Page 2 of 6

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 12:04
by spazsinbad
Given the task to rewrite the JPO press release - the first post 1st page - the 'HOPE' failed miserably for whatever reason.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 12:05
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:
Whats so surprising about this? we all know that hitting a target BVR has a lower chance of success than WVR.


Wut?

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 12:54
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:
zero-one wrote:
Whats so surprising about this? we all know that hitting a target BVR has a lower chance of success than WVR.


Wut?


I know, you're gona tell me that the age of dogfights is dead and we are now in the BVR age
and that future air combat will be fought with long range AAMs while pulling 2Gs. I get that.

and yeah, that may be true. All I was saying is that no matter how you slice it, hitting a target WVR will
always be easier and thus have a better chance of hitting than firing at a target BVR.

thats all. Im not saying that BVR systems won't work, all Im saying is that its harder for it to work.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 14:10
by hornetfinn
vanshilar wrote:
zero-one wrote:Looks like we have some conflicting jornalism here.
However its puzzeling how they let the sidewinder hit but let the AMRAAM self destruct.

Maybe the truth was somewhere in between


Speculation here. The purpose of the test is to gather data to verify that the missiles will perform as expected in operational use. It's possible that the AMRAAM, with its longer range, gives sufficient data throughout the flight that the testers can be confident of its NEZ performance without needing to sacrifice an expensive drone, while the Sidewinder, due to its short range, does need to have its entire flight be tested, including exploding on a target.


Besides, AMRAAM has been live fired so many times (total something like close to 4,000 times and AIM-120C variants have been test fired a lot) that this event would not give much new information.Besides they would know exactly if the AMRAAM would hit or not if they self destructed it some tenths of a second before impact. Since the Another thing is that the drone used for AMRAAM target might've been quite a bit more expensive (like QF-16) than what was used for AIM-9X test as it was used in BVR setting.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 14:22
by hornetfinn
zero-one wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
zero-one wrote:
Whats so surprising about this? we all know that hitting a target BVR has a lower chance of success than WVR.


Wut?


I know, you're gona tell me that the age of dogfights is dead and we are now in the BVR age
and that future air combat will be fought with long range AAMs while pulling 2Gs. I get that.

and yeah, that may be true. All I was saying is that no matter how you slice it, hitting a target WVR will
always be easier and thus have a better chance of hitting than firing at a target BVR.

thats all. Im not saying that BVR systems won't work, all Im saying is that its harder for it to work.


I don't think that hitting a target within WVR is necessarily easier at all. Vietnam war era experience with SARH AIM-7 compared to fire-and-forget IR AIM-9 (which guides itself to target after launch) is not a necessarily a good indicator at all. Now we are comparing fire-and-forget missiles against one another, both with datalinks and stuff like that. BVR might actually be easier and have higher pK in real life since the shots usually lack such large off-boresight and high maneuverability requirements to successfully engage targets. I also bet that there is also usually much more time to set up for BVR shot especially in 5th gen jet. In WVR the advantages of 5th gen jets diminish a lot and 4th gen enemy with modern HOBS missiles could mean problems quickly.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 16:03
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
zero-one wrote:
Whats so surprising about this? we all know that hitting a target BVR has a lower chance of success than WVR.


Wut?


I know, you're gona tell me that the age of dogfights is dead and we are now in the BVR age
and that future air combat will be fought with long range AAMs while pulling 2Gs. I get that.

and yeah, that may be true. All I was saying is that no matter how you slice it, hitting a target WVR will
always be easier and thus have a better chance of hitting than firing at a target BVR.

thats all. Im not saying that BVR systems won't work, all Im saying is that its harder for it to work.


No I'm going to tell you that statistically the last 25 years have seen a majority of BVR kills. I'm also going to utterly disagree with the idea that manuevering WVR is "easier" in the first place. How is it easier to wrench the aircraft all over the sky in a dogfight rather than doing a BVR intercept consisting of mainly button pushing and smaller control inputs?

You are trying to convince me it's "easier" to grapple with a guy for 5 minutes than just shooting him at 200 yards?

Kosovo had I think zero WVR kills.

