IR BVR Missiles

[Silverbolt 104]

Hi all!

do somewone know in a more detailed way explain how is possible an missile IR became BVR like the R-27 and MICA?

like.... what is the real range of the missile, and what is the real effective capability, how do they works? any another orientation sytem as Data-link , or just the IR seeker?

i can't see any logic on that.....

Edited July 3, 2008 by Silverbolt

[Tomas1975 0]

who ever said that french and russians are logical?

 

Maybe at first tracking by radar, second IFF and when identified as foe.....hit him.

Normally the russian / soviet attack profil was first to engage with an IR second and directly after the IR engage with the radar misslie.

[Silverbolt 104]

i saw both MICA version s have inertial "guindance + data-link" but i didn't found any detail more =/

80km is a great range for an IR missile

[Tomas1975 0]

that´s correct....although the range is more 60 than 80 km (Source: MBDA)

MICA was developed to replace R.550 and Super 530.....and so our french comrades developed a misssile with both options, IR and radar. They just have to change the head section. Maybe this solution made it cheaper at all.

ALso both have a reardata-link receiver for guidance.

 

But that is not really new to have a missile which affords both options....have a look at R-3 / R-13 / R-131 aka AA-2 ATOLL or R-23 aka AA-7 APEX or R-40 aka AA-6 ACRID.

[Silverbolt 104]

thanks

[az12121 0]

R-77 switch IR guidance in the last part of flight (10 km. to target)-but I'm not sure.

[sparkomatic 7]

10-D is a rather capable missile and the idea is not strange at all...think about it...at altitude the only things in front of you would be those that you dont want in front of you...so not being able to particularly "control" the missile is not really a factor...hurl the silly thing at range and if it hits something well then that is one less thing to deal with...if not, they are relatively cheap.

 

It also works against current tactics...but that will take quite a while to explain and no, 3wire games do not model tactics correctly at all, so no need to explain it here.

 

In conclusion, it is not only possible but practical...it is not silly...and the -9x is also a BVR heater

 

cheers

[MigBuster 2,884]

Slave it to radar would be my guess for long range shots - but then does the radar keep providing the missile with updates till its IR seeker gets anything?? - in which case a launch could be like a SARH one.

 

If they did launch the IR missile first as said above by Tomas - then "answers on a postcard" as to why.

 

Maybe because a SARH missile would have to be guided - so fire the IR as fire and forget (or go F&F at some stage) then fire the radar shot and guide it in.

 

There may be different versions of the R-77 - although its always labelled as active radar homing - so would imply it uses a radar in its terminal phase with some kind of home on jam backup

 

I guess there could be IR versions - did have a look for Vympels web site - but funnily enough cant find it.

[JediMaster 451]

From what I've heard, these missiles use INS guidance to get a point where their IR seeker would be able to pick up the target, then switch and start searching. Some could use datalink updates ala AMRAAM/Phoenix, but I'm not sure if any do.

 

The only problem is target designation in any LOAL scenario is iffy. Say for example you have a transport escorted by fighters at close range and launch an IR missile BVR without a datalink. You fire the missile at the transport and it flies 2/3 of the distance or whatever based on INS measurements which put it where it would see the target IF the target has continued without changing speed/course since launch. It then switches to the IR seeker. What will it do?

If the group has altered speed/course enough, it may not see anything!

It may only see one of the escort fighters, and lock onto that.

If it sees more than one target, what will it do? Go for the one closest to the center (assuming that is the correct target)? Go for the strongest target return (assuming weaker might be countermeasures)?

 

Years ago I remember having to deal with this a lot in MPS' F-19 Stealth Fighter. It let you carry AMRAAMs, but you had no radar. Unless you fired so close that the radar switched on as it left the bay, it had to fly for quite a ways without any radar datalink. I sometimes had a mission where I was to shoot down a transport but NOT the escorting fighters. It was a "covert mission" and I was to ONLY destroy the target. Many a time the AMRAAM would lock onto an escort instead of the transport just because of how the formation would be when the radar went active.

[Silverbolt 104]

It also works against current tactics...but that will take quite a while to explain and no, 3wire games do not model tactics correctly at all, so no need to explain it here.

 

the -9x is also a BVR heater

 

ah, it was just personal curiosity.....

but the -9X didn't have 80km range as the Mica and Alamo

[+SkippyBing 8]

I'm fairly sure ASRAAM uses a data link for a mid course update before switching to IR homing, at least if launched from a radar equipped aircraft. The Sea Harrier was in the middle of an upgrade programme to implement this when someone decided they had to save some money somewhere.

[Tomas1975 0]

@MigBuster

why launching the IR missile first? simple....if the first to go would be the radar missile, the IR missile would lock on the hot exhaust of the radar missile.

 

 

to all :-)

 

imagine....you were tracked by radar...maybe at a distance of 40km.....the radar is gone....and you think "well the bastard is gone"....suddenly a few seconds later your a** explodes and than YOU are gone

What happened? the bandit took just a short look where You are....the switched off his radar.....launched an IR missile into your direction....just for fun or as a try....the IR missile will be guided into your direction by its own inertial guidance system....10km ahead it will switch on its own IR sensor...will find You and.......boom.

[MigBuster 2,884]

@MigBuster

why launching the IR missile first? simple....if the first to go would be the radar missile, the IR missile would lock on the hot exhaust of the radar missile.

 

 

to all :-)

 

imagine....you were tracked by radar...maybe at a distance of 40km.....the radar is gone....and you think "well the bastard is gone"....suddenly a few seconds later your a** explodes and than YOU are gone

What happened? the bandit took just a short look where You are....the switched off his radar.....launched an IR missile into your direction....just for fun or as a try....the IR missile will be guided into your direction by its own inertial guidance system....10km ahead it will switch on its own IR sensor...will find You and.......boom.

