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 missile deployed with RAF

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by aerospaceweb

Originally posted by waynos
Excellent post, thank you. I was going round in circles anyway. You don't know about the Meteor as well do you as my web searches have revealed surprisingly little?


I'm not an expert on it since I've never worked on Meteor, but I know a little about it. It's an advanced long-range air-to-air missile generally comparable to the American AMRAAM but with a much different propulsion system. AMRAAM uses a solid rocket motor while Meteor uses an integral rocket ramjet (IRR). An IRR is essentially a solid rocket inside of a comustion chamber. The solid rocket is used to boost the missile to high speed. Once it is used up, inlets open up to bring in outside air. The air is mixed with fuel in the combustion chamber and ignited to produce thrust. The IRR therefore converts itself from a solid rocket to an air-breathing ramjet. Although more complex and expensive, the advantage of this propuslion system is that it can fly farther than a solid rocket. Meteor has a range of about 55 miles while AMRAAM is limited to about 40 miles. Both travel at about Mach 4 and both use an active radar seeker for terminal guidance.

Anything in particular you'd like to know about Meteor?


Question about the misille ranges. They seem to be quite different in various sources. In one source I read Amraam has 32 km range, in other 70.... In another Meteor has 185 km in another 50 miles (app. 90km). Why is that?
I really don't know. So can you tell what ranges this rockets really have?




posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 07:38 AM
link   
I think for both missiles the higher range is the distance at which targets can be acquired and the lower figure is the actual range for shooting down said target. This might seem pointless but allows a particulr target to be tracked for some distance while its intentions/identity are determined and allowing instant launch once it is known to be hostile.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Aim-120 kills in range it allows the raptor to shoot down targets at close to 200 Miles now isn't that something but for close A2A missiles im not sure what their normal range is.


[edit on 17-7-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 08:00 AM
link   
How can the AIM-120C shoot down a target flying 200 miles away when all other version can only shoot up to 45 miles? Thats some difference.


I found this quote "Once AIM-120 Extended Range Air To Air Missiles (ERAAM) are available, the F/A-22 will be able to destroy that enemy at a range of 185 kilometers (100 nautical miles). "

Here www.vectorsite.net...

Are you getting carried away Wespoint?


[edit on 17-7-2004 by waynos]



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I meant that the raptor can target an enemy aircraft close to 200 miles away but the actual range of the missile is probably close to 100nm and does the AIM-54 Phoenix Missile have more range than the AIM-120?



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I think it does, and there is a line in the link I posted that says something like the AIM-120C being 'a sort of' replacement for the Phoenix which to me reads like 'well, it'll do' . I suppose the Phoenix is a very big missile, certainly far too big for internal carriage on anything the US Navy will be flying. It seems odd that the range capability of the Phoenix is just being given up without a proper replacemnet, maybe another black project out there might explain this?



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 05:11 PM
link   
The AIM-54 has a range of 93 miles. It is a long range missile. The AIM-120 is a medium range missile. It has a range of about half of the AIM-54. If the extended range version is actually going to be produced then it could be a good replacement. The problem with the AIM-54 was that it was very expensive. Much more than a AIM-120.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I think the raptor is going to use un updated version of the AIM-120 with extended range cuz all specs that I have read for the raptor and all the shows I have watched on all say the same thing that it can shoot and target beyond 100nm.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 07:42 PM
link   
The ranges for the AIM-120C are unrealiable because while the missile may be able to reach 100 nm it does not guarantee that the missile will have enough fuel to out-manoeuvre it's target. Other factors such as the missile's maximum burn time and how many speeds it can fly at are usually more important.



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Uhh...wlee do you think our air force is stupid you think they would put a missile on the most expensive jet and the best jet that wont even hit its target trust me they have things figured out I wouldn't worry about it too much.



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 12:40 AM
link   
The name of the missile is AIM-120C-7.



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I think it does, and there is a line in the link I posted that says something like the AIM-120C being 'a sort of' replacement for the Phoenix which to me reads like 'well, it'll do' . I suppose the Phoenix is a very big missile, certainly far too big for internal carriage on anything the US Navy will be flying. It seems odd that the range capability of the Phoenix is just being given up without a proper replacemnet, maybe another black project out there might explain this?


Yes Phoenix was a really BIG misille, it weights almost 500 kg! Earlier AMRAAMs weight was only 160 kg. So you can see the difference. I think the long range rockets are not longer produced because, in future most aircrafts will be stealth so it will be difficult to target and track them.

