Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 pm

    It does, I agree, but it is not some fantasy I have made up.

    A Russian official stated that the range of the missiles is 2,000km... and it is the missile type the Russian Navy seems to have decided to use.

    From corvette right up to carrier and everything in between will likely carry this missile family in UKSK vertical launch tubes.

    The missile itself has lots of names... I have seen it being called Club, Klub, and Calibr (often with a letter denoting whether it is ship or sub or air launched.

    As a standard land attack cruise missile for the Navy I would expect a reasonable flight range.

    I rather suspect they also will use the Kh-101 as I have seen range figures for cruise missiles by navy officials for ships and subs as being 5,000km and also as 2,000km.

    Now knowing the range performance of most Russian missiles the only weapons that fit these specs are the Kh-101, and the Club/Klub/Calibr respectively.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9457
    Points : 9949
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  George1 on Sat Jan 07, 2012 11:29 am

    GarryB wrote:It does, I agree, but it is not some fantasy I have made up.

    A Russian official stated that the range of the missiles is 2,000km... and it is the missile type the Russian Navy seems to have decided to use.

    From corvette right up to carrier and everything in between will likely carry this missile family in UKSK vertical launch tubes.

    The missile itself has lots of names... I have seen it being called Club, Klub, and Calibr (often with a letter denoting whether it is ship or sub or air launched.

    As a standard land attack cruise missile for the Navy I would expect a reasonable flight range.

    I rather suspect they also will use the Kh-101 as I have seen range figures for cruise missiles by navy officials for ships and subs as being 5,000km and also as 2,000km.

    Now knowing the range performance of most Russian missiles the only weapons that fit these specs are the Kh-101, and the Club/Klub/Calibr respectively.

    Ι think that Kh-101 maybe be fitted to larger warships like Kirovs or project 21956 destroyers. For smaller ships, stereguschy, gorshkov, i think 3M-14E meets the requirements.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 08, 2012 12:07 am

    Ι think that Kh-101 maybe be fitted to larger warships like Kirovs or project 21956 destroyers. For smaller ships, stereguschy, gorshkov, i think 3M-14E meets the requirements.

    I totally agree, in fact I think the main user of Kh-101 at sea will be submarines.

    In a carrier battlegroup the Kirovs might have a few land attack cruise missiles fitted, but it will also likely carry a significant number of supersonic anti ship missiles too.

    Corvette sized vessels even though fitted with UKSK launchers and Redut SAM launchers will likely not carry long range land attack missiles or 400km range SAMs operationally even if their launchers are compatible.

    Of course a radar picket vessel has traditionally been a very dangerous role allocated to smaller more expendible vessels, so a tiny corvette armed with 32 x 400km range SAMs would be an interesting prospect.

    The Russian Navy has developed a C4IR system that shares air, sea surface and under sea information between ships... very much like AEGIS, but fitted to ships and subs so they can share info from all sorts of sources including subs, ships, aircraft, and satellites.

    This means a corvette that would normally have weak air defence, could be loaded up with 400km range SAMs and be fed target data from a range of other platforms, so while an old corvette unable to see much past a very small radar horizon (because it is a small vessel its mast mounted radar is not up very high so it can't see very far), new corvettes with Sigma will be able to carry and use very long range weapons.

    Obviously for land attack cruise missiles it makes more sense to send a sub than a corvette, but I think very occasionally as a radar picket, or indeed as a SAM trap it might make sense to sometimes arm a Corvette with the big stuff.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  IronsightSniper on Mon Jan 16, 2012 6:02 am

    That would be doubtful. Unless the Russians somehow got a missile to have x2 more range at the same size, putting the 40N6E's on a corvette's VLS would be wish.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jan 16, 2012 8:58 pm

    By corvette sized, are you guys talking about project 20380? It does not intend to carry the big S-400 missile, but 9m96 variants. Even the long range variant of that would be impressive on such a small ship.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:09 am

    That would be doubtful. Unless the Russians somehow got a missile to have x2 more range at the same size, putting the 40N6E's on a corvette's VLS would be wish.

    I said it would only be under very specific circumstances, but the large S-400 missile with the lofted flight trajectory is supposed to be able to engage targets at 400km range, and if the Redut VLS can handle all the missiles of the S-400 system then it makes sense that when fitted to even small surface vessels it wont suddenly lose its capacity to hold the larger missiles.

    For normal duties it is most likely to be fitted with the two small missiles of the S-400 system (with 40km and 120km range missiles), which as TR-1 points out are still very long range and capable missiles for a Corvette, which traditionally have been armed with MANPADs and Osa/Tor class SAMs.

    But for a role of Radar picket vessel using target information from other platforms as a sort of SAM trap then such a loading might make sense.

