![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "D. Strang" wrote in message news:HNpbc.4808$zc1.3884@okepread03... "Kevin Brooks" wrote "D. Strang" wrote The F/A-22 also has an inherent air-to-surface capability." It can already lug a couple of JDAM's. So how does that even *require* an optimized ground mapping radar to allow it to strike ground targets with significant precision? I'm not a bombardier, but I think the SAR radar is necessary for the INS inputs. The INS being only updated by the GPS, and only if the GPS isn't being jammed (which will be unlikely down the road). I think I read where GPS only doubles the accuracy of the INS (50 feet versus 100 feet). Without SAR, and GPS being jammed, you'll need a good pair of TACAN's, which some enemies don't seem to provide :-) I have yet to hear that a SAR update is required. Doing so would require the preloaded data for the terrain (so that the SAR would have something to relate its picture to). From what i understand, the weapon gets its update from the aircraft (through its own INS), then after release it uses GPS to improve the accuracy of its own INS. If SAR was required, then I guess the A-10 would never be certified to carry JDAM...? An A-10 at altitude? What a waste. They were designed to be down with the tanks... The way I picture it, and I admit I may be completely bogus on this, but I picture the navigator finding a reference point (coordinates), and then using the SAR to find the point in weather, and then updating the INS from this point. You wouldn't need SAR if the point was available by other means, or the target could tolerate greater than 100 foot error. For example, if a 2k/lb jobber hit 500 foot from my house, I'd still be dead, and the house would be destroyed :-) I am guessing that the primary means of updating the aircraft INS is via GPS; maybe BUFFDRVR or one of the folks who has a clue can answer that question. Otherwise you'd have a wee bit of a problem if your target was a coastal one and your ingress was from over the water, or if you were dropping it over a nice, relatively flat desert plain where you could not get much in the line of significant terrain features from which to perform your update, etc. Brooks |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Kevin Brooks" wrote "D. Strang" wrote The way I picture it, and I admit I may be completely bogus on this, but I picture the navigator finding a reference point (coordinates), and then using the SAR to find the point in weather, and then updating the INS from this point. You wouldn't need SAR if the point was available by other means, or the target could tolerate greater than 100 foot error. For example, if a 2k/lb jobber hit 500 foot from my house, I'd still be dead, and the house would be destroyed :-) I am guessing that the primary means of updating the aircraft INS is via GPS; maybe BUFFDRVR or one of the folks who has a clue can answer that question. Otherwise you'd have a wee bit of a problem if your target was a coastal one and your ingress was from over the water, or if you were dropping it over a nice, relatively flat desert plain where you could not get much in the line of significant terrain features from which to perform your update, etc. On-board SAR's main purpose in fighters is autonomous targeting. As far as I know, no fighter is planned to have GMTI functions but SAR imaging has been a standard function for a long time. Other targeting options of course include off-board sensors and Guys On the Ground. GPS is unlikely to be jammed for aircraft since any ground based jammer is going to be 'way out of the main lobe of an AJ GPS antenna. JDAM and SDB are going to get AJ antennas as well. There is an issue with geolocation. From what I've read in AvWeek, geolocation errors are the dominant error term in the JSTARS to JDAM loop. B2s (again according to AW) are the most accurate platform for RADAR imaging and targeting, which is surprising. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|