Jump to content

renhanxue

Members
  • Posts

    655
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by renhanxue

  1. Glad y'all agree with me. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here... In the meantime: Ammunitionskatalog, data och bilder: flygvapnet (1984) True arch-nerd stuff. Handy to have around as a reference sometimes though, and has a good list of obscure abbreviations. Also, the Swedish armed forces of the late Cold War really, really loved mines. Anvisningar för telefonitrafik vid flygning: trafikexempel (1959) While the DCS Viggen module will let you walk the walk, this little handy little brochure will let you talk the talk too. Swedish military aviation phraseology is pretty weird.
  2. I can offer you the unclassified parts of the JA 37C flight manual in English if you want, just need to turn it into a PDF first. Many (but far from all) of the subsystems are the same or quite similar, after all... Speaking of which though, poll: what should I request declassification of next? Some ideas I have kicking around are: - SFI JA 37 - Taktiska anvisningar för attackförband, 1970 or 1982 edition - Classified parts of the AJ(S) 37 systems overview binders If you have better ideas, post away. I'm leaning towards Taktiska anvisningar, myself. SFI JA 37 might take forever and a half to get declassified.
  3. Mid-late 90's. The national archives library catalog says the technical description was published in 1998, so probably around that time. Which reminds me, I should go photograph that.
  4. I agree that "rotetvåa" is wingman, but is "rotetrea" even a thing? Never heard of it.
  5. That's another one of the weird Swedish military aviation terms. A division in Swedish is a squadron, a flottilj is an air wing, and an eskader is not the equivalent of an "escadrille" in French, it's a larger formation made up of several wings. "Air group" is one possible translation, but a grupp is not a group, it's a flight (of four aircraft). Originally the Swedish air force had four eskadrar but the other three disappeared in the 60's. E1 was retained because it was considered necessary with a unified command to achieve sufficient concentration of force. By the way, what's a good word for translating rote? Pair?
  6. Continuing on the rb 04 theme, enjoy some Lansen porn in the form of Taktiska anvisningar för attackförband, 1961 års utgåva Speech bubble: "Let's try ARMING next time!" Caption: "It is a grave error to overlook any setting such that there is no effect on the target"
  7. The missile and the warhead were originally designed in the late 1950's, when the Soviets were still building gun cruisers like the Sverdlovs with armor 100mm thick, or even thicker. You couldn't penetrate that kinetically with a missile like this, so you had to rely on the explosive effect for penetration. I also agree with emg's post - as I've understood it the missile is intended to work like a torpedo does, by breaking the keel of the ship.
  8. Right, found where FOI put their magazine on their new new new webpage. The article the quote comes from is in issue 1, 2004, page 20 and on. Highly recommended reading, someone (not me) should translate it. Sample quote:
  9. Brain fart, I meant 1.5 nm. The reason I made the connection is this quote from an old issue of FOI's internal magazine Framsyn (as cited here - I would really like to read the entire article but it's not online anymore):
  10. I happened to refresh at the right moment ;) The rb 15 has been confirmed to be in :) I'll see about a write up about that one too. By the way, I was wondering what was up with the 2700 meters figure for the group targeting mode since it seemed pretty arbitrary, but then I realized it's pretty close to two nautical miles (correction, 1.5). I bet that's where it comes from.
  11. I haven't found any number on the cruise speed, just "high subsonic". Doing the math though, in order to travel 20 km in the 65 seconds the rocket motor burns, you have to do around 1100 km/h or M 0.9. So somewhere in that ballpark is a reasonable assumption. The rb 15 probably has a considerably longer range since it's turbojet powered, but I don't have any exact numbers.