I'd like to see your stats because I don't think it's a given.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 16:32
by zero-one
hornetfinn wrote:
I don't think that hitting a target within WVR is necessarily easier at all. Vietnam war era experience with SARH AIM-7 compared to fire-and-forget IR AIM-9 (which guides itself to target after launch) is not a necessarily a good indicator at all. Now we are comparing fire-and-forget missiles against one another, both with datalinks and stuff like that. BVR might actually be easier and have higher pK in real life since the shots usually lack such large off-boresight and high maneuverability requirements to successfully engage targets. I also bet that there is also usually much more time to set up for BVR shot especially in 5th gen jet. In WVR the advantages of 5th gen jets diminish a lot and 4th gen enemy with modern HOBS missiles could mean problems quickly.



I understand what you're trying to say, but it has always been harder to set up a long range shot than a
short range one. a lot of factors come in to play, the enemy has more time to evade, you need more energy,
there are more ways to spoof BVR missiles.

I also understand that we have come a long way from the days of Vietnam and that BVR technology today is a world away from what it used to. But I don't think we have come to the point yet where the AMRAAM can match, let alone exceed the reliability of the sidewinder.

The F-14 was probably the best American 4th gen for BVR in the 90s, maybe better than the Eagle due to the APG-71, AAX-1 and Aim-54 Phoenix combos. but even with such advancements the Aim-54 never had a successful kill,(it had a mission kill though) but with simple Sidewinders, all targets were downed.

To me this is what makes American fighters great, they are usually designed for BVR with WVR requirements usually being secondary, but event that secondary requirement surpasses the WVR capabilities of most fighters.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 16:39
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:
No I'm going to tell you that statistically the last 25 years have seen a majority of BVR kills. I'm also going to utterly disagree with the idea that manuevering WVR is "easier" in the first place. How is it easier to wrench the aircraft all over the sky in a dogfight rather than doing a BVR intercept consisting of mainly button pushing and smaller control inputs?

You are trying to convince me it's "easier" to grapple with a guy for 5 minutes than just shooting him at 200 yards?

Kosovo had I think zero WVR kills.

I'd like to see your stats because I don't think it's a given.


I didn't say that WVR was easier than BVR, all I said was, it's easier to hit something WVR.

Lets take the kill statistics of the Sidewinder against the AMRAAM or Aim-54 or Aim-7.

I'm not questioning the relevance or the upward trend of BVR, it's there, and I agree with you that it will dominate future
air battles.

But won't you agree that it was harder for the AMRAAM to hit the test drone than it was for the sidewinder?
which is why a mis wasn't all that surprising at all.

Dog fighting is hard, BVR is easy, but once shots have been fired, the guy at the end of the sidewinder's sensor cone is as good as dead. on the other hand the guy at the end of the AMRAAM's radar, still has options left.

oh and by the way
http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article1010.html

At the time, U.N. officials said the Serb jets struck an arms plant run by Bosnia's Muslim-led government.

Capt. Robert Wright, flying F-16C #89-2137, got three kills; one with an AIM-120 and two using the AIM-9. Capt. Scott O'Grady fired an AIM-9 at a fourth J-21 but it missed. Two more F-16s arrived and S. Allen, flying F-16C #89-2009 got one using a AIM-9.


So unless the Aim-9M is capable of BVR I think there were at least 3 WVR kills
Also If I remember correctly some of the AMRAAM kills were WVR as well.

http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F ... ofile/3150
I also remember a reporter asking Lt. Col North why he did not use the cheaper missile, his come back was great; he stated if you were in a fight and had a knife and a gun, which one would you use.


Judging by his response, it looks like the sidewinder was also an option in that engagement. but even if it wasn't it looks like that even against the lowly Serbs, WVR was still used

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 17:30
by basher54321
zero-one wrote: but even with such advancements the Aim-54 never had a successful kill,(it had a mission kill though)


See Iran v Iraq war 1980 - 1988.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 17:55
by smsgtmac
Looks like we have some conflicting jornalism here.
However its puzzeling how they let the sidewinder hit but let the AMRAAM self destruct.
Maybe the truth was somewhere in between.


