It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Best of the Best....Air superiority Fighters

page: 35
2
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Except those with Rear-mounted Radar, which is on almost all of the more advanced Su-27 variants.

Shattered OUT...

I don't think reward firing missiles are very feasible. I thought that the rear radar was more for warning and tracking. I don't think I've ever seen a missile mounted backwards on a Flanker.

[edit on 14-9-2006 by JFrazier]




posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   
The missile isn't mounted backwards, instead the missile is dropped forward and immedietaly fires it's rockets and manuevers to it's six as quickly as possible.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
I'm not aware of any radar guided missiles with "over the shoulder" capability not to mention that firing a long range missile in this fashion is a waste of energy and makes no sense. Firing a WVR missile like this (which can actually be done) makes sense but why would they need the back radar, they are heat seekers?

I believe JFrazier is right, the radar is for threat warning and detection, I don't think it's meant to be used for missile guidance.


[edit on 14-9-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   
One of the AIM-120s has an over the shoulder capability and has hit targets behind the launching platform. It takes the steering information from the AWACS datalink. I BELIEVE it's the AIM-120D, but I've seen quotes from Raytheon saying they do LOAL shots with the AMRAAM all the time, either simulated, or real.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   
The Aim-120D will have better HOB capability then the C version but it has not been tested in the air, yet, (as far as I'm aware). And as for LOAL on the AMRAAM, interesting topic, anyone have any more information on this capability? Seems to me like a last ditch desperate measure.

[edit on 14-9-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   
That's why I said I BELIEVE it was the D, but wasn't sure. I couldn't remember if it had been flight tested yet.

For the rearward firing missile debate:


It is worth noting that over-the-shoulder launching is a fundamentally different approach to that taken by the Russians, who have addressed this problem by producing a rearward firing variant of the R-73 Archer, the R-73R, which uses an additional booster to overcome the aircraft's forward velocity. The rearward firing Archer is cued by the Flanker's NIIP N-O12 tail warning radar.

www.ausairpower.net...



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:55 PM
link   
The R-73 is WVR or short ranged heat seeker, it surly will not be guided by any rear facing radar, and in a WVR scenario this could be interesting...


[edit on 14-9-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Yo Westpoint in your opinion whats better, a F-15 or a SU-27/30/35.

Im saying the F-15.

5th
1. F-22A
2. F-35
3. Typhoon
4. Raf
5. F-15C

Oldies
1. F-15C
2. SU-35
3. F/A-18E
4. F-16AM
5. MIG-29



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The R-73 is WVR or short ranged heat seeker, it surly will not be guided by any rear facing radar, and in a WVR scenario this could be interesting...


[edit on 14-9-2006 by WestPoint23]


It didn't say it was GUIDED by the radar. It said it was CUED by the radar. Of course it is, because if you don't have a radar to cue it, how does anyone know when to shoot it?



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   
In a 1v1 battle with no AWACS or other network support I think that the Su-35 would be an equal match for the Eagle BVR and would hurt it WVR. It's design is just more advanced as should be expected. It carries more fuel, has more powerful engines, is more manueverable, has a better TWR, and its radar is just as powerful. That's why the F-22 is around.

[edit on 14-9-2006 by JFrazier]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 07:10 PM
link   
The rearward facing missile never hit operational deployment, despite some open source claims.

As Zaphod correctly points out, the missile is cued by the rearward radar. The next problem is there is no indication to the pilot what the seeker is tracking (they'll get a tone, but this is all). So you have fratricide issues. There's also the fundamental problem that if an adversary is behind you, you're already in a world of tactical hurt. If he's in range of your R-73, then you've probably been in his AIM-9M range for a while (and more likely AIM-7/120 range for a lot longer). And his seeker has the benefit of a nice big IR source from your engines, while the R-73 is relying on less IR signature to get a lock, which actually reduces the effective range of the missile. The R-73 shooter also won't be able to see if the target is flaring, which would normally influence launch decisions.

