| Author |
Message |
|
moon_light
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 05:57 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: May 28, 2012 - 01:31 AM
Posts: 40
Location: oxford
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: May 26, 2013 - 7:38 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1st503rdsgt
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 06:22 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: Jan 23, 2011 - 01:23 AM
Posts: 1549
Status: Offline
|
| I would assume one or both versions of LRASM at some point (assuming they even get developed), but there's not much in the pipeline in that area. It's been a long time since anti-ship capability (surface or air launched) has been taken seriously in the West. |
_________________ The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
SpudmanWP
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 06:55 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: Oct 12, 2006 - 08:18 PM
Posts: 4280
Location: California
Status: Offline
|
IR management has one drawback... Where are you going to dump the heat that is generated by not only the vehicle itself, but the cooling system as well?
There is also the issue of what IR signature you are tying to emulate... The empty sky behind you as seen by a sea-skimming missile or the cold ocean below you as seen by a missile doing a plunging attack? You cannot emulate both so you will show up on something. There is also the issue of newer seekers evolving into Multi-Spectral in nature to defeat this type of single-mode seeker defeat camo.
Last, but not least, movement. How would you compensate quick enough for wave action and its effect on the background heat signature depending on what angle the seeker is looking from.
Given all of that you will soon realize that hiding one's IR signature based on unmoving land background vs the ever-changing seascape means this will not be put to sea any time soon. |
_________________ "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Last edited by SpudmanWP on Jun 01, 2012 - 08:07 AM; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
 |
|
archeman
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 08:04 AM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Dec 28, 2011 - 05:37 AM
Posts: 314
Location: CA
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
this will not be put to sea nay time soon
You may well be correct Spud, this type of tech won't look like the near 100% coverage sales examples we have seen for land equipment.
But often when addressing signature reduction, the task is approached incrementally.
Identify those areas of the vessel that generate the greatest signature from a likely threat direction and go about addressing those areas first rather than trying to pull off a Philadelphia experiment from a thermal perspective. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
SpudmanWP
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 08:08 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: Oct 12, 2006 - 08:18 PM
Posts: 4280
Location: California
Status: Offline
|
| I agree that this is the likely first application of the tech. It reminds me of the leading edge cooling of the F-22/35 wings. |
_________________ "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
|
|
|
|
 |
|
moon_light
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 08:20 PM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: May 28, 2012 - 01:31 AM
Posts: 40
Location: oxford
Status: Offline
|
|
SpudmanWP wrote:
IR management has one drawback... Where are you going to dump the heat that is generated by not only the vehicle itself, but the cooling system as well?
There is also the issue of what IR signature you are tying to emulate... The empty sky behind you as seen by a sea-skimming missile or the cold ocean below you as seen by a missile doing a plunging attack? You cannot emulate both so you will show up on something. There is also the issue of newer seekers evolving into Multi-Spectral in nature to defeat this type of single-mode seeker defeat camo.
Last, but not least, movement. How would you compensate quick enough for wave action and its effect on the background heat signature depending on what angle the seeker is looking from.
Given all of that you will soon realize that hiding one's IR signature based on unmoving land background vs the ever-changing seascape means this will not be put to sea any time soon.
but almost every IIR anti ship missile are scene matching ( target's image stored in the missile ) so if the target ir signature can be change these missile will be useless |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
neptune
|
Posted: Jun 01, 2012 - 10:43 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Oct 24, 2008 - 01:03 AM
Posts: 1145
Location: Houston
Status: Offline
|
[quote="moon_light... so if the target ir signature can be change these missile will be useless[/quote]
Raytheon has a proven Tri-Mode seeker for missles. SDB II's seeker fuses millimeter-wave radar, uncooled imaging infrared (IIR) and semiactive laser sensors on a single gimbal.
You can't run and you can't hide!  |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
lamoey
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 12:05 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Apr 25, 2004 - 06:44 PM
Posts: 699
Location: 77006
Status: Offline
|
|
neptune wrote:
Raytheon has a proven Tri-Mode seeker for missles. SDB II's seeker fuses millimeter-wave radar, uncooled imaging infrared (IIR) and semiactive laser sensors on a single gimbal.
You can't run and you can't hide!
A three pronged fork seem just like your choice of weapon, o great Neptune |
_________________ Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
|
|
|
|
 |
|
moon_light
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 12:42 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: May 28, 2012 - 01:31 AM
Posts: 40
Location: oxford
Status: Offline
|
|
neptune wrote:
Raytheon has a proven Tri-Mode seeker for missles. SDB II's seeker fuses millimeter-wave radar, uncooled imaging infrared (IIR) and semiactive laser sensors on a single gimbal.
You can't run and you can't hide!
that seem a good ideas but only JAGM and sdb II used tri-mode seeker ,JAGM have very short range , sdb II only have long range when released from high altitude , not to mention that it is very slow ( in an anti ship mission i think the F-35 must fly at low altitude to reduce detection range " radar horizon ", the low RCS of F-35 means not thing as ships often have very big and low band radar ) |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1st503rdsgt
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 02:22 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: Jan 23, 2011 - 01:23 AM
Posts: 1549
Status: Offline
|
| Good seekers have a way of showing up in places besides their original platform. |
_________________ The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
arkadyrenko
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 04:29 AM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Sep 19, 2011 - 08:40 PM
Posts: 304
Status: Offline
|
| If its a tri-mode seeker, that's all well and good, until it becomes obvious that the ship will be using aggressive radar jamming, chaff clouds, and decoys to divert the radar signal. Or, they'll have radar jamming combined with IR flares in the middle of the chaff cloud to provide an alternate target. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
SpudmanWP
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 04:37 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: Oct 12, 2006 - 08:18 PM
Posts: 4280
Location: California
Status: Offline
|
| IIR seekers are virtually immune to flares and chaff is useless vs mmw radar. |
_________________ "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
|
|
|
|
 |
|
moon_light
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 06:28 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: May 28, 2012 - 01:31 AM
Posts: 40
Location: oxford
Status: Offline
|
|
SpudmanWP wrote:
IIR seekers are virtually immune to flares and chaff is useless vs mmw radar.
not really it true that for IIR seeker and MMW radar it is easy to distinguish between chaff , flare and the real target however chaff and flares can also be used to shield the target ( block the vision of the enemy seeker ) rather than just create a new target |
Last edited by moon_light on Jun 02, 2012 - 07:01 AM; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
 |
|
moon_light
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 06:33 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Joined: May 28, 2012 - 01:31 AM
Posts: 40
Location: oxford
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
SpudmanWP
|
Posted: Jun 02, 2012 - 07:09 AM
|
|
|
Elite 3K

Joined: Oct 12, 2006 - 08:18 PM
Posts: 4280
Location: California
Status: Offline
|
That is a thermal camera, not an IIR imager.
Remember that it is IIR with MMW so if you blind one, the other backs it up.
Besides, all your missile has to do is aim for the center of the mass (if both seekers are jammed and it is not getting GPS updates from a F-35) and it will likely score a hit. |
_________________ "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|