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.

 

New Chinese Air-to-Air Missile Designed to Threaten US Air Force

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2017 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: darkstar57

We had a very similar problem with the Phoenix. Extremely fast, extremely long ranged missiles are very hard to direct on a maneuvering target. They simply cannot turn and the guidance has to be damn close to exact. Any offset at those distances and its a far miss. The hard part for them is going to be to get a sensor craft close enough to pick up our AWACS without being detected all the while transmitting that data back to a shooter and the missile itself. Keeping that link alive is where one can easily exploit. Remember the missile has to shoot to where the AWACS is going to be 10 minutes from now, not where he currently is. That's a lot of time for reactionary measures.

Frighteningly, the risk of a Phoenix missile training in on a passenger liner or something of the sort was huge. One of the multiple of reasons why it was retired. In a 250 mile swath of sky, there's quite a bit of traffic. This Chinese missile is sure to have the same speed bumps.

I doubt it's a HARM system, since the AWACS could just to dark, change course, and the missile would be lost in the night.




posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

lol.
Such a tease.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: muzzleflash
It's all bluster and bravado.

The Chinese are very far behind and these are fantasies.
In a full scale engagement they'd lose their entire air force in under 100 hours.
They are certainly not the superpower people want to depict them as.
In 2050 they could be if they continue investing and growing their capabilities.


This reminds me how Japan was discounted as a serious air power before Pearl Harbour because people said they could not see properly with slant eyes. I think you're way too naive.

The US Air Force is heavily invested in STEALTH with distributed information networks susceptible to jamming. STEALTH aircraft do not use active radar, but rely on distant AWACS aircraft to give them vectors.

Both the Russians with the Vympel R-77 and now the Chinese with their 400km range PL-15 active homing missile intend to blind STEALTH fighters by knocking out their AWACS mother ships.

Without AWACS all the STEALTH in the world is utterly useless.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: sy.gunson

Wow, a few years behind the time aren't we. Both the F-22 and F-35 use active LPI radar systems. The F-22 uses a dispersed antenna system.

As for their datalinks they also are not as easy to jam as you think. They also are almost impossible to detect, especially MADL.

The F-22 has been acting as AWACS for strike packages over Syria using their own information gathering systems.
edit on 2/6/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:44 AM
link   

edit on 2/6/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: sy.gunson

Wow, a few years behind the time aren't we. Both the F-22 and F-35 use active LPI radar systems. The F-22 uses a dispersed antenna system.

As for their datalinks they also are not as easy to jam as you think. They also are almost impossible to detect, especially MADL.

The F-22 has been acting as AWACS for strike packages over Syria using their own information gathering systems.


The LPI AN/APG-77 radar because of it's low signal strength is in fact a tactical radar only and not of much use for longer range search & scan. For that reason STEALTH still depends on AWACS guidance.


edit on 6-2-2017 by sy.gunson because: spelling correction



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: sy.gunson

No, it doesn't. The APG-77 has an unclassified range of over 100 miles, LPI. Newer versions double that in narrow beam. They're operating out of range of AWACS over Syria, and directing strike packages, acting as AWACS for them.

Stealth does not rely on AWACS. If it did, they wouldn't be able to do anything. The AWACS radar has a range of 300-350 miles or so. Add in the distance offshore they have to remain due to threats, and the stealth you say desperately rely on AWACS could get MAYBE 100 miles inland. There wouldn't be any point in having them.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Now you got me thinking.

Will the new raider also have this ability built in as well?

Be interesting if it could double as a stealthy AWACS.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

Yes that's the idea.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 07:49 AM
link   
We have old tech that can make one airplane look like more then one.
The SR70 used it many time to confuse SAM sites and there missiles.
Likely or planes already have jamming equipment that can fool these missiles.



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
A while ago there was an article from Foxtrot Alpha or Tyler's new gig where the F22 pilot reported he could pick up aircraft at "more than 300 miles".

We also had that great big bus that retired in the 90s (Tacit Blue) that was proof of concept that we could operate behind enemy lines with an active radar and still be undetected.

Tankers would be my big worry for the Chinese missile.



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Flipper35

It's an anti support missile. It will be used against tankers and AWACS both. The tankers are huge in the Pacific with the ranges they have to operate at from the nearest US base in the region.



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I just meant if the excrement hits the rotary air mover and we use the F22/F35 (and other assets) as pseudo AWACS we still have big lumbering tankers out there. They buddy system doesn't haul much fuel.



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Flipper35

Yeah, I know what you meant. The ranges are so far for them to even get to the target areas that it's not funny. No tankers, no fighting with air to air.



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: sy.gunson
The US Air Force is heavily invested in STEALTH with distributed information networks susceptible to jamming. STEALTH aircraft do not use active radar, but rely on distant AWACS aircraft to give them vectors.


Wow, I don't have even 10% of the aircraft knowledge as most of the regulars in this forum and even I know that's wrong...



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   


The tankers are huge in the Pacific with the ranges they have to operate at from the nearest US base in the region.

During WW2 the biggest threat to allied aircraft was the weather.Anything that gives pilots support in that theatre will be looked as a godsend.
For long ranged missiles one has to look at the accuracy of Tomahawks and other Cruise Missile platforms.



posted on Apr, 25 2017 @ 03:33 AM
link   
The assumption (or presumption) of western countries that China only has inferior weapon technology to the west, and that this "supposedly" inferior weapon technology is the result of tech transfer from the US by certain previous administrations is a pure fantasy!

China has achieved most of its missile ICBM technology only on a very minimal part due to tech transfer from Russia and the Soviet Union, not from the US or Europe. About 90% is all homemade and home-developed.
Not only that, but contrary to western assumption China already achieved Prompt Global Strike technology comparable to that of the US.

Regarding big bombs / MOAB and other toys like that, I would put western clowns' focus on 20Mt nuclear bombs that China has since the 70s.
The US and Europe are going to realize this very soon at their expenses. If the west wants a repetition of 2013 hot summer stand-off, it is going to get it ... more than they can chew!
edit on 25-4-2017 by Flanker86 because: c




top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join