Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Fly at a 90 deg. angle to missiles vector, ECMs on missile radar , and when comes inside of a 2-3 km range, brake hard towards to missile, will firing chaffs. This will force the missile to turn also a lot of harder to maintain lead at the aircraft. But it will have travelled for a long way, with the engine out.
+9
Hannibal Barca
Flyingdutchman
Mindstorm
Pervius
Stealthflanker
IronsightSniper
GarryB
nightcrawler
ahmedfire
13 posters
AIM-120 AMRAAM
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
Fly at a 90 deg. angle to missiles vector, ECMs on missile radar , and when comes inside of a 2-3 km range, brake hard towards to missile, will firing chaffs. This will force the missile to turn also a lot of harder to maintain lead at the aircraft. But it will have travelled for a long way, with the engine out.
nightcrawler- Posts : 522
Points : 634
Join date : 2010-08-20
Age : 34
Location : Pakistan
No this is less than 12G pulling something missiles can do. Besides 90 degree flying requires that aircraft with that engines having more than 1 Thrust/Weight ratio
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
NC I think he means flying perpendicular to the incoming track of the missile so that if it were to hit you it would hit your side.
This means you are neither receeding or closing on the missile so it will not be able to use doppler shift to pick you out from the back ground.
The best solution in my opinion is to develop a small very cheap and simple noise jammer and build it into a 57mm unguided rocket.
Have a Mig-29 in your formation and when the AMRAAM is detected when it lights up its active radar homing seeker simply fire a single 57mm rocket away from the flight group and watch the AMRAAM kick into home on jam mode and chase down that 57mm rocket...
The Soviets had already developed a drone based on the 130mm unguided rocket system... such a jammer wouldn't be that hard to develop if they haven't already.
This means you are neither receeding or closing on the missile so it will not be able to use doppler shift to pick you out from the back ground.
The best solution in my opinion is to develop a small very cheap and simple noise jammer and build it into a 57mm unguided rocket.
Have a Mig-29 in your formation and when the AMRAAM is detected when it lights up its active radar homing seeker simply fire a single 57mm rocket away from the flight group and watch the AMRAAM kick into home on jam mode and chase down that 57mm rocket...
The Soviets had already developed a drone based on the 130mm unguided rocket system... such a jammer wouldn't be that hard to develop if they haven't already.
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
Evading the Guided Missile:
http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Evading-Missiles.html
nice read...
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/3450584/OG-Hughes-Raytheon-AIM-AMRAAM-Operations-Guide-This-guide-applies
IronsightSniper- Posts : 414
Points : 418
Join date : 2010-09-25
Location : California, USA
The AMRAAM isn't actually the most maneuverable missile in the world but it's standing as the World's Best Missile by Operational Record is only so as it has only faced terrible enemy pilots. However, any maneuvers and tactics that can be employed to defeat the AMRAAM will require a high-sophisticated aircraft with a very well trained pilot, the former, Russia has, the latter, Russia doesn't really have.
Stealthflanker- Posts : 1410
Points : 1486
Join date : 2009-08-04
Age : 36
Location : Indonesia
IronsightSniper wrote:high-sophisticated aircraft
well no need to be so "highly sophisticated" and such.. it just need tobe able to provide enough maneuverability..perhaps some 7-8G's and Good RHAWS.. either RF or IR based...to warn the pilot.
and such capability was already around in 1980's
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The AMRAAM isn't actually the most maneuverable missile in the world but it's standing as the World's Best Missile by Operational Record is only so as it has only faced terrible enemy pilots.
Currently the only nuclear weapon with a combat record are the two bombs used during WWII.
To suggest they are the best nuclear weapons available because they have the best combat record is clearly silly.
The pilots it has taken on were in aircraft that had very poor defensive avionics suites to the degree one could say the pilot was unaware of attacks until the explosion of the warhead. In such a situation it is not a question of pilot quality really.
However, any maneuvers and tactics that can be employed to defeat the AMRAAM will require a high-sophisticated aircraft with a very well trained pilot, the former, Russia has, the latter, Russia doesn't really have.
Sorry... what? Russia hasn't been training its pilots? Really?
I realise they haven't had an enormous amount of fuel allocations from 1990 to about 2000 but flight hours have improved radically since then.
Or do they need combat experience against capable air opponents like Afghanistans airforce or Libyas to rate in your book?
