D-Scythe Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 I think he was mainly referring to air-to-air missiles, like the R-27ET. I mean, most people would know that IR SAMs usually don't have the reach to engage a Mach 1.5 target at angels 50.
GGTharos Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Yep ... I don't think the 22 was in any short to mid-term plans to simulate ... not by ED anyway :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
ARM505 Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Sorry, I deleted my post. Shooting from the hip again, might have been perceived as too sarcastic. But like I said, an F22 sim would seem to be a pretty dull thing!
TucksonSonny Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 I think he was mainly referring to air-to-air missiles, like the R-27ET. I mean, most people would know that IR SAMs usually don't have the reach to engage a Mach 1.5 target at angels 50. I was referring to S-400 with I/AR guidance. DELL Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 940 2,93 GHz @3 GHz, 8 MB cache | 8.192 MB 1.067 MHz Tri Channel DDR3 | 512 MB ATI® Radeon™ 4850 | 500 GB 7200 rpm Serial ATA | Samsung SM 2693 HM 25.5 " | HOTAS Cougar Thrustmaster |
GGTharos Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Did they implement dual mode seekers yet? I know the Patriot had one, but it was only used in tests and they decided that AR is far better against missiles anyway - my guess, probably because it gives you the closure. My question is, though, how's this S-400 going to do when a -stealth- aircraft which it only has -radar- to dect it with, drops its weapons from 24nm away and leaves, going to shoot that aircraft down? 24nm is quite a significant range! A conventional fighter couldn't pull it off, but the F-22 has this whole stealth thing going for it, meaning detection and engagement is -very- significantly delayed. Mind, the 400 may well just shoot down the JDAMs, it has that capability. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
tflash Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 But how will this S-400 system now a JDAM is on its way? Is it programmed to search with such resolution that it would detect such a small target incoming if there is no launch trace whatsoever? And then, from what distance would it be able to track the JDAM? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
GGTharos Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Yep, it can. These are TBM weapons,and typical TBM RCS' are pretty small. Bigger than a stealth fighter, but less than that of a 'reduced RCS' fighter. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
D-Scythe Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 I was referring to S-400 with I/AR guidance. How's the S400 gonna detect, track and guide a missile within range of its IR seeker if it cannot detect, track and guide the missile with radar? You might as well maddog all your SAMs just to see if they can by chance pick an F-22 up.
Guest IguanaKing Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 I think he was mainly referring to air-to-air missiles, like the R-27ET. I mean, most people would know that IR SAMs usually don't have the reach to engage a Mach 1.5 target at angels 50. Possibly...but it seemed as though he said AAA...which isn't air-to-air. ;)
TucksonSonny Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Did they implement dual mode seekers yet? I know the Patriot had one, but it was only used in tests and they decided that AR is far better against missiles anyway - my guess, probably because it gives you the closure. My question is, though, how's this S-400 going to do when a -stealth- aircraft which it only has -radar- to dect it with, drops its weapons from 24nm away and leaves, going to shoot that aircraft down? 24nm is quite a significant range! A conventional fighter couldn't pull it off, but the F-22 has this whole stealth thing going for it, meaning detection and engagement is -very- significantly delayed. Mind, the 400 may well just shoot down the JDAMs, it has that capability. About the S-400: - Ceiling: 25,000 m (82,000 ft) - Guidance: I/AR with use of new mathematical techniques and computer equipment. - all-new ground elements providing capabilities against low RCS stealth aircraft, small cruise missiles, and future low-RCS re-entry vehicles. Competitive development with Almaz for Russian equivalent to THAAD. - The S-400 featured an unbreakable, unjammable data link from the launcher to the missile in flight. - In 1999 trials began at the test range of a new surface-to-air missile, the S-400 Triumf: The S-400 was capable of simultaneously tracking and guiding missiles to a classified but enormous number of targets during trials starting in 1999. - A single SU consisted of a phased array radar - One SPU launcher contained four surface-to-air missiles with 400 km range. These missiles were not just capable against airborne targets, but also radar stations, command points, strategic bunkers, and re-entry vehicles of intermediate range missies with velocities of up to 3 km/s. Manufacturer/source: Efremov/Lyulev. Location: Moscow, Russian Federation. DELL Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 940 2,93 GHz @3 GHz, 8 MB cache | 8.192 MB 1.067 MHz Tri Channel DDR3 | 512 MB ATI® Radeon™ 4850 | 500 GB 7200 rpm Serial ATA | Samsung SM 2693 HM 25.5 " | HOTAS Cougar Thrustmaster |
