It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
An R60 would never identify the cockpit as the primary heat source for lock-on.
originally posted by: Kukri
a reply to: noeltrotsky
Not sure how resource independent the Netherlands are but that could bite them in the rear if Russia supplies the gas to them.
Also would I be responsible if I sold you a car then you proceeded to run someone over with it. Apples and oranges I guess but the analogy is suitable.
More modern infra-red guided missiles can detect the heat of an aircraft's skin, warmed by the friction of airflow, in addition to the fainter heat signature of the engine when the aircraft is seen from the side or head-on. This, combined with greater maneuverability, gives them an "all-aspect" capability, and an attacking aircraft no longer had to be behind its target to fire. Although launching from behind the target increases the probability of a hit, the launching aircraft usually has to be closer to the target in such a tail-chase engagement.
AAM warheads work very differently. They need to hit a target moving at hundreds or thousands of miles per hour, not a few dozen. They generally don't need to defeat armor as very few aircraft platforms have any armor with which to speak of (and none of it is sufficient to require specific countermeasures). So you need a warhead that can kill the target even with a near miss, and that doesn't need to defeat a ton of armor. There are a few ways to do this, but the two most common are a continuous rod warhead (or annular blast-fragmentation), and a high explosive blast-fragmentation warhead. A continuous rod warhead is the type found on the AIM-9 Sidewinder series. It basically is a bundle of steel rods inside the missile's warhead. When it detonates, the rods expand outward into a large circle that basically cuts the plane apart, doing enough damage to cause it to catastrophically break up due to the forces involved in flight. Even just shearing off part of a critical control surface could be enough to down the plane.
In this shootdown of a target drone, you can see the rods expanding as lines in the smoke. It looks like they cause the drop tank to rip off in the bottom image. One can only imagine how the rest of the rear of that drone is basically obliterated.
“A Ukraine Air Force military jet was detected gaining height, it’s distance from the Malaysian Boeing was 3 to 5km,” said the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the HQ of Russia’s military forces, Lieutenant-General Andrey Kartopolov speaking at a media conference in Moscow on Monday.
“[We] would like to get an explanation as to why the military jet was flying along a civil aviation corridor at almost the same time and at the same level as a passenger plane,” he stated.
“The SU-25 fighter jet can gain an altitude of 10km, according to its specification,” he added. “It’s equipped with air-to-air R-60 missiles that can hit a target at a distance up to 12km, up to 5km for sure.”
originally posted by: Xcathdra
originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Xcathdra
If you had actually taken the time to read the alternative analysis, you would have read it wasn`t ripped apart right away.
Black box data suggests otherwise.
The front of Airliners get hot by friction, and by so can also become the target.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BornAgainAlien
We still don't know what happened because it takes a year or more for the final report to come out.