AMRAAM Question
MZ
received on another aircraft, (AWACS)? Could an F-15 launch on a distant
target, turn and run, with an E-3's radar guiding the missile now that
the Eagle's radar cannot track the target?
Would the same answer apply to the AIM-54?
>MZ
Tom F. Cat
Tom F. Cat
Gadhafi, all I have to say is 'Anytime,Baby!'
Tom F. Cat, 1989 Gulf of Sidra,Libya
Ross King
weapon to target. As such, it does not require an aircraft radar platform to
get it to the target. The aircraft finds the target on it's radar (or the
E-3's), fires the weapon and scrams. The weapon turns on its radar and
actively seeks the target. The AIM-54 Phoenix works the same way.
Therefore the E-3 to my knowledge would not be able to guide the weapon. In
reality it has no need to anyway. With a semi-active radar missile (ie,
AIM-7 Sparrow) it should be possible provided the E-3 has the correct
datalink etc. No idea whether it has been done or not though.
Cheers,
Ross
"MZ" <nuke...@home.com> wrote in message news:39ECFBF2...@home.com...
MZ
dsitant and changes course while the missile is in flight, then the
missile can only compensate its course if the target is being tracked
and the information relayed to it by the launching aircraft.
So does the launching aircraft need to keep tracking the target, or can
it send the missile guidance data through a link from another aircraft?
>MZ
Ross King
the target the entire way. Not sure on ranges etc of the actual radar inside
at all. I know that its a "Fire and forget" weapon (that was its design
spec) so i can only assume that the radar has enough range to track the
target continuously.
Ross
"MZ" <nuke...@home.com> wrote in message news:39ED1FAF...@home.com...
Dennis Jensen
Ross King wrote:
>
> As far as i know (not a physicist or weapon engineer) the weapon can track
> the target the entire way. Not sure on ranges etc of the actual radar inside
> at all. I know that its a "Fire and forget" weapon (that was its design
> spec) so i can only assume that the radar has enough range to track the
> target continuously.
> Ross
>
Nope, only tracks with its own radar in terminal phase. generally gets
midcourse updates, but if no update, just goes to the predetermined
point and on goes the radar.
Dennis
> "MZ" <nuke...@home.com> wrote in message news:39ED1FAF...@home.com...
Ralph Savelsberg
> As far as i know (not a physicist or weapon engineer) the weapon can track
> the target the entire way. Not sure on ranges etc of the actual radar inside
> at all. I know that its a "Fire and forget" weapon (that was its design
> spec) so i can only assume that the radar has enough range to track the
> target continuously.
> Ross
The radars in the mssiles themselves are relatively small. Generally speaking
the bigger the antenna, the more power and thus the more range a radar has. The
tiny antennas in AIM-54 and AIM-120 don't have enough range to guide the
weapons all the way to their targets (150 km + for the Phoenix and 40 km + for
the AMRAAM). Both weapons require updates through a datalink on their target's
position. The missiles rely on their own radars for the terminal phase of the
flight only, which for the AIM-54 is during roughly the last 20 km. In theory
there is no reason why the updates shouldn't come from another aircraft, i.e.
not the aircraft that launched the missile. I think that it is certainly
possible with F-14Ds. In the absence of these updates, the missile just keeps
on going in the general direction the target used to have, relying on an
Inertial Navigation System.
Ralph Savelsberg
>
>
> "MZ" <nuke...@home.com> wrote in message news:39ED1FAF...@home.com...
John Carrier
>
support for most of its operational modes.
The key to success for E-3 guidance for a passive launch A/C is sufficiently
accurate launch data ... probably take a major mod of the E-3 radar or the
addition of a fire control radar to the aircraft.
Tom Clancy hypothesized this kind of thing in "Debt of Honor." I also
believe a pair of F-22's has the ability.
R / John
Maury Markowitz
news:39ed...@news.adfa.edu.au...
> The AIM-120 AMRAAM uses active radar )in the missile itself) to guide the
> weapon to target.
