Missile Discussion

[FLANKERATOR]

Flankerator, no, it wouldn't be.

 

It might look like it might be dangerous, but modern fighters aren't using STT much anymore, and they frequency-hop like mofos. That's not so bad for a stationary target, but a target that's moving at mach 2 in three dimensions... Yeah... ;)

 

Oh, and R-77 is dead.

 

R77 is dead? first time I hear that...dont forget those missiles (R27/77) are meant to track and destroy high G maneuvering targets, specially the adder(up to 12G maneuvering target)....so we are not talking about HARMs...

 

and tracking an emitting radar is easier for a seeker..just look at how precisely a HARM does the SEAD job.

[EtherealN]

R-77 is not being produced.

R-77 is not deployed.

R-77 is not used by anyone.

 

Dead.

 

There are derivatives from the programme that are being developed, but the R-77 is gone and never was, and it's siblings are not deployed yet or even shown to be at IOC.

 

EDIT: Also, we are talking about ARM's. "HARM" is a "heavy", btw, don't confuse things. And no matter what G's your missile can do, it matters absolutely zilch if it's seeker loses you because your radar was developed this side of the new millennium. (But if you want to fight old stuff, like DPRK migs or Iranian F-14's, sure, might work. But why not use something better that won't go to **** through your target blipping his radar?)

Edited December 20, 2010 by EtherealN

[RIPTIDE]

R-77 is not being produced.

R-77 is not deployed.

R-77 is not used by anyone.

 

Thought India had a few? just sayin..

[Pilotasso]

Its the RVV-AE

[GGTharos]

Have you noticed how easy the HARM was to fool? Granted, you need only a few corrections to deal with it, but the Serbs did a good job of showing the HARM to be a bit of a boob as it was deployed and used back then.

 

An ARM needs a radar source to track, and if a HARM has issues with a NON MOVING source which can actually cause it to miss by messing with sidelobes etc, never-mind frequency-hopping, what do you think an ARM can do against an aircraft? It's next to useless because it doesn't have a good target source to track.

 

You don't have the knowledge to make the statements you are making - radar isn't a binary factor, ie. on or off ... it is fairly complex and not so easy to deal with.

 

And what Pilotasso said - you go up against an LPI radar, good luck picking it up on your RWR, let alone having an ARM pick it up.

 

As for the R-77 - yep, it's dead. They produce the RVV-AE, and the difference between the two is something we don't know. Even the RVV-AE is going to the dump - Russia is developing a new missile to develop it.

 

R77 is dead? first time I hear that...dont forget those missiles (R27/77) are meant to track and destroy high G maneuvering targets, specially the adder(up to 12G maneuvering target)....so we are not talking about HARMs...

 

and tracking an emitting radar is easier for a seeker..just look at how precisely a HARM does the SEAD job.

[FLANKERATOR]

come on guys, R77 or RVV-AE, we are talkimg about russian ARH missiles.

 

some sources report R77 in its early version (50km range) has been delivered to many counties like Algeria.

 

RVV-AE is the next generation with greater range.

 

well anyone has any evidence re AESA stealth effect on an RWR?

[GGTharos]

come on guys, R77 or RVV-AE, we are talkimg about russian ARH missiles.

 

some sources report R77 in its early version (50km range) has been delivered to many counties like Algeria.

 

RVV-AE is the next generation with greater range.

 

Sure, the difference might be like AIM-120A and AIM-120C, but vympel doesn't like using R-77 for whatever reason. It's done for, and they sell the RVV-AE. They aren't the same, and AFAIK it was the electronics, not the rocket motor, that are different. The RVV-AE is still a '50km missile', for all that's worth. RVV-AE does not lay claim to better kinematics. Some on-paper RVV-AE designs do, but not the real deal that's used out there.

 

well anyone has any evidence re AESA stealth effect on an RWR?

Uhm ... F-15C pilots practicing against F-22's? Yes, I asked. They never see it. Anywhere. They're just told an AMRAAM killed them. The radar is LPI - AESA makes LPI easier, but it isn't necessarily an AESA feature. LPI means you're very unlikely to get a hit on your RWR - it is usually rejected as background noise. If you try to make it sensitive enough to pick up an LPI radar, you'll get a crapload of false positives for your effort. That's the idea.

[FLANKERATOR]

GG dude relax, here is a definition for you. its funny how you try to make others look the way u want.

 

HARM = High-speed Anti Radiation Missile.

