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.

 

Best Air to Air missiles?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Yeah, but it's only short range, still impressive though...

The missile looks like BAe's ASRAAM...curious...


Did you actually read the description? It is nothing like the AIM-132.....




posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Well, you could have been more considderate, I know I am only a stranger to you but I am sensitive to what others say to me, I try my best to get to know the truth, I do admit when someone is right, but I do defend my views.

You information was wrong. Is there a better way to say that?





Cruise missiles are not very manauverable targets, they are essentially like fast UAVs and is less of a challenge to shoot down than aircraft banking away and deploying counter measures...common sense.

You base that on what????

Common sense


Perhaps it is time for you to do research rather than use your common sense?



Currently, the only widely fielded and dedicated land attack CM is the Tomahawk, what other CM's was the AIM-54C ever proven on? was it ever proven to work? or does it work jsut as great as the PAC-3?

It wasn't designed to defeat land attack cruise missiles, but rather anti-shipping ones.





The first generation ones did. Todays cruise missiles employ random maneuvering and terminal manuevers in order to defeat attempts to shoot them down.

and you claim the AIM-54 can hit that? it's based on 1950's technology...

Yes, that is why they modified the seeker head and the fusing system. The AIM-54 has undergone continuous updates and enhancements throughout its entire life.



Other than that, they are too expensive and they DO only hit 60% of the time.

Where did you get that load from? I have never heard of percentages that low when it comes to the Phoenix.



why is it that every time anyone criticises American technology they get mass-bashed? why is Russian tech alway based?

I don't know, maybe because of the track record of Russian equipment vs US?



next thing you guys are gonna say is that a AN-94 can't hit a target from 50 yards!


Please stay on the topic. If you want to start talking about gun effectiveness than start a new one.



Maybe so, but you still make it sound like you guys are better than Russia, this is not true, both have their strengths, Russia's strength is missiles.


We may not be better than Russia, but our equipment is.

[edit on 21/12/04 by COOL HAND]



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 03:37 PM
link   
I didn't say it WAS the AIM-132, Jetsetter, I merely noticed it looked like it, don't REDICULE me please...

I am NOT here to BASH American technology, I am here to deny ignorance...

As I stated once before, I am Married to an American citizen, I love all military equipment, but I state the facts, it's your own choice to be arrogant and/or ignorant...



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Lacking a source for the 60%, as mentioned by Ground_Zero, considering the missiles to be compared with it (the AIM-54), I'll take 60% to intercept/kill any day of the week. There isn't a Russian made air-to-air missile that remotely has a comparable rating.


In fact, probability to intercept/kill for air-to-air missiles is debatable all day long due to environmental conditions, manufacturer success rates, technological conditions, ECMS, ranges, etc.

Personally, I'd take the AIM-120 AMRAAM's coupled with AIM-9X or the Python 4 air-to-air missiles any time.

The AA-10 Alamo R-27 = to the AIM-7M
The AA-11 ARCHER R-73 = to the AIM-9X
The AA-12 ADDER R-77 = to the AIM-120 AMRAAM
The Matra Magic R.550 = to the AIM-7M (if that)
The Matra Mica = to the AIM-120 AMRAAM (if that)
etc., etc.

BTW Ground_Zero, care to elaborate on the basic to intercept/kill ratio for air-to-air missiles (nationaility excluded)? You bet I would take 60%.....source or no source.




seekerof



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Give me one reliable source that states the R-27 missiles have such low hit-probability...

I currently have no sources for the claim that the Phoenix only hits ~60% of it's target but I heard this from an insider of LockMart....



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Ground_Zero, you want a source, but can't provide one yourself?
Tell you what, I stated what I did because I heard it from a Pentagon Air Force 'insider'.......

Then again, maybe you can provide a source to refut what I asserted?





seekerof



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
The R-77 Adder is untested, and the R-27 Alamos has only a 5% kill ratio (20 missiles filed, 1 hit), and all the R-73 varaiants (R-73AE, R-73E) have only hit fleeing (non-maneuvering) targets.




