F-35 vs. Mig-29

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 595
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post11 Aug 2017, 23:37

popcorn wrote:The GPS-enhamced INS on the D model enables a lofted profile to enable target engagement at much longer distances.


But again, this compared to the AIM-120C-7?
I'm aware that this is a hard question to answer but what is the gain in range from the AIM-120C-7 to the AIM-120D?

Also, doesn't the AIM-120C (don't know from which variant) also has the ability to fly in lofted profiles?
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6814
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post12 Aug 2017, 00:25

Google C7 and D ranges. Granted these are not official.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 595
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post12 Aug 2017, 01:20

popcorn wrote:Google C7 and D ranges. Granted these are not official.


That's exactly what I did before posting my previous post. All I could find about the subject was a reference in Wikipedia mentioning that the range of more than 105 Km for the AIM-120C-5 (which has less range than the C-7) and a range of more than 160km for the AIM-120D (which has more range than the C-7).
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6814
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post12 Aug 2017, 01:51

viewtopic.php?f=38&t=27998&p=308990
A lot of stuff discussed here.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 595
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post13 Aug 2017, 19:33

popcorn wrote:http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=27998&p=308990
A lot of stuff discussed here.


Thanks for the heads up.
By reading some of the posts in the thread that you shared, it confirms something that I was already aware about: The motor of the AIM-120C-7 is the same as the one in the AIM-120D hence my statement that the AIM-120C-7 range/gain over the C-7 shouldn't be "that big".
Don't get me wrong, there are certainly range improvement on the -D over the C-7 (due to dual-link and GPS) but I don't think that we're talking about something as close as a 50% improvement in range but I could be wrong thou... :wink:
Offline

talkitron

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2007, 10:55

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 01:26

ricnunes wrote: Don't get me wrong, there are certainly range improvement on the -D over the C-7 (due to dual-link and GPS) but I don't think that we're talking about something as close as a 50% improvement in range but I could be wrong thou... :wink:


If Meteor was really better I think someone in the USN or USAF would talk to the media about the US acquiring a similar capability. The lack of public interest by anyone in the USN or USAF in acquiring the Meteor must provide some evidence that the missile is not seen as a big improvement over AMRAAM. This could be for any number of reasons in addition to AMRAAM having a competitive range; one example is electronic warfare issues with Meteor.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6814
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 02:02

ricnunes wrote:
popcorn wrote:http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=27998&p=308990
A lot of stuff discussed here.


Thanks for the heads up.
By reading some of the posts in the thread that you shared, it confirms something that I was already aware about: The motor of the AIM-120C-7 is the same as the one in the AIM-120D hence my statement that the AIM-120C-7 range/gain over the C-7 shouldn't be "that big".
Don't get me wrong, there are certainly range improvement on the -D over the C-7 (due to dual-link and GPS) but I don't think that we're talking about something as close as a 50% improvement in range but I could be wrong thou... :wink:


Consider doing a simple experiment. Throw a baseball on a flat trajectory and measure how far it goes before hitting the ground. Next, throw the same baseball at a 45-deg angle and measure the impact distance. Compare. :devil:
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

lbk000

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 91
  • Joined: 04 May 2017, 16:19

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 02:26

But lofting isn't something new, it's been a standard feature on AMRAAMS since the A, iirc.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6814
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 02:51

lbk000 wrote:But lofting isn't something new, it's been a standard feature on AMRAAMS since the A, iirc.

Were the lofting algorithms available in earlier models? Would appreciate some confirmation. AFAIK some AMRAAM users even opted not to acquire the in-flight update capability via 1-way data link.
In any case, I postulate that the incorporation of a 2-way data link and a more precise GPS-assisted INS maximize the kinetic capability of the motor that directly enable much longer range intercepts.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

lbk000

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 91
  • Joined: 04 May 2017, 16:19

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 02:58

Lack of midcourse guidance (silly Brits) didn't mean the removal of the capability, just meant the missile was flying dumb. Not much different than if you were forced to drop support of the missile before pitbull. Lofted profile seems to have become somewhat standard solution for long ranged US missiles, AIM-54 is well known for it and even the RIM-66 has been described as having a lofted trajectory and both predated the AIM-120 by a fair bit.

Yes for the 120D I think more likely it's just more refined guidance algorithms at work.
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6840
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 03:58

The -120D can do a lofting profile more efficiently than the C7 due to the GPS component of the -D. It allows the -D to know EXACTLY where the target is and where it is so it can calculate an intercept more accurately.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

talkitron

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2007, 10:55

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 04:22

SpudmanWP wrote:The -120D can do a lofting profile more efficiently than the C7 due to the GPS component of the -D. It allows the -D to know EXACTLY where the target is and where it is so it can calculate an intercept more accurately.


So this capability will not work if China or Russia disables the ability to use GPS?
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6840
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 04:52

lol.. not going to happen. The normal INS is also present so there is a backup.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

talkitron

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2007, 10:55

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 06:03

SpudmanWP wrote:lol.. not going to happen. The normal INS is also present so there is a backup.


Wouldn't it be easy to shoot down a GPS satellite? As the backup lowers the range, it does provide a selling point for Meteor.
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 917
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post14 Aug 2017, 06:48

talkitron wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:lol.. not going to happen. The normal INS is also present so there is a backup.


Wouldn't it be easy to shoot down a GPS satellite? As the backup lowers the range, it does provide a selling point for Meteor.


Easy? Well all things are possible but "shooting" down the satellites would not be "easy." There are over 30 satellites that have to be taken out pretty much at the same time, and the constellation is not in "low earth" orbit. They are over 12,000 miles up (MEO), so the demonstrated ASAT systems would not be up to the challenge.

However, electronic counter measures, jamming, cyber or signal blinding techniques are probably well thought out. Even here, attacking 30 satellites at once tends to get the attacker "Noticed." That can be a negative when it comes to conflict escalation. Local jamming is probably the only realistic capability that exists today ... but then there are counter measures for those things as well.

Bottom line is ECM/ECCM/EW/Cyber stuff is highly classified and we will not know where the current state of the art is for that. But kinematic attacks are more problematic. I'd say kinematic shoot downs falls into the category of debates we've had here on just attacking with "swarms of missiles," and expecting that to be unnoticed, and not create a serious response even before the missiles hit. Such attacks would tend to run the risk of having your Capitol City turned into a glass parking lot, before your attack hits the targets.

MHO FWIW,
BP
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gta4, steve2267 and 6 guests