In that case an entire passive targeting system via IRST/TIS image processor is necessary, because as soon you aim your gun at the helicopter the crew will be alerted by LWR and try to get low to break the LOS.
The energy in the laser beam riding missiles laser beam is so weak it will likely not set off most LWR.
Bear in mind that a laser range finder has a much much more powerful beam... the energy from a laser range finding system is such that if an object next to the target is lased that the reflected energy from the laser spot on the helo next to the target is comparable to the energy of the beam riders laser.
This means that laser reflections will set off a LWR including laser reflections from the Helos own LRF... so LWR are often set to ignore less powerful signals... meaning often beam riders lasers are ignored.
the alternative is that any laser reflection will set off the LWR so the crew will likely start ignoring it because any laser will set it off including the helicopters own laser rangefinder.
Which one? Optronic database? There is no tank that could do that. There are systems in study for the AMX-56 with shape-factor IFF. They are trying to solve one issue with Optronic IFF, density. In most cases the optical/IR IFF will be difficult over 1K since the tank will show a shape, but not the actual density. Thales BMS PIDed 8/10 cardboards as real targets...it went to 9/10 with cars dressed up as tanks.
The only missiles I have read about with onboard databases of targets signatures are the Brimstone MMW radar guided missile which has an onboard database of 3D MMW radar signatures of targets so detected targets can be identified, and the proposed Morfei IIR guided missile with a 3D database of IR images that can be used to ID targets.
I remember in the 1980s the Europeans were developing artificial intelligence to try to teach an AI computer system to detect tanks.
They got it to the point where 97% of the time it was right in lab tests and then they had field trials... and it was pathetic... its accuracy was aweful.
Turns out they fed it with photos with tanks and photos without tanks and it tried to guess. they told it whether it was right or not and it used its own method of working out why... it was a black box system so you couldn't just generate rules.
Anyway after a few years of trying to work out what was wrong it was eventually worked out that the sample photos with tanks in them were taken on sunny days.
they thought they were training the computer to detect the presence or absence of tanks, but in actual fact what they trained it to do was detect a sunny day from a dark gray gloomy day...
hehehe... true story...
actually impossibru, in order to autotrack the target must be lased first for a couple secs, then there is sudden abrupt movement changes and boom you have to restart an autotrack, so sorry my bad
Not true. To autotrack a target you don't need to know its range... it is a video processing feature that would work on the moon or the sun if you want... you don't need to know the range to either to track their movements.
Equally you don't need to know the range to the target... you can look at where the target is and turn 45 degrees and lase something on the ground a similar distance away to get a rough estimate... if it is 6km away then you know your gun launched missile will reach as it can hit targets at 8km so you turn your turret round and place the crosshair on the target and "lock it"... ie tell the autotracker to follow the target... load the round and fire... the guidance system normally raises the beam to a couple of metres above the target so your missile will fly a few metres high and wont fly into fences of trees etc... the ballistics computer has a rough idea of range and knows the flight performance of the missile... so knowing the target is about 6km away after x number of seconds where the missile will have flown 5km the guidance system will automatically drop the laser down to centre it on the target and the missile will sense the beam drop several metres and it will descend back into the centre of the beam and follow it to hit the target.
The missile will still be covering several hundred metres per second so the pilot wont see it until it is way too late... an end on GLATGM is 125mm across... if you can see that 200m away then you are a better man than I... and one second later it is punching through your cockpit windscreen... you will see that but you wont have time to do anything about it...
Dodging bullets is Hollywood BS.
During a real war if a pilot sees an SA-2 launch they might be able to start a manouver that the missile can't follow so you dodge the missile... but there is a difference between a telephone pole sized missile with an enormous smoke trail behind it and a missile the size of a football with no rocket motor and no smoke coming up from the ground with ground clutter to hide in.
This probably belongs in ATGM thread at this point, but wouldn't LWRs only be effective against LRFs?
A Laser Beam riding missile has the guidance laser shining up it's ass the whole trip, so should never need to trigger any LWR, right?
Yes... having the LWR so sensitive that they are set off by beam riding lasers will simply result in hundreds or thousands of false alarms... which will likely lead to the being turned off.