Impact of Eurofighters in the Middle East

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
The Meteor is still a few years from deployment though, but when it
arrives, it should handily outrange AMRAAM which is the longest spear
in the IAF armoury (Derby is alleged to have a much shorter range).

Incidently, why is Israel naming this missile after an English city?

Why do you think that future American or Israeli made
missiles won't have those capabilities?

Because there are no current projects publicly announced that have the
capabilities of the Meteor. Could there be one in development? Maybe,
but there's no evidence for it.

IIRC a successor to the Phoenix was planned, but was scrapped in
the 1990s.


--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

"phil hunt" wrote
Peter Kemp wrote
The Meteor is still a few years from deployment though, but when it
arrives, it should handily outrange AMRAAM which is the longest
spear
in the IAF armoury (Derby is alleged to have a much shorter range).

Incidently, why is Israel naming this missile after an English city?

Why do you think that future American or Israeli made
missiles won't have those capabilities?

Because there are no current projects publicly announced that have
the
capabilities of the Meteor. Could there be one in development?
Maybe,
but there's no evidence for it.

IIRC a successor to the Phoenix was planned, but was scrapped in
the 1990s.

Yep, the USAF isn't convinced there's a real mission for AAMs with
that range.

It's going to be interesting watching Meteor's schedule slip to the
right. Here's why. Meteor's main claim to fame is very loooong range,
courtesy of rocket-ramjet propulsion. What comes with is a
built-from-scratch active AAM seeker. As anyone who's paid attention
knows, the reason AMRAAM took so long to enter service was the
difficulty in engineering that seeker to fit into a 7 inch airframe.
AMRAAM's seeker, with the best RADAR seeker designers in the world
working on it, took many more years to develop than planned. Since
I've seen nothing about special emphasis in Meteor development being
placed on risk reduction in the seeker, I expect a series of schedule
slips due to vague reasons that will push IOC out about ten years.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:22:42 -0400, Paul Austin wrote:

Yep, the USAF isn't convinced there's a real mission for AAMs with
that range.

A and B are at war. A and B operate the same fighter, but A has 100
km range missiles, and B only has 20 km.

Some A fighters intercept some B aircraft on a bombing mission
(assume they are flying herad-on courses). A fires AAMs at 60 km.
If B doesn't know the missiles are launched, they won't take evasive
action, and are likely to be hit. If they do know, the fact that
missiles are firing towards them will have a large effect on their
mental state, making them behave cautiously. Probably they'll turn
and run -- but certainly they are likely to be less threat to A's
aircraft than if the missiles weren't flying.

Now consider they meet, both sides on an air superiority mission.
Again, the fact that A gets its missiles off first gives them a big
advantage in air-to-air combat.

If this argument is wrong, what's wrong with it?

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

On 13 Sep 2003 04:51:07 -0700, (Quant) wrote:

(Jack White) wrote


I'm not an air force expert but it is clear from your post that
neither do you. Lets post your claims at rec.aviation.military and
watch the replies.


The Eurofighter Typhoon will give the Saudi Armed Forces the
capability maintain air superiority over any country in the Middle
East including Israel.


The Eurofighter Typhoon has the Meteor Mach4+ Ramjet Powered air to
air BVR missiles with OVER 100km range.


So? The US AIM-54 is operative for many years now and has a range of
at least 135 km.

And is designed for shooting down non-manouvering bombers. It's also
being withdrawn from service, and the Israelis never even had aircraft
qualified for it, let alone any missiles.

The Meteor is still a few years from deployment though, but when it
arrives, it should handily outrange AMRAAM which is the longest spear
in the IAF armoury (Derby is alleged to have a much shorter range).

Why do you think that future American or Israeli made
missiles won't have those capabilities?

Because there are no current projects publicly announced that have the
capabilities of the Meteor. Could there be one in development? Maybe,
but there's no evidence for it.

Why do you think that in the
tiny Israeli airspace medium/long range missiles are more important
than short range ones?

Because you don't need to be in Israel's airspace to fire a missile!
The simple fact is that if you can launch at 20 miles, and you
opponent has to close to 10 miles, then he's already on the defensive
and at a disadvantage.

Israel clearly has superiority in the short
range.

Python 4 is indeed supposed to be very good. Now look up ASRAAM, which
is a handy little performer itself.


Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

Python 4 is indeed supposed to be very good. Now look up ASRAAM, which
is a handy little performer itself.

Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

Indeed, although IIRC the 5 is basically a 4 with a staring array
(please correct me if my memory's going). ASRAAM already has the
staring array.

IIRC the ASRAAM has the longer range, and the Python goes for shorter
range but greater maneuverability.

Peter Kemp

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:44:56 -0400, Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

Python 4 is indeed supposed to be very good. Now look up ASRAAM, which
is a handy little performer itself.

Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

Indeed, although IIRC the 5 is basically a 4 with a staring array
(please correct me if my memory's going).

Yes. Python 5 is new guidance system, same everything else.

ASRAAM already has the
staring array.

Python 5 is said to have 100 degree off-boresight aquisition, and
lock on after launch which IIRC ASRAAM doesn't have.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:47:23 +0100, (phil hunt)
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:44:56 -0400, Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

Python 4 is indeed supposed to be very good. Now look up ASRAAM, which
is a handy little performer itself.

Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

Indeed, although IIRC the 5 is basically a 4 with a staring array
(please correct me if my memory's going).

Yes. Python 5 is new guidance system, same everything else.

Ta for confirming that.

ASRAAM already has the
staring array.

Python 5 is said to have 100 degree off-boresight aquisition, and
lock on after launch which IIRC ASRAAM doesn't have.

ASRAAM does have LOAL, and it's off boresight is 90 degrees. How much
difference the extra 10 degrees would make is not something I could
estimate, but presumably with LOAL you could still "fire over the
shoulder" and have a chance of it still getting a kill (as you could
with the Python 4/5).

Peter Kemp

"phil hunt" wrote
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:44:56 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:56:58 -0400, Peter Kemp
peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote:

Python 4 is indeed supposed to be very good. Now look up ASRAAM,
which
is a handy little performer itself.

Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

Indeed, although IIRC the 5 is basically a 4 with a staring array
(please correct me if my memory's going).

Yes. Python 5 is new guidance system, same everything else.

ASRAAM already has the
staring array.

Python 5 is said to have 100 degree off-boresight aquisition, and
lock on after launch which IIRC ASRAAM doesn't have.

I'm really unkeen about an AAM that locks on after launch. Both the
Python and ASRAAM airframes have much better kinematics than AIM-9X
with comparable (identical in the case of ASRAAM) seekers. The USAF
seems to see little utility in long range, which is odd.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:

Let's not forget the recently announced Python 5.

Is there any independent assessment of how good it is? I mean, the
manufacturer's web site says it's good, but they would say that
wouldn't they.

Ditto for other missiles.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

[snip]

The info will probably come from early warning systems. Israel is
relying upon its own early warning systems while Saudi Arabia and
Egypt will have to rely upon inferior systems, unless the US will sell
its best technology to these Arab countries (and I doubt it will
happen).

Both Israel the Arab nations use US early warning systems, including
E-2s, and in the case of SA, E-3s (which the Israelis *don't* have.


What about IAI Phalcon 707, "The world's most advanced AEWC&C system"
according to Federation of American Scientists?

Peter Kemp