    In many ways it is akin to the PVOs idea of using the Su-30 with its larger and more powerful radar to operate with a flight of Mig-29s where the Su-30 uses its two man crew, where one crewman flys the plane and the other crewman operates the onboard large radar and data from ground radar and AWACS aircraft to find targets at maximum range. The Su-30 does not launch its own missiles at these targets, it directs the Mig-29s within its flight to move closer to the targets in radar and radio silence and to climb and accelerate and then launch their missiles at the target, which the Su-30 will monitor and guide. The enemy will detect the Su-30, and will detect incoming missiles but may not detect the Mig-29s who can... after firing their BVR missiles withdraw and rearm and refuel and return to combat.
    This gives the Su-30 the best standoff capability, and it is still fully armed and ready for combat, and allows it to use its radar to best effect. The Mig-29s receive target data from the Su-30 so their radar screens show threats even though their radars are not emitting, and of course they can still listen with their radars and IRSTs for extra target information without giving away their position.
    By climbing and accelerating they burn off a lot of fuel, but also give a lot of extra energy to their missiles to maximise their range and terminal energy.

    In many ways the Corvettes could be used in the same way with their small size and speed an advantage, while the long range of their missiles means they don't need to get close to the targets they are engaging in the first place. 400km range SAMs means they can engage enemy aircraft over an enormous volume of sky, a circle with a 400km radius means a circle 800km across... which is huge... and there will be rather more Corvettes than Kirovs...

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9457
    Points : 9949
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  George1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:00 am

    Cyberspec wrote:The domestic LR Club which BTW is called Kalibr, comes in a version with a 2000km range. I doubt very much that can be launched from a fighter sized aircraft (including the Su-34)

    We havent seen this missile yet however. But i agree, i think it will be carried from Tu-160 and Tu-22M3

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:40 pm

    The article Cyberspec mentions above says it will use the Il-76 as a platform.

    I rather suspect the plan is for theatre or tactical use of these missiles.

    One of the main problems of cruise missiles is that they get more effective when you launch them in large numbers, but assembling large numbers of launch platforms attracts attention and could give away the fact that your country might be under attack.

    It is possible they might plan to fit underwing pylons on Il-76 aircraft an use them as cruise missile carriers, but I suspect carrying a huge bundle of cruise missiles in a big pallet that releases half a dozen to a dozen cruise missiles at once would be covert as it would not be seen till the missiles were released, and also allow enormous numbers of missiles to be released on a target area at one time.

    With a payload capacity of 60 tons for the new production Il-476 it could probably hold 20-26 missiles at 2 tons each with pallets and parachutes to stabilise the pallets as it falls.

    Release from 10,000m or above on a normal flight path would give time for separation of the cruise missiles from the pallet especially if the pallet is parachute retarded and stabilised.

    A more expensive option could be to have a bomb bay in the floor of the Il-476 through which missiles are released, which would be more expensive and require custom designed aircraft.

    A fully developed pallet system could be used in any transport type with rear ramps... an AN-225 could carry an enormous load of cruise missiles.

    Of course if you limited the missile weight to about 1.5 tons with a range of about 2,000km then the number of missiles carried per aircraft increases.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9457
    Points : 9949
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  George1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:43 pm

    GarryB wrote:The article Cyberspec mentions above says it will use the Il-76 as a platform.

    I rather suspect the plan is for theatre or tactical use of these missiles.

    One of the main problems of cruise missiles is that they get more effective when you launch them in large numbers, but assembling large numbers of launch platforms attracts attention and could give away the fact that your country might be under attack.

    It is possible they might plan to fit underwing pylons on Il-76 aircraft an use them as cruise missile carriers, but I suspect carrying a huge bundle of cruise missiles in a big pallet that releases half a dozen to a dozen cruise missiles at once would be covert as it would not be seen till the missiles were released, and also allow enormous numbers of missiles to be released on a target area at one time.

    With a payload capacity of 60 tons for the new production Il-476 it could probably hold 20-26 missiles at 2 tons each with pallets and parachutes to stabilise the pallets as it falls.

    Release from 10,000m or above on a normal flight path would give time for separation of the cruise missiles from the pallet especially if the pallet is parachute retarded and stabilised.

    A more expensive option could be to have a bomb bay in the floor of the Il-476 through which missiles are released, which would be more expensive and require custom designed aircraft.

    A fully developed pallet system could be used in any transport type with rear ramps... an AN-225 could carry an enormous load of cruise missiles.

    Of course if you limited the missile weight to about 1.5 tons with a range of about 2,000km then the number of missiles carried per aircraft increases.

    IL-476 could be evolved to a heavy strategic bomber? Interesting

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:46 am

    If they design the missile system right... no.

    If they make the cruise missiles fit on a pallet that is loaded on the Il-76 like any other pallet of payload, with a parachute for air dropping so it can be released out the back of the aircraft in flight and the cruise missiles separate from the Pallet as they fall and start up their engines and fly to their targets, then it is even better than an Il-476 bomber.

