Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 23:46:56 GMT, Guy Alcala
wrote:
Ed Rasimus wrote:
snip
Actually, you ascribe too much capability to the helmet mounted sight
system. You might be surprised at how much a pilot can see and how far
a good one can twist around in the seat. I used to be able to see my
right wing-tip when twisted around to the left--IOW, all the way past
the vertical fin to the opposite side. There's no missile yet designed
that will make that kind of turn.
snip
Yes there are, Ed, and several of them are in or entering service,
credited with over the shoulder launch capability. There used to be an
mpeg circulating around the web showing a P4 being fired (from an F-15),
which immediately makes a controlled half loop (guesstimating a radius of
a couple hundred feet) and heads off towards the rear of the a/c. In
addition to an HMS (or 360 degree sensors), the missile needs a
programmable autopilot that allows it to make it around the corner until
the seeker can acquire the target. High off-boresight missile seekers now
start at about 60 deg. AoB, going out to 90 degrees or potentially more
(one of the seeker competitors for the AIM-9X went out to 120 deg. AoB).
Guy
You're adding a parameter here, the need to pre-program the missile.
That's a step beyond the initial proposition of "look-to-kill" linkage
between the helmet field of view and the missile's regard. I've always
been a bit cautious, nay even skeptical about marketing brochure
claims and operational capability.
Me too, as should be apparent from recent discussions about the R.530. But
like the AIM-9L's head-on capability (no matter how rarely used in practice),
these capabilities do exist - here's an example of such a brochure, for the P5:
http://www.rafael.co.il/web/rafnew/news/news-120603.htm
and click on the brochure link. And it's not just the marketeers saying so,
but the service types as well ( of course, they've also been known to stretch a
point to get funding or keep their careers unblemished). The HMS 'look to
acquire' high off-boresight capability, and the substantial no escape zones of
4th and 5th generation (or perhaps gen. 4.5 would be more accurate) missiles,
is real. And it's not only the WVR missiles that are looking at adding such
360 degree targeting capability. From an article in the May 22nd, 2000 AvLeak,
pg. 28. I forget who's speaking, but IIRR it was an Air Force type, maybe the
program manager:
"'We are embarking on putting a high off-boresight capability into AMRAAM.'"
"Two Phase Program. Initially, only the missile software will be modified,
allowing AMRAAM to engage a target throughout the FOV of the fighter's radar,
including about 70 degrees off boresight. The current software limits the
missile to about 25 degrees off boresight. The enhancement should be available
next year [i.e. 2001].
"The second phase, still unfunded, would involve upgrading the fighter's
software and enable AMRAAM to engage targets behind the shooting a/c. Data on
the target would be provided by a second fighter through so-called 'third-party
cuing,' [through Link-16],. After launch, updates continue to be relayed
through back and sidelobes of the firer's radar. The upgrade follows the
ongoing improvement to the missile's warhead, fuse and motor."
The first phase seems to have been completed already, with the missile software
improvements to allow high off-boresight capability apparently incorporated
from the AIM-120C-5 (maybe the C-4) on; the C-7 is due to achieve IOC at any
time. I have no idea what the status of the second phase might be, although
given the amount of money being put into A/G ordnance right now I wouldn't be
surprised if phase two had been put on the back burner, especially with the
dearth of A/A combat.
The AGM-78 Standard ARM had the first generation program for launch
capability to strike targets behind the launch aircraft.
In the Standard's case, I've read Weasel anecdotes which suggest that making a
180 pretty much decreased the remaining energy to zero, the Standard not being
the most maneuverable missile on the planet. I've been given some info of the
kind of sustained maneuverability the P4 is capable of, and if you'd like I'll
be happy to share it with you. Suffice it to say (here), it's far better.
I saw a lot
of them launched and have to confess, I never saw confirmation of a
SAM kill with the damn thing.
A lot has to happen in very short time and in a very dynamic scenario.
Sure does. And computers just get faster, smaller and cheaper all the time.
We appear to be entering the era of missiles like the ones 007 had on his gyro
in "You Only Live Twice."
Guy