No. We have a credentialed but uneducated journalist making sh…tuff up about a press release.

No It’s not. It’s not puzzling at all if one knows anything about A2A missiles, the relative operational and functional differences between the missiles, missile testing or even the history of target drone operations.

No. There is no middle ground. The missile was either self-destructed or it was not. The original source of the story said it was.

There is no cause to invoke pet fears, theories or straws for grasping. No basis to infuse doubt or read into a story what one might want to be there. There is no hook upon which to hang any Strawman. The story is the F-35 and weapons appear to be operating as advertised and designed. The end.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 19:10
by SpudmanWP
bojack_horseman wrote:
the AIM-120C was given a successful self-destruct signal right before target impact.


My impression from this line was that they knew the target would be hit, but they aborted if only to save the cost of 1 target drone?

Am I right in this impression?


One is a direct quote of the original press release and the other is a reporter's "interpretation" of that same press release.

Care to guess which one is which? 8)

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 19:23
by les_paul59
the writer from DOD Buzz is obviously ignorant to how the usaf tests missiles but that's besides the point.

I think you can make a case that there is not a better equipped aircraft for a wvr engagement than an f-35 with the helmet, das, and 2 aim 9x sidewinders.

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 19:26
by zero-one
basher54321 wrote:
zero-one wrote: but even with such advancements the Aim-54 never had a successful kill,(it had a mission kill though)


See Iran v Iraq war 1980 - 1988.

I knew some one would notice that thats why I said "American"

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 19:31
by SpudmanWP
Just to give some context and reasoning behind the self destruct signal, here is an exerpt from the F-35's very first live AAM shot.

Test data and observers confirmed the F-35 identified and targeted the drone with its mission systems sensors, passed the target "track" information to the missile, and launched the AIM-120 from the aircraft to engage the target drone. After launch, the missile successfully acquired the target and followed an intercept flight profile. Moments before the missile was about to destroy the target, a self-destruct signal was sent to the AIM-120 in order to preserve the aerial drone for use in future tests.


https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35a-l ... -120-amraa

Re: F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2016, 20:13
by zero-one
smsgtmac wrote:No. We have a credentialed but uneducated journalist making sh…tuff up about a press release.


Easy there, not trying to pick a fight with you sgtMac, but why are we so intent on dismissing one of the claims? Is because it was proven false and multiple sources confirmed that it was indeed a hit for both weapons. Or is it simply because one of the claims were inconvenient and we don't want to believe it so lets just say its not true.

The post was by Military.com, which is known to be a very reliable source and is hardly an anti-F35 site. In fact I don't think they have ever posted anything to discredit the program.

If anything, both statements confirm that the Aim-120 did not hit, one said that it was destroyed before it could hit and the other siad it totally missed.

smsgtmac wrote:No It’s not. It’s not puzzling at all if one knows anything about A2A missiles, the relative operational and functional differences between the missiles, missile testing or even the history of target drone operations.


Well we civilians don't know, far as I know some test launches don't have live explosive warheads to minimize the damage on the drone, so it could be used further. But maybe the AMRAAMs sheer size will cause too much damage which is why they decided to destroy it knowing that it may result in a successful hit anyway. Is that even close to how things are done?



smsgtmac wrote:There is no cause to invoke pet fears, theories or straws for grasping. No basis to infuse doubt or read into a story what one might want to be there. There is no hook upon which to hang any Strawman. The story is the F-35 and weapons appear to be operating as advertised and designed. The end.


I didn't understand this one, what fear? i have always said that the F-35's combination of impressive Kinematics, DAS, VLO (which works even in WVR) and HMD will make it dominant in any type of fight BVR or WVR. There is no fear in entering the merge if you are an In an F-35.

Yes it is not prefered and its like giving the enemy a chance, but if it does happen,
there is nothing for the F-35 pilot to fear, the level of superiority the F-35 gives post merge is still overwhelming compared to anything short of a Raptor.

So saying that the AMRAAM didn't hit isn't much news at all, its like telling a Delta force comando that his Rifle didn't work, that doesn't make him ineffective all of a sudden, his side arm makes him deadlier than most regular infantry men, and if he has to, the knife would suffice.