Eight Amraams or mix?

[tflash]

I read this intersting article in Airforces June 2006 about the Tornado F.3

Currently they are armed with 4 fully integrated Amraam AIM-120A (will soon become C5) and 4 Asraam.

They argue for the Asraam as follows:

 

"In all Amraam kills to date, no one has been in a BVR scenario at the point of Detonation. Consequently, cleaning up the airspace of bandits after the merge remains a vital skill."

 

Nothing new, but then my question is this: why do US aircraft sometimes favour full Amraam load instead of mixed Amraam/Aim-9 one?

 

Suppose we would have AIM-9X in Lockon, would you fly all-Amraam or mixed? (Asraam has a lifting body design and is somewhat less manoevrable but extremely fast and has good range)

 

(Another interesting remark is that the current Foxhunter radar enables tracking of beaming fighters: not really what the in theory superior APG-63 is capable of in Lockon?)

[Kula66]

Do ADVs have the data link yet? Or is it still launch and pray? Given that they can't turn for toffee ... the ADV just will not want to get close! Fire, turn and run ...

 

ASRAAM has longer legs than AIM-9 ... and is more useful in the 8-10mile bracket?

 

Reading accounts of F-15 victories it always amazes me the close range at which they actually get the kill!

 

Me, online always 8 x AMRAAMs ...

[Pilotasso]

"In all Amraam kills to date, no one has been in a BVR scenario at the point of Detonation. Consequently, cleaning up the airspace of bandits after the merge remains a vital skill."

 

Merging in a tornado? hmmm ;)

 

it better get the kill because it will be in serious trouble under 10 miles.

 

 

Suppose we would have AIM-9X in Lockon, would you fly all-Amraam or mixed? (Asraam has a lifting body design and is somewhat less manoevrable but extremely fast and has good range)

 

Im beggining to understand why some airforces are adopting the ASRAAM instead of the AIM-9x and all other missiles on the same class, Python 4 Iris-T R-73 etc.

 

For 1 their extreme manueverability comes only from the thrust vectoring but they burn for only 3-4 seconds and the manuvers depletes their range utterly to 2 miles or less. The real advantage comes from the IIR seekers and if you couple that with a bigger rocket mottor you dont need thrust vectoring because you can shoot from further away for gentler turns. This is often more usefull and effective than short range extreme manueverability.

 

For example you get an analogous situation in lomac when comparing the AIM-9 with the R-27ET. At 10 miles the ET has you dead, while the extra manueverability of the AIM-9 is only needed if your target is passing your nose to a high algle off boresight wich you cant avoid given its short range.

 

I usualy fly combos of AIM-7's and 120's.

[pschelchshorn]

AMRAAM = Bigger Boom/ Can still be used within 5 to 10 miles (statement of my dad, ex FP)

ASRAAM = Fast, high range (when head to head as all ir missiles) , not as maneuverable as the IRIS-T (personal favorite) or AIM-9X. IRIS-T : Best combination between long legs, vectored thrust and lift surfaces.

 

 

Flip

[tflash]

Do ADVs have the data link yet? ..

 

Yes, they do have the data link.

[Dudikoff]

Yes, they do have the data link.

 

I think, given the subject, he meant AMRAAM datalink to give midcourse updates to the missile. I'm not sure they installed that upgrade to the radar, especially due to the fact that Typhoon is entering service.

[tflash]

I think, given the subject, he meant AMRAAM datalink to give midcourse updates to the missile. I'm not sure they installed that upgrade to the radar, especially due to the fact that Typhoon is entering service.

 

According to the article they did; it's what is meant by "full amraam capability".

 

It is very strange indeed that the MoD has invested so much in the F.3, given that Typhoon is coming and above all thet the F.3 airframe is not really a dogfighter at all.

 

With Link-16, Amraam+datalink and Asraam, together with the now very capable AI-24 Foxhunter, the F.3 seems to be a formidable interceptor though.

[Guest Cali]

I fly with a mixed loadout of either 4-120's and 4-7's or 4-120's 2-7's and 2-Aim 9's.

