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.

 

Air to air missiles current..

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Was interesting how Zaphod was stating the fact about Soviet missiles being far superior to USA or allied types and I,m beginning to think he is 100% correct.
Back in the 80,s it was all about Top Gun with the Phoenix and Sidewinders on the F14,s with the AMRAAM being the next big thing..Doing a bit of digging the Phoenix with all its hype didn,t really have much success in the engagements it was used in.The Aim9.x series is dated and with its seeker head becoming more updated in regards to engaging targets at a higher rate of success (remembering during Vietnam) the kill ratio was fairly low to begin with.Even the mid range Sparrow was a total disaster on F4,s with an 80% fail rate in the conflict.
With the French,Indian,Israeli and Soviets pushing forward in missile tech will the USA ever catch up or continue to go with the next Gen weapons tech and forget about missiles altogether.It is up there though but with the other countries catching up especially the Indian/Russian consortium with the Astra and K100 series..Air to Air comparison list




posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Russian missiles are often cited as pretty good, but what's their combat record from (say) 1990? I know it is a simplification, but in the last three decades Russian kit has proven a poor match when faced with Western kit.

Things look good on paper, but when push comes to shove it's the real life outcomes that count.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
Russian missiles are often cited as pretty good, but what's their combat record from (say) 1990? I know it is a simplification, but in the last three decades Russian kit has proven a poor match when faced with Western kit.

Things look good on paper, but when push comes to shove it's the real life outcomes that count.

Exactly what I was thinking with the Phoenix program...



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blackfinger
Exactly what I was thinking with the Phoenix program...


Indeed, the Pheonix missile looked good on paper, but appear to have had an unfavourable combat record, although I am happy to be corrected.

This proves my point that it is operational use that determines how good something is, so beyond the flashy specs of Russian missiles, have any got a combat record to proves they are any good?



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 04:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blackfinger
Was interesting how Zaphod was stating the fact about Soviet missiles being far superior to USA or allied types and I,m beginning to think he is 100% correct.
Back in the 80,s it was all about Top Gun with the Phoenix and Sidewinders on the F14,s with the AMRAAM being the next big thing..Doing a bit of digging the Phoenix with all its hype didn,t really have much success in the engagements it was used in.The Aim9.x series is dated and with its seeker head becoming more updated in regards to engaging targets at a higher rate of success (remembering during Vietnam) the kill ratio was fairly low to begin with.Even the mid range Sparrow was a total disaster on F4,s with an 80% fail rate in the conflict.
With the French,Indian,Israeli and Soviets pushing forward in missile tech will the USA ever catch up or continue to go with the next Gen weapons tech and forget about missiles altogether.It is up there though but with the other countries catching up especially the Indian/Russian consortium with the Astra and K100 series..Air to Air comparison list


I don't profess to know much about US military hardware but it would be cool to see a bunch of ALIICE's flying around. Your post made me think of an early American analogy when foreign auto makers stopped mass producing vehicles for a couple years to focus on R&D while the U.S. kept churning out model T's. Although it gave us an early edge, we've been playing catch up ever since. Thank God for Tesla Motors lol.
edit on 23-3-2015 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   
A 6 meter long 3/4 tonne mach 4.5 missile (K-100), I would imagine a jumbo jet could out maneuver it.

Hit the breaks and it will fly right by....

Now I dont agree Zaphod was 'stating the facts' about Soviets missile but he can fight his own battles. AFAIK he said he knew US were well aware and concerned of a Russian missile, I think with AESA which switched on with seconds to impact.

However, either overpower or overcome, so instead of making better BVR missiles which are almost at the limits of being UAVs, the US could be concentrated on countering the ones threatening. So say laser counter measures.

Once the BVR missile threat is overcome, the aamrams, meteors, iris-t and aim-9 will eat those pesky Russians for breakfast.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   
The AIM-64 Phoenix and The AIM-7 Sparrow looked good on paper but suffer miserable success rates, in fact the AIM-7 is sometimes referred to as the "Great White Hope". I was digging into A2A missiles a few weeks ago and I believe there is a newer version of he AIM-9x in the works and plans for a newer variant of the AIM-120 in the near future. Also I believe I remember reading of another proposed A2A missile as well.

The newer Russian missiles will pretty much dominate existing aircraft save for the F-22/ F35 and B-2 in its final days. That's one reason why the push to get the F-35 going is so urgent. The older aircraft wont be able to suitably counter the incoming missile with chaff/flares and evasive maneuvers, now we need some electronic goodies to trick the seeker in the enemy missile or prevent the enemy radar from attaining a lock on in the first place.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

That's as much training as it is the missiles themselves.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

I wouldn't say far superior, but they've definitely always had the lead in missile development, and they are getting better.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
OP i have to chime in. You do know that SEAram is a new Sidewinder version correct? Its just the naval version and will also be used in air to air. it can hit a target at its 6 0 clock of the person firing it.

Russians have the QMM missile that can do that already. were starting to even it out.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Blackfinger
Exactly what I was thinking with the Phoenix program...


Indeed, the Pheonix missile looked good on paper, but appear to have had an unfavourable combat record, although I am happy to be corrected.


Iran vs Iraq war 80's: the Tomcats did great against Soviet stuff & their style of piloting.



edit on 23-3-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yup, Russian missiles, from their MANPADS to their ICBMs are and always have been a step or two ahead of our tech, and it's nothing short of frightening what their stuff can do today.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

The Phoenix at long range was designed for anti bomber missions. It was actually fairly easy to generate an over shoot because it was big and not as maneuverable as other missiles. At shorter ranges it was better.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

two words

Have Dash

en.wikipedia.org...

supersonic mach3+ stealthy missile that disappeared into the pit of blackness


and then there was the lenticular nuclear sam interceptor that was also mach3+ for the XB-70


edit on 24-3-2015 by penroc3 because: speling



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Oooohhh nice..



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   
AIM 7 is waya too old to still be knocking about.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Aurora7z

And it's still effective.



posted on Aug, 4 2015 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Also that was my 1st ever thread so cheers for answering chief.



posted on Aug, 4 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
When it comes to air to air missile kills somebody needs to ask the Syrian Air Force. Something about losing 86-0 to the Israeli Air Force back in the 80's.

What are the Russian missile's combat record? At least one airliner that I know of.



posted on Aug, 4 2015 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499
Actually I believe it's
two unarmed airliners.




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join