Westpoint - F-22 cannot track the enemy 200 miles away. It can only detect its presence (using pasive radar). F-22 active radar has "only" the range of 140 miles (against bigger planes I think). But it is still one of the most powerfull fighter radar ever produced (second to Mig-31) and of course the most advanced.



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Westpoint - F-22 cannot track the enemy 200 miles away. It can only detect its presence (using pasive radar). F-22 active radar has "only" the range of 140 miles (against bigger planes I think). But it is still one of the most powerfull fighter radar ever produced (second to Mig-31) and of course the most advanced


But the Raptor can detect the enemy at 200 miles like you said but the raptor can get off a bout 6 missiles before the enemy is in range to shoot back
Because the Raptor was made to have first look first shot and first kill capabilities. Also how is the Raptors radar second to the Mig-31 put up some stats for the mig and well see who has the better radar.


[edit on 18-7-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I 've done a little digging myself and here's the figures from the MiG OKB website regarding the MiG 31;

"electronically scanned phased-array fire-control radar (NATO "Flash Dance") in nose; search range of 108 n miles (200 km; 124 miles) in clutter-free forward sector; range in rear sector 48 n miles (90 km; 56 miles); capable of tracking 10 targets and attacking four simultaneously."



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Here are some stats about the AN/APG-77 radar of the F/A-22 Raptor enjoy!



The AN/APG-77 radar a novel type of electronically scanned phased array. In what is likely to be the most advanced airborne radar in the world,

The AN/APG-77 radar antenna is a elliptical, active electronically scanned antenna array of 2000 transmitter/receive modules which provides agility, low radar cross section and wide bandwidth. The radar is able to sweep 120 degrees of airspace instantaneously. In comparison to the F-15 Strike Eagle's APG-70 radar takes 14 seconds to scan that amount of airspace. The APG-77 is capable of performing this feat by electronically forming multiple radar beams to rapidly search the airspace.

The system exhibits a very low radar cross section, supporting the F-22's stealthy design. Reliability of the all-solid-state system is expected to be substantially better than the already highly reliable F-16 radar, with MTBF predicted at more than 450 hours.


If you awnt the rest of the facts from this websiteclick here

And here are some facts from another website about the AN/APG-77.


With the APG-77, the F-22 will be able to detect an enemy aircraft's radar from distances of up to 460 kilometers (250 nautical miles). It will be able to acquire an enemy aircraft with radar at distances of up to 220 kilometers (125 nautical miles), while its "low probability of intercept" radar signal will be very difficult to detect and the "stealthy" F-22 will remain invisible to the enemy's radar.

Once AIM-120 Extended Range Air To Air Missiles (ERAAM) are available, the F-22 will be able to destroy that enemy at a range of 185 kilometers (100 nautical miles). In many cases, the enemy will be hit without warning.


And if you want some more factsclick here


E_T

posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
The best current short range missille is Israelis Python 4.

Define "current" .

Do you mean missiles which aren't anymore in prototype phase and are in production?
AIM-9X has been in low-rate production couple years and is now going to full-rate production.
I've got videos from both and from them it's clear that non-thrust vectoring Python 4 is inferior to AIM-9X.

www.raytheon.com...



posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Wow, F3's with AMRAAM and ASRAAM? When did that happen?

F3's seem to be getting treated, didn't they just mate a few ALARM missiles to one?

Edit: very recently, check the date:

www.raf.mod.uk...

[edit on 22-7-2004 by Cjwinnit]



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by KKing123
the USAF was close to using the ASRAAM as well, until they decided to just use the AIM-9X, i've heard that the ASRAAM is actually a better missile, and would fit better with the AMRAAM in the US arsenal, but the AIM-9X was cheaper


I actually heard that the AIM-9X missile is the best short-ranged AAM in the world.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Never hit tab, never hit tab.


[edit on 31-8-2004 by Hockeyguy567]



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hyperen

Originally posted by WestPoint23
So true I only know what top of the line fighters look like not what second rate ones look like




Tornado is as good, if not better than american fighters. Same airframe. Two very different roles.



The tornado is an ok BVR platfrom but woefully undercapable in the WVR arena.

As a Russian, i have to give the US credit on their warplanes as the best in the world.



[edit on 31-8-2004 by Hockeyguy567]

[edit on 31-8-2004 by Hockeyguy567]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join