Updated R-77 and R-73 come out

[tflash]

TRV will release updated versions of R-77 and R-73 shortly:

 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/R77081309.xml&headline=R-77, R-73 Missile Upgrades Emerge&channel=defense

[topol-m]

Very interesting info.

[Boberro]

Yes, good finally to see upgrades in RuAF weaponry. Thx for article.

[RedTiger]

Yes, good finally to see upgrades in RuAF weaponry. Thx for article.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those upgrades are being rolled out for import and foreign buyers, right?

[GGTharos]

Yes, they are.

 

So now they've caught up to AIM-120C possibly; the new R-77 also seems to sport a bigger rocket motor.

[pauldy]

So they plan to take out the "potato masher" Lattice fins of the R-77?

 

That lattice fin design seems impractical for internal storage anyway.. at least for me..

[Vault]

So they plan to take out the "potato masher" Lattice fins of the R-77?

 

That lattice fin design seems impractical for internal storage anyway.. at least for me..

 

I think they removed the lattice fins because of their huge RCS and drag factors. Lattice fins can fold up for storage so I don't think it's a storage issue.

 

[topol-m]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those upgrades are being rolled out for import and foreign buyers, right?

 

Russian airforce may also use them - note the unusual retractable fins upgrade, pointing out that they might be used for internal storage. The only plane that might need such design in the near future is Pak-Fa. After all it is very unlikely this aircraft to be equiped with the old unreliable R-27 and if it`s true that the RVV-AE has not been mass produced for Ruaf it might turn out the newest most advanced russian fighter doesn`t have an advanced missile to use :huh:. So these upgraded R-73, RVV-AE are very plausible weapon for it and for other 4 and 4+ gen fighters, at least until the new generation of russian AA missiles is released (as someone already posted several new gen missiles are in development in Russia).

Edited August 14, 2009 by topol-m

[pauldy]

Impractical since the "folding action" of the lattice fins adds to the complexity of the missile.. at least to its mechanical side..

 

oh well, just my casual observation~ :)

 

Anyway it'll be removed from the R-77 system..

 

And that's a MOAB right?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Anyway it'll be removed from the R-77 system..

I doubt it ... When we see pictures then we will know for sure.

[Vault]

Hajduk those lattice fins have a really high RCS according to Eugene Fleeman, I really don't think that's compatible with a 5th Gen VLO aircraft like the PAK-FA, which I suspect this new R-77 is a stop gap for the PAK-FA untill the next Gen R-77 is released but like you said we'll see when the pictures are released, but don't be surprised if you see Delta's on the new R-77.

[GGTharos]

Why doubt it? They really didn't offer a particularly useful advantage.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Why doubt it? They really didn't offer a particularly useful advantage.

Other then the fact that they make the missile more maneuverable. Yes there is a price to pay, but it is a compromise just like with every other design out there.

 

I am not even sure that we know the true specs for the R-77. The RVV-EA is an export variant of the R-77. There was a thread here on this subject. Too lazy to search for it now ...

 

Reminder SAM = Stealth STOP!

[GGTharos]

They make it more controllable at higher AoA; the problem is that this offers no useful advantage except perhaps in a tiny number of cases.

 

There are other advantages - less power needed to control the fins for a given speed ... good if your control servos suck I suppose.

 

On the other hand, there's a bunch of disadvantages:

 

Airbrake action below certain speed (... the speeds at which you can achieve those high AoAs)

High storage requirements with unfolded fins

Requirement to fold fins in carriage even if you have the storage space (ie. pylons) because of airbrake action at low speeds

High RCS

 

 

 

Other then the fact that they make the missile more maneuverable. Yes there is a price to pay, but it is a compromise just like with every other design out there.

 

I am not even sure that we know the true specs for the R-77. The RVV-EA is an export variant of the R-77. There was a thread here on this subject. Too lazy to search for it now ...

 

Reminder SAM = Stealth STOP!

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Reportedly, the R-77 has longer range compared to AIM-120A and is more maneuverable too. And yes, just as I stated above, the lattice rudders do have its own problems as well. Nothing is perfect ...