[D-Scythe]

Nothing new, but then my question is this: why do US aircraft sometimes favour full Amraam load instead of mixed Amraam/Aim-9 one?

 

No U.S. fighter on MiGCAP duty favours full AMRAAMs, which are always mixed in withSidewinder and Sparrow (in the case of the F-15/F/A-18C).

 

Some F-16CJs load up with 4 AMRAAMs for self-defense, as I'd imagine that there's no point to the dogfighting AIM-9 when you're carrying HARMs, fuel tanks and ECM pods altogether.

 

IMO, there really is no point for the ASRAAM's extended range. The AIM-120 is absolutely lethal IRL within it's NEZ, and from pilot accounts have been basically described as "almost a deathray" when fired from a few hundred yards out to 8 miles. Other SRAAMs like the AIM-9X complement the AMRAAM much better in terms of being able to kill what the AMRAAM cannot (like a target 70 degrees off boresight a mile off the nose).

[mikoriad]

Given the current state of the BVR situation for the f-15, I tend to run 4 120's and 4 aim9's. I will almost certainly end up getting in close and have to have make an of angle shot at some point. Given that the 120 is as bad close in as it is from a far, I can't justify carrying 8 of them. Now if the BVR ablitly of the eagle and the 120 was better, I'd go 6 120's to 2 aim9's. Aside from the VERY short range of the 9, for me it's quite a reliable missle.

 

... of course all of this is based on the in game performance...

[S77th-GOYA]

To compare real world loadouts and weapon capabilities with this game is silly.

[Force_Feedback]

To compare real world loadouts and weapon capabilities with this game is silly.

 

Sure, but there are always people wanting to ave the maximum realism they can get, and I respect that, cause all I don is flying the humancockpit=yes M-2000 in lomac, testing the suckyness of the MICA RF and the "Uber heater" (yes, the r-27ET is crap compared to this one) MICA IR. And the Super 530s are nice too, as are the most sucky small IR ones, the R-550, which basically is rear hemisphere only (cool to have such missile, allows for more "dogfighting" is staead of those off-bore-boreness)

 

Oh, a bit of speculation, when we will get WAFM is the future, will the (radar guided) missiles guide themselves in this snake-like fashion we see on all vids of such missiles in real life, or will they just fly in a straight path like they do now?

[MBot]

off-bore-boreness

 

I love that one :D Bring on the AIM-9P baby 8)

[Dudikoff]

I love that one :D Bring on the AIM-9P baby 8)

 

Yeah. Cold War early-mid 80s setting would be great (can't help myself).

[Pilotasso]

F-16 block 5 rules! ;)

 

http://www.aviapedia.com/videos/fighters/F-16/F-16-Osiraq.mpg ;)

[D-Scythe]

Oh, a bit of speculation, when we will get WAFM is the future, will the (radar guided) missiles guide themselves in this snake-like fashion we see on all vids of such missiles in real life, or will they just fly in a straight path like they do now?

 

Radar guided missiles don't snake because of aerodynamic reasons - they snake because of seeker limitations. I'm hoping we get this effect with the advanced seeker model, but ED made no gaurantees.

[GGTharos]

This is also the reason that missiles have less range than what minizap would lead you to believe ...

 

In any case, there have been proposals pertaining to this, but there's no reason to see snaking until the missile's gone terminal ... you should see more snaking from IRH than RH.

[Force_Feedback]

This is also the reason that missiles have less range than what minizap would lead you to believe ...

 

In any case, there have been proposals pertaining to this, but there's no reason to see snaking until the missile's gone terminal ... you should see more snaking from IRH than RH.

 

Hmm, why's that, I always got the impression the IR missiles got a sturdier lock, if you're referring to the AIM-9 and the R-60, well, that's due to the design, but I see no reason for the other ir seekers to snake, especially without any flares being shot off.

And it appears that SARH missiles are more prone to snaking than ARH ones, the Pheonix for example snakes, as does the R-33, as is the case with the R-27R. The AMRAAM snakes too, but you can barely see it on vids.

There is also snaking due to atmospheric effects, but we can't expect that to be modled, just some seeker deviations.

