UK ordering first 14 F-35's

reply to post by Sammamishman


If they can solve the laser problems then we'll eventually see that day. The problem is solving those problems, which won't be easy.

One of the early ideas with the F-35 was to create a bay similar to that for the lift fan on the B model, and install the equipment for a laser in there. Too many problems with lasers though.

Stealthy hypersonic drones with lasers. Skynet? They better not be fully autonomous with AI or they might attack their masters. lol.

Zaphod58
Now imagine an R-77 with an AESA radar, and potentially thrust vectoring. That's what the Allies are up against with the K-77M.

The Russian's are certainly promoting this new missile and how it will never miss and every plane is vulnerable. Nothing like a good PR machine to push the message.

As with everything in life, the proof will be in the pudding, but best resolve the realities of whether this missile - in model form - will ever be manufactured and fitted to any plane.

Regards

paraphi

Zaphod58
Now imagine an R-77 with an AESA radar, and potentially thrust vectoring. That's what the Allies are up against with the K-77M.

The Russian's are certainly promoting this new missile and how it will never miss and every plane is vulnerable. Nothing like a good PR machine to push the message.

As with everything in life, the proof will be in the pudding, but best resolve the realities of whether this missile - in model form - will ever be manufactured and fitted to any plane.

Regards

what nonsense.the russians are dead and buried.they are a paper tiger of no consequence.

we outspend them.we outstared them.


we played chicken and they swerved and they blinked.

it not the russians promoting this.

its the American military industrial complex promoting this so they can suck more money out of us.

i mean did a russian knock on your door promoting this?

the military industrial complex is sucking more and more and more money and needs to keep inventing more bogeymen
to get more money.

look how they pushing the terror angle DAILY.

they certainly seemed to have sucked you in to this propaganda.

i mean... think about a missile that will never miss.ABSURD.

no machine in existence can be that infallible.

i mean it is just a stick with a finite amount of fuel.right?

i can make it miss easily

how?

how ? you ask?

well i figured it out within seconds. being smart.

now you figure it out.

reply to post by beckybecky


Well you better go take that super genius IQ and get a job helping them.

The K-77 will occasionally miss. It's inevitable. But traditional counters are useless against it.

reply to post by paraphi


It will miss sometimes. But traditional BVR missiles have a kill rate in the teens percentage wise. This missile will shoot up into the sixty to seventy percent range or higher when used correctly.

Even when not paired with something like the T-50, a 15-20% increase is HUGE in air to air combat.

beckybecky
how ? you ask?

well i figured it out within seconds. being smart.

now you figure it out.

I bow to your immense knowledge on this - and every subject. I can only apologise that I deigned to make what I considered was a measured comment. I was clearly mistaken, even if you completely misread what I wrote. I feel liberated by the thought that your mind towers, yet you cannot write properly.

Regards

reply to post by Zaphod58

And you are showing yet again your utter lack of knowledge. The aircraft is still in testing. That means identifying and fixing these problems. You act like these problems are unsolvable, and will always be there. This aircraft is the most complex aircraft ever built. That means a lot of problems. None of them are unsolvable.

I am not being a smart ass with the following question, why are Nations putting money before proof in this instance?

I for one would never buy a product at such a sky high cost unless it is proven to do what it does.
From reading links provided here in this thread I come to the understanding that up till now every fighter every produced was purchased after it was proven air worthy?

Correct me if I am wrong and you certainly have the knowledge to do so.

Posted sincerely.

Regards, Iwinder

Well you better go take that super genius IQ and get a job helping them. The K-77 will occasionally miss. It's inevitable. But traditional counters are useless against it.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Is the K-77 really that good and tested true?

If so I can see a need for stealth and will stealth alone be good enough?
Learning as I go in a forum I usually don't post in for lack of knowledge. :-)

Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


The military making the purchase (in this case the USAF let's say), sends out a Request For Proposal (RFP). That RFP gives the requirements that the aircraft must meet. However many companies then send their proposals to the contract office (let's go with four). If all four of them are accepted, then those four companies are paid a set amount to develop their designs from paper to windtunnel/computer models. The results of that are evaluated by the contract office, and some (usually to whittle down to two) are then eliminated.

Those two companies are then paid an amount to develop their models into flyable prototypes (usually two to three), as well as non-flyable test airframes (fatigue testing, etc). Based on those test results, the final decision is made for who gets the contract to develop the aircraft into the actual operational aircraft.

This is when we see the overruns come in. As with the F-35, the models usually don't quite do what they expect them to do, so extra development goes into getting them up to where they need them to be.

During the flight testing phase, is when we see the purchases start. They buy the LRIP (Low Rate Initial Production) materials, and start building the operational aircraft that are going to be operational (usually later in the flight test phase, after they've had a chance to get a handle on the bigger problems). They're usually bought in lots, so that any changes that need to be made based on the flight tests can be made as the production run goes on.

Usually though, when the initial contract is awarded for a set number of aircraft (the KC-46 is an example, with the initial purchase being for something like 18 aircraft). Then once they reach a certain point in the test program, another lot is added. But purchases actually start from the initial contract award.

reply to post by Iwinder


It hasn't been tested yet, but based on available information, it's one of the scariest weapons I've seen since the introduction of stealth.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Iwinder

 

It hasn't been tested yet, but based on available information, it's one of the scariest weapons I've seen since the introduction of stealth.

If you have the time please inform the ignorant why the above is so?

I could search for it but I will take your opinion on the matter.

This makes me think if the tech wars keep going like they are we might as well revert to canvas bi-planes and machine guns that shoot your own props off if not timed right.