    It is a cruise missiles system that can be used from any medium or heavy transport plane.

    The original system is based on a standard shipping crate so any container ship at sea could have normal cargo, or it could have an enormous load of ready to use cruise missiles.

    This new system being developed could be the aircraft equivalent... you don't need a special container ship for the other system and you wont need a special transport for this new system... it is brilliant.

    Il-76s are common sights all round the world so a couple of Il-76s flying in international airspace around a country would not attract a lot of attention, where as a flight of Flankers each carrying three 3M14 cruise missiles would be a problem and would be closely followed.

    As I said a full 10 ton standard pallet could carry perhaps 4-5 missiles each.

    The article above states that the shipping container launcher is also compatible with the 3M54, 3M14, and the new model long range KH-35 missile.

    The 3M54 is the ship and sub launched anti ship missile, while the 3M14 is the land attack missile both with ranges of about 290km for export but for domestic use closer to 2,000km range for the land attack missile... likely similar for the anti ship missile.

    The new Kh-35 is an upgrade of the Uran... sometimes called Uranium with a flight range of 240-260km and a dedicated anti ship missile.

    Similar flexibility for an air launched system for transport aircraft would be very useful.

    You could buy lots of ready to use pallets and simply store them till they were needed.
    In a conflict who will notice that Il-76 transport flying past that carrier group... all of a sudden the back opens up while it is cruising at 10,000m and all of a sudden you spot large numbers of anti ship missiles on their way... at about 700kgs per missile a transport like an Il-476 could carry 60 or more per plane. An An-124 could carry more than 150.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9457
    Points : 9949
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Kh-37 variant of Kh-35U

    Post  George1 on Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:46 pm

    Kh-37 (3M24E1) - proposed upgrade with 250 km range and a land-attack capability, GPS mid-course guidance and an imaging infrared seeker akin to the Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM). Some sources attribute the name Uran or Bal to this variant

    http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Air-Launched-Weapons/Kh-37-Russian-Federation.html

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:41 am

    Some sources attribute the name Uran or Bal to this variant

    Uran is Kh-35, and Bal is the shore based anti ship battery name for the same missile.

    I think they are talking about the extended range updated model, that is sometimes called Uranium and has the designation Kh-35UE.

    Here is its webpage:

    http://eng.ktrv.ru/production_eng/323/512/563/

    Land attack models certainly wouldn't be impossible, and the original weapon was good enough that the Indians bought them without tender or much negotiation.

    The thing is that for an air launched land attack missile with optical guidance the Russians already have the Kh-59 and Kh-59M missile systems (AS-13 Kingbolt and AS-18 Kazoo respectively).

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Pictures of Kh-41 (P-270 Moskit) carried by aircraft

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Wed Aug 29, 2012 12:29 am

    some people say that the P-270 could actually be carried by aircraft including the Su-33 while others say its shipbourne only. However the other official designation of this missile is kh-41 so that means its an air to surfacce weapon too.

    I would really appreciate some pictures of the moskit loaded on to an aircraft so I can prove its AS capability scratch

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 29, 2012 5:17 am

    The Moskits shown at airshows suggest an air lunched variant... But I am not so sure they ever actually developed it into an operational weapon.

    By the end of the 1980s they were already working on the Onyx and its Yakhont relative... after the Onyx was developed I really can't see them developing air launched Moskit.

    Moskit is not much bigger than Onyx, buy Onyx is significantly lighter... 4.5 ton vs about 2.5 ton in the air launched models.

    I have seen video of a very large belly mounted missile being launched from an Su-34, but couldn't tell if it was Moskit or Yakhont/Onyx.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  Viktor on Wed Aug 29, 2012 12:09 pm

    Some of the MIG-31 where able to carry Kh-41.

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  SOC on Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:58 pm

    Viktor wrote:Some of the MIG-31 where able to carry Kh-41.

    I think you're confusing the Moskit with the MiG-31D's Vympel-made ASAT.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  Viktor on Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:39 am

    SOC wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Some of the MIG-31 where able to carry Kh-41.

    I think you're confusing the Moskit with the MiG-31D's Vympel-made ASAT.

    Perhaps, althrow I remember seeing Kh-41 "parked" by MIG-31 on some display the same way as we sow 3M-14E "parked" by MIG-31 on MAKS-2007.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Aug 30, 2012 6:20 am

    Might have been a joke...

    The Mig-31 would not be tasked with any mission that would require Kh-41s.

    The main carrier aircraft of such a weapon would be the Tu-22M3, but as posted on another thread the Tu-22M3 had the Kh-22M and now has the Kh-32 which exceeds the performance (and weight) of the Moskit.

    There were plans for a naval Su-32, and talk of the Su-33 carrying the 4.5 ton 9m long missile, but considering the lack of money during the period I rather doubt they even actually bothered.