Oh my gosh......you must have been lied to.....



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
I currently have no sources for the claim that the Phoenix only hits ~60% of it's target but I heard this from an insider of LockMart....



Hmm, Phoenix made by Raytheon. You were given factsby an insider at Lockheed (proably a janitor). Yeah, that is an unbiased and honest source if I ever heard one.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 12:51 PM
link   
This insider know alot about avionics in general and they test the weapon systems as well and are WELL aware of their capabilities...

This insider was known by the name Kurai Ookami, actually his dad works on the F/A-22, he also knew about the optical stealth project long before many others did...this source is quite reliable...

I will post my source as soon as I can find it, I don't speak until I am fairly certain about the accuracy of my statements...



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Maybe so, but you still make it sound like you guys are better than Russia, this is not true, both have their strengths, Russia's strength is missiles.


Keep telling yourself that, I think everyone knows that Russian missiles are inferior to western built AAM's.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
This insider know alot about avionics in general and they test the weapon systems as well and are WELL aware of their capabilities...


Why would Lockheed be testing missiles by another company? None of their aircraft are capable of firing them. There was some testing of it with the A-12, but that was with the earliest versions of the Phoenix, not todays model.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567

Maybe so, but you still make it sound like you guys are better than Russia, this is not true, both have their strengths, Russia's strength is missiles.


Keep telling yourself that, I think everyone knows that Russian missiles are inferior to western built AAM's.


You say this, Russian... You are not worthy to be a russian



[edit on 22-12-2004 by Angrykirill]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 06:49 PM
link   


Keep telling yourself that, I think everyone knows that Russian missiles are inferior to western built AAM's.


I dont mean to start an argument but 'some' Russian missiles are superior in certain aspects when compared to their Western counterpart. That doesnt mean that they have the upper-hand in A2A combat though...


One thing that I think you all should take a look at and what I've been eyeing for a while now is the development of Air Superiority Missile Technology ...



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 09:42 PM
link   
Russians definetly have better missles with longer range and more manoverability. Take a look at the A-12 (R-77) and the A-10 (R-27) against the AAMRAAM,its clear the Russians have better missle tech. However,the USA went for radar and stealth,and that gives them the edge for A2A combat.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Thank you W4rl0rd and ChrisRT...

I just wish to get my point acrossed, the US needs better missile technology...

The AIM-54 could be mounted in a modified form (in theory) on a F-15 for example, but the capabilities are not good enough to keep it and they are WAY too expensive so they retired it...

They hope the AIM-120 with extended range will be good enough to replace it, I hope it will be...



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I would be interested to see how the AIM120C and AIM-120D compare with the Meteor BVRAAM. Does anyone have stats or links that would help illustrate this?

The AMRAAM is clearly a great missile but as the UK already operates it but chose to buy the Meteor instead of the latest AMRAAM variant I would be interested to see how they stack up against each other.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 04:50 PM
link   
I'd like to hear some stats for the Meteor, I have heard about it though...

Will this be the armanents for the Typhoon?



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Yes it will be the standard BVR weapon on the type for all operators.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Seems like the US should considder procuring this system! sounds impressive...

www.globalsecurity.org...

here is a link for the ones who are interested...

Will you guys admit NOW that the US is lagging behind in AAM development?!! this >IS< important...otherwise the US will have to COMPLETELY rely on their stealth aircraft and even that has no guarantee if it will be effective enough for 4th and 5th generation radar systems...



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Seems like the US should considder procuring this system! sounds impressive...

www.globalsecurity.org...

here is a link for the ones who are interested...

Will you guys admit NOW that the US is lagging behind in AAM development?!! this >IS< important...otherwise the US will have to COMPLETELY rely on their stealth aircraft and even that has no guarantee if it will be effective enough for 4th and 5th generation radar systems...


Where have you been? The USAF and USN will be receing the AIM-120D by 2007-2008. It will have twice the range of the AIM-120C, 70 click no-escape zone, 2 way data-ling, improved ECCM capabilities, and a much improved seeker head.


www.designation-systems.net...


www.janes.com...




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join