Well, kinda. For the majority of the flight the missile is relying on a
"known" position - where the plane was heading when it was launched - and it
flies there without any guidance. If the target plane changes direction then
the launch platform can send an updated position using a datalink to the
missile. It's only when the missile gets very close to the target (under 5
miles IIRC) that it's own radar is turned on.
In theory any plane with a datalink could guide the missile, but due to
the way the DL's work this isn't always easy/possible. However I still have
a lingering memory of a test in which a Hawkeye did the guidance, but that
seems likely to be a false one.
Maury
Corsair
little loosly when it comes to the AIM-120. I wrote a short piece about
it and how it seeks out the target here:
http://www.jolly-rogers.com/airpower/aim-120/
Just select avionics if you don't want to look at the rest.
Ross King wrote:
>
> The AIM-120 AMRAAM uses active radar )in the missile itself) to guide the
> weapon to target. As such, it does not require an aircraft radar platform to
> get it to the target. The aircraft finds the target on it's radar (or the
> E-3's), fires the weapon and scrams. The weapon turns on its radar and
> actively seeks the target. The AIM-54 Phoenix works the same way.
--
Corsair
The Jolly Rogers Squadron Site
www.Jolly-Rogers.com
Steve Davies
--
Steve Davies
Apogée Partnering Ltd.
Urban Fredriksson
>Would it be possible to launch and guide an AIM-120 by relying on data
>received on another aircraft, (AWACS)?
Sure.
>Could an F-15 launch on a distant
>target, turn and run, with an E-3's radar guiding the missile now that
>the Eagle's radar cannot track the target?
Theoretically. But I think it's more likely the AWACS
transmits the target data to the fighter which then sends
updates to the missile. Or perhaps a second fighter.
--
Urban Fredriksson gri...@canit.se Military aviation: weekly news, Swedish
military aviation and aircraft, the rec.aviation.military FAQ
http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/aviation/
J.T. Wenting
"Urban Fredriksson" <gri...@canit.se> wrote in message
news:8smfip$t...@uno.canit.se...
> >received on another aircraft, (AWACS)?
>
>
Will be near-standard practice with the F-22, with one aircraft painting
targets for the rest of the group.
> >Could an F-15 launch on a distant
> >target, turn and run, with an E-3's radar guiding the missile now that
> >the Eagle's radar cannot track the target?
>
> Theoretically. But I think it's more likely the AWACS
> transmits the target data to the fighter which then sends
> updates to the missile. Or perhaps a second fighter.
> --
That is the scenario. The launching fighter receives guidance information
and uses that to guide the missile. The weapon itself is never under direct
control of the Sentry.
Martin Rosenkranz
The small radar in the missiles nose have only power for a short time of
operating and a range of maybe 10 km (6 miles) or so. (The Gripen has a
Radarpower of about 1kW, a antenna-diameter of 600mm and is able to get
contact at a distance of about 120km (75miles) - how small is the antenna of
the missile and how many power for how long he can use?)
So the missile goes out to a place where the target is expected because of
last known course and speed, if the target turns slightly away and changes
speed the missile ist not able to get contact with the own radar.
So there is a midway guidance from the shooting aircraft who sends small
datapackages trough the radar sidelobes to the missile - an for this phase
there are now tests underway to give/transmit this work to another aircraft.
Saab works on thet process with the Gripen an i think others also.
Martin Rosenkranz, Editor
+43 664 35 00 411
eMail: ma...@airpower.at
----------------------------------------------
Österreichs's virtuelles Militäraviatik-Journal
http://www.airpower.at/
----------------------------------------------
Ross King <rw-...@adfa.edu.au> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
39ed...@news.adfa.edu.au...
Brian
"J.T. Wenting" wrote:
> That is the scenario. The launching fighter receives guidance information
> and uses that to guide the missile. The weapon itself is never under direct
> control of the Sentry.
