Operational Performace Comparison: Viper, Beagle, and Stubby

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Online

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post20 May 2019, 16:01

garrya wrote:While looking for information about R-40 guidance, I coincidently ran into this:
123.PNG

https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=rg ... &q&f=false

If R-40 with its big fin can't sustain controlled flight above 27 km, then it is quite unlikely AIM-120 can be loft above this altitude, IMHO, it won't be able to pitch down or change direction once loft to this altitude
Image

There's a world of difference between being loft to a given altitude, and having the ability to engage targets at that altitude. The AIM-120 doesn't need to perform extreme manuevers, while lofted. Those will occur after it dives down into thicker air.
Offline

garrya

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 735
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post20 May 2019, 17:14

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Dismal. 1.9G, less than 1 degree per second. The point is that for that shot in particular there is no need to turn. Here is the actual G force commanded for the flight of that shot.
Remember the MiG won't know anything is happening until the seeker goes active.

IMHO, at the altitude of 60k ft, the air is thin enough that AIM-120 launch can be detected from a large distance.
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Here is the Alt, Speed, and G profile for that shot.
Capture8.PNG

That available G-load is eye-watering, i guess that partly due to the inlet area?
The more i look at this, the more i believe Meteor is superior to AIM-120 and R-77
IMHO F-35 with 4 Meteor will have better PK than F-35 with 6 AIM-120D, what do you think?
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post20 May 2019, 18:00

garrya wrote:IMHO, at the altitude of 60k ft, the air is thin enough that AIM-120 launch can be detected from a large distance.


For a whopping 8 seconds. You think it could be detected 150nm out? Let's say your right. Every enemy MLWR in 150nm goes off and they all immediately begin evasive actions... Sounds like a win to me. You just disrupted the entire enemy air force with a single missile shot because no one knows who it was directed at. Or, they all get a missile launch warning from x-o'clock, and then nothing. Nothing at all. No contrail to see from 150nm away. Then the RWR starts blaring, you look down to see where it's coming from start rolling to turn, get maybe a few degrees in and bam, you explode. NOT having a motor burn the entire flight improves the stealth of the missile.

garrya wrote:That available G-load is eye-watering, i guess that partly due to the inlet area?
The more i look at this, the more i believe Meteor is superior to AIM-120 and R-77
IMHO F-35 with 4 Meteor will have better PK than F-35 with 6 AIM-120D, what do you think?

It is almost entirely due to the inlets. the surface area they provide is astounding. As for the second question here, see above. You are commenting on the range at which a missile launch could be detected but ignore the fact that this is a continual burn in the cold air of 85,000ft. Which missile is more likely to be detected in a manner that gives warning to the target? I think AIM-120D is a better fit for VLO airframes as it increases the "surprise" effect. The Meteor is kinematically superior but loses nearly all of its surprise, so I think it is the better fit for LO or O airframes. It is ideal for, say, a Typhoon hanging out in the back while an F-35B up front does the targeting.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

garrya

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 735
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post20 May 2019, 18:12

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:For a whopping 8 seconds. You think it could be detected 150nm out? Let's say your right. Every enemy MLWR in 150nm goes off and they all immediately begin evasive actions... Sounds like a win to me. You just disrupted the entire enemy air force with a single missile shot because no one knows who it was directed at. Or, they all get a missile launch warning from x-o'clock, and then nothing. Nothing at all. No contrail to see from 150nm away. Then the RWR starts blaring, you look down to see where it's coming from start rolling to turn, get maybe a few degrees in and bam, you explode. NOT having a motor burn the entire flight improves the stealth of the missile.
It is almost entirely due to the inlets. the surface area they provide is astounding. As for the second question here, see above. You are commenting on the range at which a missile launch could be detected but ignore the fact that this is a continual burn in the cold air of 85,000ft. Which missile is more likely to be detected in a manner that gives warning to the target? I think AIM-120D is a better fit for VLO airframes as it increases the "surprise" effect. The Meteor is kinematically superior but loses nearly all of its surprise, so I think it is the better fit for LO or O airframes. It is ideal for, say, a Typhoon hanging out in the back while an F-35B up front does the targeting.

You brought up very good point
AIM-120 without burning motor is very hard to detect
How about a load out of 2 Meteor and 4 AIM-120D
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post20 May 2019, 18:43

garrya wrote:You brought up very good point
AIM-120 without burning motor is very hard to detect
How about a load out of 2 Meteor and 4 AIM-120D

Sadly, as it stands right now that will only be possible on A/C models. The B bay is too short on one side for the dual AMRAAM rack currently in work. It would be great though. Two REALLY long range missiles that even if detected may not be able to be avoided, and if they are, so much time, energy, would have been spent that the AIM-120D shots are in a great position.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post20 May 2019, 19:06

So, how about 4 AMRAAM + 2 CUDA per bay for the B?
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post20 May 2019, 19:26

A USMC B model would be able to do 1 AMRAAM and 3 Cuda per bay (based on SDB-II) for a total of 2 AMRAAM and 6 Cuda internally. For my comparison I am using a RN F-35B so it will have two Meteors per bay for AA and one Meteor and four SPEAR-3 per bay for some of the AG missions (Paveway IV for the others likely).

EDIT - I am not using Cuda at all in my comparison. It is unfunded as of now.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post20 May 2019, 19:30

When I say "CUDA", I am referring to the SACM program as a whole which is still funded and ongoing.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post20 May 2019, 19:41

SpudmanWP wrote:When I say "CUDA", I am referring to the SACM program as a whole which is still funded and ongoing.

Okay, thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize SACM was still on-going. I thought it died along with JAGM. Is there any ETA for operation?
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Online

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post20 May 2019, 20:07

SACM, MSDM, and LREW are all under development. They'll probably come online around Block 5.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post20 May 2019, 20:14

You may be right as sh*t get absorbed, canceled, or renamed all the time.

Time for some Google-Fu.

-------------------------------------------

Closest thing I could find is a Sep 2018 article about CUDA having a paid flight demo contract.
The U.S. Air Force has funded a flight test demonstration program for Lockheed Martin’s Cuda air-to-air missile, pushing the concept forward more than five years after it first appeared, the company ...

https://aviationweek.com/awindefense/us ... le-flights

Anyone with access beyond the paywall, feel free to provide more info.

--------------------------------------------

It also seems that LM is not counting on just SACM money to develop CUDA as it looks like CUDA could be an M_SHORAD solution as well.

https://www.janes.com/article/84936/loc ... nterceptor
Attachments
p1636023[1].jpg
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Online

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post20 May 2019, 20:56

As for Russian MAWS, if the missile is launched further than 20km, the likelihood of detection prior to the missile going active, is minimal.
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post20 May 2019, 21:12

wrightwing wrote:As for Russian MAWS, if the missile is launched further than 20km, the likelihood of detection prior to the missile going active, is minimal.

Why?
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post20 May 2019, 22:19

If it's too far away to detect the initial motor burn then it will not pick up the inbound AAM till it's close enough for residual heat to show or it goes active.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Online

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post20 May 2019, 22:22

:roll:
SpudmanWP wrote:If it's too far away to detect the initial motor burn then it will not pick up the inbound AAM till it's close enough for residual heat to show or it goes active.

I suppose I should have clarified. Why is a Russian MAWS so short ranged? That is a lower range than the OLS-35 is supposed to detect a fighter jet from the front.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: wrightwing and 10 guests