Pod for SEAD

[blackadam]

Or Targeting Pod for ARM system

 

I had a debate with my friends, about the use of anti-radar weapon (ARM) for Su-24/25/27/30/34/35 or F-15/16, Mirage, Rafale, Typhoon, Tornado as Kh-31P, ALARM or AGM-88.

 

My friend is an idiot, he thinks that all smart weapons can be mounted on any plane and firing any target, pilot don't need main radar guidance (FCR) or dedicated targeting pods (FLIR).

 

eg: F-14 with the AWG-9 radar guidance for the AIM-54, or the system detects the target L-086B for the Su-24 Kh-58. As far as I know Su-24/30 Fantasmagoria pod to use guided Kh-31A / P, for F-16 used HARM pod (AN/ASQ-213) to lead the way for the AGM-88

 

So I think the Fighter need 2 targeting pod for conventional weapons such as TV/EO/IR guided missiles, laser-guided missiles and radar guided missile (mainly ARM).

 

eg: F-16C with Sniper-XR pod (Maverick missile) and HARM pod (Harm missile).

 

However, for systems of Russia it is much more complex.

 

Eg: Su-30MK is pretty much targeting pod includes OLS-27 IRST for A2A missile (no turn on radar), APK-9E Tekon (datalink pod) to guided Kh-31P, Kh-59ME, Sapsan-E ir / laser targeting pod just for ground attack as KAB-500L, Kh-29D

Edited October 5, 2013 by blackadam

[sorcer3r]

AGM-65 can be used without TGP.

Also AGM-88 can be used without HTS-pod. (HARM as sensor)

[blackadam]

AGM-65 can be used without TGP.

Also AGM-88 can be used without HTS-pod. (HARM as sensor)

 

Read in here pls

 

HARM targeting pod

http://defense-update.com/products/h/HTS.htm

 

Sniper-XR aka TGP

http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/technology/avionics/73-sniper-xr-pod

[VTJS17_Fire]

He's right.

 

You can use these pods for HARM and Maverick, but you don't need so. The A-10A used the Maverick in the gulf war, without the TGP.

 

IIRC, the HARM was first used in the early 80s, there was no HTS pod, like today.

 

 

regards,

Fire

[countto10]

Difficult to use a laser guided weapon without a laser though. Similarly a JDAM needs an inertial input pre-release. So the assertion that 'all smart weapons can be mounted on any plane is wrong'. And even in the case of those that don't require special avionics, they still need to be qualified.

[sorcer3r]

So the assertion that 'all smart weapons can be mounted on any plane is wrong'.

 

Agree but " the Fighter need 2 targeting pod for conventional weapons such as TV/EO/IR guided missiles, laser-guided missiles and radar guided missile" is wrong, too.

 

truth lies in between... ;)

[Eddie]

Or Targeting Pod for ARM system

 

I had a debate with my friends, about the use of anti-radar weapon (ARM) for Su-24/25/27/30/34/35 or F-15/16, Mirage, Rafale, Typhoon, Tornado as Kh-31P, ALARM or AGM-88.

 

A few of those aircraft can't carry any ARMs.

 

My friend is an idiot, he thinks that all smart weapons can be mounted on any plane and firing any target, pilot don't need main radar guidance (FCR) or dedicated targeting pods (FLIR).

 

Actually, depending on the aircraft and the weapon system in question, your friend is absolutely correct.

 

eg: F-14 with the AWG-9 radar guidance for the AIM-54, or the system detects the target L-086B for the Su-24 Kh-58. As far as I know Su-24/30 Fantasmagoria pod to use guided Kh-31A / P, for F-16 used HARM pod (AN/ASQ-213) to lead the way for the AGM-88

 

The Viper "can" use the HTS, it does not "have" to.

 

So I think the Fighter need 2 targeting pod for conventional weapons such as TV/EO/IR guided missiles, laser-guided missiles and radar guided missile (mainly ARM).

 

Nope, targeting pods are not "required" for any of them. Most modern RADAR guided weapons require no support from the launch platform (especially true in the case of air-surface weapons), and even LASER guided weapons do not need the launch platform to provide a LASER spot, any aircraft or ground unit can do it.

 

eg: F-16C with Sniper-XR pod (Maverick missile) and HARM pod (Harm missile).

