AV-8B Harrier Thread

[Vitormouraa]

Interesting, Chizh said that RAZBAM was using an older version of the Caucasus when they took those screenshots.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3262611&postcount=728

[shagrat]

Yeah, I understand this, hence why I wrote DCSW vehicle damage modeling needs work, I know it's out of your hands.

 

But, the main point was the seeker tracking the EWR radar emissions. Do you have any sources that back that this small missile's seeker is capable of locking up the VHF EWR radars?

Do you have any evidence it can't lock on to an EWR?

I couldn't find any, only that it was built to find radars with a passive Radar-Seeker-hat.

So it should lock on to a radar, shouldn't it?!

[drPhibes]

The TDD part of the AGM-122 is described in volume 3 of the AV-8 TAC manuals, which isn't available online, so accurate information on the seeker specs might be a bit tricky to come by. But in general, building a seeker that is wideband enough to detect both VHF and J/Ku band radars (the latter operating at 100x the frequency of the former) and fits in the limited available space in the AIM-9 "host" is nearly impossible (at least using 1980-ies technology). It could however have several narrowband receiver channels tuned for different parts of the frequency spectrum. But without TAC vol 3 (or similar reputable sources), we'll just have to guess what it can or cannot do.

[Dudikoff]

But in general, building a seeker that is wideband enough to detect both VHF and J/Ku band radars (the latter operating at 100x the frequency of the former) and fits in the limited available space in the AIM-9 "host" is nearly impossible (at least using 1980-ies technology). It could however have several narrowband receiver channels tuned for different parts of the frequency spectrum. But without TAC vol 3 (or similar reputable sources), we'll just have to guess what it can or cannot do.

 

Yeah, that's my point. If I understand the idea behind it correctly, it's a self-defense missile so I'd presume they only developed seeker(s) for the typical short (and perhaps medium) range SAM tracking radars (I guess that would be the J/Ku bands you mention). It would really make zero sense to develop a seeker for VHF frequencies for such a short range missile even if such a thing was possible.

Edited October 9, 2017 by Dudikoff

[Dudikoff]

Do you have any evidence it can't lock on to an EWR? I couldn't find any, only that it was built to find radars with a passive Radar-Seeker-hat. So it should lock on to a radar, shouldn't it?!

 

It's not that simple; the radar wavelength and seeker size constraints play a big role here, there was some earlier discussion here.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=12041

 

Plus I'd presume the fact that most of these 2D search radars are rotating to cover the 360 degrees of azimuth doesn't help much either (so, there's no continuous signal cone the missile's seeker could easily lock on to and track precisely).

Edited October 9, 2017 by Dudikoff

[shagrat]

It's not that simple; the radar wavelength and seeker size constraints play a big role here, there was some earlier discussion here.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=12041

 

Plus I'd presume the fact that the EWR radars are rotating to cover the 360 degrees of azimuth doesn't help much either (so, there's no continuous signal cone the missile's seeker could lock on to).

Yep, interesting issue. Only thing I found is the Sidearm was focused on handling ZSU-23-4 and SA-8 threats.

And that wasn't from any official source.

 

Anything about the seeker is about a "wider passive band", but no conclusions on even the area of the spectrum.

[Dudikoff]

Yep, interesting issue. Only thing I found is the Sidearm was focused on handling ZSU-23-4 and SA-8 threats. And that wasn't from any official source.

 

Yeah, that would make sense as those were the common short range threats equipped with a tracking radar that could be expected to be encountered.

 

What interests me is if the capability to engage the EWR is added by Razbam or not.. IIRC, e.g. the Kh-58 missile (Soviet ARM missile with a much larger seeker) cannot engage the EWR's in DCSW, so I suppose it's up to the ARM missile developer to list the supported targets for it?

[Zeus67]

Yeah, that would make sense as those were the common short range threats equipped with a tracking radar that could be expected to be encountered.

 

What interests me is if the capability to engage the EWR is added by Razbam or not.. IIRC, e.g. the Kh-58 missile (Soviet ARM missile with a much larger seeker) cannot engage the EWR's in DCSW, so I suppose it's up to the ARM missile developer to list the supported targets for it?