Thanks for getting back to me.

Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


The way current missiles work is that the radar signal goes out from the launch aircraft, which locks onto the target. The missile sees that signal, and uses it to home in. Missiles like the AIM-120 AMRAAM use the signal from the aircraft radar to lock on, and data links from the plane to correct their course on the way to the target aircraft. At a certain point in the flight, it uses its onboard radar to identify the target and home in. With these missiles, there is a radar signal received at the target to at least let the pilot know that he's being tracked. The seeker on these missiles is a mechanical antenna, which means it has to physically move to change where it's looking. That means that if done right, you can maneuver out of the "basket" of the missile, causing a miss, because it can't see you.

Now the F-22 and F-35 use what's known as Low Probability of Intercept radar (LPI). That means that the beam comes from multiple antennas mounted around the aircraft to send out a more diffuse signal, that's much harder to detect.

Now the K-77M replaces the mechanically steered antenna for an AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array). That means that, like the F-22/F-35 radar, it uses multiple antennas to send out multiple beams and creates a picture. That means that where the mechanical antenna has to move to see around it, the K-77M can put antennas around where it can see all around the nose of it. So even if you move to get out of the "basket" it would still be able to see you. Not only that, but the chances of detecting the radar beam at the target are drastically reduced, to almost no chance. So even if it was paired with an older MiG or Sukhoi, it would have a much higher chance of getting a kill, as opposed to such as the R-77 or AIM-120, even at long range, where a current long range missile has a very low kill rate. Paired with such as the T-50, which will have an LPI radar, the target may not even know that it's been targeted, let alone launched on until the missile explodes.

the K-77M can put antennas around where it can see all around the nose of it. So even if you move to get out of the "basket" it would still be able to see you. Not only that, but the chances of detecting the radar beam at the target are drastically reduced, to almost no chance. So even if it was paired with an older MiG or Sukhoi, it would have a much higher chance of getting a kill, as opposed to such as the R-77 or AIM-120, even at long range, where a current long range missile has a very low kill rate. Paired with such as the T-50, which will have an LPI radar, the target may not even know that it's been targeted, let alone launched on until the missile explodes.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Thanks very much for that explanation which even I could grasp ( almost all of it)

No warnings, not a thing happening then BOOM........

Sounds impressive.

Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


One of the things that makes it kind of scary is that the Su-27 family has a tail mounted radar that is LPI. So he could shoot at you, turn away from you, and use the tail radar to guide the missile in and you wouldn't be able to tell. So even with an older aircraft, it's a very dangerous weapon.

What parts gave you trouble? I can go into more detail and make it a little easier.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Iwinder

 

One of the things that makes it kind of scary is that the Su-27 family has a tail mounted radar that is LPI. So he could shoot at you, turn away from you, and use the tail radar to guide the missile in and you wouldn't be able to tell. So even with an older aircraft, it's a very dangerous weapon.

What parts gave you trouble? I can go into more detail and make it a little easier.

edit on 2/20/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

No trouble at all, just some of the numbers and such but I have it figured out right I do believe.

Thanks again for your patience and explanations.......That is a scary thing to be able to fire and turn tail and still guide your shot.

Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Always happy to help out. Obviously I love this stuff (some would call it obsession, but I don't think that's a strong enough word), and am more than happy to teach people what I know.

Zaphod58
Now the K-77M replaces the mechanically steered antenna for an AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array). That means that, like the F-22/F-35 radar, it uses multiple antennas to send out multiple beams and creates a picture. That means that where the mechanical antenna has to move to see around it, the K-77M can put antennas around where it can see all around the nose of it.

Actually the K-77M head still has a mechanical gimble and only has 64 T/R modules.

Paired with such as the T-50, which will have an LPI radar, the target may not even know that it's been targeted, let alone launched on until the missile explodes.

This is where LO is an asset and the F-35 should fare rather better in that regard than the T-50. It's harder for the T-50 to avoid detection, and easier for the F-35 to disengage. Factor in sensor integration with other F-35's MADL (one electric eyeball and three displaced shooters, for example, and in theory once mature the AF will move on the F-22 upgrade again) and AWACS with JTIDS, etc is still something the T-50 cannot compete with on a level playing ground.
EODAS is going to give you a pretty good heads up on inbound missiles. The K-77M inbound is still going to radiate IR. It'd be better if they integrate UV sensors eventually to the DAS, but there is a lot of built-in growth potential to the airframe.

Defeating the K-77M, like any other missile will often come down to kinematics. If you can run it out of energy, you'll put your self out of the engagement envelope. To this end, the K-77M is generally held to hold better end-run kinematics than the AMRAAM. That's a huge advantage, but I don't think you need to buy into the super-missile "can't miss' hype quite yet.

_Del_
but I don't think you need to buy into the super-missile "can't miss' hype quite yet.

I don't buy into it, and haven't yet. But as I said, the average BVR missile, such as the AMRAAM has a kill rate in the mid to low teens, even at shorter ranges. The K-77 would bump that up at least 15-20%, which is huge when it comes to BVR combat.

Zaphod58

_Del_
but I don't think you need to buy into the super-missile "can't miss' hype quite yet.

I don't buy into it, and haven't yet. But as I said, the average BVR missile, such as the AMRAAM has a kill rate in the mid to low teens, even at shorter ranges. The K-77 would bump that up at least 15-20%, which is huge when it comes to BVR combat.

i am afraid you all frightened about nothing.

spock:-

"military secrets are the most fleeting of all...".