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