  12. I wrote a little piece on the rb 04E based on the SFI's. Figured people might be interested. Robot 04E (with "robot", abbreviated "rb", being military Swedish for "missile") was the AJ 37 Viggen's signature weapon: a radar-guided, sea-skimming anti-ship missile, developed from the rb 04C which had originally entered service in the 1961 on the A 32 Lansen. The E version entered service in 1975, with 315 missiles produced. Let's have a look at how it works. Rb 04C or D on a A 32 Lansen. Missiles on the assembly line at the air force's Central Aircraft Workshops in Arboga. First, some background on the doctrine and use case that shaped the design of the missile. The Swedish armed forces expected the Warsaw Pact to attempt to secure a beachhead on the Swedish coast with a D-Day style invasion: a massive fleet of hundreds of ships with surface combatant screens protecting a core of various landing craft. The AJ 37's raison d'être was to attack a fleet like this. The rb 04E was mainly intended to be used against the screening combat ships, since if their AA was silenced the Viggens would be able to go to town on the vulnerable landing craft with less expensive weapons like bombs, autocannons and unguided rockets. In order to achieve saturation of the defenses and a reasonable chance to actually sink mutually supporting surface combatants, the plan was to deploy at least four but preferably six or more full squadrons in each attack wave (one squadron in the air was two flights of four aircraft, so six squadrons would be 48 aircraft). Since the plan involved launching up to close to a hundred missiles at the same time (or slightly less - some aircraft would be carrying countermeasures instead of missiles), getting the missiles to spread themselves out between different targets and not collide with each other or lock on each other was a very real concern, which will be apparent when we get into discussing the seeker. Onwards to the technical details! The missile's about four and a half meters long (14 ft 9 in), weighs around 625 kg total (1378 lbs), has a shaped charge warhead that weighs about 200 kg (441 lbs) and is powered by a solid rocket motor that produces a nominal thrust of 195 kp (1.9 kN, 430 lbf) for a nominal burn time of 65.5 seconds (can vary between 60 and 75 seconds depending on propellant temperature). The control surfaces are pneumatically actuated. The seeker is a frequency hopping monopulse radar with a parabolic receiver antenna located under the radome in the front of the missile (the text "TRYCK EJ HÄR" on the radome means "do not press here"). The antenna sweeps horizontally only, 28 degrees to each side. The missile cruises at an altitude of 10 meters above sea level, which it maintains by the use of a radar altimeter. The AJ 37 can carry two rb 04E's on the inner underwing pylons. When pre-flighting the missile, the mechanic had a panel with five switches and a knob available to him for programming the missile - there really isn't much the pilot can configure from the cockpit. The panel looks like this: The switches are intentionally only labeled with numbers for opsec reasons - the seeker electronics were highly classified and conscripts were not allowed to know much about how it worked. Switch 1 ("balkläge") is the missile's position on the aircraft; V (vänster, left), C (center) or H (höger, right). The centerline pylon © was initially planned as a possible launch position on the AJ 37 but the electronics to actually launch the missile from there were never implemented. The rest of the switches we'll cover when we get to the functionality they affect. The missiles can be launched one by one or both together - in the latter case there's an automatic delay of about two seconds between the two, to avoid collisions. Targeting is simple: the pilot simply points the entire aircraft at the desired target, guided by the head-down radar screen, on which either a PPI or a B-scope is presented together with a wind-compensated aiming line (wind speed is taken from the aircraft computer, where it is either doppler calculated by the radar altimeter system or taken from the weather forecast as input during pre-flight procedures). The presentation looks like this: B-scope and PPI, respectively. The number 60 shown in the bottom right means that the range of the display is set to 60 km. The two short, curved lines on the PPI represent the ranges 12 and 24 km respectively, while the line marked "raktframlinje" is the wind-compensated aiming line. Originally, the 12 and 24 km lines represented minimum and maximum firing ranges for the missile, but at some point the procedure was improved to calculate the engagement envelope dynamically based on air pressure, temperature and speed of the launching aircraft (later manuals recommend a max launch