GGTharos Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Sounds pretty competitive ... but I wouldn't confuse 'capability against stealth targets' with the ability to -easily- prosecute them. From USAF's own research, they don't seem to think that ARH seekers are very effective against stealth aircraft (which doesn't mean they're useless ... it just means that as cool as this Triumf is, it's once more what a SAM has always been to aircraft: A speed bump. And in the case of stealth aircraft, a small one - just IMHO) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Rhen Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 You're leaving out another important part of the Raptor's repertoire - its ECM/ECCM capabilities.:music_whistling:
nscode Posted June 15, 2006 Posted June 15, 2006 Sounds pretty competitive ... but I wouldn't confuse 'capability against stealth targets' with the ability to -easily- prosecute them. From USAF's own research, they don't seem to think that ARH seekers are very effective against stealth aircraft (which doesn't mean they're useless ... it just means that as cool as this Triumf is, it's once more what a SAM has always been to aircraft: A speed bump. And in the case of stealth aircraft, a small one - just IMHO) If you think of other SAMs as speed bumps, think of S-300 as an anti-tank thrench. At least I'm sure any life-loving pilot sees it that way, and it's funny how nato describes it: "We know Serbs didn't recive the S-300 because we would have seen dozens of our planes hit." Multiplie that by some factor and you've got what the 400 is. Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us.
Dudikoff Posted June 15, 2006 Posted June 15, 2006 My question is, though, how's this S-400 going to do when a -stealth- aircraft which it only has -radar- to dect it with, drops its weapons from 24nm away and leaves, going to shoot that aircraft down? 24nm is quite a significant range! A conventional fighter couldn't pull it off, but the F-22 has this whole stealth thing going for it, meaning detection and engagement is -very- significantly delayed. I'm not so sure about this. How big is F-22's RCS? It's not invisible anyway so at some range, it will return enough signal to be detected and I guess it probably depends on the signal strength in the first place. And we're not talking about fighter-sized radars, but much more powerful radars which can detect standard fighters at 150 miles. 24 miles for a SAM system of this class doesn't sound nearly enough. It's a nice feat but I wouldn't call this a standoff weapon in context of large-area defense SAMs. BTW, this thread kind of ignited rather quickly; any post which doesn't praise F-22 seems to be taken as an insult. Well, blaze away. I'm from the YF-23 camp anyway. :) i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
D-Scythe Posted June 15, 2006 Posted June 15, 2006 I'm not so sure about this. How big is F-22's RCS? It's not invisible anyway so at some range, it will return enough signal to be detected and I guess it probably depends on the signal strength in the first place. And we're not talking about fighter-sized radars, but much more powerful radars which can detect standard fighters at 150 miles. 24 miles for a SAM system of this class doesn't sound nearly enough. It's a nice feat but I wouldn't call this a standoff weapon in context of large-area defense SAMs. BTW, this thread kind of ignited rather quickly; any post which doesn't praise F-22 seems to be taken as an insult. Well, blaze away. I'm from the YF-23 camp anyway. :) The YF-23 was a damn sexy fighter :thumbup:
Shaman Posted June 15, 2006 Posted June 15, 2006 When I think Boeing.. I think of this: http://www.edwards.af.mil/archive/2001/images/X32B_250.jpg :doh: Back to YF-32. Is it still true that YF-32 might be adopted as fighter-bomber? I've read something about that some time ago. 51PVO Founding member (DEC2007-) 100KIAP Founding member (DEC2018-) :: Shaman aka [100☭] Shamansky tail# 44 or 444 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] 100KIAP Regiment Early Warning & Control officer
Cobra360 Posted June 15, 2006 Posted June 15, 2006 You mean the YF-23, the X-32 was the loosing JSF design. There are rumors that the YF-23 may be adopted as a fighter bomber in the long term but LM also has plans for a FB-22 bomber aswell.
hitman Posted June 15, 2006 Posted June 15, 2006 I would have rather seen the F-23 in the AirForce instead of the turkey. And Id rather have the Harrier in service instead of that bastard child F-32 JSF...FB-22. Thats absurd. I saw their concept in popular mechanics and it was waaay too fugly, and if they do design and mod it I hope it gets shot down. Matter of fact they should have picked the scorpion instead of the raptor in them contests. My .03$.
Recommended Posts