AIM-54 Phoenix vs R-33

[Frisco1522]

Which was more capable in terms of:

1. Speed

2. Service Ceiling

3. Maneuverability

4. Ease of Use

5. Explosives

6. Hit Percentage

7. Range

 

Let the debate begin! :smartass:

 

Frisco1522

[Harpoon]

Oh God, here we go again.

[Quent]

Well, in terms of range, the maximum assumed distance that the AIM-54 can reach is 190 KM from its initial point of release, whereas the R-33's is only 160 (1999 version). But let us be honest, I don't think an AIM-54 would hit that often at such a distance, however it still makes it more probable for the missile to hit at 160km than the R-33, since the distance is 30 km short of the maximum range of the weapon device whilst this very distance is the limit of the R-33.

This being said, in terms of distance, the AIM-54 wins.

 

In terms of speed, the R-33 is assumed to reach a maximum speed that would stand between mach 3,5 and 4,5, while the AIM-54 can reach a speed of approximately mach 5, which would make it faster than its russian counterpart.

 

 

In terms of percentage of chance for the missiles to hit, it's hard to say, atleast for the AIM-54 Phoenix. The few times the weapon was ever released in real conditions (by the US), it missed its targets, because the conditions were, well....real. Trainings are meant for the missiles to hit and thus we cannot base a general percentage of hit for the missile based on both training simulations and real air-combat situations.

True, there are accounts that the missile was effectively used in the Iran-Iraq war and Iran claimed that it performed admirably, taking down a few iraqian aircrafts, HOWEVER we'll never be able to confirm those sources.

 

You'll find here a good website with relevant and reliable data about Hughes Aircraft Company's most advanced long range missile (at the time).

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-54.htm

 

 

I'll let the others look through data for the other aspects of the two missiles :)

Edited May 14, 2015 by Quent

[turkeydriver]

Well, in terms of range, the maximum assumed distance that the AIM-54 can reach is 190 KM from its initial point of release, whereas the R-33's is only 160 (1999 version). But let us be honest, I don't think an AIM-54 would hit that often at such a distance, however it still makes it more probable for the missile to hit at 160km than the R-33, since the distance is 30 km short of the maximum range of the weapon device whilst this very distance is the limit of the R-33.

This being said, in terms of distance, the AIM-54 wins.

 

In terms of speed, the R-33 is assumed to reach a maximum speed that would stand between mach 3,5 and 4,5, while the AIM-54 can reach a speed of approximately mach 5, which would make it faster than its russian counterpart.

 

 

In terms of percentage of chance for the missiles to hit, it's hard to say, atleast for the AIM-54 Phoenix. The few times the weapon was ever released in real conditions (by the US), it missed its targets, because the conditions were, well....real. Trainings are meant for the missiles to hit and thus we cannot base a general percentage of hit for the missile based on both training simulations and real air-combat situations.

True, there are accounts that the missile was effectively used in the Iran-Iraq war and Iran claimed that it performed admirably, taking down a few iraqian aircrafts, HOWEVER we'll never be able to confirm those sources.

 

You'll find here a good website with relevant and reliable data about Hughes Aircraft Company's most advanced long range missile (at the time).

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-54.htm

 

 

I'll let the others look through data for the other aspects of the two missiles :)

 

NONONONONONONONONOSTEVECARRELLNONONO!

 

You have zero actual facts on the IRL launches of the AIM-54 based on your assumptions. This is a valid rant that is supported by all logic and reason in the universe. Please delete the stupid and do a small amount of research other than reading internet posts. Please.

 

Of the misses that you speak of( US launches-3 of which we know of), one tracked fine perfectly a high-speed target which beamed at high Mach and then ran at high Mach-translate, not even an SA-10 will complete that intercept, it missed AFTER F-15s missed with an undisclosed amount of AIM-7s and AIM-120s. I use this not to clown the F-15, but to demonstrate how hard the intercept was. The only thing an Iraqi fighter pilot could do after GW1 was learn to run, period. The AIM-54 tracked and dropped after it lost energy. The MiG crashed on final after fuel exhaustion-which is why the crew were congratulated when they landed, they weren't awarded a kill, but it resulted in a kill(sort of).