The launching fighter would almost have to send the data since the data link
receive antenna is on the back of the missile and shoots back. Unless the AWACS
is within the LOS of the receiver, it wouldn't work.
nx1...@my-deja.com
Corsair <Cor...@Jolly-Rogers.comREMOVE> wrote:
> In it's terminal phase yes, but the term fire-and-forget is used a
> little loosly when it comes to the AIM-120. I wrote a short piece
about
> it and how it seeks out the target here:
>
> http://www.jolly-rogers.com/airpower/aim-120/
>
> Just select avionics if you don't want to look at the rest.
>
> Ross King wrote:
> >
guide the
> > weapon to target. As such, it does not require an aircraft radar
platform to
> > get it to the target. The aircraft finds the target on it's radar
(or the
> > E-3's), fires the weapon and scrams. The weapon turns on its radar
and
> > actively seeks the target. The AIM-54 Phoenix works the same way.
>
a public official website on the AMRAAM programme office (you like the
one they have for the THAAD and the BMDO). Also even if the AMRAAM
doesn't have this E-3 type link it should soon anyway by using JTIDS via
a link 16 terminal.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jarmo Lindberg
> >
> > Theoretically. But I think it's more likely the AWACS
> > transmits the target data to the fighter which then sends
> > updates to the missile. Or perhaps a second fighter.
> > --
> That is the scenario. The launching fighter receives guidance information
> and uses that to guide the missile. The weapon itself is never under direct
> control of the Sentry.
The wording on the Saab Gripen News: http://www.gripen.saab.se/news/
METEOR BOOST FOR GRIPEN:
"Its cutting edge technology allows updated targeting data to be
transmitted from the launch aircraft, another friendly fighter, AWACS or
Saab Erieye aircraft after the missile has been fired. This will enable
Gripen pilots to maneuver away from the target zone immediately after
firing in order to avoid being attacked themselves."
--
Jarmo Lindberg
Fighter Tactics Academy: http://www.sci.fi/~fta/
Jyväskylä Air Show 2001: http://www.jyvairshow.com
Fighter Squadron 21: http://www.mil.fi/joukot/satlsto/
ly...@cdsnet.net
<jarmo.l...@sci.fi> wrote:
But is this really new, F-14/Phoinix and Hawkeye have been doing this
for years i think.
correct me if i'm wrong please
Jussi Saari
>
> But is this really new, F-14/Phoinix and Hawkeye have been doing this
> for years i think.
> correct me if i'm wrong please
Not really. Phoenix needed to have the target regularly illuminated by
the launching Tomcat. A Hawkeye couldn't do it, with multiple targets
they had to be conveniently close to each other, and the launch platform
couldn't turn away until the missile went active.
Jussi
ly...@cdsnet.net
<Jussi...@mail.lut.fi> wrote:
>ly...@cdsnet.net wrote:
>>
>> But is this really new, F-14/Phoinix and Hawkeye have been doing this
>> for years i think.
>> correct me if i'm wrong please
>
> Not really. Phoenix needed to have the target regularly illuminated by
>the launching Tomcat. A Hawkeye couldn't do it, with multiple targets
>they had to be conveniently close to each other, and the launch platform
>couldn't turn away until the missile went active.
>
>Jussi
But the F-14 dose not have to have its radar on, the hawkeye can just
tell the f-14 where to shoot
Bernhard Zunk
target where its active radar will go active. There is a datalink to provide
updates of target position to accomodate higly manaovering targets.
Therefore if the data link was established on the AWACs and the inertial guidence
of the AIM120 and AWACS shared the same reference this would be possible.
Since AWACS and interceptors already share a datalink I suspect this should be
possible.
Bernhard
Hanni
Of course Hawkeye can direct Tomcat towards targets.
<ly...@cdsnet.net> wrote in message
news:39f491f...@reader.meganews.com...
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:08:21 +0200, Jussi Saari
> <Jussi...@mail.lut.fi> wrote:
>
> >ly...@cdsnet.net wrote:
> >>
> >> But is this really new, F-14/Phoinix and Hawkeye have been doing this
> >> for years i think.
