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.

 

Anti-radiation Air-to-Air Missile

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 09:07 PM
link   
But if the pilot doesn't even know whats coming for him, he surely also doesn't know when to turn off the radar isn't it? Thats what they are using to advertise the R-27P, as a stealth missile.

As for using a active radar seeker over heat seeker on a BVR missile, is it because that heat seeker are only more effective at tail engagement and not that great when the missile is coming at the opposite direction of the target?




posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Just to make sure everyone is singing off the same sheet of music (Russian Designator/Western Designator)

R-27R/AA10A - Boost only Semi-Active Radar Homing (SARH)
R-27T/AA-10B - Boost only IR Homing
R-27ER/AA-10C - Boost/Sustain (also known as long burn, or "Chuck") SARH
R-27ET/AA-10D - Boost/Sustain IR homing
R-27P/AA-10E - Boost only Passive Radar Homing (PRH)
R-27EP/AA-10F - Boost/Sustain PRH

There was an active seeker in development for the R-27 family, however this never achieved IOC. Active Radar Homing would = ARH. Some of the confusion is arising due to ARMs, or anti-radiation missiles such as the HARM, being confused with ARHs, which are active radar homing missiles, not anti-radiation homing.

Hope this helps clear up some confusion.



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   
^^^
Oh yeah..
totally..
I think Pyros and Co were referring to ARH as in Anti-Radiation homing!

miscommunication!
All ARM (esp BVR) missiles require initial target painting so...
The R-27P is not 'better' than the R-27ET/ER just different and totally passive where as the ET/ER are SARH I think..


EDIT: correction as willard pointed out SARH and IR..

CW do have any reasonable estimates of R-27 types in stock with the PLA?
Is there a chinese equivalent?


[edit on 19-9-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
CW do have any reasonable estimates of R-27 types in stock with the PLA?
Is there a chinese equivalent?


Here are the ones which seem accurate

200 R-27 (make unknown) from ukrain
134 in 2000, possibly with the deal for 38 MKK's

The rest are unknown but there is bound to be more than that in service considering the amount of Su-XX series of aircraft in chinese service


To my knowledge, there is no chinese equivalent (PL-10/11 might be considered one)

[edit on 19-9-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotheRaGe
But if the pilot doesn't even know whats coming for him, he surely also doesn't know when to turn off the radar isn't it?


Unless we have actual fighter pilots or industry insider, we cannot know if or if not a plane can detect a missile coming, Im just wondering if the IRST can detect a missile coming.

But I was assumer it was



As for using a active radar seeker over heat seeker on a BVR missile


I actually said

Heat seekers over active radar in a WVR situation



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   
The Chinese have received exported R-27s, and also have some locally produced missiles in the PL-10, PL-11 and PL-12. PL-10 and PL-11 are based on the Aspide missile bought from Italy in the 80's, which is a missile based on the AIM-7, so SARH seeker. PL-10 got accredited, but never produced if I recall correctly, whereas PL-11 did. PL-12 is a locally produced ARH missile, similar to AA-12, but apparently has improved kinematics.

For R-27 stocks, the Chinese definitely have AA-10A and AA-10B, and pictures seem to confirm at least AA-10E (though the pictures I've seen on the web have the seeker cap on, but it is a fairly distinctive shape. Some websites claim this is an active AA-10 variant, but like I said in my previous post, I'm pretty sure this never became operational). If China have the short burn variants, it is logical to assume they may have the long burn variants as well, but I haven't seen anything on the web to confirm this, though some of the pictures of Flankers suggest that the missiles indeed have the sustain section on them.

Chinawhite will probably have better insight that I anyways!



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Here are some pics of the R-27 on the Su-30 MKI walkaround I linked to another thread:


Originally posted by Daedalus3
Su 30 MKI walkaround


No seeker so A/B?

[edit on 19-9-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Eh....Hasen't the R-27AE been in Russian Service since the 1990s?

warfare.ru...

R-27AE
Type: Air -to- Air, medium range
Year: 1990
Range (km): 0.5- 130/60
Weight (kg): 350
Lenght (m): 4.78
Type of warhead: active radarhoming
Carried by: su-27, su-35, yak-141, mig-29



www.sinodefence.com...

"Public photos of the Chinese Su-27 show that the PLAAF is also equipped with the R-27AE."




The R-27 is 350kg......half way between the Aim-120 and the Phoenix......anythings possible......

[edit on 19-9-2006 by xihaoli321456]



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   
From your Su-30MKI walkaround link, those are AA-10A missiles. Long burns have a slight step in the sustain section, which these don't, so definitely AA-10A. AA-10Cs are substantially bigger. AA-10E and F have a sharper head that houses the seeker. I'll see if I can find a picture to illustrate better.