The next two misses were due solely to the missiles being loaded incorrectly by a new Sailor so when the missiles were launched, the rocket arming pins remained with the missiles. After seeing both missiles drop after good avionics checks, the crews knew there was a loading problem and didn't bother shooting their other AIM-54s. It has nothing to due the missile not meeting its advertised capability. I'll warrant that Iran's claims are exaggerated, and I don't give Iraq's claims credibility either, but Iran did deploy and use the weapon successfully many times. This is directly why Iraq fled every F-14 that escorted flights in country(not often). So much so that A-6 drivers wanted to develop a pod containing an AWG-9 transmitter to drive MiGs away.

 

Your link shows good info for the rocket motor, and I'll forgive your mistakes here. Don't pontificate over 3 shots and dub it a failure. That's just armchair commando lunacy.

[Fake]

Well, in terms of range, the maximum assumed distance that the AIM-54 can reach is 190 KM from its initial point of release, whereas the R-33's is only 160 (1999 version). But let us be honest, I don't think an AIM-54 would hit that often at such a distance, however it still makes it more probable for the missile to hit at 160km than the R-33, since the distance is 30 km short of the maximum range of the weapon device whilst this very distance is the limit of the R-33.

This being said, in terms of distance, the AIM-54 wins.

 

In terms of speed, the R-33 is assumed to reach a maximum speed that would stand between mach 3,5 and 4,5, while the AIM-54 can reach a speed of approximately mach 5, which would make it faster than its russian counterpart.

 

 

In terms of percentage of chance for the missiles to hit, it's hard to say, atleast for the AIM-54 Phoenix. The few times the weapon was ever released in real conditions (by the US), it missed its targets, because the conditions were, well....real. Trainings are meant for the missiles to hit and thus we cannot base a general percentage of hit for the missile based on both training simulations and real air-combat situations.

True, there are accounts that the missile was effectively used in the Iran-Iraq war and Iran claimed that it performed admirably, taking down a few iraqian aircrafts, HOWEVER we'll never be able to confirm those sources.

 

You'll find here a good website with relevant and reliable data about Hughes Aircraft Company's most advanced long range missile (at the time).

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-54.htm

 

 

I'll let the others look through data for the other aspects of the two missiles :)

The farthest air kill is recorded by Cp.Aslani who was a Iranian F-14A pilot.He recorded the kill with an AIM-54A in the distance of 150 Km.

[Fake]

Well, in terms of range, the maximum assumed distance that the AIM-54 can reach is 190 KM from its initial point of release, whereas the R-33's is only 160 (1999 version). But let us be honest, I don't think an AIM-54 would hit that often at such a distance, however it still makes it more probable for the missile to hit at 160km than the R-33, since the distance is 30 km short of the maximum range of the weapon device whilst this very distance is the limit of the R-33.

This being said, in terms of distance, the AIM-54 wins.

 

In terms of speed, the R-33 is assumed to reach a maximum speed that would stand between mach 3,5 and 4,5, while the AIM-54 can reach a speed of approximately mach 5, which would make it faster than its russian counterpart.

 

 

In terms of percentage of chance for the missiles to hit, it's hard to say, atleast for the AIM-54 Phoenix. The few times the weapon was ever released in real conditions (by the US), it missed its targets, because the conditions were, well....real. Trainings are meant for the missiles to hit and thus we cannot base a general percentage of hit for the missile based on both training simulations and real air-combat situations.

True, there are accounts that the missile was effectively used in the Iran-Iraq war and Iran claimed that it performed admirably, taking down a few iraqian aircrafts, HOWEVER we'll never be able to confirm those sources.

 

You'll find here a good website with relevant and reliable data about Hughes Aircraft Company's most advanced long range missile (at the time).

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-54.htm

 

 

I'll let the others look through data for the other aspects of the two missiles :)

The farthest air kill is recorded by Cp.Aslani who was a Iranian F-14A pilot.He recorded the kill with an AIM-54A in the distance of 150 Km.