Pervius- Posts : 224
Points : 240
Join date : 2011-03-08
Maybe if you got locked you release external fuel pods and ignite them with a magnesium fire causing massive heat signature, massive visible object for the AMRAAM.
If Amraam makes it thru that you use rear facing sonic weapon to destroy AMRAAM's eyes.
New sonic weapons used to fire sound at pirates off of somalia disrupts air molecules at a distance creating massive sound. Same theory could be used to disrupt Amraam looking at you by disrupting waves between you and the Amraam causing Amraam to not see you.
Cloaking device of sorts. Vibrating air molecules blocking signal return/ even visible light, it's a wavelength.
If Amraam makes it thru that you use rear facing sonic weapon to destroy AMRAAM's eyes.
New sonic weapons used to fire sound at pirates off of somalia disrupts air molecules at a distance creating massive sound. Same theory could be used to disrupt Amraam looking at you by disrupting waves between you and the Amraam causing Amraam to not see you.
Cloaking device of sorts. Vibrating air molecules blocking signal return/ even visible light, it's a wavelength.
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Problem with that is that AMRAAM can't see IR so your burning fuel tanks were a complete waste of time.
The "eyes" of the Amraam is a small active radar seeker and would not be effected by sound any more than it is effected by the mach 4 slipstream it is flying through.
The only wavelengths the AMRAAM sees in is pretty much X band radar so any effort in other frequencies is largely wasted.
IR camouflage might prevent an F-35 seeing you in the first place but burning fuel tanks with magnesium flares will get the attention of all IR seekers in the area... F-22s will not detect you except if the pilots sees the flash.
The "eyes" of the Amraam is a small active radar seeker and would not be effected by sound any more than it is effected by the mach 4 slipstream it is flying through.
The only wavelengths the AMRAAM sees in is pretty much X band radar so any effort in other frequencies is largely wasted.
IR camouflage might prevent an F-35 seeing you in the first place but burning fuel tanks with magnesium flares will get the attention of all IR seekers in the area... F-22s will not detect you except if the pilots sees the flash.
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
and if we talk about jamming,,i think is very hard to jam AESA on aircraft board that guide the Aim 120 as they can continuously change frequency !
but there is still good DRFM jammers and decoy on su35...
cobra ??
to shake of enemy in extream situations when he is at your 6 you can suddenly get behind him and higher then him giving you a massive tactical advantage.
so ,evading BVR missiles from the two boys,,then get in aclose combat,falnker will overcome any european aircraft in this region..
anyone remember training exercise between USAF eagles and Su-27 in August 1992 ?
.........
nice read:
A competent Flanker driver gets the first shot with three or four round salvo of long burn R-27 variants, with mixed seekers, leaving one or two remaining salvoes of BVR missiles on his rails, and the same Flanker driver will have modern DRFM monopulse jammers capable of causing likely much more than a 50 percent degradation of AIM-120 kill probability. With a thrust vectoring engine capability (TVC), the Flanker driver has the option of making himself into a very difficult endgame target for the AIM-120 regardless of the capability of his jamming equipment. Since all of the AIM-120s fired are identical in kinematic performance and seeker jam resistance, any measure applied by the Flanker driver which is effective against one AIM-120 round in the salvo is apt to produce the same effect against all AIM-120 rounds - a problem the Flanker driver does not have due to diversity in seeker types and missile kinematics.
Currently classified capabilities such as the use of the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar as an X-band high power jammer against the Russian BARS or Irbis E radar are not a panacea, and may actually hasten the demise of the F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF in a BVR shootout. This is for the simple reason that to jam the Russian radar, the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar must jam the frequencies being used by the Russian radar, and this then turns the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar into a wholly electronically predictable X-band high power beacon for an anti-radiation seeker equipped Russian BVR missile such as the R-27EP or R-77P. The act of jamming the Russian radar effectively surrenders the frequency hopping agility in the emissions of the APG-79 or APG-81 AESA radar, denying it the only defence it has against the anti-radiation missile. A smart Russian radar software designer will include a "seduction mode" to this effect, with narrowband emissions to make it very easy even for an early model 9B-1032 anti-radiation seeker.