[FLANKERATOR]

. The RVV-AE is still a '50km missile', for all that's worth.

just LOL, the russians are dumb enough to put a 50km weapon inside a T50 :lol:

Uhm ... F-15C pilots practicing against F-22's? Yes, I asked. They never see it. Anywhere. They're just told an AMRAAM killed them. The radar is LPI - AESA makes LPI easier, but it isn't necessarily an AESA feature. LPI means you're very unlikely to get a hit on your RWR - it is usually rejected as background noise. If you try to make it sensitive enough to pick up an LPI radar, you'll get a crapload of false positives for your effort. That's the idea.

 

Uhm...wondering why the mighty LPI radar did not much against the rafale at the last UAE redflag...

[Pilotasso]

They got other missiles planned if you payed attention to GG's post. Right now, the RVV-AE is the only active missile of Russian manufacture anywhere.

[GGTharos]

They'll put what they have in it. Are you suffering from some sort of comprehension problem? That's how the real world works.

 

just LOL, the russians are dumb enough to put a 50km weapon inside a T50 :lol:

 

Probably because F-22's weren't flying against the mighty frenchmen ;)

 

Uhm...wondering why the mighty LPI radar did not much against the rafale at the last UAE redflag...

[Geskes]

As far as I know R77 has always been RVV-AE, its just the designation for export. No difference between plain r-77 and rvv-ae.

[RIPTIDE]

what do you think an ARM can do against an aircraft? It's next to useless because it doesn't have a good target source to track.

Well there was that time a HARM blew the ass of a B-52... just sayin' . lol

[GGTharos]

That's just not written right, dude.

 

Anyway, haven't heard of that one.

[RIPTIDE]

That's just not written right, dude.

 

Anyway, haven't heard of that one.

Ya... A F-4G Wild Weasal in operations over Iraq fired at either 1) A Sam/AAA system or 2) The radar source of the B-52 rear gun. Anyway, the HARM ended up tracking the targeting radar for the rear gun and busted it up a bit. No fatalities but the bird was up on blocks for a long time.

[GGTharos]

That rings a bell. Makes some sense too - radar in STT is the perfect HARM target.

 

According to the story the F4G's equipment mis-indentified the tail gun as an AAA site, which is possible, also I wonder if the B-52 wasn't in the process of jamming such a site in which case the jammer might have been emitting just that kind of signal ...

Edited December 21, 2010 by GGTharos

[Pilotasso]

Ya... A F-4G Wild Weasal in operations over Iraq fired at either 1) A Sam/AAA system or 2) The radar source of the B-52 rear gun. Anyway, the HARM ended up tracking the targeting radar for the rear gun and busted it up a bit. No fatalities but the bird was up on blocks for a long time.

 

That rings a bell. Makes some sense too - radar in STT is the perfect HARM target.

 

According to the story the F4G's equipment mis-indentified the tail gun as an AAA site, which is possible, also I wonder if the B-52 wasn't in the process of jamming such a site in which case the jammer might have been emitting just that kind of signal ...

 

Wasnt it a shrike missile? they didnt have HARMS back then.

[combatace]

As far as I know R77 has always been RVV-AE, its just the designation for export. No difference between plain r-77 and rvv-ae.

 

R-77 has a more sharper nose than RVV-AE, a Russian friend told me. Also there is a difference in size in their lattices controls and RVV-AE has folding latticeNot sure of last one).

[combatace]

Wasnt it a shrike missile? they didnt have HARMS back then.

 

As far as I can recall 'In the HARM's Way' quote came into existence after this incident.

[RIPTIDE]

they didn't have HARMS back then.

Back when?

 

Besides AGM-88's have been out for the past 25 years.

Edited December 21, 2010 by RIPTIDE

[RIPTIDE]

As far as I can recall 'In the HARM's Way' quote came into existence after this incident.

No. The quote always existed but the B-52 was renamed.

[GGTharos]

I feel fine thanks...but its funny cauz I was about to return you the question.

 

You can feel fine and still have a comprehension problem.

 

 

As how the real world works, I doubt you have any clue about it especially when you are talking about the T50 and its weapons.

See? Once more, comprehension problem. If you actually understood what I said, you wouldn't have bothered with that comment.

 

They were :thumbup:

No, the USAF doesn't fly F22's in adversarial A2A with anything but other USAF forces. There was an assumption F-22's were flying against other planes in that big red flag, but that isn't what they were doing there.