 

IRIAF didn't record a few kills with AIM-54A,they recorded lots of kills with AIM-54A because this missile is really good in TWS mode (except the Iranian pilots capability of course :thumbup: )

[1.JaVA_Platypus]

In an exercise somewhere in the 90's, rookie Dutch pilots flew mock-up engagements against majors and colonels from the US navy in their F-14's. We only had the non upgraded F16-A at the time. And nine times out of ten, The F-16's evaded the Phoenix missiles and got close enough to shoot the F-14's with sidewinders and cannon. The only simulated air-kill that the US Navy was able to get was after one F-14 fired ALL six of their simulated AIM-54's.

[dekiplav]

In an exercise somewhere in the 90's, rookie Dutch pilots flew mock-up engagements against majors and colonels from the US navy in their F-14's. We only had the non upgraded F16-A at the time. And nine times out of ten, The F-16's evaded the Phoenix missiles and got close enough to shoot the F-14's with sidewinders and cannon. The only simulated air-kill that the US Navy was able to get was after one F-14 fired ALL six of their simulated AIM-54's.

 

Did they mention how they where able to evade them (tactic used)? Because the RWR doesn't alert that an AIM-54 is being launch, the missile attacks from above, can reach very, very high speeds (above mach 4), which in return leaves very little time for reaction, has a huge warhead and you can't see the missile coming for you. This have been told to me by an actual F-14 pilot. I really wonder what is the appropriate tactic for engaging F-14 at long range, because if the Dutch pilots did this in F-16A 9/10 times, probably MiG-21 pilots can do the same (close to him) making the F-14 obsolete BVR platform.

Edited May 15, 2015 by dekiplav

[1.JaVA_Platypus]

I think they used to fly head-on towards the tomcats and immediatly turned 90degrees once they AIM-54's were being launched. Or maybe the missile has such tremendous speed, you can out-maneuver it?

[turkeydriver]

I think they used to fly head-on towards the tomcats and immediatly turned 90degrees once they AIM-54's were being launched. Or maybe the missile has such tremendous speed, you can out-maneuver it?

 

That's a bogus story for an exercise unless the intent was specifically to teach your pilots to evade long range shots and give them the confidence they could close to WVR and win.

 

In reality, the scenario goes like something like this. Detection, and tracking in TWS is done beyond the range of your radar and at a low-enough signal strength that doesn't trip your RWR (AWG-9 selling point, that was moot after the Shah fell in Iran). If the tomcat goes for lonest range AIM-54 shot-beyond 50nm, then they'll STT you and most likely trip your RWR. So you perform your first evasive maneuver and break lock....

-in your training scenario the weapon is considered defeated, in every sense of reality, the weapon continues to fly its course and then takes updates from the F-14 on where to go-it has every possibility of relocking and retracking you, unless it calculates it has no possibility of a kill.

 

Meanwhile, AIM-54 no. 2 has been launched at you..... you're closer now, and its harder to break lock, if several F-14s are attacking your flight, and their datalink is functional, you most likely will not break all of the lock tracks on you, and the datalink will ensure tracking info goes to both of the missiles trying to kill you.

 

Now let's say the F-14 is out of AIM-54s, he's still got plenty of gas, plenty of energy, and unless you've dropped your external tanks he's more maneuverable than you......and he's still 30+nm out.

 

-let's say you're God's gift to the F-16 world and your lightning quick reflexes, cloned from Doug Masters and Pete Mitchell, plus the brain of Mitchell Gant(Firefox), allow you to easily dodge the 2 missiles dropping from heaven at Mach 4.

 

-at 20nm the first AIM-7 shot could happen depending on closing speed and altitudes. this forces you break 90 yet again, and offer advantage to one of the F-14s closing on you, as they started bracketing your flight from 50 miles out.

- at 15 NM the second AIM-7 shot comes, and if you keep doging these you're still at best fully defensive.

 

Then there's the 2 AIM-9 shots and the gun.

 

So if your Dutch pilots, or any pilots on the planet have the ability and wherewithal to dodge 7 missiles and get a kill, more power to them.......I just highly doubt that possibility for 95% of the planet's fighter pilots.