In electronic warfare terms neither side has a decisive advantage, but the Flanker does have a decisive advantage in aircraft and missile kinematics and in having up to six times the payload of BVR missiles to expend. The simple conclusion to be drawn is that operators of the F/A-18E/F or F-35 JSF should make every effort to avoid Beyond Visual Range combat with late model Flankers, as the best case outcome is parity in exchange rates, and the worst case outcome a decisive exchange ratio advantage to the Flanker. Given the evident design choices the Russians have made, this is not an accident, but rather a consequence of well thought through operational analysis of capabilities and limitations of contemporary BVR weapon systems.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html
Ref :Comparison of Vympel R-77 with AIM-120 AMRAAM
Range
The R-77's main advantage over the AIM-120 AMRAAM is in range and maneuverability. The longer range is because the R-77 is a larger 200 mm (7.9 in) vs 178 mm (7.0 in), heavier 175 kg (390 lb) vs 150 kg (330 lb) missile than the AMRAAM and contains more propellant. Like most AAM weapons, the claimed range is for a non-maneuvering target, at a high altitude, and probably on a head-on aspect with a respectable closing rate. Lower altitudes, rear aspect, or maneuvering targets will all reduce this range, but the same applies to the AMRAAM.
Maneuverability
The missile's maneuverability relies on the lattice work fins at the rear. The R-77's overall aerodynamic configuration is more efficient at high speed and high angles of attack than the conventional deltas used on the AIM-120 and most other missiles. This reduces the loss of energy when the R-77 is chasing a maneuvering target[12]. However, near Mach 1, oblique shock waves can substantially increase drag of the lattice fins and reverse their advantage [13]. If the missile was fired at a range long enough for it to decelerate to low Mach speeds, it would deplete its energy very quickly while maneuvering. The increased drag would also hamper the carrying aircraft at certain speeds unless the fins were folded or the missiles were stored internally. Nonetheless, the weapon is reported to be able to handle a target maneuvering at up to 12g,[14] a substantially higher rate than any manned fighter.
There is one more thing where russian Sukois carry a large number of Vympel R-77 in "Many vs Many" Scenario.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The radar you have to defeat is in the missile, not the launch aircraft.
It it the radar seeker in the missile trying to get a lock to home in on the target... whether you jam the radar in the launch aircraft or not is not important... it is the missiles seeker you need to defeat... and it is not an AESA, nor is it particularly big or powerful.
I would expect by the time the T-50 enters service there will be an IIR homing short range missile perhaps the 9M100 also in vehicle and ship and perhaps even sub launched models with the accuracy and manouver performance and seeker sensitivity to actually be used to shoot down incoming AMRAAMs and other missiles.
It it the radar seeker in the missile trying to get a lock to home in on the target... whether you jam the radar in the launch aircraft or not is not important... it is the missiles seeker you need to defeat... and it is not an AESA, nor is it particularly big or powerful.
I would expect by the time the T-50 enters service there will be an IIR homing short range missile perhaps the 9M100 also in vehicle and ship and perhaps even sub launched models with the accuracy and manouver performance and seeker sensitivity to actually be used to shoot down incoming AMRAAMs and other missiles.
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
oh sorry,just confused..
but, Self protection jammer (internal or external) is useless due to employment of HOJ (home on jam) mode at extended ranges before burn-through occurs. i think Without a towed decoy, defeating an active radar homing missile like the AIM-120 or AA-12 Adder using countermeasures designed primarily to defeat SARH missiles and the supporting fire control radar system is not a healthy endeavor
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The use of two separate wingtip mounted jammers can be used to disrupt the guidance of the missile.
It might also be possible to direct a jamming signal to reflect off another surface... like the ground so that in home on jam mode the missile does not hit its target.
Compared to Sparrow the AMRAAM is certainly a much more formidible weapon but you have to keep in mind that against targets that were not aware they were being engaged and not equipped with self defence suites have a 50% survival rate in real combat against this weapon.
Against a BVR missile early warning you are under attack can make all the difference.
One obvious thing you could do is for the flight to split up and fly in completely different directions so when the incoming missile goes active one aircraft in the flight that the missile is clearly not heading for can start active jamming.
When the missile turns to engage the active jammer the jammer can cease jamming and another aircraft within the flight can start jamming.
In most cases that should be enough as a couple of 90 or 180 degree turns at the end of a long flight to the target area should be enough to burn off any excess energy the missile might have had.
It might also be possible to direct a jamming signal to reflect off another surface... like the ground so that in home on jam mode the missile does not hit its target.
Compared to Sparrow the AMRAAM is certainly a much more formidible weapon but you have to keep in mind that against targets that were not aware they were being engaged and not equipped with self defence suites have a 50% survival rate in real combat against this weapon.