 

Edit: I see, they must have changed that policy:

 

"Although French aviators showed off a great deal about the "beatings" inflicted by their Rafales on British Typhoons during the last ATLC exercise in the United Arab Emirates, very little was said about the confrontation between Dassault's delta-wing aircraft and the American F-22As. In out-of-visual-range engagements, the American Raptors did not even condescend to turn on their radars, remaining invisible to the Rafale's RBE2 [radar system] and Spectra [self-defense system] while precisely locating the electromagnetic waves from the French fighter, thus securing their AMRAAM [missile] launches from a secure distance. On two occasions at least, the F-22As also "tangled" with the Rafales in close combat, securing a "gun kill" each time without much difficulty."

 

I think you can figure out how well the RWR worked now. ;)

Edited December 21, 2010 by GGTharos

[Pilotasso]

Back when?

 

Besides AGM-88's have been out for the past 25 years.

 

 

Your right, I missed the "IRAQ" word after reading "F-4 Wild weasel", so I associated it with Vietnam.

[RIPTIDE]

"Although French aviators showed off a great deal about the "beatings" inflicted by their Rafales on British Typhoons during the last ATLC exercise in the United Arab Emirates, very little was said about the confrontation between Dassault's delta-wing aircraft and the American F-22As. In out-of-visual-range engagements, the American Raptors did not even condescend to turn on their radars, remaining invisible to the Rafale's RBE2 [radar system] and Spectra [self-defense system] while precisely locating the electromagnetic waves from the French fighter, thus securing their AMRAAM [missile] launches from a secure distance. On two occasions at least, the F-22As also "tangled" with the Rafales in close combat, securing a "gun kill" each time without much difficulty."

I think you can figure out how well the RWR worked now. ;)

 

From AirCosmos magazine in France. More information came out and it was contested and they subsequently withdrew the opinion. Apparently there was 4/5 draws and 1 or maybe 2 losses. lol. But after that then came some other confusing claims and counter claims... so its all fogged.

 

Rafale vs F-22 : the balance of the match

 

The Air & Cosmos magazine publishes the results of the meeting between the French Rafale and the F-22 in the skies of the United Arab Emirates in December 2009, as it has been confirmed by the Air Force. Six engagements have taken place during the exercice we already reported on this blog.

Of those six games, "the F-22 conducted one shot gun, five other ending with a draw" -a scenario called "mutual neutralization " .Slightly dominated by the U.S. plane, a pure stealth fighter and very maneuverable the Rafale has therefore proved to be a tough opponent. This information confirms what we wrote in mid-December.

 

It should be noted that the Americans had wanted to limit these meetings in within visual range engagements , that is to say dogfights one against one. Du "dogfight" dans le style de la bataille d'Angleterre revue et corrigée avec la technologie du XXI ème siècle. "dogfight" in the style of the Battle of Britain, revised with the technology of XXI century.

 

This is little in the way combat aircrafts act today because the long-range interceptor (Beyond Visual Range) is preferred.

 

Through its system of passive detection AN/ALR-94 the F-22 Raptor "fighter would have detected the French long-distance" which allowed him to shoot the (fictional) of air-air missile "standoff" says the Weekly Air and Cosmos.

So it boils down to this: The F22's decided NOT to BVR and ended up tangling with the Rafales... for whatever reason. Probably to limit their system use. I bet the French surrendered.

 

Anyway, I'm waiting on Karlo Kopp's analysis on this one. :D

Edited December 21, 2010 by RIPTIDE

[FLANKERATOR]

You can feel fine and still have a comprehension problem.

See? Once more, comprehension problem. If you actually understood what I said, you wouldn't have bothered with that comment.

 

you said RVV-AE has been designed to be a 50km range missile, and that RAF will put that inside a T50 and that is completely absurd.

So actually I feel fine and fortunetely fine enough to understand your BS.

 

 

No, the USAF doesn't fly F22's in adversarial A2A with anything but other USAF forces. There was an assumption F-22's were flying against other planes in that big red flag, but that isn't what they were doing there.

Edit: I see, they must have changed that policy

 

Good to see you able to understand better....finally :thumbup:

 

I think you can figure out how well the RWR worked now. ;)

 

apparently, BVR was diabled after the USAF required that (top secret data protection or bad advertising protection ?)....anyways there is no RWR conclusions to get from that...however and as I have told you before the score Rafale-Raptor was 0-1 only.