 

In my tests, the SA-8 Gecko is doable since you are engaging it at the edge of its operational envelope. Long range SAMs are a big IF, because they can engage you long before you can engage them.

 

This is a small ARM designed to counter tactical SAM threats, the kind that you will find when attacking enemy forces in the battlefield.

[Dudikoff]

In my tests, the SA-8 Gecko is doable since you are engaging it at the edge of its operational envelope. Long range SAMs are a big IF, because they can engage you long before you can engage them.

 

This is a small ARM designed to counter tactical SAM threats, the kind that you will find when attacking enemy forces in the battlefield.

 

Definitely. But, I'm just saying how it probably shouldn't be able to lock on to EWR radars and wondering if you as a 3rd party have control over this capability? I.e. to lock on to e.g. SA-8 radar, but not the EWR.

[DZShizzam]

Definitely. But, I'm just saying how it probably shouldn't be able to lock on to EWR radars and wondering if you as a 3rd party have control over this capability? I.e. to lock on to e.g. SA-8 radar, but not the EWR.

 

 

Do you have any source on the whole "not being able to lock EWR" thing? AFAIK the AGM-122 didn't have any such limitations in real life, although hitting EWR was not the missile's intended use.

[Spudknocker]

Well the Sidearm is also carried by the Marines' Ah-1's... So its definitely designed for more of a pop-up type of threat during battlefield interdiction, CAS and the like since Soviet tank divisions had dedicated air defense units embedded in them.

 

In real life and DCS your AV-8's carrying AGM-122's would deal with your Pop-Up SA-8's and Shilkas while your F/A-18's go after larger SAM installations (SA-2/5/11 etc) with their AGM-88's and in the future in DCS I Guess we could also have F-4E's carrying Standard ARMS's or 88's for those bigger sams.

 

AGM-122 is named the Sidearm because that exactly what it is a sidearm for those quick self defense snap shots at threats that come out of nowhere

[JINX_1391]

In real life and DCS...

 

 

 

...In DCS I do what I want

 

[drPhibes]

Do you have any source on the whole "not being able to lock EWR" thing? AFAIK the AGM-122 didn't have any such limitations in real life, although hitting EWR was not the missile's intended use.

 

What are your sources?

 

I'm pretty sure the antenna in the AGM-122 is practically useless at VHF/UHF frequencies. Here's a sectioned view of the AGM-122 seeker:

(borrowed from )

 

The body diameter of an AIM-9 is approximately 5" / 127mm, so let's say the antenna diameter is approximately 110mm. By using a simple parabolic antenna gain calculator, with ideal conditions (100% efficiency), we get an approximation of how well the antenna works at different frequencies:

 

VHF/UHF:

100MHz: -18,8dB

200MHz: -12,7dB

300MHz: -9,2dB

Negative gain = a really terrible antenna at these frequencies.

 

J band:

10GHz: +21,2dB

15GHz: +24,7dB

20GHz: +27,2dB

 

So the antenna is about 4000 times (36dB) as effective at 15GHz than it is at 200MHz. This combined with the fact that it is pretty unlikely that the RF receiver is wideband enough to detect anything at these low frequencies leads me to conclude that it is unlikely that the AGM-122 can detect, track and intercept VHF/UHF EWR radars. But if anyone has actual technical data (no, wikipedia etc. is not a reliable source) that says otherwise, feel free to post it here.

[Zeus67]

Another teaser. This one is a GIF.

 

 

Link: https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohhwvLfEOFwR5ObKg/giphy.gif

[Vitormouraa]

Friday... where are you?! :D

[Flia]

Friday is coming :)

Edited October 11, 2017 by Flia

[Harry.R]

Excellent!

[Techy111]

Don't tell anyone, but there's another Friday next week also ;)

[rjetster1]

That GIF is fantastic!!

[rjetster1]

12 Fridays left in the year;)

[Vampyre]

... and there's 52 Fridays in 2018.:thumbup:

[Panzerfan]

All aboard the Hype Train!

[Glowing_Amraam]

That GIF is fantastic!!

 

Off to a good start then :pilotfly:

[Dave317]

Looking forward to the full trailer tomorrow:)

[dhevans79]

Lol,

 

Tomorrow, tomorrow, I miss you, tomorrow. You're always a day away...

 

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk