA meets Su-35S in a one to one combat armed with similar A2A weapon.What advantage would stealth give to PAK-FA ?

    The PAK-FA can fire an R-77 or somethign similar before it's detected.  As it closes in on the target, the target has to go on the defensive.  That makes a follow-up WVR IR AAM engagement significantly more favorable to the PAK-FA, if the BVR AAM is avoided.

    Or, you use your LO airframe to stay out of Su-35S sensor range, and maneuver behind it.  Then fire a BVR IR-guided AAM straight up it's ass.  Something like an R-27ET will never "go active" and betray its position by emitting.  Your DAS or DIRCM may get a hit from the motor, but it's still a very sneaky and potentially successful way to go about things.

    Austin wrote:In some arms magazine that i read it was mentioned ASRAAM was very agile missile but with a short range , since it lacked control surface to generate lift like Python or R-73

    ASRAAM has decent range, as well as LOAL capability.  One quoted max range is 18 kilometers.  Sure, not what you might get from an R-73, but still a solid figure.  Besides, a decent motor can overcome lack of lift from control fins to a degree.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 952
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:20 pm

    Lets say hypthetically a PAK-FA meets Su-35S in a one to one combat armed with similar A2A weapon.What advantage would stealth give to PAK-FA ?


    Absolutely none.



    If we consider the average RCS of 0.3-0.4m2 for PAK-FA and 3-5 m2 for Su-35 with weapons then it gives an advantage of early detection for PAK-FA and first launch of BVR missile , ofcourse the ESM of Su-35 will warn of such BVR launch and it would take evasive measure


    Yes ,surely Su-35S would have a wide chances to avoid potential BVR shoots from PAKFA/FGFA (at least taking in consideration the medium range AAM now operatives worldwide ), but naturally PAKFA/FGFA having a far lower RCS could capitalize the significant stand-off advantage in detection ranges to move around the radar field coverage of SU-35S's squadron ,at supercruising flight regimes ,for attack it at high supersonic speed from a "blind" vector and evade immediatily for repeat the process some dozen of seconds later ( that is the typical tactic with LO/VLO aircraft and that at which anyone refer when allude at theirs capability to attack without that its opponents even realize the shooter's position of the incoming missiles) or ,in offensive missions, a PAKFA/FGFA could even simply avoid completely the engagement to complete its mission wiuthotu even begin the engagement .
    Those are the advantages offered by "stealth" in real world.


    When it comes to Knife Fight WVR combat then all the stealth advantage is negated , so the aircraft with better flying qualities like accleration , turn rate , T/W ratio etc and pilot with better tactics will win the day. In that there is nothing to choose between PAK-FA and Su-35S when it comes to close combat.



    In WVR PAKFA/FGFA will litterally eat an SU-35S for breackfast !!! Austin PAKFA's prototype ,under a strict aerodynamics standpoint, is today and by far, the most advanced and complex aircraft at world ,it will literally leave into dust SU-35S in pratically any cardinal parameters (without even taking into account the incomparably more advanced avionic suit ,purposely developed for it and optimized exactly for its structure and its capabilities.
    Even only a comparison would be totally unfair for SU-35S.



    avatar
    SOC

    Posts : 583
    Points : 632
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 39
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  SOC on Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:10 pm

    Austin wrote:BTW what is the possibility of a R-37M and modernised Mig-31 intercepting a Mach 3 Brahmos/Yakhont ? The R-37/Mig-31 is described as capable of intercepting target with a maximum speed of Mach 6.

    Depends on if the upgraded Zaslon can find it (which I'm sure it can) and guide a missile accurately enough to get close for intercept. The faster the target is approaching (because you aren't firing at a Mach 3 target in tail-chase), the smaller your margin for error is insofar as putting the missile where the seeker can uncage and acquire the target. Honestly I doubt it would be outside the capability of the system, but it wouldn't be as "easy" as firing at an E-3C or U-2, which are significantly slower.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16293
    Points : 16924
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:19 pm

    If we consider the average RCS of 0.3-0.4m2 for PAK-FA and 3-5 m2 for Su-35 with weapons then it gives an advantage of early detection for PAK-FA and first launch of BVR missile , ofcourse the ESM of Su-35 will warn of such BVR launch and it would take evasive measure.

    It lets the pilot of the PAK FA decide whether to fight or to leave.

    If he is fully fuelled and armed he can manouver to the side or rear of the the Su-35 staying out of sensor range and then creep up behind him and launch a couple of missiles at his rear.

    Alternatively he could hold back and fire an R-37M and then wait 30 seconds and then fire another, and then wait another 30 seconds and fire a third missile. While the Flanker is manouvering and jamming and doing all sorts of things to deal with the first missile the second missile will be lining him up and if they both miss then the last missile will have a good chance for a kill too... and while this is happening the PAK FA could close in to launch an IR missile or leave the area.

    Remember when trading missiles even if the Su-35 can detect the PAK FA at 100km, if they start trading missiles the missile seekers will have reduced range performance against a low RCS target so a BVR missile might blow past a PAK FA without detecting it.

    Besides, a decent motor can overcome lack of lift from control fins to a degree.

    Lack of aerodynamic surfaces means it will likely rely on hypersonic body lift... as it slows down there will be a dramatic loss in manouver performance because of a lack of control surfaces and of course because when there is no thrust the thrust vectoring is useless too.

    No big deal however as IR WVR missiles are generally not used at ultra long range... 20km range targets are normally engaged with AMRAAM or similar.

    BTW what is the possibility of a R-37M and modernised Mig-31 intercepting a Mach 3 Brahmos/Yakhont ? The R-37/Mig-31 is described as capable of intercepting target with a maximum speed of Mach 6.

    Depends on what part of flight it intercepts it and from which direction. A manouvering low altitude missile would not be easy, but a cruising high altitude missile should be well within design parameters.

    Of course scramjet Brahmos should exceed the mach 6 limit, but of course by then we will likely have seen the replacement for the R-37.

    Honestly I doubt it would be outside the capability of the system, but it wouldn't be as "easy" as firing at an E-3C or U-2, which are significantly slower.

    The fact that the Mig-31/R-27 combo are described as being capable of engaging Mach 6 targets suggests a mach 3 missile should be well within engagement parameters.

    Of course having said that a Mig-25 should be a relatively easy target for AAMs as its manouver capability is limited to 5gs, yet they can be difficult targets with a skillful pilot.

    Austin

    Posts : 6232
    Points : 6638
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Austin on Fri Nov 11, 2011 5:45 am

    SOC wrote:Depends on if the upgraded Zaslon can find it (which I'm sure it can) and guide a missile accurately enough to get close for intercept. The faster the target is approaching (because you aren't firing at a Mach 3 target in tail-chase), the smaller your margin for error is insofar as putting the missile where the seeker can uncage and acquire the target. Honestly I doubt it would be outside the capability of the system, but it wouldn't be as "easy" as firing at an E-3C or U-2, which are significantly slower.

    Yes thats going to be a tough ask , the entire Brahmos engagement of ~ 290 km gets over in 4.5 minutes , so any Mig-31 needs to be in the air at the right place and get the entire firecontrol solution ready for it and most certainly if the missile is travelling a low trajectory against background clutter and a speed of mach 2 at low level for brahmos it going to be difficult.

    I think given adequate time and a volley of 2-3 R-37M per target it would have a better chance.

    BTW how do they come to the conclusion that a Mig-31BM with R-37M can intercept a target travelling at Mach 6 , do they actually do such interception to prove it or its just a theory thing based on known facts ?

    Sponsored content

    Re: BVR Air-to-Air Missiles Development

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 18, 2017 6:28 pm