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.

 

How did an Su-22 defeat an AIM-9X

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   
When the US F-18 shot down the Syrian Su-22, the first missile fired was an AIM-9X, which missed when the Fitter released flares. It turns out that Soviet/Russian flares have a long history of being more effective against the AIM-9 family. The 4477th Test & Evaluation Squadron was handed a flare dispenser from an Su-25 that had been shot down in Afghanistan, for them to test. After maintenance had installed it on one of their MiG-21s, they began flight testing.

According to reports, when an AIM-9P was fired at a US built aircraft, using US manufactured flares, the missile ignored every flare, to go after the target. When the Su-25 dispenser was used, the missile totally ignored the target to show the flares all kinds of love. The Soviet flares were dirty, none of them had the same burn time, or intensity. That made them much more attractive to the AIM-9s that were used.


“We had 210 maintainers,” Manclark recalled. “They were dedicated, just unbelievable, tech sergeants and master sergeants. The CIA gave us a flare dispenser from a Frogfoot [Su-25] that had been shot down in Afghanistan. We gave it to maintenance – it was just a thing with wires coming out of it. Four hours later they had it operational on a MiG-21.”

That proved to be a very important test. “In 1987 we had the AIM-9P, which was designed to reject flares, and when we used US flares against it would ignore them and go straight for the target. We had the Soviet flares – they were dirty, and none of them looked the same – and the AIM-9P said ‘I love that flare’.

“Why’d that happen? We had designed it to reject American flares. The Soviet flares had different burn time, intensity and separation. The same way, every time we tried to build a SAM simulator, when we got the real thing it wasn’t the same.

www.combataircraft.net...




posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

i would think the 9X would also have some sort of target recognition or a bank of possible target aircraft to help it ignore countermeasures

maybe with the different burn times and temperatures it could more accurately fool a seeker into thinking the varying temps look like a aircraft



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Yeah, the different intensities and burn times would be a lot more effective at spoofing a straight IR seeker. That's one reason that the Python and some others in development have gone to a combined IR/EO seeker.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


The Soviet flares were dirty, none of them had the same burn time, or intensity.

That right there.

Instead of selecting one target different than the rest , it sees multiple different targets, getting confused.

Brilliant, all they have to do to maintain immunity is continue to change the flares "profile" presentation.



new topics

top topics
 
8

log in

join