range of about 20 km). The pilot can select if the missile's seeker should be in single ("ENKEL") or group ("GRUPP") targeting mode. In single target mode, the missile will simply lock on the first detected target. In group mode, the target selection process is more involved and we'll get back to it in a little bit. The missile can be launched at altitudes between 50 and 425 meters above sea level and airspeeds between Mach 0.7 and 0.92. The aircraft's radar does not need to be radiating to launch the missile, since the targeting is done just by pointing the aircraft the right way. In fact, the missile can be launched completely "blind" - this was particularly desirable on the Lansen, which did not have a radar in every aircraft. The flight lead could do the radar thing and the rest of the flight just launched when he did - a tactic that was also technically usable on the AJ 37. Once launched, the missile is completely autonomous and can no longer be controlled in any way by the launching aircraft. When the launch signal is given, the missile activates its internal batteries, releases its gyro from being slaved to the aircraft's attitude gyros, unlocks and pressurizes the aileron actuators, and when the batteries have reached full power (after about 0.6 seconds), it separates from the aircraft. 0.7 seconds after separation, the elevators and rudders are pressurized and the missile immediately starts diving at an angle of about 7 degrees. About 1.1 seconds after separation, the missile starts yawing either 2.5 or 7.5 degrees to either the left or the right - which direction and by how much is determined by the position of the knob (marked 6, "kurstillskott") on the switch panel on the missile. After 8 seconds, the missile returns to the launch course. The reason for this is to separate the missiles horizontally. When the missile's radar altimeter detects that the missile has had an altitude under 120 meters above sea level for more than 100 milliseconds, the automatic 7 degree dive stops and the missile instead follows a descent profile that takes around 10 seconds to reach its cruise altitude of 10 meters. Missiles launched from the right pylon ignite their rocket engine when descending below 130 meters, while missiles launched from the left pylon ignite it upon reaching the cruise altitude, to further separate them in time and in altitude. When the cruise altitude is reached, the seeker starts scanning for targets; the scan area (and lock envelope) is shown above. When a possible target is detected, the seeker activates a function called "three-view logic", which means that the ranging function continues seeking forward about 80 meters. Then, the antenna sweep is reversed and the ranging seeks about 250 meters backwards, then the sweep is reversed again and the ranging seeks about 300 meters forwards. If the seeker gets a return again during the first or second reversed sweep, the target is considered valid. If no return is received during the first or second reversed sweeps, the target search continues. On the other hand, if the seeker gets another return immediately after the first indication, caused by the size of the target, the three-view logic function is blocked and the seeker accepts the target immediately. When the seeker has locked on a target, the range to the target is monitored. The range should be decreasing, since the missile is approaching it. If the closing speed is too low, for example because the seeker has locked on another missile flying in the same direction, the missile releases the lock and starts a new search. The seeker will not lock on targets that are located such that the missile cannot be maneuvered to hit them, either. In group targeting mode, the seeker will assume that the target ships are traveling in columns, and can be programmed to lock on a target in the first, second or third row as seen from the attacking aircraft, using the target selection switch (marked 5, "målval") on the switch panel on the missile. In order for the missile to lock in group mode, two or more targets have to be detected in the same range sweep, and they have to be a maximum of 2700 meters from each other (this number looks arbitrary, but it's just about 1.5 nautical miles). In order to allow for at least some flexibility in the line up, the seeker performs a fictional widening of the antenna lobe by copying detected targets and considering them for the next range sweep as well. This is all perhaps best explained with a picture: The "angle jump" function, which can be enabled on the switch panel using the switch marked 4 ("vinkelhopp") makes the missile skip the first possible target it sees and lock on the next one instead, if one is found before the antenna sweep reaches the end position and turns around. The missile also has an