 

AIM-54 has had aging rocket motor problems, had manufacturing quality control problems, and its advantages neutralized via espionage, and the Navy guarded them too much for the Nuke War that never happened, but it didn't cost $800,000 all up round because of an expensive rocket motor and warhead plus a radar transmitter...

[dekiplav]

I think they used to fly head-on towards the tomcats and immediatly turned 90degrees once they AIM-54's were being launched. Or maybe the missile has such tremendous speed, you can out-maneuver it?

 

The thing is they don't know when is launched, just like Aim-120. F-16A gets warning on their RWR only when the missile goes active. And by then they have like 8-9 sec. to react. The missile has huge warhead, almost like a bomb, and therefore a huge blast radius. It is by no means a magic bullet but it is considered a dangerous missile. Now those rookie F-16 guys must have come up with some good tactic to slaughter those experienced F-14 guys with a 9/10 kill ratio in a BVR engagement. :music_whistling:

[Greekbull]

In an exercise somewhere in the 90's, rookie Dutch pilots flew mock-up engagements against majors and colonels from the US navy in their F-14's. We only had the non upgraded F16-A at the time. And nine times out of ten, The F-16's evaded the Phoenix missiles and got close enough to shoot the F-14's with sidewinders and cannon. The only simulated air-kill that the US Navy was able to get was after one F-14 fired ALL six of their simulated AIM-54's.

 

Majors and Colonels don't fly F-14s...Not buying this engagement story at all... also we didn't deploy F-14s with 6 AIM-54s...I know it was done in pictures but that wouldn't be a combat loadout...

[captain_dalan]

Majors and Colonels don't fly F-14s...Not buying this engagement story at all... also we didn't deploy F-14s with 6 AIM-54s...I know it was done in pictures but that wouldn't be a combat loadout...

Beat me to it :)

[Dudikoff]

The thing is they don't know when is launched, just like Aim-120. F-16A gets warning on their RWR only when the missile goes active.

 

I'm not so sure about this. First of all, maybe the TWS didn't trigger the contemporary RWR systems as it was a new thing, but I'd expect that the RWR systems were updated accordingly afterwards (especially since digital systems became available). Second, the exact midcourse guidance technique of the Phoenix is still not publicly available AFAIK - there were some guesses that it uses SARH guidance - in that case the radar would be sending pulses to the target to illuminate it for the missile in which case it could trigger the RWR (depending on the type of course). Perhaps someone can illuminate us on this topic?

 

In regards to the R-33 comparison, I'd expect the Phoenix was better for maneuverable targets since it had terminal active radar homing unlike the R-33 which used SARH guidance to the reflections of the MiG-31 monopulse radar (it could guide up to 4 missiles simultaneously). Not to mention it used a conical scan seeker which was more susceptible to countermeasures. Though, it was intended to be used against bombers and cruise missiles only AFAIK.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Dudikoff

[captain_dalan]

It would definitely show the AWG9 on your RWR if your system can ID it, but the launch it self? In the 80's? I doubt it. Unless you specifically program it to read and interpret the whatever carrier the radar uses to feed the missile its mid course updates. And that's only and only the format actually differs in any way from the standard track records.

Edited May 16, 2015 by captain_dalan

[turkeydriver]

It would definitely show the AWG9 on your RWR if your system can ID it, but the launch it self? In the 80's? I doubt it. Unless you specifically program it to read and interpret the whatever carrier the radar uses to feed the missile it mid course updates. And that's only and only the format actually differs in any way from the standard track records.

 

 

The range is the question. AWG-9 tracked at very low power and had a very sensitive receiver for the time, so while you could pick it up, the range at which you did would mean its too late. This is shown in Iran as the majority of claimed AIM-54 kills the targets never knew they were shot at until the missiles hit, but if you went STT on a target with an RWR that could determine who you where, you made them drop bombs and run.

