CW vs. Pulse-doppler

[Guest Hell Sqn Protos]

If troubles of devices of both sides will not be modelled it may destroy balance.

 

Hmmmm......... well between porked radar/missiles lack of data link for blue and over optimistic radar/missiles ect for red............ where is the balance NOW?

[D-Scythe]

Information about russian avionic's problemms more accessible for us than same info about western devices. If troubles of devices of both sides will not be modelled it may destroy balance.

 

If the point was to maintain balance, the F-15C+AIM-120C should have never been modelled in the first place. That is a mid/late-1990s weapons system flying against first generation, 80s-era Su-27s and MiG-29s.

[Dudikoff]

If the point was to maintain balance, the F-15C+AIM-120C should have never been modelled in the first place. That is a mid/late-1990s weapons system flying against first generation, 80s-era Su-27s and MiG-29s.

 

I agree. I always though the Cold War setting would be much more interesting, but then again, it is much harder to create some convincing limited scale confrontations in that time-frame (and especially on this map).

[Bimbac]

I hope in the future, as ED makes things more realistic, LO or its successor will require use of realistic tactics in BVR combat :)

 

Definitely! Therefore I suggest that all the people with any RL knowledge should put their heads together in order to help ED.

 

By the way, I could obtain some more detailed info about MiG-23ML radar system, if anyone's interested.

 

I don't want to hijack this thread, but since the other people were discussing ballance issues here, I can tell that in RL Su-27S armed with R-27ER would outrange AMRAAM equipped F-15C by around 30%. Although R-27s are SARH, they are VERY FAST - much faster than AMRAAM. This particular fact makes them very dangerous, and is also the reason why any sane RL F-15C pilot would try anything possible to avoid this missile being launched in a first place.

 

The other fact is, that since the Su-27 radar is coherent pulse-doppler, it should perform much better against ground clutter. This works exactly opposite in Lock-On.

[*Rage*]

By the way, I could obtain some more detailed info about MiG-23ML radar system, if anyone's interested.

 

I don't want to hijack this thread, but since the other people were discussing ballance issues here, I can tell that in RL Su-27S armed with R-27ER would outrange AMRAAM equipped F-15C by around 30%. Although R-27s are SARH, they are VERY FAST - much faster than AMRAAM. This particular fact makes them very dangerous, and is also the reason why any sane RL F-15C pilot would try anything possible to avoid this missile being launched in a first place.

 

The other fact is, that since the Su-27 radar is coherent pulse-doppler, it should perform much better against ground clutter. This works exactly opposite in Lock-On.

 

How do you source such information........just interested.:)

[MiGMadness]

Thats the AA-7 Apex I talked about.

 

Yes I am aware of the NATO designations but why did you state this.

 

To make things worse, the main IR missiles the 23 saw most of its life time were AA-2 Atols and AA-8 Aphids.

To quote FAS

 

In the mid-1960s the Vympel design bureau developed the K-23 intermediate-range missile for MiG-23 fighter jet aircraft. While the first units of the K-23 missile were tested with the prototypes the MiG-23 aircraft, the missile was certified as a weapon for the MiG-23M in 1973. The R-23 comes in two variants: R-23R (Object 340) with radar guidance and R-23T (Object 360) with infrared guidance. There is also the training version R-23UT.

The later MiG-23ML and MiG-23MLD aircraft carry the R-24 missile, a modification of the R-23 with various improved characteristics, most importantly a 50 km rather than 35 km range. In its external appearance this missile is similar to the predecessor R-23. For actual use it is available in two variants: R-24R (Object 140) and R-24T (Object 160).

So if both MiG-23/R-23 prototypes were tested together, the MiG-23 entered operational service in 1971 and was certified to carry the R-23R/T in 1973 then its main IR weapon was the R-23T/R-24T. Would you agree?

[Scart]

The MiG-23MLD had maneuvrability comparable to the MiG-29A execpt climb. The russian "top gun" instructors also used this model and it was really succesfull against MiG-29A. The second thing was that R-24R or T much more deadly than R-23 but their range was still smaller than R-27 series. MiG-23MLD was designed to fight an F-16A and was really capable of that.

[Bimbac]

How do you source such information........just interested.:)

 

I think I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you :)

 

But seriously, check my avatar. Any further explanation needed?

 

By the way, I guess the range and velocity of the R-27ER was the primary reason for U.S. Air Force to buy F-22s. Just a thought.

[GGTharos]

I'd like to know where you get your information too, because last I checked, AIM-120C had pretty close range parity with R-27ER ...

But yes any info you have would always be useful :)

 

Definitely! Therefore I suggest that all the people with any RL knowledge should put their heads together in order to help ED.

