Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues

    Meteor vs RVV-BD Long Range AAM



    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Meteor vs RVV-BD Long Range AAM

    Post  Austin on Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:57 am

    Mindstorm wrote:Yes , probably is so and its PK would be ,very very low against a modern, aware, manoeuvrable (or worse supermanoeuvrable) target like for all BVR medium range missiles operative today worldwide.

    Can you tell me how supermanoeuvrability helps here becuase all supermanouverable is done at when the aircraft is at low speed , a bvr missile would still beat that because the missile can pull substantial more G then aircraft for eg RVV-SD is capable of intercepting 12 g targets.

    BTW i always wondered why dont they develop a IIR or 2 color IR version of RVV-SD for BVR engagements like they used to do with R-27 ? You can fire both missile simultanously at the target for improved Pk

    largely outdated/downgraded aircraft ,firing often at very reduced rangeand from the most favourable geometry a PK of 0,46 ..... at least acceptable ).

    Yes i read that in Kosovo conflict AIM-120A/B was fired at a distance of no more than 30 km and multiple in tens of BVR was fired at single target.

    So in real sense the true potential of BVR is still to be exploited , in a complex war scneario even with AWACS support i suppose IFF is a BIG problem.

    Meteor is the first technological attempt to produce a medium range BVR sufficiently efficient against modern fighter aircraft .

    I really do not know if ramjet makes a very big difference but it does make a difference compared to other boys in the block.

    BTW dual pulse propulsion seems to be very promising field for solid motor rocket both to have end game energy and the way it manages energy.

    Those figures of RCS of 0,0001 or 0,001 (-40/30 dBSM ) are refered to totally academic critical narrow reradiating cones for the head-on inception angles not .... i reapeat NOT the average RCS of this type of aircraft Laughing Laughing Laughing
    Even very little variation from that critical angle, always considering only an head-on radar illumination, produce enormous variations in the final RCS ,even in the scale of some orders of magnitude ,those figures ,representing the lower RCS achieved by a particular platform in a single, academic ,super critical,frontal angle , was conceived to "dramatize" public marketing ; the problem is that the horde of ignorants fan-boys have quickly jumped on them believing that them was the average RCS of those aircraft !!! Razz Razz

    I thought so he was refering to average RCS versus frontal RCS that LM was touting.

    At 0.3-0.4 m2 average RCS even a decent X band radar like that of IRBIS will be able to see it far enough not to mention high power ground based radars.

    I guess aircraft like F-22 , F-35 and PAK-FA will have to rely on good old tactics of low flying , avoiding known Radars sites and using Jammers if required like conventional aircraft besides relying on stealth to do its job , there is no immunity by flying high and fast since they would be seen by modern radars specially those with VHF and L-band.

    Tell me what do you think about B-2 stealth since Dr Carlo told me it can even avoid getting detected by VHF radars due to its size , that was designed to fly high and slow and penetrate deep in to Soviet Airspace and hunt mobile topol launchers ?

    Therefore no one has lied : LM executives talk of a single,academic, super critical head-on angle RCS figure , Davidenko refer,instead, to effective average RCS figure for a typical three-dimensional tactical many vs many engagement, clear ?

    Yes clear , yes no one lied but they didnt speak the full truth Laughing


    Posts : 6233
    Points : 6639
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Meteor missile

    Post  Austin on Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:33 pm

    Some data on Meteor

      Current date/time is Sat Aug 19, 2017 9:07 am