Against a BVR missile early warning you are under attack can make all the difference.
One obvious thing you could do is for the flight to split up and fly in completely different directions so when the incoming missile goes active one aircraft in the flight that the missile is clearly not heading for can start active jamming.
When the missile turns to engage the active jammer the jammer can cease jamming and another aircraft within the flight can start jamming.
In most cases that should be enough as a couple of 90 or 180 degree turns at the end of a long flight to the target area should be enough to burn off any excess energy the missile might have had.
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
nice words...
http://tailslide.firelightsoftware.com/evadingm.asp
hey Garry,thnx
ahmedfire- Posts : 2115
Points : 2295
Join date : 2010-11-11
Location : The Land Of Pharaohs
on ayoutube video, Typhoon pilot was asked how effective he thought the Cobra maneuver was in air combat and he emphatically replied it was useless !!
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
I rather suspect the Typhoon can't do a cobra manouver then... 
The Cobra manouver itself is an airshow manouver, not a combat manouver.
What it shows is that the aircraft is able to have its nose dragged off the direction of flight... 120 degrees or more and then recover without stalling or rolling or losing control.
The manouver causes a rapid reduction in forward airspeed and in the old Su-27 is recovered using afterburners in a predictable stall manouver.
In the Su-35 and other aircraft with thrust vectoring control as shown in airshows the same manouver can be started with the pull back to 120 degrees and then that can be continued with a full 360 vertical turn, with full control of the nose.
Why is this important for combat?
Where you point your nose is where you are pointing your weapons and your main sensors.
Being able to fly your plane without worrying about the angle of attack limits of your plane... worrying whether you can do this without stalling or going into a spin makes a huge difference in how you fly your plane and how you fight.
Modern missiles are becoming hittiles so first shot fastest kill wins.
Perhaps when Typhoon gets thrust vectoring engines such things will suddenly become very important to a Typhoon pilot.
The Cobra manouver itself is an airshow manouver, not a combat manouver.
What it shows is that the aircraft is able to have its nose dragged off the direction of flight... 120 degrees or more and then recover without stalling or rolling or losing control.
The manouver causes a rapid reduction in forward airspeed and in the old Su-27 is recovered using afterburners in a predictable stall manouver.
In the Su-35 and other aircraft with thrust vectoring control as shown in airshows the same manouver can be started with the pull back to 120 degrees and then that can be continued with a full 360 vertical turn, with full control of the nose.
Why is this important for combat?
Where you point your nose is where you are pointing your weapons and your main sensors.
Being able to fly your plane without worrying about the angle of attack limits of your plane... worrying whether you can do this without stalling or going into a spin makes a huge difference in how you fly your plane and how you fight.
Modern missiles are becoming hittiles so first shot fastest kill wins.
Perhaps when Typhoon gets thrust vectoring engines such things will suddenly become very important to a Typhoon pilot.
Stealthflanker- Posts : 1410
Points : 1486
Join date : 2009-08-04
Age : 36
Location : Indonesia
ahmedfire wrote:
oh sorry,just confused..
but, Self protection jammer (internal or external) is useless due to employment of HOJ (home on jam) mode at extended ranges before burn-through occurs. i think Without a towed decoy, defeating an active radar homing missile like the AIM-120 or AA-12 Adder using countermeasures designed primarily to defeat SARH missiles and the supporting fire control radar system is not a healthy endeavor
I'm still confused on this "HOJ argument".. especially on "What kind of Jammer can be tracked by this method ?"..... well Russian SAM's like SA-2 , Bristol Bloodhound or American Talos already have this kind of mode since 50's ,and yet those systems can still be jammed, anyway despite lower probability of hit due to unavailability of Range information (HOJ only provide Azimuth and Elevation No ranges) ..i see that this method is only applicable to Noise Jammer , which emit noise to "cover up the screen of opposing RADAR's" .
BUT not so for more advanced Jammers employing Technique like Cross Polarization or Cross Eye , which messing with Angular Information (Azimuth, Elevation and perhaps range) this HOJ technique might be no use as your tracker is already confused and tracking into wrong directions.
IronsightSniper- Posts : 414
Points : 418
Join date : 2010-09-25
Location : California, USA
GarryB wrote:
However, any maneuvers and tactics that can be employed to defeat the AMRAAM will require a high-sophisticated aircraft with a very well trained pilot, the former, Russia has, the latter, Russia doesn't really have.