[captain_dalan]

The range is the question. AWG-9 tracked at very low power and had a very sensitive receiver for the time, so while you could pick it up, the range at which you did would mean its too late. This is shown in Iran as the majority of claimed AIM-54 kills the targets never knew they were shot at until the missiles hit, but if you went STT on a target with an RWR that could determine who you where, you made them drop bombs and run.

There is no doubt the STT would sound the alarm, however during the Desert Storm it seams like the Iraqis would bug out as soon as any kind of AWG9 presence was detected. Were they always "locked up" or could their receivers detect the AWG9 emissions?

[turkeydriver]

There is no doubt the STT would sound the alarm, however during the Desert Storm it seams like the Iraqis would bug out as soon as any kind of AWG9 presence was detected. Were they always "locked up" or could their receivers detect the AWG9 emissions?

 

This would be the ELINT part of every country's military. Even if their jets didn't have an RWR that could detect the AWG-9, radio trasmissions would tell them to run when they received the information. In GW1 the jets ran when they picked up the presence of the F-14. There is one instance of Dale Snodgrass' flight actually going in country for A-6 escort(one of the few times F-14s went in country on an A-A mission during that war), were they detected a flight of MiG-29s that were no threat to the A-6s, they could have left their A-6s and gotten easy kills but they remained disciplined and stayed with their bombers and listened as F-15s were vectored in as designed to get the kills-this is no insult to the Air Force or F-15s, their NCTR almost ensured fratricide wouldn't happen, and the F-14 at this point still had avionics that suited blue water, with the radar pings known as bandits.

Anyway, I have heard of one instance only in GW1 where an F-14 came back with a missing AIM-54 and a smiling RIO. If there's any truth to this story, the kill may have happened after the bogey crossed into Iran, but the story hasn't been confirmed from anything I've read.

Mark Fox's J-7 kill is directly due to the J-7s deliberately avoiding F-14 escort to try to kill the F/A-18s. At the start of the war, Iraq thought it could fight F-152, F-16s, and F/A-18s due to them being constrained by the AIM-7. Iran had the AIM-7E-2 and no AIM-7Fs or AIM-7Ms and it was believed the AIM-7 was a horrible weapon- turns out the AIM-7f and AIM-7M more than fixed the AIM-7s previous horrible reputation and most kills in the war were made with the AIM-7, both at even altitude and low altitude, in head-on, beam and tail chase scenarios.......and one F-15 "killed" a Mercedes that the pilot thought was a low flying helo.......

Off the rabbit trail, back on target, Iran feared the AWG-9 because it meant the much improved AIM-54C was heading your way.

Many of Iraq's fighters were point defense types that launched at climbed when the enemy got too close to the airfield, so their RWRs would detect the fighter's targeting them as soon as AWACs pointed them there, AWACs routinely detected enemy fighters as soon as they took off, if not as soon as they started rolling down the runway.

[Dudikoff]

It would definitely show the AWG9 on your RWR if your system can ID it, but the launch it self? In the 80's? I doubt it. Unless you specifically program it to read and interpret the whatever carrier the radar uses to feed the missile its mid course updates. And that's only and only the format actually differs in any way from the standard track records.

 

Well, I did say "at least since digital RWR systems became available" meaning easily programmable, but I never said the Soviet tech could at the time as the plane mentioned was an F-16. Also, I hinted that if it actually used SARH mid-course guidance, there might be some change in the signal unless the missile seeker head was really sensitive enough to just guide on the TWS reflections (since it's much smaller than the main dish, I'd doubt this is possible during the launch at max TWS range unless the missile is initially simply lofted towards a calculated intercept point and then when it starts coming down it is close enough to pick up the reflections). It's quite possible that some other mid-course guidance method was used, of course, but I never found anything solid, just rumors.

 

Regarding the Iraqi planes, I guess most of them didn't even have RWR systems or had the obsolete Sirena ones. Supposedly the ones equipped with SPO-15 systems could detect the AWG-9 (and I'd assume the Mirage F-1's), but I don't know about any official documents on this. It would be nice if US released some documents on the tests on the Soviet tech from the 80's.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Dudikoff

[captain_dalan]

It's quite possible that some other mid-course guidance method was used, of course, but I never found anything solid, just rumors.