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 11:19 PM
link   


Eh....Hasen't the R-27AE been in Russian Service since the 1990s?


That's what I'm talking about when I say there are some websites that are wrong. That one, and the Chinese one you link to are classic examples. The Chinese military website definitely shows what I believe to be an AA-10E passive radar homing missile (and illustrates what I mean about the seeker head shape being sharper than the AA-10A and C shape).

The AA-10 active seeker had a number of problems. Another seeker was in development at the same time, and this evolved into the AA-12. So there was no need to continue development of the AA-10 active variant. Though with the range advantage that the Chuck offers, an active variant may now prove useful.



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Here is my take on it,

China has the following missiles, refered to as long burn ?

- R-27RE1 - 70km range, SARH.
- R-27TE1 - 130km range, IR guided

Standard
- R-27R (sometimes refered to as R-27R1 for downgraded export variants) - 50~80km SARH
- R-27T (same as the R-27R) - 45~70km, IR guided


And of course the R-27AE which is claimed to be in chinese service, the R-27AE is suppose to utlise the 9B-1103M series of seekers

Larger Image


Larger Image


Here is the R-27RE1 for comparison, notice the red strips instead of the Black ones found on the claimed R-27AE, not sure if there is any relation or it actually matters though

Larger Image



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 02:10 AM
link   
ut if the pilot doesn't even know whats coming for him, he surely also doesn't know when to turn off the radar isn't it? Thats what they are using to advertise the R-27P, as a stealth missile.

Incoming missiles emmit quite a lot of heat, so they can be also detected by IR warning sensors.



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
- R-27R (sometimes refered to as R-27R1 for downgraded export variants) - 50~80km SARH


Mistake here, the range is 35 km



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 04:03 AM
link   
I'd say the red stripes are covers as well, likely over the fusing mechanism. Black stripes, like the ones you can see on the R-73 there, indicate training rounds.

Your ranges are interesting, the missile bodies are the same for the all similar variants (ie AA-10A,B and E for the shorter range, boost only missile, and AA-10C,D and F for the longer range, boost and sustain missile). So kinematically, ranges should be identical. The only variation will be in seeker detection capability. Is this what your figures represent?



posted on Sep, 20 2006 @ 04:27 AM
link   
The R-27RE1 and R-27TE1 are 17% larger which accounts for their increased range.


The only variation will be in seeker detection capability


Sorry about that, I was looking at multiple sites and some stated effective range of the missile and some of them were range. Effective range refers to the No Escape Zone (NEZ)

The figures for range are

R-27R Range 80(missile range) /50 km (effective range)
R-R-27RE Range 130(missile range) /60 km (effective range)
R-R-27T Range 70(missile range) /45 km (effective range)
R-27TE Range 120(missile range) /55 km (effective range)



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Willard856
From your Su-30MKI walkaround link, those are AA-10A missiles. Long burns have a slight step in the sustain section, which these don't, so definitely AA-10A. AA-10Cs are substantially bigger. AA-10E and F have a sharper head that houses the seeker. I'll see if I can find a picture to illustrate better.



hmmm..
As far as as I know the IAF has R-27R1/T1/RE1/TE1 where the T1/TE1 variants are SARH while the R1/RE1 are IR.So thats all from Alamo AA-10A to AA-10D.


As per this site theIAF has purchased insane amounts of R-27 R1/T1s(exceeding 1100 missiles; possibly as many as 1400~) while moderate amounts of R-27 RE1/TE1s



SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) reported that 300 R-27R1/T1 air-to-air missiles were ordered by the Indian Air Force in 1995 and all 300 missiles were delivered in the same year. SIPRI reported that 1140 R-27E missiles were ordered in 1996 and 250 were delivered by 2001. SIPRI also reported that 1140 R-27R1/T1 missiles were ordered from Ukraine in 1996 and 304 were delivered by 2001. As per the annual UN conventional arms register, the Indian Government reported it had purchased 40 R-27ER1 and 36 R-27ET1 missiles in 1999 and 20 R-27ER1 and 20 R-27ET1 missiles in 2000.
Source


Here's a few pics(somewhere in the middle) of the MiG 29B carrying what is claimed to be the SARH R-27RE1

link

[edit on 21-9-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Daedalus3,

arent the R-27T the IR versions and the R the SARH?



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:01 AM
link   
China is right, your designations are around the wrong way. And it is unlikely that a Mig-29B would carry AA-10A or C as they don't have a fire control radar, thus defeating the purpose of a SARH missile.



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I know the Su-27SK and the Su-30MKK needed more modes to be able to fire the R-27RE1/TE1 . I think that only after indias MiG-29 fleet is upgraded that they can fire these missiles



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:30 AM
link   
True.. my bad.. the other way around..
And willard, seems like those MiG29s ARE carrying the R-27 for sure; that says something about the Radar..



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join