Operational Performance Comparison: Viper, Beagle and Stubby

[swiss]

**EDIT** Okay I speced the R-37 to have a 150nm flight range when fired by a Foxhound (2.5M @75,000ft). As this missile was a Foxhound exclusive I consider it prudent to consider all range claims to be made from this type of profile. Launches against incoming aircraft can occur at the 400km range mentioned while this gives a ~300km range against an orbiting target (e.g. AWACS, Tanker) Range will be significantly less from an Su-35S but will handedly out stick the R-77.

According to the manufacturer the range is "up to" 200 km.

http://eng.ktrv.ru/production/military_ ... vv-bd.html

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

"Range performance varies with the flight profile, from 80 NMI for a direct shot, to a maximum of 215 NMI for a cruise glide profile. In 1994 a trial round killed a target at 162 NMI, a record for a BVR missile. The production status of the R-37 remains unclear at this time, but the missile remains a candidate for advanced Sukhoi users."

https://web.archive.org/web/20090126154 ... May-05.pdf

I was looking at this. Head on launch range of up to 200km isn't overly impressive for a modern missile that size. Do you refute the statement about the trial shots?

[southerncross]

Keep in mind published data normally refer to export versions of the missiles, not domestic ones. For the R-37M at least 300 km range were claimed, though I don't have the source at hand. Besides, the warhead is around 60 kg so it carries notably more weight than other AAMs. It is supposed to be capable against 8 g aerodynamic targets, which should be far more than what a fighter can turn at altitude. With the Mach 6 speed and huge warhead, I wonder what pk this thing has against a fighter, it surely does not need a direct impact to be lethal.

[wrightwing]

Keep in mind published data normally refer to export versions of the missiles, not domestic ones. For the R-37M at least 300 km range were claimed, though I don't have the source at hand. Besides, the warhead is around 60 kg so it carries notably more weight than other AAMs. It is supposed to be capable against 8 g aerodynamic targets, which should be far more than what a fighter can turn at altitude. With the Mach 6 speed and huge warhead, I wonder what pk this thing has against a fighter, it surely does not need a direct impact to be lethal.

The problem here is that Flankers and Foxhounds are hardly sneaky opponents. Nobody is going to fly into the path of an R-37, at high altitude (and hundreds of kilometers away.) It's still a dangerous missile for AWACS/Tankers/etc...., as they'll have to immediately change course, or remain further away. Fighters on the other hand can change course/altitude, to greatly reduce the WEZ.

[swiss]

"Range performance varies with the flight profile, from 80 NMI for a direct shot, to a maximum of 215 NMI for a cruise glide profile. In 1994 a trial round killed a target at 162 NMI, a record for a BVR missile. The production status of the R-37 remains unclear at this time, but the missile remains a candidate for advanced Sukhoi users."

https://web.archive.org/web/20090126154 ... May-05.pdf

I was looking at this. Head on launch range of up to 200km isn't overly impressive for a modern missile that size. Do you refute the statement about the trial shots?

Well im always careful with information from Russian sources. They tend to be optimistic or give you only half of the information. Good example are the Range of Flanker Radars or the R-77. It could be, that some prototype of the R-37 hit a target 300 km away. We don't now the circumstances. But all information where are available tells us the R-37 was only a protoype and never reach IOC.

Keep in mind published data normally refer to export versions of the missiles, not domestic ones. For the R-37M at least 300 km range were claimed, though I don't have the source at hand. Besides, the warhead is around 60 kg so it carries notably more weight than other AAMs. It is supposed to be capable against 8 g aerodynamic targets, which should be far more than what a fighter can turn at altitude. With the Mach 6 speed and huge warhead, I wonder what pk this thing has against a fighter, it surely does not need a direct impact to be lethal.

The problem here is that Flankers and Foxhounds are hardly sneaky opponents. Nobody is going to fly into the path of an R-37, at high altitude (and hundreds of kilometers away.) It's still a dangerous missile for AWACS/Tankers/etc...., as they'll have to immediately change course, or remain further away. Fighters on the other hand can change course/altitude, to greatly reduce the WEZ.

I fully agree with your opinion.

And i also never heare that Russian missile have more range than the export model. See the Indian R-77.

[swiss]

double

[ricnunes]

Well im always careful with information from Russian sources. They tend to be optimistic or give you only half of the information. Good example are the Range of Flanker Radars or the R-77.

I fully agree! A classical example of that is the reported IBRIS-E radar range of 400km against a target with a 3 square meter RCS. This would only happen if that radar is scanning in a very narrow area.

And i also never heare that Russian missile have more range than the export model. See the Indian R-77.

Ditto!

Nowadays or since the end of the cold war, claiming that the export variants of Russian military equipment are inferior to the Russian ones is IMO plain wrong. This may have been true in the Soviet Union era but it certainly isn't the truth anymore (since the fall of the USSR).
An example of this was the failure and atrocious hit rate (only 4%) of the R-27 missile during the Ethiopia-Eritrea War where many so-called "experts" put the blame on the R-27's used in that war by being "export variants" but the fact is that aren't any export variants of this missile or resuming, the exported R-27's are of the variants same used by the Russians.

Actually and since the end of the cold war what has been happening quite often is exactly the opposite of the traditional "export variants being worse":
- It happened quite often that the exported variants of Russian equipment are actually better than the ones used by the Russians themselves.
A classical example of this is the Su-30 where export variants, namely the Chinese (Su-30MKK) and specially the Indian (Su-30MKI) were quite more advanced than the variants used by the Russians.
Another example is the R-77, or at least the pre-R-77-1 variants whose the best variant (again and at least pre R-77-1) was precisely the RVV-AE, an export variant (this was due to a combination of financing and usage of foreign components).