Sorry... what? Russia hasn't been training its pilots? Really?
I realise they haven't had an enormous amount of fuel allocations from 1990 to about 2000 but flight hours have improved radically since then.
Or do they need combat experience against capable air opponents like Afghanistans airforce or Libyas to rate in your book?
"very well trained pilot". AFAIK, Russia only gives their pilots about 100 hours of flight training compared to the 400 hours the USAF gives to ours.
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
An AMRAAM has small triangular wings... I suspect its terminal performance at BVR ranges would be quite poor.
Its success rate of about 50% is against targets that didn't know what hit them and were not trying to evade.
Of course 'Merican pilots have lots of weddings to bomb and lots more of Gaddafis grandkids to murder... they need the extra training time.
Its success rate of about 50% is against targets that didn't know what hit them and were not trying to evade.
Of course 'Merican pilots have lots of weddings to bomb and lots more of Gaddafis grandkids to murder... they need the extra training time.
IronsightSniper- Posts : 414
Points : 418
Join date : 2010-09-25
Location : California, USA
I already said that the AMRAAM isn't the most maneuverable missile out there, you're just trying to look good now 
But like I've said, you're going to need a pilot that's trained enough how to do hard maneuvers if you want to evade an AMRAAM or two.
But like I've said, you're going to need a pilot that's trained enough how to do hard maneuvers if you want to evade an AMRAAM or two.
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Yeah, cause hard manouvers are only taught after the 250th hour per year of flight training...
Actually situational awareness is rather significantly more important that the ability to turn hard... which any pilot can do by the way... even if it is by accident.
You have to know when to turn and where the missile is to turn inside it... and it would be harder to do that with an R-77 coming at you than if it were an AMRAAM.
The R-77 can outturn a 12g turning target so trying to out turn it... even with 400 hours of flying experience would be interesting to see.
Actually situational awareness is rather significantly more important that the ability to turn hard... which any pilot can do by the way... even if it is by accident.
You have to know when to turn and where the missile is to turn inside it... and it would be harder to do that with an R-77 coming at you than if it were an AMRAAM.
The R-77 can outturn a 12g turning target so trying to out turn it... even with 400 hours of flying experience would be interesting to see.
IronsightSniper- Posts : 414
Points : 418
Join date : 2010-09-25
Location : California, USA
You're underestimating the maneuverability of the AIM-120D, but you seem to do that to a lot of things so I'll let it slide.
In any case, you will have to pull a relatively high-G maneuver that is not intrinsic to basic flying maneuvers in order to even avoid a terminal-phase AIM-120D. The thing about missiles is that they don't have to follow the plane directly and thus, they don't have to pull the same amount of Gs to whack it. So relying on Grisha won't work there.
In any case, you will have to pull a relatively high-G maneuver that is not intrinsic to basic flying maneuvers in order to even avoid a terminal-phase AIM-120D. The thing about missiles is that they don't have to follow the plane directly and thus, they don't have to pull the same amount of Gs to whack it. So relying on Grisha won't work there.
GarryB- Posts : 38978
Points : 39474
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The missile will be blowing past at Mach 3 plus, it might be able to pull a 40 g turn, but g is increased with speed so a Mach 3 plus 40g turner can be outflown by a subsonic 5 g turn as long as it is inside the missiles turn. And that is assuming the missile is not distracted by Chaff or towed decoys or electronic jammers.
Very simply a very fast missile has a large turning circle so flying towards the missile increases the closing speed and diving at high speed means the interception point that initially required no manouvering by the missile suddenly needs a sharp downwards turn to an interception point well in front of the target... accelerate fast enough and the missile wont make it and will lose lock.
Very simply a very fast missile has a large turning circle so flying towards the missile increases the closing speed and diving at high speed means the interception point that initially required no manouvering by the missile suddenly needs a sharp downwards turn to an interception point well in front of the target... accelerate fast enough and the missile wont make it and will lose lock.
IronsightSniper- Posts : 414
Points : 418
Join date : 2010-09-25
Location : California, USA
I just told you...missiles doesn't necessarily have to chase the plane, tail on. It all depends on the distance from Target, if you start evasive maneuvers too soon, the missile has to do less to compensate. If you do them too late, the missile doesn't have to even do much. Which is why you'd need a highly trained pilot to do the correct maneuvers in time to evade the missile, or otherwise he'll panic and get whacked.
|
|
|