Kula66 Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 Indeed ... but, switching to digital, did they add any capabilities over the A?
Naquaii Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Kula66 said: @Naquaii Is there any difference between the 54A & C in terms of seeker modelling??? Only what's available to change in luas like chaff resistance, we have little to no control over that aspect of the missile. Edited December 27, 2020 by Naquaii
Kula66 Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 Ok, thanks @Naquaii From the unclass docs you've seen, were there any major differences? I assume, with it digital, they improved the software over it's life time. I did read somewhere it was used as the basis for the early 120A control programs.
Naquaii Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 24 minutes ago, Kula66 said: Ok, thanks @Naquaii From the unclass docs you've seen, were there any major differences? I assume, with it digital, they improved the software over it's life time. I did read somewhere it was used as the basis for the early 120A control programs. There's likely to have been quite a lot of differences but that's only educated guesses. Iirc the -C was more digital than the -A but it's not something that can currently be modelled in DCS.
Kula66 Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 I read somewhere (can't remember where) that because the secrets of the As were compromised, they reworked it so as to give the USN 14s an edge over the IRIAF - I wonder if it had more autonomous operation, ie. not requiring so much support from the host. I guess there is not much out there in unclassified docs yet to read.
Naquaii Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 1 minute ago, Kula66 said: I read somewhere (can't remember where) that because the secrets of the As were compromised, they reworked it so as to give the USN 14s an edge over the IRIAF - I wonder if it had more autonomous operation, ie. not requiring so much support from the host. I guess there is not much out there in unclassified docs yet to read. Yeah, makes sense even if we can't find it in writing as we do know that it was in the hands of the IRIAF after the revolution. And yeah, it might've worked differently from the -A in regards to how the seeker went active but unless we find data on that that's just gonna be speculation.
Kula66 Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html seems to suggest an INS ... but I guess you need some official docs. Interesting that it references increased range for the C, I guess through better lofting. It'd be nice to see some more differences develop for the C, but I guess that's in ED lap now. Incredible that they built more than 5000 missiles ... they weren't cheap!
GGTharos Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 (edited) The range can be 'increased' in many ways. The trick is really to know what they mean by 'range'. For example, if the phoenix is in danger of locking into MLC during its flight (as computed by the AWG-9 before launch), display of the LAR is inhibited, ie. it's telling you 'don't shoot'. The 54A was dependent on a SARH return from the target to guide in mid-course, the 54C might completely behave like a 120 instead, where it will fly under INS until it's time to look for a target. So, the dependence of the seeker on the target RCS for mid-course goes away. Suddenly you can attack smaller RCS targets from longer ranges. Likewise, modernization can come with better trajectory shaping and maneuver choices, thus again resulting in a range increase. All this stuff is not modeled in DCS. And of course, this is before we get into actual tracking/ECCM discussions. Edited December 27, 2020 by GGTharos [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
Naquaii Posted December 27, 2020 Posted December 27, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Kula66 said: http://designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html seems to suggest an INS ... but I guess you need some official docs. Interesting that it references increased range for the C, I guess through better lofting. It'd be nice to see some more differences develop for the C, but I guess that's in ED lap now. Incredible that they built more than 5000 missiles ... they weren't cheap! The AIM-54A had an INS as well, just an older variant. A newer "strap-down" INS like mentioned there for the AIM-54C is likely much more accurate and while we can make educated guesses from that it doesn't really help us model the AIM-54C in any other way even if we could. Edited December 27, 2020 by Naquaii 1
Recommended Posts