additional targeting mode, called "active + passive", which can be selected on the switch panel (switch marked 3, "följemod"). When this is selected, the missile is basically home-on-jam - if it detects it is being jammed, it will lock on the jammer after one full horizontal sweep. While locked on the jammer (passive targeting mode), the antenna is kept pointed at the signal source and the missile tracks the bearing to it. The range search stays active during the passive target tracking and if a target is detected in the jammer's direction, the missile will lock on that. If the jammer stops transmitting, the missile will keep going "blind" for two seconds; after that it resumes active targeting. Rb 04E seeker unit. The seeker keeps the missile pointed straight at the target until it is less than 4000 meters away, at which point the missile starts accounting for the target's speed and leads it. The seeker keeps tracking the target until it has closed to 250 meters, then the missile flies blind the last distance. If the warhead does not detonate when the target is passed, the missile re-starts targeting and simply locks on the first thing it sees (disregarding the single/group target selection and any previous considerations). At 250 meters from the target, the missile arms its fuzes. The missile is not intended to actually hit the target - the warhead is a shaped charge that is focused downwards, so it is supposed to be detonated above the target. There are three different proximity fuzes - one magnetometric, one temperature-sensitive and one based on the radar altimeter, which triggers on the sudden altitude change when passing over the target. There are two proximity fuze modes, selected with the switch marked 2 ("zonrör") on the switch panel - in mode 1, only the radar altimeter is active, while in mode 2, any two fuzes both giving the detonation signal is required (presumably mode 2 is for use in rough seas to prevent accidental detonations from high waves). Additionally, there is also a contact fuze in the nose of the missile, which detonates it after a small delay if it should hit the target directly. In summary, I find the group mode to of questionable utility since it requires the targets to line up almost perfectly, but I guess they did what they could to try to get the missile to be able to work against large ship formations. In the single target mode though the missile seems to be a pretty nasty piece of business for 1975, especially considering the radio silent mass usage doctrine and the fact that very few aircraft needed to actually radiate to enable a launch. The main weakness was probably that there were so few missiles purchased - about two missiles per AJ 37, total.
  13. "transition arc" sounds great when translated literally though
  14. Yes. See this SHK report about the crash of a Gripen back in 1999, page 13: (emphasis mine)
  15. Haha, glad you appreciate it. :) Please tell me if you see anything else that looks dumb in the English text. The language in these manuals is rather hard to just read in the first place, and making it make sense in aeronautical English is pretty challenging. Figuring what exactly "tätning" (literally "sealing", as in making something airtight) referred to wasn't trivial, but Google eventually turned up a report from Statens Haverikommission where it was actually explained. It means "rapid pitch-up". Explain how that makes sense, anyone? Then again, is that what "departure" refers to in English as well? That makes more sense but it's still kinda odd.
  16. It's certainly better than what I had. Changed. Thanks!
  17. Kapitelrubriken "Okontrollerade flyglägen" "Överstegrade inverterade flyglägen har inte kunnat erhållas vid prov." "Endast vid ett fåtal tillfällen under spinnutprovningen hamnade fpl i en rättvänd störtspiral. Något repeterbart flygläge/manöver som resulterar i en rättvänd störtspiral har ej kunnat definieras."
  18. SFI AJS 37 part 2, chapter II, page 38 (page 41 in the PDF): The aerodynamics compendium also mentions that pitch stability is "basically undisturbed" all the way up to alpha 25° or so. Other than that: Swedish speakers, how would you translate "flygläge"? I chose "flight mode" here but it's clunky. Flight regime isn't quite right either, or is it? Flight position?
  19. The AB has three zones. The thrust reverser cannot be engaged in the air, there are several different safety interlocks that prevent this. Pulling the thrust reverser handle in the air just makes it automatically engage when there's weight on the right main gear (if there isn't also weight on the nose gear within one second it'll abort closing the reverser hatches until there is). Closing the hatches completely takes several seconds, which I think is going to be something of an issue when landing on a carrier.