[southerncross]

The problem here is that Flankers and Foxhounds are hardly sneaky opponents. Nobody is going to fly into the path of an R-37, at high altitude (and hundreds of kilometers away.) It's still a dangerous missile for AWACS/Tankers/etc...., as they'll have to immediately change course, or remain further away. Fighters on the other hand can change course/altitude, to greatly reduce the WEZ.

A plane that flies 2.8 M does not need anybody to come in its way actually, and if the fighters run away then the mission of the interceptor is accomplished too, and in a very effective way. Also relevant that at that given speed what is really small is the WEZ of opposing forces missiles. But of course, a lot of their real effectiveness depends on very complex matters related to the force structure and tactics that I am in no position to discuss in depth.

As to the claims that Russian domestic weapons are inferior to their export versions: are you guys for real? In fact the only weapons about which any official information of real performance is given are those for export, so I don't know what data you are handling. Besides such approach not making simply any sense from a national defence perspective and requiring to assume Russian military are nothing but idiots.

[wrightwing]

The problem here is that Flankers and Foxhounds are hardly sneaky opponents. Nobody is going to fly into the path of an R-37, at high altitude (and hundreds of kilometers away.) It's still a dangerous missile for AWACS/Tankers/etc...., as they'll have to immediately change course, or remain further away. Fighters on the other hand can change course/altitude, to greatly reduce the WEZ.

A plane that flies 2.8 M does not need anybody to come in its way actually, and if the fighters run away then the mission of the interceptor is accomplished too, and in a very effective way. Also relevant that at that given speed what is really small is the WEZ of opposing forces missiles. But of course, a lot of their real effectiveness depends on very complex matters related to the force structure and tactics that I am in no position to discuss in depth.

Why would the fighters run? They'll kill the Mig/Sukhoi long before they're detected.

[garrya]

Range will be significantly less from an Su-35S but will handedly out stick the R-77.

I am curious, does R-37 range when launched from Su-35S excess its detection range of others such as Mig-31, F-16?

[garrya]

Also relevant that at that given speed what is really small is the WEZ of opposing forces missiles. But of course, a lot of their real effectiveness depends on very complex matters related to the force structure and tactics that I am in no position to discuss in depth.

AFAIK, the very high speed of Mig-31 will increase the WEZ of head on shot.

0E4A19E4-C727-47C0-B9F4-D21002343089.png (238.3 KiB) Viewed 22674 times

[fidgetspinner]

@ricnunes

"An example of this was the failure and atrocious hit rate (only 4%) of the R-27 missile during the Ethiopia-Eritrea War where many so-called "experts" put the blame on the R-27's used in that war by being "export variants" but the fact is that aren't any export variants of this missile or resuming, the exported R-27's are of the variants same used by the Russians."

http://www.enemyforces.net/missiles/r_27.htm " Initially, as almost all soviet air-to-air missiles, the R-27 came in two variants, having either semi-active radarhoming or an infrared homing seeker. The semi-active radarhoming variant was designated as the R-27R (AA-10A "Alamo-A"), while the infrared variant was designated as R-27T (AA-10B "Alamo-B"). The standard soviet tactic for interceptions is based on firing two missiles with a various seeker types at the same target to maximize kill probability. There are also designed downgraded export versions of these missiles, designated as R-27R1 (AA-10A "Alamo-A") and R-27T1 (AA-10B "Alamo-B") respectively." Sorry but it seems exports do exist of this missile



"- It happened quite often that the exported variants of Russian equipment are actually better than the ones used by the Russians themselves.
A classical example of this is the Su-30 where export variants, namely the Chinese (Su-30MKK) and specially the Indian (Su-30MKI) were quite more advanced than the variants used by the Russians.
Another example is the R-77, or at least the pre-R-77-1 variants whose the best variant (again and at least pre R-77-1) was precisely the RVV-AE, an export variant (this was due to a combination of financing and usage of foreign components)."

I agree that they are better than the su-30s but what about the su-30SMs or su-30SM1?
I got an example either way that I want to share. https://www.air-cosmos.com/article/maks ... e-ku-21639

"Thus, in order to optimize the Mig-35 export opportunities, Phazotron has developed a new Aesa radar with a range of 170 km, the Zhuk AE-AR. Most importantly, in cooperation with the Baumann Institute in Moscow, Phazotron has produced a multi-function radar demonstrator for UAV 35kg in Ku-band, and not in X-band as its Western competitors. With weather, radiolocation, altimetry, and Gmti modes, its SAR imaging capabilities with a range of 80 km could be as low as 25 cm. But especially the use of the Ku-band would allow it to resist a large part of the NATO jamming systems."

indian requirement was 3m2 for 130kms although Guskov has already raised it 250kms. If the Indian requirement according to the attachment requires a higher range than will cost a little extra. Egypts offer was to buy mig-35s with PESA radars.

@swiss

"And i also never heare that Russian missile have more range than the export model. See the Indian R-77."

There are R-77s with different sensors though.

[swiss]

@swiss

"And i also never heare that Russian missile have more range than the export model. See the Indian R-77."

There are R-77s with different sensors though.

I read nothing about the R-77 in this article.

@ Ric: you nail it.

[madrat]

R-27 export models do not have as wide of spectrum available, limiting the conditions they can be used afaik. The non-export models are hardened for use in a continuous wave jamming environment and have demonstrated the ability to remain on target in such conditions. The export models do not have the gear on the aircraft to do that.

[southerncross]

AFAIK, the very high speed of Mig-31 will increase the WEZ of head on shot.

I am not sure what you mean: MiG's missiles having an increased range because of its speed and altitude or enemy missiles enjoying increased WEZ against it when head on? If you mean the later, do you expect the MiG not to be able to change course after being locked / detecting launch / detecting the missile & radio link?