 

Me neither. It's somewhat odd that the data is still classified today, after all that time.

 

But my point is, what if there is no detectable change in the signal carrier? In such a case, even if the radar itself is detected, a launch wouldn't be.

 

EDIT: not until the missile goes active that is.

[GGTharos]

But my point is, what if there is no detectable change in the signal carrier? In such a case, even if the radar itself is detected, a launch wouldn't be.

 

Highly unlikely. Without MCUs you get very low pk, and radar will generally not generate signals it does not need to use. More to the point you can detect the MCUs but you might not be able to decode who is being tracked.

[captain_dalan]

More to the point you can detect the MCUs but you might not be able to decode who is being tracked.

Or if tracking itself involves a launch. This is what i was getting at, anyway.

[GGTharos]

No MCU, no launch (barring certain modes that are typically used wvr anyway). Or more correctly, no launch, no MCU.

 

Is really up to the equipment on the target aircraft to be able to classify all that, but as long as your rwr is providing audio you'll hear the signal change anyway ;-)

[turkeydriver]

AIM-54 could be launched and supported by either STT or TWS. TWS allowed for the multiple shots and AIM-54s were then coded to a target that was in the TWS scan zone. I'm guessing this coding was to ensure the right targeting info went to the right missile and there weren't miscues. Something like this would be done like for example on the leading edge of a radio signal pulse, before the "message", so the AIM-54 sets its code before launch and then filters out all signals except the one its coded to receive. I have no idea if this is how it works but typical avionics work in a similar manner.

The whole TWS launch method begs to question a number of scenarios.....such as, could an AIM-54 be launched in a LOAL type and then told by the radar to fly to an area? The AWG-9 wouldn't be tracking anyone, and the AIM-54 radar wouldn't be live, so the shot could be taken silent until say the last 30% of the trip, or until the AIM-54 radar kicks on around 12 miles out, but that's 12 miles LOS, so if the AIm-54 is at 60k ft and dropping on a target at 20k feet, that's 7 miles of vertical and about 8 miles horizontal and closing above Mach 4.........so you need video game reflexes to understand the situation you are in and solve it in the next 7 seconds lol.

 

Also, with coded pulses to the missiles for mid course updates, and with the radars ability to track 24 targets, could a lead F-14 guide all 24 missiles from a flight of 4, with the other 3 keeping their radars off?

 

I know the F-14D had an ability with the APG-71 to double its displayed scan area by joining with another F-14 and sharing information.....of course that's nothing compared to what Link-16 will show you, and the F-14D had that, but I think the antenna sharing info most likely gave you more info than Link-16.

[GGTharos]

TWS allowed for the multiple shots and AIM-54s were then coded to a target that was in the TWS scan zone.

 

The missile is programmed to receive a specific channel before launch. The radar then generates the data-link info on that channel. That simple, and used regardless of STT/TWS.

 

 

The whole TWS launch method begs to question a number of scenarios.....such as, could an AIM-54 be launched in a LOAL type and then told by the radar to fly to an area? The AWG-9 wouldn't be tracking anyone, and the AIM-54 radar wouldn't be live, so the shot could be taken silent until say the last 30% of the trip, or until the AIM-54 radar kicks on around 12 miles out, but that's 12 miles LOS, so if the AIm-54 is at 60k ft and dropping on a target at 20k feet, that's 7 miles of vertical and about 8 miles horizontal and closing above Mach 4.........so you need video game reflexes to understand the situation you are in and solve it in the next 7 seconds lol.

 

Your ECM already has those reflexes, and without MCUs it'll be more effective. Not to mention that missile isn't likely to hit much anyway. This is basically an INS-to-active flight, it's been tried and didn't do so hot.

 

Also, with coded pulses to the missiles for mid course updates, and with the radars ability to track 24 targets, could a lead F-14 guide all 24 missiles from a flight of 4, with the other 3 keeping their radars off?

 

Nope. The launcher programs the missile and generates the data-link. It will very specifically use different channels than other aircraft to prevent EMI.

 

Link-16 already shares everything ... beyond what an inter-flight data-link would.