The end result is a missile that has little to zero utility in a real world combat environment.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhosTBR55
Yo Westpoint in your opinion whats better, a F-15 or a SU-27/30/35.


First I just want to say that both aircraft have their advantages and disadvantages. If we assume single combat with no support systems the F-15C AESA would have the advantage (however small or big it might be) in BVR because of avionics, radar and a better overall long range missile. In WVR both fighters would have HMS and HOB missiles but the Su-30/35 family is more maneuverable then the Eagle so the flanker series would have the advantage (however small or big it might be) in that environment. Since I'm a firm believer in BVR as the future of air warfare I'd say the F-15C AESA is overall a slightly better A2A fighter.

However as was pointed out these differences are not significant enough to ensure total Air Dominance, that is indeed why we have the F-22. And I'm so glad it's on our side.


[edit on 14-9-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
I'm just curious will enough F-15C's be outfitted with AESA to make THAT much of a difference?

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 14-9-2006 by ShatteredSkies]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Not sure what the USAF will do with that, I think it will eventually upgrade the newest Eagles with the AN/APG-60v(3) to serve as a backstop for F-22's if we don't get more Raptors (it might upgrade them regardless though). This would be in addition to the two dozen or so F-15C's equipped with the AN/APG-62v(2) we already have in Alaska. Take in consideration that there are only a dozen or so Su-35's in use I believe.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
I'm just curious will enough F-15C's be outfitted with AESA to make THAT much of a difference?

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 14-9-2006 by ShatteredSkies]


No. They're only upgrading 18. All up at Alaska.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   

They're only upgrading 18. All up at Alaska.


Emphasis by me.

You sure about this? I didn't think it was a done deal.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:40 PM
link   
My mistake. It's 18 with the APG-63(v)2, but I don't think the rest of the program has gotten much funding, because of the F-22.



[edit on 9/14/2006 by Zaphod58]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Well, different sources give different information over the subject which is why I didn't think a "real" decision on the matter had been made one way or another.


A total of 18 F-15Cs, known as "Golden Eagles", have been fitted with the AN/APG-63(V)2 AESA radar and evaluated in service for several years. This model has been followed by the improved AN/APG-63(V)3, which has generally the same capabilities, but it lighter, more efficient, and more reliable.

The Air Force has had plans for upgrading most of the F-15C and F-15Es in service with the AN/APG-63(V)3, but there is a debate among Air Force brass over how long the F-15 will remain in service and if it makes sense to implement such an expensive upgrade. One faction would like to completely phase out the F-15 in favor of the F/A-22 Raptor as soon as possible, while another sees the F-15 as a first-line item to at least 2020, and if the Eagle remains in service the radar will need to be updated just to keep it operational.

Eagle Upgrades



To keep the legacy fleets flying for another 20 years, the Defense Department and the fighters’ overseas customers have a long list of upgrades in the works. Despite the arrival of the F-22 Raptor and the development of the F-35 joint strike fighter, production of the older fighters continues.

"Our whole objective is to keep the Eagle viable past 2025," Spencer said at an Institute for Defense and Government Advancement conference. There are currently 224 Eagles in the U.S. fleet. "We look at what we can afford, as well as what’s going to give us the most bang for the buck," he added.

The program receives between $300 million to $400 million per year to spend on upgrades, a figure that has been stable over the years, Spencer said.

Upgrades to the aircraft's sensor arrays top the list, he said.
The active electronically scanned array (AESA) is replacing the APG-70 radar. AESA allows a pilot to track and target multiple targets.

Future F-15 Upgrades


[edit on 14-9-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhosTBR55

Originally posted by phsyco
stop here.


i wrote this.


Also not even sure what you were asking me about the jackknive and cobra manuv? were you talkin about the f-22a losing its wings??? never heard of this? Heard of an F-22A able to do the same tricks, otherwise post me a website and ill take a look.

i meant the 37.not the 22.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 04:41 AM
link   
there's a schematic somewhere on the R-73R RWR capable missile. Never made operational though..



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join