  20. peep that landing gear retraction
  21. I don't think Higby misses the point. BVR is enormously attractive - the notion of getting to shoot at someone who can't shoot back (or, ideally, even see you) is basically the holy grail. One of Higby's points is that if you don't have equipment that can deliver on this promise, you're just wasting time and money and additionally you may be giving your own location away (via RWR's). That part is basically a non-issue for missiles in use today but may become true again with future developments in electronic warfare or such things (okay, I'm reaching here but bear with me for a moment). The other point he's making is about the political and human factors of BVR. If you absolutely cannot accept friendly fire, then you need an absolutely reliable IFF system that has at least the same range as your missiles. The advance of technology has mitigated this problem too to some extent but as long as the fog of war is a thing it will still be a factor that needs to be considered. Hence you need both BVR and WVR. On a different level though, Higby's paper is more of an indictment of early air-launched radar guided missiles than anything else. His distinction of BVR vs WVR is also a distinction of radar vs IR guidance. From that perspective it is very easy to see why IR is so much cheaper and more reliable: ranges are shorter, energy levels received by the seeker orders of magnitude greater, the seeker mechanism is less complex and does not need support from the launching aircraft's radar, etc etc. Again this is less of a problem today but it is worth keeping in mind that the costs (in many senses of the word, not merely monetary) of technological complexity have not simply gone away. Complex technology is more vulnerable to the unexpected than simple technology is almost by definition, and radar missiles are inherently more complex and have way more variables involved than IR missiles do. The "keep it simple, stupid" principle exists for a reason - it's not that simplicity has a value of its own, but simple solutions tend to have desirable side effects (or perhaps it is more accurate to say that they tend to have less undesirable side effects).
  22. I didn't mean "your" as in "the pilots belonging to you degenerate Americans", just in a more general sense. I should just have written "the pilots" instead, that would have been clearer. No nationalism and no offense intended :) I actually found the numbers for the rb 04. There were 315 rb 04E's delivered (to be used on a total of about a hundred AJ 37's - you get one load of two missiles per aircraft, basically). Weirdly enough though there were 889 rb 05A's (that's the MCLOS one). I guess it was cheaper since no radar. Available numbers (source: Sipri) indicate there were around 1800 Skyflashes purchased for around 150 JA 37's. I suspect that number may be too high but let's assume it's correct, which gives around ten missiles per aircraft, and it could only carry two at a time. Add to this the fact that any war at all for the Swedish air force during the Cold War would almost by definition be an existential one (that's why you see the stuff about deploying E1 completely without regard for own losses in a "decisive situation") and that the Swedish air force didn't even attempt to escort strike aircraft - it was all about trying to shoot down (nuclear) bombers or Il-76's dropping paratroopers. With that in mind I think that yes, a JA 37 pilot would definitely be disciplined about taking missile shots irresponsibly. That's a different doctrine for a different war, though. Still, the USAF had radically different numbers in ODS, indicating that they at least did something different. e: at least on the F-16 there were something like 30 accidental Sidewinder launches in ODS simply because of poor ergonomics. Don't know if this was the case on any other aircraft though.
  23. Since you only carry 6-8 missiles even in the best case and they cost the tax payer tens of thousands (or even hundreds of thousands) of dollars each, you really shouldn't waste them. Taking a lot of shots that have a low likelihood of hitting is at the very least a sign of poor discipline, but also indicates that your pilots may not have a proper understanding of the engagement envelope. Either way it's a failure in training and can be remedied. You Americans might be able to afford such things (at least in the short term) but lesser air forces usually do not acquire more live missiles than maybe 2-4 combat loads per aircraft. I don't believe more than a few hundred live rb 04's were ever built, for example. That's how expensive those things are. e: Higby just cites "GWAPS" for his numbers and I really can't be bothered to go read through all that
  24. The Tomcats didn't have a sufficiently reliable IFF system and were rarely or never cleared for BVR in Desert Storm, hence no reason to carry the Phoenix. (AFAIK this went for everything other than the F-15C, which had the NCTR system.) The Navy and Marines were also really, really bad at A2A in Desert Storm: (source: Promise and Reality: Beyond-Visual-Range (BVR) Air-to-Air Combat, p. 16) Also, you really shouldn't talk about the O.G. Phoenix and the AIM-54C as if it was the same missile. It might look the same, but I'd wager my butt that there differences in reliability are an order of magnitude or greater.
×
×
  • Create New...