 

SNIPER or any other targeting pod is not required for Maverick, in fact Maverick itself can be(and has been) used as a makeshift targeting pod in the days before such pods were common . And nor is the HTS required for HARM. In fact of all the aircraft capable of carrying HARM, only the F-16 can carry the HTS. All other aircraft use the HARM in the "HARM as sensor" modes.

[countto10]

Agree but " the Fighter need 2 targeting pod for conventional weapons such as TV/EO/IR guided missiles, laser-guided missiles and radar guided missile" is wrong, too.

 

truth lies in between... ;)

But the full truth is that on DCS A-10C I have used a Maverick without TGP about once during the training mission and then never again because it is such a b*stard to lock without cueing from the TGP.

 

And at the very least, you would still need a software upgrade to interface the missile with the MFCD and HUD. And having these things in the first place is also a pre-requisite.:D

[countto10]

Not meaning to disagree with your clearly superior experience but some of the answers require a few qualifiers.

 

Actually, depending on the aircraft and the weapon system in question, your friend is absolutely correct.

I don't think "all smart weapons" can be mounted on "any aircraft" and used on "any target" as the original post states. Mavericks are fairly versatile that way although they'll struggle to actually hit a fighter jet.

 

Nope, targeting pods are not "required" for any of them. Most modern RADAR guided weapons require no support from the launch platform (especially true in the case of air-surface weapons), and even LASER guided weapons do not need the launch platform to provide a LASER spot, any aircraft or ground unit can do it.

True in the case of the laser spot, however it would be fair to say that the aircraft still needs a datalink so that HUD can provide targeting info and the LGB can be launched within parameters. With radar guided weapons we need to distinguish between SARH and ARH. The latter can be launched without post launch support, however they still need the software interface to inform the pilot of when they are 'locked' and not having datalink support from the launch aircraft will severely limit effective range. Without mid-course update AMRAAMs (at least early ones), were found to be less effective than the older Skyflashs when launched from outside self-lock range if I remember rightly.

 

SNIPER or any other targeting pod is not required for Maverick, in fact Maverick itself can be(and has been) used as a makeshift targeting pod in the days before such pods were common . And nor is the HTS required for HARM. In fact of all the aircraft capable of carrying HARM, only the F-16 can carry the HTS. All other aircraft use the HARM in the "HARM as sensor" modes.

True but it does limit effective range if the aircraft can't provide it with an INS reference pre-launch. You could argue that range is limited by the fact the radar can switch off anyway but I believe MWR on the E models solves that problem slightly.

[Eddie]

I don't think "all smart weapons" can be mounted on "any aircraft" and used on "any target" as the original post states. Mavericks are fairly versatile that way although they'll struggle to actually hit a fighter jet.

 

Huh? Why would you want a Maverick to hit a fighter, or any aircraft for that matter? They are an air to surface weapon.

 

 

True in the case of the laser spot, however it would be fair to say that the aircraft still needs a datalink so that HUD can provide targeting info and the LGB can be launched within parameters.

 

No, you only need to know where to release the weapon. That can be determined via a multitude of means, from precision coordinates provided by another party of onboard sensors to simply visual release on the right area.

 

With radar guided weapons we need to distinguish between SARH and ARH. The latter can be launched without post launch support, however they still need the software interface to inform the pilot of when they are 'locked' and not having datalink support from the launch aircraft will severely limit effective range. Without mid-course update AMRAAMs (at least early ones), were found to be less effective than the older Skyflashs when launched from outside self-lock range if I remember rightly.

 

In the case of air to air weapons yes. But as this discussion is primarily catering for air to surface weapons, no.

 

True but it does limit effective range if the aircraft can't provide it with an INS reference pre-launch. You could argue that range is limited by the fact the radar can switch off anyway but I believe MWR on the E models solves that problem slightly.

 

Again, huh? Perhaps I'm not understanding what you're referencing, but the Maverick has no INS, it is simply Optically guided. It does not know or care where is it pre-launch. There are also no RADAR guided Maverick models, only Optical (both visual light and IR) and LASER.

 

Even JDAM doesn't need to be have target data sent to it in flight, that can be (and often is) uploaded on the ground. The only thing it needs is a starting position to be provided at release by the launch aircraft to start it's INS on the right track, but even the accuracy of that isn't vital provided the weapon time of flight is greater than 10 seconds (the time needed for JDAM to acquire GPS).

