R-77M with AESA arh head?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Serbian edition of "Russian Word" reports that One of the construction biros in Russia is working on the ARH AESA radar head for the advanced K-77M A-A missile. Apparently, T-50 will be equipped with this missile.

 

http://ruskarec.ru/news/2013/12/04/lovac_pete_generacije_t-50_bice_opremljen_raketama_sa_digitalnim_kontrol_26707.html

 

I wonder does any current ARH A-A missile use AESA radar head?

[Haukka81]

Any one knows if new RWR's can "see" aesa radars singals? those are killers and when missiles got those on their nose it will be suicide to fly combat missions.. aesa radar will see even F-22 easily ? least New russian sam's are so high tech.

[Namenlos Ein]

http://www.myshared.ru/slide/264263/

[Kaktus29]

yup, read this news 2 days ago.. its going to be a reliable missile especially in the last stage of flight when enemy starts pulling serious G's to evade it..or even before..

 

but it is expensive as such..most probably will be reserved for high-value targets and not for drones, and teen fighters of the west..

[karambiatos]

So what kind of advantages would AESA radar give to a missile?

[AlexHunter]

quote:

Planar functionally complete design with integrated antenna elements

record low thickness. 13 mm

high resistance to WWF microwave submodules of LTCC ceramics

high manufacturability , repeatability and stability of parameters

integrated high-speed synchronous serial interface control

the possibility of combining modules to create any size antennas

lowest price

 

General

 

Planar AFAR have significant advantages weight and size compared to other solutions. In times reduced weight and thickness of sheet AFAR. This allows them to use in small radar homing, on board the UAV for a new class of antenna systems . Conformal antenna arrays , i.e. echoing the shape of the object. Such lattice , for example, needed to create the next fighter - 6th generation .

NIIPP JSC has the most advanced positions in Russia and in the world in the development of modules using planar AESA technology LTCC- ceramics ...

http://www.traisel.ru/doc/production/niipp/36/2

 

- this is compared with the

- this is compared with the

Edited December 5, 2013 by AlexHunter

[sobek]

So what kind of advantages would AESA radar give to a missile?

 

Higher scan rate, higher power density/less weight, possibly better jamming resistance. There are probably more advantages.

[sobek]

Any one knows if new RWR's can "see" aesa radars singals?

 

Yes, there are ways to detect AESAs. The devil is in the details, reliability may vary.

 

aesa radar will see even F-22 easily ?

 

AESA alone does not do much for you in terms of better being able to detect stealthy vehicles besides their general better performance.

[GGTharos]

It's funny that they're having issues with the aircraft based AESAs, but they're thinking of sticking a low-TR count AESA inside a missile, which has its own problems.

 

I just don't believe the 'high manufacturability' claim, not do I believe it will be reliable right now. Most AESA radars need liquid cooling on aircraft.

 

They aren't the first to think of it, and I'll be surprised if they will be the first to successfully implement it.

[GGTharos]

Eliminate the mechanical gimbals, which will also eliminate a lot of seeker settling time (A source of error in guidance, increases miss distance), faster search, better ECCM agility probably, and a few other goodies.

 

So what kind of advantages would AESA radar give to a missile?

[Pilotasso]

I believe the Japanese AAM-4B Missile already has an AESA seeker. They were also the first ones to field an airborne AESA radar in the Mitsubishi F-2 fighter.

[GGTharos]

Then I am behind on my tech study, but last I heard there were quite significant issues with AESA on missiles.

 

Perhaps you can do more things with an item you expect to be destroyed though, but I'd always expect that thermal stability for the array is as important as it is for MSA seekers and radars.

[RIPTIDE]

Then I am behind on my tech study, but last I heard there were quite significant issues with AESA on missiles.

 

Perhaps you can do more things with an item you expect to be destroyed though, but I'd always expect that thermal stability for the array is as important as it is for MSA seekers and radars.

The thermal issues maybe are discounted. I guess they already are in current missile heads? You won't need the same tolerances in something that will live for no more than 60 seconds once activated.. knowing that if it is still operated beyond 5 mins it would incinerate.

[GGTharos]

Yep, but that's not the only issue. Thermal noise is also sensor noise - even with radar seekers.

 

Think of it as uncooled vs cooled IR seeker, same principle.

[Pilotasso]

Been trying to figure out where I seen the AESA seeker for a week, could not find it again. :(

[Pilotasso]

Very hard to get anything from the Japanese Hardware specs but they do surface from time to time albeit in a vague way:

 

http://www.terminalx.org/2012/02/japan-upgrades-missile-system-for-60-f.html

 

http://defense-update.com/20120314_japan-making-its-f-2-fighter-fleet-more-lethal.html

[Pilotasso]

Here's 1 more confirmation the Japanese did indeed developed a missile with AESA seeker:

 

This is from Combat Aircraft magazine.

[Weta43]

Eliminate the mechanical gimbals, which will also eliminate a lot of seeker settling time (A source of error in guidance, increases miss distance), faster search, better ECCM agility probably, and a few other goodies.

 

In that picture they haven't eliminated the gimbals, so maybe they're taking the same approach as with the NIIP Irbis-E, and going for 120 degree off-boresight capability

[Agiel7]

It does seem a tad wasteful to invest in putting a very sophisticated piece of technology into something that, if deployed as intended, you're likely not going to be able to use again.

[Kuky]

It does seem a tad wasteful to invest in putting a very sophisticated piece of technology into something that, if deployed as intended, you're likely not going to be able to use again.

 

If it will destroy a much more expensive and more sophisticated aircraft it would be worth it :)

[danilop]

Even if the target is way cheaper than the missile / weapon, and taking it out means that your foe cannot wage war anymore, it is well worth the cost.

 

Think about all that money US spent in Afghanistan on fighting goat herders, basically ...

[Kuky]

Even if the target is way cheaper than the missile / weapon, and taking it out means that your foe cannot wage war anymore, it is well worth the cost.

 

Think about all that money US spent in Afghanistan on fighting goat herders, basically ...

 

The "worth" there is in the politics... by spending so much money on high tech warfare even if its against goat herders, by accomplishing what they want (insert their political goal here) ultimately they will gain economical power that will bring back what's been spent in warfare... it's all calculated :music_whistling:

[danilop]

That is true as well

[Pilotasso]

In that picture they haven't eliminated the gimbals, so maybe they're taking the same approach as with the NIIP Irbis-E, and going for 120 degree off-boresight capability

 

It is convenient to explain that the AAM-4B is so heavy (more than AMRAAM or AIM-7) that it wasn't certified to be carried on the F-15's wing racks, therefore its short range agility wont be great, also the Japanese have another indigenous missile to fill that role.

 

One exception to this would be a rear quadrant shot: Most fighters today can shoot to the rear quadrant with the JHMS but its a low PK shot due to the lack of precision of the passive warning systems (no guidance rate information possible) except if the missile can search a high volume of space rapidly. But even then the turn is so hard it bleeds off most of its kinetic energy doing so.

Edited February 9, 2014 by Pilotasso

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

It does seem a tad wasteful to invest in putting a very sophisticated piece of technology into something that, if deployed as intended, you're likely not going to be able to use again.

It is well worth when the technology saves your house from incoming bomber. And with the steering system R-77 has and now the AESA seeker head, I think, this new missile should be named a "freedom" missile. Hopefully, they are working on SAM version as well.