JDAM A-10 strikes...

[Speed_2]

Is that something that exists today? Is there any documentation on the subject?

Oh yes, it exists, though I don't think it is fielded technology, yet. I worked for the US Army doing work on IR sensors, and I can tell you, ATR is all the rage right now in the software side of IR systems. I worked more on the hardware side, so I did not have any direct exposure to the technology.

 

Here's a little blurb from Dynetics, a defense contractor company with whom I did a little work with, on ATR and ATD:

http://www.dynetics.com/techsandapps/discrimatrda.html

 

Basically, the way it works is that the ATR algorithm has a list of 3D models in its library with movable parts, and it tries to match what the IR sensor is seeing with some specific configuration and orientation of known hardware in its library.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Speed_2

[Speed_2]

No, current generations of AAMs are not good at it - new gen AAMs, Sidewinder, Python 5 etc - those are basically immune to flares so long as you shoot them from a range where the aircraft can be distinguished from a flare.

 

This has more to do with target size than any other kind of recognition though ... you target the big blob and let the little ones go ;)

 

There will be other countermeasures to handle this sort of missile eventually.

 

Well, exactly how good current fielded generations of IR missiles are- I don't know exactly. But it is very easy to do better CM rejection than to "just let the little ones go". For example, when to flares ever fire forward? The IR seeker can be trained to track the LEADING target. I know that, for example, while the AIM-9M has only one detector (it is a scanning IR system), it can do pseudo-imaging with that one detector. It should be easy to then make it find the leading target in a line of flares, and go after that.

 

New generations of AAMs such as the AIM-9X actually has an imaging IR focal plane array, so it should have MUCH better CCM than the 9M.

 

I donno where you are getting your info that countermeasures work well against current generations. Generally, to evade missiles, you have to combine clever manuvering WITH liberal use of countermeasures (or outrun them, or make the launching platform lose lock (SARH)...)

Edited August 28, 2009 by Speed_2

[joey45]

Why would a low level attack [CAS] plane carry a GPS guided bomb that is ment to be deployed from high alt [for best resaults], when an F16/F22/F35/F15E/FA18abcdefg..xyz can do the job just as good...

[topol-m]

Oh yes, it exists, though I don't think it is fielded technology, yet. I worked for the US Army doing work on IR sensors, and I can tell you, ATR is all the rage right now in the software side of IR systems. I worked more on the hardware side, so I did not have any direct exposure to the technology.

 

Here's a little blurb from Dynetics, a defense contractor company with whom I did a little work with, on ATR and ATD:

http://www.dynetics.com/techsandapps/discrimatrda.html

 

Basically, the way it works is that the ATR algorithm has a list of 3D models in its library with movable parts, and it tries to match what the IR sensor is seeing with some specific configuration and orientation of known hardware in its library.

 

Interesting info Speed-2. :thumbup:

 

Why would a low level attack [CAS] plane carry a GPS guided bomb that is ment to be deployed from high alt [for best resaults], when an F16/F22/F35/F15E/FA18abcdefg..xyz can do the job just as good...

 

Versatility - if you can do all the tasks with one plane why send another. Besides it`s no problem for A-10C to drop it from high altitude. I hope we are going to have such missions in the game.

Edited August 28, 2009 by topol-m

[Speed_2]

Why would a low level attack [CAS] plane carry a GPS guided bomb that is ment to be deployed from high alt [for best resaults], when an F16/F22/F35/F15E/FA18abcdefg..xyz can do the job just as good...

 

JDAMs work very well from 10k feet I am sure, and that's certainly not high altitude. Besides, the A-10, like all aircraft, is gonna fly pretty high to and from the target area, and even at the target area, it's much safer to deploy weapons from high altitude than to expose yourself to all kinds of threats by going low. It's risky to strafe, even in an A-10, so you should avoid it as much as possible.

 

Besides, JDAMs reason for existance isn't simply that they can be deployed at high altitudes (30k feet+). JDAMs also have the following advantages over LGBs:

1) All weather

2) More reliable

3) Less risky to deploy (an aircraft guiding a LGB has to fly in a straight line or a slow turn).

4) Easier to use in general- just enter a set of coordinates

5) Doesn't require support hardware (I.E., a targetting pod)

Edited August 28, 2009 by Speed_2

[sinelnic]

Also, the JDAM is CHEAP!!! ...er than a Maverick for instance.