    By the time they had the money they also had the Onyx, which is a more powerful missile.

    The Chinese bought the Sunburn for their ships, which AFAIK are their only customer... as such vessels leave the Russian Naval inventory the requirement for the air launched model becomes less important.

    If they haven't integrated it by now I doubt they will unless an export customer wants to pay for it. It makes rather more sense to integrate the Onyx/Yakhont and Kalibr missiles as they are compatible with the UKSK launcher going into every armed Russian navy vessel of Corvette and larger size.

    The designation Kh-41 means it is an air launched model, whether it was every tested and integrated into an aircrafts inventory is debatable... the important thing is that the weapon is largely replaced by Brahmos/Onyx/Yakhont, which is available in air, land, sea surface, and sub launched models.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  Viktor on Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:55 am

    Althrow MIG-31F/BM can be used in antiship role with its 6xKh-31A missiles.

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Tactical Missiles and Ordnance in Soviet / Russian Frontal Aviation

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:22 am

    How does the soviet equivalent of the AGM-65 fare against it? Is it more or less accurate?  Does it have the same destructive power? Can it be an extremely effective tank killer like the maverick and does it have a HEAT version?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    X-25 vs AGM-65 maverick

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:42 am

    The X-25/Kh-25 is a missile in a very similar class to the Maverick and on paper its performance is very similar.

    The main difference is that the loiter for long periods behind enemy lines hitting targets of opportunity with an A-10 simply didn't exist for the Soviets/Russians.

    The Su-25 is not a tank buster, it is a direct fire support aircraft and most of the time it will engage targets with unguided rockets or bombs rather than any sort of missile.

    The standard anti tank weapon of the Su-25 was the RBK-500 cluster bomb with sensor fused anti tank submunitions.

    A direct comparison between them is difficult because the TV and IR guided models of the X-25/Kh-25 were not widely deployed, the most common types to see service were called AS-10 and AS-12 by NATO. The AS-7 was briefly used but its command guidance made it a poor choice for most single crew aircraft.

    The laser homing Kh-25 (AS-10) and the radar homing Kh-25 (AS-12) were widely deployed and used and their 90kg HE warheads really wouldn't need a shaped charge design to kill a tank... a direct hit and the blast alone would likely kill the crew.

    The Maverick was widely deployed in TV and IR guided models, but AFAIK had no anti radiation model that entered widespread service... the only US equivalent of the AS-12 would be Sidearm, the ARM version of Sidewinder.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  TR1 on Wed Jan 16, 2013 11:51 am

    http://lenta.ru/news/2013/01/16/missile/

    So, Izvestia claims Kh-38 passed trials and was accepted in December 2012. This year combat rounds are going to be delivered.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jan 17, 2013 12:27 am

    I remember a Russian official saying the Kh-38 has a range of 40km in the export model and 80km in the domestic model.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:49 am

    80km?!?!

    I would imagine practical guidance and targeting would become an issue at such ranges.

    With a favorable launch profile + proper flight profile it should be feasible physically though.

    Su-34 could carry a huge bag of these guys.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kh-38 missile

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:34 am

    I would imagine practical guidance and targeting would become an issue at such ranges.

    Based on the descriptions of the export models... ie:

    - Kh-38MAE - inertial + active radar guidance;
    - Kh-38MKE - inertial + satellite guidance;
    - Kh-38MLE - inertial + semiactive laser guidance;
    - Kh-38MTE - inertial + thermal-imaging guidance.

    There shouldn't be a problem. Targets detected and IDed at 40km should be able to be detected and IDed at 80km.

    The active radar guided model can be locked and launched from an Su-34 using its own ground radar to detect the target... whether it is a building or a bridge or a tank.

    The satellite guided weapon would simply require the coordinates of the target so 80km is no different from 40km.

    SALH means you need a laser to mark the target, but that laser does not have to come from the launch aircraft... assets like UAVs or ground forces near the target can mark it with a laser... the extended range simply means the missile can be launched from a safer distance.

    And finally a thermal guidance system wouldn't work from 40km so it wouldn't work directly from 80km either. Clearly the Thermally guided missile has an EO guidance system perhaps like AS-13 or AS-18 that allows the missile to be flown to the target area and transmits an image of the target area back to the launch aircraft where the weapon officer can mark the precise target with a cursor and the missile will be sent target information to engage the target.
    The alternative would be for the IIR guided missile to have a range of IR signatures in its memory and it can be launched to look for specific targets. The former would be easier and cheaper to implement and would also be more flexible as you can target what you find.

    They will be useful weapons but I still think that for some roles the Kh-25M would be more useful as a smaller and lighter missile with a potent warhead.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Air-to-Surface Missiles (Short Range and Standoff)

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 7:32 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 7:32 pm