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

They make it more controllable at higher AoA; the problem is that this offers no useful advantage except perhaps in a tiny number of cases.

 

There are other advantages - less power needed to control the fins for a given speed ... good if your control servos suck I suppose.

 

On the other hand, there's a bunch of disadvantages:

 

Airbrake action below certain speed (... the speeds at which you can achieve those high AoAs)

High storage requirements with unfolded fins

Requirement to fold fins in carriage even if you have the storage space (ie. pylons) because of airbrake action at low speeds

High RCS

[GGTharos]

The R-77 has a larger, all-boost motor so some extra max range is expected. That it's 'more maneuverable' is actually questionable. Maneuverability that you can't actually use isn't very useful ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I understand what you are saying. But the R-77 does have better range and is more maneuverable when compared to missiles of the same age/generation.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

The R-77 has a larger, all-boost motor so some extra max range is expected. That it's 'more maneuverable' is actually questionable. Maneuverability that you can't actually use isn't very useful ;)

[DarkWanderer]

That it's 'more maneuverable' is actually questionable.

It isn't. Lattice controls induced drag is much lower. So, while a delta may create less drag on straight flight, on maneuvering it will just waste the missile's energy, while lattice won't.

I understand what you are saying. But the R-77 does have better range and is more maneuverable when compared to missiles of the same age/generation.

AIM-120C-1 may have more actual range, because it's slower - it uses boost/sustain motor.

But that's all theory. Here're some facts:

http://www.ktrv.ru/production/68/649/902/

Still the same scheme.

[GGTharos]

It isn't. Lattice controls induced drag is much lower. So, while a delta may create less drag on straight flight, on maneuvering it will just waste the missile's energy, while lattice won't.

 

Yes, but that doesn't give a lot more terminal range - you correct me if I'm wrong, but in terminal maneuvering a lot more drag will come from the body than the control surfaces.

 

At the same time, mid-course guidance is chosen such that the missile will fly in as straight a line as possible. This is one of the most important mid-course guidance optimizations made for AMRAAM, at least AFAIK.

[Maximus_G]

TRV will release updated versions of R-77 and R-73 shortly:

 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/R77081309.xml&headline=R-77, R-73 Missile Upgrades Emerge&channel=defense

 

Missile names messed up on the second page of that article. SD is the RVV-AE development, and MD is based on R-73 accordingly.

[Pilotasso]

Manueverability for a BVR missile is of secondary importance because:

 

firstly what you want is reach,

secondly because the missile is much faster than the target and it will cut through the targets turns.

 

 

Furthermore if your counting on a slower speed end terminal game to get the advantages of latice wings you probably need shoot the missile at its longest range, in wich case, if the target suspects of an attack, turning to one side will efectively waste the missile anyway. So you will want to shoot it within the no escape zone instead, or close to it where it is likely to be fast by the time it reaches the target.

 

It isn't. Lattice controls induced drag is much lower. So, while a delta may create less drag on straight flight, on maneuvering it will just waste the missile's energy, while lattice won't.

 

 

I think your not considering the fact what provides lift in a missile are not the " delta wings" because AMRAAM has none. Its the cylindric body (the very thing thats resposible for most of the drag for ALL manuevering missiles) . It has stability fins and actuator fins. Wich not only are very small compared to the total size and mass of the missile as a whole but they will have negligeble angles of attack and comparitively reduced induced drag due to the same reasons. You cannot compare it to aircrafts deltas.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Pilotasso

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Manueverability for a BVR missile is of secondary importance because:

R-77 has longer range then AIM120.

 

firstly what you want is reach,

R-77 has longer range then AIM120.

[GGTharos]

Actually AMRAAMs are likely to reach farther thanks to R-77 guidance failings.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

R-77 has a longer range then AMRAAM. You stated it here.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

Actually AMRAAMs are likely to reach farther thanks to R-77 guidance failings.

[GGTharos]

R-77 has a longer range then AMRAAM. You stated it here.

 

When you shoot them in a straight line. R-77 has had plenty of issues with having to go in a straight line instead of using more interesting flight paths according to reports. AMRAAM uses more efficient flight paths.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

 

And really, stop that childish behavior already. Believing in a lie won't make it come true.