 

By the way, I could obtain some more detailed info about MiG-23ML radar system, if anyone's interested.

 

I don't want to hijack this thread, but since the other people were discussing ballance issues here, I can tell that in RL Su-27S armed with R-27ER would outrange AMRAAM equipped F-15C by around 30%. Although R-27s are SARH, they are VERY FAST - much faster than AMRAAM. This particular fact makes them very dangerous, and is also the reason why any sane RL F-15C pilot would try anything possible to avoid this missile being launched in a first place.

 

The other fact is, that since the Su-27 radar is coherent pulse-doppler, it should perform much better against ground clutter. This works exactly opposite in Lock-On.

[Bimbac]

I'd like to know where you get your information too,

 

Let's just say that I take part in Czech Air Force pilots training and military aviation is not just a job for me, but also a hobby.

 

because last I checked, AIM-120C had pretty close range parity with R-27ER ...

But yes any info you have would always be useful :)

 

I concur, but the issue here is speed. R-27ER will reach you sooner than AMRAAM.

 

By the way, most of the info comes from public sources, but it's quite useful to know other languages than just English ;)

[GGTharos]

I understand ... my info came from public sources too, though one is computed (Range of R-27ER based on published aerodynamic data or R-27R) and the AMRAAM's range is available ... elsewhere. I just checked and according to that, it does seem the ER out-ranges the 120 by some 20%, however ... the real AMRAAM range seems longer than this computation provides for (Whereas due to having the correct aerodynamic coefficients etc, one might assume that R-27ER range is closer to reality by the same computation.)

 

But I'll tell you right now that the R-27ER isn't the reason there's an F-22 :)

[Bimbac]

But I'll tell you right now that the R-27ER isn't the reason there's an F-22 :)

 

I agree. There is no need to be serious all the time :)

 

Please, check PM.

 

I think we are getting some quite constructive discussion here, which is not very common on this forum. (no offence or bragging intended ;))

[Pilotasso]

Yes I am aware of the NATO designations but why did you state this.

 

I have an old book about missiles and the Mig-23 and its missiles have an awfull reputation. 36 were outmanuevered and downed by F-16's and 15's with guns and Sidwinders in isreali Arab conflicts. The accounts say that not one AA-7 even left their rails. And at the time the falcon was much criticized for not matching the floggers BVR reach. In Angola VS South africa AA-7's were dodged in 8G turns.The MIg-23 also fared badly in the Iran Iraq war.

 

Ironicaly Mig-21's were demosntrating how wrong the BVR aproach and missiles in general were (then) agains F-4 phamtoms in vietnam by the time the Soviets finished designing the flogger.

[Pilotasso]

The MiG-23MLD had maneuvrability comparable to the MiG-29A execpt climb. The russian "top gun" instructors also used this model and it was really succesfull against MiG-29A. The second thing was that R-24R or T much more deadly than R-23 but their range was still smaller than R-27 series. MiG-23MLD was designed to fight an F-16A and was really capable of that.

 

The Mig-23 had a fast acceleration but according to everyone who flown against it including american pilots having captured 23's said that a well piloted F4 phamtom could keep up with it. The mig was badly outmanuevered by F-16's and 15's every time they met.

 

The Mig-23 is a stable aerodynamic confuguration and has very heavy controlls, and poor outside view. I cant see it out manuevering the 29 or the F-16 at all.

The Mig-23 doesnt even use the first stage sweep angle for close combat unlike the F-14 Tomcat for example. It uses the intermidiate position instead, wich is not optimal for manueverability. The reasons for this are not clear but the Flogger has been known to have vicious tendencies for spins at low speeds. An american pilot flying a captured Mig-23 crashed the plane and died in it for this same reason.

 

The planes designers basicaly commited the same missconceptions as the F-4 designers did. The Flogger was cut and made to be the cheapest and most easely produced fighter capable of BVR reach, and as such manueverability suffered.

And this was at a time Mig-21's were showing that BVR missiles would be defeated by guns WVR. No wonder they lasted longer.

[nscode]

Did US ever capture & try to fly any 21s? Think they would be dropping right out of the sky in em :)

[Scart]

2 Pilotasso: MiG-23MLD differs from original MiG-23 dramatically (for ex. like F/A-18A from F/A-18F) also weapons and targeting systems on the export versions were certainly different (reduced perfomance) than on VVS/PVO planes.

[VMFA117_Poko]

Did US ever capture & try to fly any 21s? Think they would be dropping right out of the sky in em :)

Capture no. But they got some. One is called "Jenny" (UM ver.) if I well remeber. I don't know if they got them from post-USSR allies or from Russia directly.