[GGTharos]

Look up 'guidance constant' :)

 

All missiles are prone to 'snaking' because of it. I have already suggested one way of modelling seeker deviations, but I don't think it would cause snaking.

 

I think you're looking at two cases: One is the INS correcting the missile's flight path constantly, the other is the homing doing the same ... basically you might say there is always some error in flight.

[D-Scythe]

Hmm, why's that, I always got the impression the IR missiles got a sturdier lock, if you're referring to the AIM-9 and the R-60, well, that's due to the design, but I see no reason for the other ir seekers to snake, especially without any flares being shot off.

And it appears that SARH missiles are more prone to snaking than ARH ones, the Pheonix for example snakes, as does the R-33, as is the case with the R-27R. The AMRAAM snakes too, but you can barely see it on vids.

There is also snaking due to atmospheric effects, but we can't expect that to be modled, just some seeker deviations.

 

All missiles are prone to "snaking", because they use LOS algorithms to home in and kill their target. The snaking is caused by limitations to LOS tracking. Swingkid or GG can probably explain it better, but the impression I get is that due to errors in tracking that causes continuous LOS errors, the missile has to adjust its flight path back onto the target. This adjustment slows down the missile enough that the "new" intercept geometry is obsolete, which in turn requires another course correction to the flight profile. And this cycle of constant course corrections by the missile repeats itself continuously until impact.

[GGTharos]

Well, -one- very good reason for snaking which I had forgotten, is proportional navigation: PN attempts to stop the LOS drift in the seeker's view. However, this means that both fighter and missile must travel at constant speed, and a missile NEVER travels at constant speed.

 

It's always speeding up (at the start) or slowing down.

 

Therefore it'll take a huge lead while slow, damp it as it gets faster, and then slowly start increasing it as it starts slowing down again.

 

There are techniques implemented in missile guidance units to reduce snaking due to PN, as well as at long range - this is -one- and probably one of the most prominent reasons, but there are others.

 

D-Scythe has it mostly right, but add to that the fact that, for example, a radar target always 'walks around' as the actual target maneuvers, due to radar glint etc.

 

 

So ... you have a -lot- of factors contributing to 'snaking' and 'jitter' in real missiles ... I forgot to mention seeker settling, which is also a big one ;)

 

That's where the missile orients itself to stop the LOS drift but 'overshoots' and needs to come back etc. This typically only happens during target maneuvering, but glint could also cause it.

[Weta43]

Can you explain Glint GG?

[GGTharos]

Same thing as you get with light glinting off surfaces - if you have a multi-faceted surface, a different part of it will 'glint' (ie beam more light your way) as you turn/tilt it. Same thing with radar bouncing off of an aircraft's skin, so the radar 'target', the brightest spot of radar reflection, might be alking all over the aircraft, all the time, or even 'warping' from one place to the next as the aircraft pitches/rolls/yaws etc.

 

While it isn't an issue from afar (except that the return may appear to be 'blinking'), it may contribute to seeker settling issues up close; the reason that this affects the missile seeker is because it will stay locke donto the brightest/most powerful return (so, the glint) ... it is possible for two spots on the plane (or more) to glint at the same time as well ... so you can probably imagine all sorts of whacky stuff happening ;)

[nscode]

Warping you say.... now here's something we know about... :D

[tflash]

IMO, there really is no point for the ASRAAM's extended range. The AIM-120 is absolutely lethal IRL within it's NEZ, and from pilot accounts have been basically described as "almost a deathray" when fired from a few hundred yards out to 8 miles. Other SRAAMs like the AIM-9X complement the AMRAAM much better in terms of being able to kill what the AMRAAM cannot (like a target 70 degrees off boresight a mile off the nose).

 

I see an advantage in Asraam's speed. It is a mach 5 missile, faster than Amraam. As we can see in lockon, speed is very important: the fact that R-77 in Lockon flies faster than Amraam clearly gives it an edge.

 

An extreme fast approach speed limits the ability of the opponent to outmanoeuver or to bring chaff and flares into the seeker cone. It also reduces the need for course corrections.