 

 

1. Sorry I thought you meant in your earlier post that the IR missile would be fired before the radar missile.

 

 

2. That comes back to what Jedi says above - when it switches from INS to its IR seeker what exactly does it lock onto? this sounds almost like a LOAL scenario.

INS would just get the missile to a point - the target would be long gone - so without radar providing updates to the missile about where the actual target is - surely the IR seeker will just lock onto any jet in that area?

 

 

 

 

Also to get firing information initially for the IR missile would the radar of the attacking jet need to switch to a mode like STT - because this would be picked up by the passive RWR and signify a radar lock at least.

Assume it was hoped at the time that any target would be expecting a SARH shot only at range and so would be surprised by a long range IR missile?

Edited July 4, 2008 by MigBuster

[Tomas1975 0]

Hmm....that were all the information I could get...sorry but I´m not an airforce guy, just a simple Major of signals corps german army

[gosquidgo 0]

The Russian tactic of radar first and IR second is that the radar missle most likely won't hit the target, but it will cause the target to concentrate on evading the missle instead of engaging the Russian aircraft and then the IR missile can be shot at close range hopefully before the aircraft can reaquire and engage the Russian aircraft.

[lxsapper 0]

The Russian tactic of radar first and IR second is that the radar missle most likely won't hit the target, but it will cause the target to concentrate on evading the missle instead of engaging the Russian aircraft and then the IR missile can be shot at close range hopefully before the aircraft can reaquire and engage the Russian aircraft.

 

 

Actually I read about this They were shorter ranged missiles. I think.

Do you remember that airliner the russians shot down in the 80's? Korean airlines I think.

I remember the pilot explaining how he fired two missiles one IR and one Radar in that sequence for that very same reason.

The reason they fired two was to increase the PoK.

 

I gess this was they're doctrine back then don't know now a days.

[JediMaster 451]

Yes, but IIRC they always fired the IR missile first because of concerns the IR would lock onto the RH missile's plume otherwise.

[+ordway 23]

what is the real range of the missile, and what is the real effective capability, i can't see any logic on that.....

 

Hmmm, maybe I am wrong, but I recently (last month or so) read on a defense forum that BVR is almost useless in reality because of friendly fire concerns.

 

In the opening salvo of a war where you know it's only enemy "over there" it usually works (unless neutral or friendly neighboring countries might have enemy aircraft types). However after the war starts, it gets almost impossible to know and coordinate where all your friendlies are including Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine air units and Allies, helicopter, observation, recce, drone, close support, transport, all over the place.

 

The defense forum stated that even recently in Iraq with the most advanced military and AWACS systems on the planet and complete air superiority, the USA was still killing its own air units by other friendly air units.

 

Maybe the IFF breaks down on a single aircraft/helicopter. Maybe there is combat damage that disables the IFF. Maybe an emergency rescue mission is needed or a sudden fire support mission is needed to stop a base overrun as in Viet Nam, etc. Maybe the best trained AWACS operator in the world screws up (like in Iraq) and you got a friendly fire incident that actually happened in Iraq.

 

Another concern is emission radar identification missile technologies. In it, the seeker warhead can detect the emissions of a certain aircraft based on shape, engine waves, etc, a SU-27 for example. Your Allies or neighboring countries might have the same aircraft types. India has SU-27s. Australia is contemplating getting Russian SUs also. It increases doubt of a friendly fire incident if you fire BVR.

 

So the defense forum stated that in reality, unless you are the nutty Chinese or Russian empires and don't care about friendly fire incidents ("the whole is more important than the individual") ...it just won't happen in reality very much.

 

So we are back to visual range rules in most cases in present and future combat.

 

Just a thought.

Edited July 15, 2008 by ordway

[MigBuster 2,884]

Were there any friendly fire A-A kills in 2003? I know the Patriot batteries - that (in the GR4s case ) were running in some auto aquis mode with misidentified the GR4 (and maybe the FA-18C).

 

There is an account in 1991 of an F-15 pilot (Steve Tate??)making a kill at 12 miles out after Electronic ID was made - the Iragi Jet (Mirage - I think) was getting into position at the 6 of two other F-15s.

 

Even in Vietnam there was a "Free Fire" allocation given when no other friendlies were in the area so F-4 pilots had an opportunity to fire BVR - although no accounts of this actually being used - apart from later in the war by the Navy from what ive read - they would evacuate an area of all Navy Jets then the F-4s could fire at the Migs BVR.

 

The F-4Ds and F-4Es seemed to have an IFF in 1972 (combat Tree) but in the pilot accounts ive read they still didnt trust it - and closed to Visual range........

 

Of course back then against Migs with Guns and rear aspect AA-2s closing to WVR was still a safe option.

 

Closing into something these days that may have already fired an R-77 is something different altogether (unless you are VERY confident in your Counter Measures) - you may be forced to take the BVR risk as soon as its IDd!

 

Certainly any Stealth jet getting WVR is negating its main advantage and surely would never do it unless really forced to.

[JediMaster 451]

I remember in the 90s a pair of F-15s shot down a Blackhawk or two in Iraq in the no-fly zone due to a breakdown in comms with AWACS. They asked, AWACS said "clear", it wasn't.

 

However, the other thing to remember is with each passing year the commercial air traffic just goes up. The odds of accidentally shooting down another airliner (after both the USSR and US did it in the span of what, 10 yrs?) would certainly give the higher-ups pause.

 

Of course, the F-22 can probably sneak up on the 6 of another fighter and get a look before engaging, but that's about it.