[Eddie]

But the full truth is that on DCS A-10C I have used a Maverick without TGP about once during the training mission and then never again because it is such a b*stard to lock without cueing from the TGP.

 

And at the very least, you would still need a software upgrade to interface the missile with the MFCD and HUD. And having these things in the first place is also a pre-requisite.:D

 

Then I suggest you practice a lot more. Because not only is it quite easy, it is also the "normal" method of employing Mavericks. Even the A-10Cs spend more time training to operate without a TGP than they do with one.

 

In fact, as with just about all military aircraft, there is a specific qualification/training required to actually fly with a TGP. Every pilot first learns, and masters, how to operate without one.

 

And why on earth would you need a software upgrade, all the functionality is already there, and always has been? From suite 3.1 and even in the A model.

[countto10]

Huh? Why would you want a Maverick to hit a fighter, or any aircraft for that matter? They are an air to surface weapon.

Exactly but read the original post.

 

 

 

No, you only need to know where to release the weapon. That can be determined via a multitude of means, from precision coordinates provided by another party of onboard sensors to simply visual release on the right area.

And how do you know where to release the weapon? A laser is shone but where?

 

 

In the case of air to air weapons yes. But as this discussion is primarily catering for air to surface weapons, no.

The new ones also like an INS reference though.

 

 

Again, huh? Perhaps I'm not understanding what you're referencing, but the Maverick has no INS, it is simply Optically guided. It does not know or care where is it pre-launch. There are also no RADAR guided Maverick models, only Optical (both visual light and IR) and LASER.

 

Even JDAM doesn't need to be have target data sent to it in flight, that can be (and often is) uploaded on the ground. The only thing it needs is a starting position to be provided at release by the launch aircraft to start it's INS on the right track, but even the accuracy of that isn't vital provided the weapon time of flight is greater than 10 seconds (the time needed for JDAM to acquire GPS).

Yeah you were misunderstanding, I was talking about AGM-88E.

 

The truth is that both the OP and his friend are wrong but his friend is more wrong.

[sorcer3r]

And how do you know where to release the weapon? A laser is shone but where?

 

If you have the coordinates where the laser is then you know where to release. Also if you have visual on the target you can do a manual release. (perhaps not recommended in danger close scenarios but it is possible ;) )

 

 

Yeah you were misunderstanding, I was talking about AGM-88E.

 

I think also E-Variant can be used as sensor. And that answers the question in the first post. There is no need to have a HTS-pod.

But for sure it is more comfortable to have one. ;)

[countto10]

If you have the coordinates where the laser is then you know where to release. Also if you have visual on the target you can do a manual release. (perhaps not recommended in danger close scenarios but it is possible ;) )

 

 

 

 

I think also E-Variant can be used as sensor. And that answers the question in the first post. There is no need to have a HTS-pod.

But for sure it is more comfortable to have one. ;)

How do you have those co-ordinates? It can act as sensor but it doesn't have its own INS reference system, it needs providing with that.

[mvsgas]

Or Targeting Pod for ARM system

 

I had a debate with my friends, about the use of anti-radar weapon (ARM) for Su-24/25/27/30/34/35 or F-15/16, Mirage, Rafale, Typhoon, Tornado as Kh-31P, ALARM or AGM-88.

 

My friend is an idiot, he thinks that all smart weapons can be mounted on any plane and firing any target, pilot don't need main radar guidance (FCR) or dedicated targeting pods (FLIR).

 

eg: F-14 with the AWG-9 radar guidance for the AIM-54, or the system detects the target L-086B for the Su-24 Kh-58. As far as I know Su-24/30 Fantasmagoria pod to use guided Kh-31A / P, for F-16 used HARM pod (AN/ASQ-213) to lead the way for the AGM-88

 

So I think the Fighter need 2 targeting pod for conventional weapons such as TV/EO/IR guided missiles, laser-guided missiles and radar guided missile (mainly ARM).

 

eg: F-16C with Sniper-XR pod (Maverick missile) and HARM pod (Harm missile).

 

However, for systems of Russia it is much more complex.