 

Here is one Chineese in USAF Museum:

[Bimbac]

The Mig-23 had a fast acceleration but according to everyone who flown against it including american pilots having captured 23's said that a well piloted F4 phamtom could keep up with it. The mig was badly outmanuevered by F-16's and 15's every time they met.

 

The Mig-23 is a stable aerodynamic confuguration and has very heavy controlls, and poor outside view. I cant see it out manuevering the 29 or the F-16 at all.

The Mig-23 doesnt even use the first stage sweep angle for close combat unlike the F-14 Tomcat for example. It uses the intermidiate position instead, wich is not optimal for manueverability. The reasons for this are not clear but the Flogger has been known to have vicious tendencies for spins at low speeds. An american pilot flying a captured Mig-23 crashed the plane and died in it for this same reason.

 

The planes designers basicaly commited the same missconceptions as the F-4 designers did. The Flogger was cut and made to be the cheapest and most easely produced fighter capable of BVR reach, and as such manueverability suffered.

And this was at a time Mig-21's were showing that BVR missiles would be defeated by guns WVR. No wonder they lasted longer.

 

I guess that you have been missing a point here. As I stated before, MiG-23ML/MLD is very dangerous BVR fighter - the particular role it was designed for. It would outrange first versions of F-16A, the fighter it was meant to fight against.

 

In your previous post you were refering to the aerial conflicts in Middle East and Angola. You are correct about Mig-23's performance in these wars, but as I also stated before, those MiGs had and obsolete avionics (S and MS version) and their pilots were poorly trained as well.

 

You are right in most of your other statements, however, you are forgetting that it's a pilot, not a machine, that makes a difference :) Even MiG-21MF/Bis in capable hands would make a very formidable opponent, trust me.

 

2 Pilotasso: MiG-23MLD differs from original MiG-23 dramatically (for ex. like F/A-18A from F/A-18F) also weapons and targeting systems on the export versions were certainly different (reduced perfomance) than on VVS/PVO planes.

 

Something to think about. Definitely true!

[Prophet_169th]

Just to note concerning CW vs Pulse.

 

Both would be able to detect doppler shift.

 

The biggest advantage of pulse vs CW is peak output power. You would need a much larger system to get the same output from a CW than a pulse.

[Святой]

In your previous post you were refering to the aerial conflicts in Middle East and Angola. You are correct about Mig-23's performance in these wars, but as I also stated before, those MiGs had and obsolete avionics (S and MS version) and their pilots were poorly trained as well.

Many of syrian MiG-23MF and MIG-23ML (later) flew against IAF during Lebanon war in 80s and figthers of this both modifications is in the israely pilot's victories list. Both mods has improved radar with LD/SD capabilities, IRST, and improved fire control system, which allow to use R-23 and R-60 A-A missiles.

MiG-23ML is a modification, which uses in USSR airforce.

During Desert Storm Iraqy use their MiG-23MF and lose some of them.

[Bimbac]

Many of syrian MiG-23MF and MIG-23ML (later) flew against IAF during Lebanon war in 80s and figthers of this both modifications is in the israely pilot's victories list. Both mods has improved radar with LD/SD capabilities, IRST, and improved fire control system, which allow to use R-23 and R-60 A-A missiles.

 

You are right. I didn't know that.

 

MiG-23ML is a modification, which uses in USSR airforce. During Desert Storm Iraqy use their MiG-23MF and lost som of them.

 

MF/ML version was also in service in the Czechoslovak/Czech Air Force.

[nscode]

During Desert Storm Iraqy use their MiG-23MF and lose some of them.

 

He was talking about the time they were produced... not after 15 years of no modifications and questionable maintainance.

[Pilotasso]

Did US ever capture & try to fly any 21s? Think they would be dropping right out of the sky in em :)

 

 

Only the 23 crashed. All others were flown extensively. Heres some pics from my source:

[Guest IguanaKing]

Just to note concerning CW vs Pulse.

 

Both would be able to detect doppler shift.

 

The biggest advantage of pulse vs CW is peak output power. You would need a much larger system to get the same output from a CW than a pulse.

 

Spot on! :D The 100% duty cycle of a CW radar severely limits its peak power in relation to the size of its transmitter.

[Святой]

CW radars uses in millitary units usually in polystatic location method of homing called SARH: transmitter-illuminator mounted on firing platform and receiver (it receive both direct and returning from target illumanation signal) mounted on missile.

CW radars with joint transmitter and receiver in one platform is infrequent case. Radio altimeters, doppler speed measuring device and special radars for people and vechicle detection (automatic border control radar millitary systems or road traffic control civil systems) are among them.

A know about one fire control CW radar - tracking and illumination radar of soviet SA-5 SAM system.