> >> correct me if i'm wrong please
> >
José Herculano
> tell the f-14 where to shoot
As John said, nope. The datalink with the Hawkeye allows the Tomcat to
intercept with the radar off, but then, if a Sparrow or Buffalo is needed,
the Tomcat has to light up. Of course if the target is a
big-truck-in-the-sky, there are other solutions ;-)
--
José Herculano
John Carrier
> tell the f-14 where to shoot
Nope.
R / John
collin_...@my-deja.com
Paul F Austin
"Hanni" wrote
> F-14 still has to turn its radar on to fire Phoenixes and illuminate them.
> Of course Hawkeye can direct Tomcat towards targets.
>
> <ly...@cdsnet.net> wrote in message
> >
> > >ly...@cdsnet.net wrote:
> > >>
> > >> But is this really new, F-14/Phoinix and Hawkeye have been doing this
> > >> for years i think.
> > >> correct me if i'm wrong please
> > >
> > >the launching Tomcat. A Hawkeye couldn't do it, with multiple targets
> > >they had to be conveniently close to each other, and the launch platform
> > >couldn't turn away until the missile went active.
> >
> > tell the f-14 where to shoot
There's RADARs and radars. In order to launch or provide a midcourse update,
the RADAR has to generate a fire control-grade position, both in azimuth and
elevation. Search RADARs don't manage that, they don't need to since their
purpose in life is to cue a fire control sensor onto the target. Since every
sensor is optimized for its mission, search RADARs aren't going to sacrifice
range and anti-clutter/anti-jam performance to get resolution they don't need.
ObTom Clancy: In Debt of Honor, TC has the Japanese installing a Ka band RADAR
on their E-767s. That's _much_ higher frequency (40GHz or so) than e.g. an E-2
UHF (less than 1GHz). Since for a given antenna aperture, the higher the
frequency, the higher the angular resolution, just what's needed to guide a
missile.
RADAR resolution is measured in radians. The longer the range the larger the
physical size of a given azimuth/elevation/range cell. The fire control system
has to guide the missile into lethal range of the target. In the case of either
an AIM-120 or an AIM-54, than means guidance into the acquisition range and
search volume of the missile. A search RADAR operating at long range may not be
able to resolve a small enough cell for the missile to complete terminal
homing.
There's an extra complication in asking another aircraft to provide guidance
for a Slammer or Phoenix. For an off-board platform to guide one of these
missiles, it would have to track the missile itself well enough to know where
the boresight was pointing. Neither missile searches beyond the field of regard
of the seeker antenna so it's easier for the launch platform to know which
direction the missile seeker is pointing since in end-game, the missile
velocity vector is going to be close to the line of sight between the launcher
and target.
Those are a couple of reasons why it's tough but not impossible for another
aircraft to guide a missile. If the non-launching aircraft has a high
resolution sensor like a FLIR, then is becomes a much easier proposition. In
fact one planned upgrade for E-2s is the installation of an imaging IR sensor
intended to track ballistic missiles.
--
Sincerity is the key in politics.
If you learn to fake that, you've got it made.
Paul F Austin
pau...@digital.net
Typhoon
"José Herculano" <herc...@mail.telepac.pt> wrote:
> > But the F-14 dose not have to have its radar on, the hawkeye can
just
> > tell the f-14 where to shoot
>
> intercept with the radar off, but then, if a Sparrow or Buffalo is
needed,
> the Tomcat has to light up. Of course if the target is a
> big-truck-in-the-sky, there are other solutions ;-)
Hmm...so, then, no "somewhere out there" azimuth launch--update--go-
active solution? Kind of a surprise, really, considering that sub-
launched torpedoes have done something similar for a while now.
--
"So if you meet me, have some courtesy,
Have some sympathy and some taste.
Use all your well-learned politesse
Or I'll lay your soul to waste."