 

Eg: Su-30MK is pretty much targeting pod includes OLS-27 IRST for A2A missile (no turn on radar), APK-9E Tekon (datalink pod) to guided Kh-31P, Kh-59ME, Sapsan-E ir / laser targeting pod just for ground attack as KAB-500L, Kh-29D

 

In relation to the F-16, no pods are required for any weapons specifically. It all depends on the weapons, the version of the F-16 etc. For example, F-16A (block 10 to 20) could not carry AGM-88 but over the years, with modifications, some now can carry the AGM-88 and do so without the HTS pod. F-16C block 30/32/50/52/52+ can also employ AGM-88 without HTS pod. All this can change depending on specifics, meaning some countries version of the F-16 can not carry AGM-88, other can can only carry other ARM missiles. F-16 capabilities vary very much from country to country, year to year, block to block, etc.

 

As for other "smart weapons", like Eddie posted, it depends on the weapon, aircraft, aircraft modifications, etc. But in general, no weapons is tied up to a specific pod

 

I don't think "all smart weapons" can be mounted on "any aircraft" and used on "any target" as the original post states. Mavericks are fairly versatile that way although they'll struggle to actually hit a fighter jet.

Not sure you point and how it relates to original post.

 

True in the case of the laser spot, however it would be fair to say that the aircraft still needs a datalink so that HUD can provide targeting info and the LGB can be launched within parameters. With radar guided weapons we need to distinguish between SARH and ARH. The latter can be launched without post launch support, however they still need the software interface to inform the pilot of when they are 'locked' and not having datalink support from the launch aircraft will severely limit effective range. Without mid-course update AMRAAMs (at least early ones), were found to be less effective than the older Skyflashs when launched from outside self-lock range if I remember rightly.

For laser guided bombs (LGB) no datalink is needed. How do they know where to release the bomb? All aircraft involve on the strike would know the target, they would plan release points, etc. They will also talk to each other. As long as the laser has the correct code and it is strong enough and the correct type the bomb should guide to it. Tornadoes did this during ODS 1, also, one of the ways LGB where used as far back as Vietnam for example.

[countto10]

Not sure you point and how it relates to original post.

It's fairly obvious.

 

For laser guided bombs (LGB) no datalink is needed. How do they know where to release the bomb? All aircraft involve on the strike would know the target, they would plan release points, etc. They will also talk to each other. As long as the laser has the correct code and it is strong enough and the correct type the bomb should guide to it. Tornadoes did this during ODS 1, also, one of the ways LGB where used as far back as Vietnam for example.

How do you know where to release? Not all aircraft will know the target in a fluent environment. If it's so simple, explain to me why Brimstone isn't already qualified for the Typhoon and won't be until 2019.

[EtherealN]

How do you have those co-ordinates?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_terminal_attack_controller

 

You know, the guys on the ground that have been telling pilots which weapon to use, against what, and when, and where, since the second world war. ;)

[mvsgas]

LGB are normally used on buildings, rarely are they used on vehicle, specially moving vehicle. So they can and have been drop like "dumb bombs" So is as simple as the guiding aircraft talking to the aircraft doing the bombing. Telling it what target is, they can coordinate the drop and the guiding aircraft would lase for the last few seconds before impact.

 

Why Brimstone aren't qualified on Typhoon? Several reasons speaking in general terms ( since I do not know the specifics) Separations test, pylons, software, pilot training, load out testing, money, time for the testing, etc.

 

I still don't get the Mavericks reference.

[EtherealN]

But the full truth is that on DCS A-10C I have used a Maverick without TGP about once during the training mission and then never again because it is such a b*stard to lock without cueing from the TGP.

 

 

DkYM8UWSnok

 

 

Like Eddie said, that's practice. When doing mavs I only use TGP to mark a point on my target area, allowing me to easily get my Mavs pointed in roughly the right direction.

[tflash]

How do you get the Mav ground stabilized? When I move the Mav it starts wandering around ...

[sobek]

How do you get the Mav ground stabilized? When I move the Mav it starts wandering around ...

 

TMS down short.

[tflash]

That's what I do, but if I then move the seeker it wanders until it auto-locks on a target. In the vid it seemed the movement was more user-controlled?

[Eddie]

TMS Left Long will space stailise the seeker head. There is no "ground stabilise" IRL (at least as far as those who have played previous sims will think of it), except for as part of the Force Correlate track functionality.

[EtherealN]

That's what I do, but if I then move the seeker it wanders until it auto-locks on a target. In the vid it seemed the movement was more user-controlled?

 

TMS-down-short

move

TMS-down-short

 

Basically, any movement except lock attempts are "automatically" (as in, practiced reflex) followed by a new TMS-down.

[tflash]

thanks!