AWG-9 and APG-71

Cold war, Korea, Vietnam, and Desert Storm - up to and including for example the A-10, F-15, Mirage 200, MiG-29, and F-18.
User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2443
Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

by eloise » 02 Feb 2020, 21:25

Does anyone have any sources about the range of these F-14D radar?
I got this
D83AE05F-FC71-4ED0-BA6A-408896F63A3A.png

https://www.forecastinternational.com/a ... ARC_ID=113
But I feel like that is too short.
I also found
In the 1960s, the AN/AWG-9 was at the forefront of cutting edge radar design. With the new HPRF transmission/reception and automatic tracking being incorporated into its design. However, unlike other radars of this new generation, the AWG-9 retained its 'man in the loop' design of past 'pulse radars'. The RIO would still be able to manually pick up faint targets (or targets masked by clutter) that the automatic system wouldn't. Even today, automatic trackers need the target to be ~12dB (16 times) stronger than the noise in order to track. A skilled operator could do the same with a target only 3dB stronger than the background noise. https://i.imgur.com/2zf64Tc.png?1
Thus, where these new processes failed, a human could step in and in many cases out perform the automatic processes of the receiver.
Additionally, the AWG-9 would also retain old school 'pulse radar' processes (LPRF waveform) adding further versatility to the sensor. (the LPRF was retained for 'all aspect' detection and ACM modes, but proved inferior to MPRF waveforms used by later radars)
As if it wasn't enough, the AN/AWG-9 had an extremely powerful transmitter and very large antenna, giving it a narrow beamwidth. This combination made it the most powerful fighter radar (raw effective radiated power) up until the APG-77.
However, the radar was designed primarily with 1960's equipment and sported an analog receiver. Leading to poor look down performance amid terrain, especially in automatic modes.

All that being said, she represents the best analog airborne radar ever made, but her performance is highly predicated on the skill of her operator.

One of the devs mentioned a detection range of about 110nm (in PD search; 90nm in RWS) against a fighter sized target. Giving it greater range than the F-15 and F-18. However, the AWG-9 lacks Medium PRF, giving it a distinct disadvantage against low Doppler (flanking) targets.

https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comment ... nt/e7e2p6j
But it is only a Reddit comment, anyone have better information?


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

by garrya » 03 Feb 2020, 07:29

From "Grumman F-14 Tom Cat in combat" by Frederic LERT
AWG-9.PNG

APG-71.PNG
APG-71.PNG (278.22 KiB) Viewed 33883 times


From "uncovering the Grumman F-14 A/B/C/D Tom Cat" by Danny Coremans
AWG-9 2.PNG

APG-71 2.PNG


take it with a grain of salt

IMHO, the most accurate is from "Grumman F-14 Tomcat leading fleet fighter" book by Dennis R. Jenkins because unlike others, he is a consulting engineer in Cape Canaveral, Florida, working on various aerospace projects including 20 years on the Space Shuttle and several on the X-33 program.
AWG-9 (3).PNG

APG-71.PNG


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

by garrya » 06 Feb 2020, 08:43

From "Mikoyan Mig-31" by Yefim Gordon
mig-31.PNG

mig-31 2.PNG

mig-31 3.PNG


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
Location: Finland

by hornetfinn » 12 Feb 2020, 12:25

I think comparison between N007 Zaslon radar and AWG-9/APG-71 are very interesting. It seems obvious that AWG-9/APG-71 had more sensitive receiver, more efficient antenna and better processing capabilties. It seems to have longer detection and tracking range despite having quite a bit smaller antenna and similar transmitters. It could also track more targets simultaneously. Of course Zaslon had the advantage of being able to steer beams almost instantaneously anywherre. So it could track targets with much wider separation.

I think both radars were best possible solutions at the time. Phased array antenna would've been too heavy even for F-14 at the time. It also has some performance penalties as phase shifting in the antenna introduces additional losses. Since having maximum detection range possible was crucial for their mission while having minimum weight penalty for carrier aircraft, having planar MSA antenna was the best way of doing things.

For MiG-31 the passive phased array antenna was the only possible choise given requirement to engage multiple low flying targets simultaneously. Active radar guided missile was probably not possible at the time for missiles small enough to be carried by fighter aircraft. Passive phased array system allowed tracking decent number of widely separated low flying targets and engage them simultaneously using semi-active guided missiles. Some loss of detection range was not big deal as it had good range still.


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5346
Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
Location: Parts Unknown

by mixelflick » 12 Feb 2020, 14:42

Both the AWG-9 and AN/APG-71 were incredible radars, especially for their time. Same could be said of the Foxhound's radar. And while neither entered into combat with each other, it would have been an interesting fight. We know Iranian F-14's downed several Foxbats, or at the very least caused them to abort their mission. One Foxbat being chased by an F-14 took a wrong turn, ran out of fuel and crashed. That too, was counted as a kill.

Could the F-14 catch up to a Foxhound? Tough call. It caught Foxbats, but in all of my reading the highest speed these Foxbats were recorded at were mach 2.3 - 2.4ish. I saw no mach 2.8 figures, which supposedly was its red - line. The Mig-31's max speed is listed at mach 2.8, although I'd say with weapons that was doubtful. One interesting anecdote was that an Iranian F-14 was said to reach mach 2.3 during one chase, the fastest in combat I've ever heard of one flying. It took a Phoenix shot from that range (actually, I think 2 of them).

The Foxbat defeated the first missile but then feeling safe, decelerated. That proved to be his undoing, as the 2nd Phoenix quickly found its mark. I'm sure American intelligence found all of this very interesting, assuming of course they were privy to it. Both phenomenal aircraft/radars, both still fly today.

Remarkable, when you think about how long ago they were both created...


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
Location: Finland

by hornetfinn » 12 Feb 2020, 15:44

F-14 vs. MiG-31 would've been an interesting fight for sure. Of course neither was really designed for that fight, but both were likely still very capable BVR machines. F-14 was clearly superior in maneuverability while MiG-31 had superior speed and high altitude capabilties. F-14 also had more capable close-in weapons in the form of AIM-9 as MiG-31 only had the small and short ranged R-60. AIM-7 was also likely more effective weapon against fighters than the huge R-40. So if R-33s and Phoenix missiles missed, then F-14 was going to win a fight but MiG-31 would likely just run away if it went to that.

But both were very capable in their main roles of fleet defence and long range interception of bombers and cruise missiles. It would've been daunting for bomber crews to go against either one.


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5346
Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
Location: Parts Unknown

by mixelflick » 13 Feb 2020, 16:38

I agree.

Frankly, I'm perplexed as to why Iran or another nation hasn't purchased Mig-31's. It's absurdly capable at least insofar as defending vast swaths or airspace, Iran's nuclear facilities etc... Up until the F-35 acquisition by Israel, I'd go so far as to say it would be a very destabilizing influence in the Middle East. The Mig-31 is given a lot of respect and for good reason: It's one of the few interceptors that can engage/re-engage at will due to its long range and blistering speed.

I have no doubt Israeli F-15's would have probably carried the day, but the Mig-31 would present an entirely new and dangerous calculus in any strike on Iranian reactors. I understand sanctions are likely the reason they haven't been acquired, but if memory serves they'll be lifted soon.

When they are, I guess it'll be a toss up between the SU-30SM, SU-35 and SU-57. I'm not sure if the Mig-31 production line is closed, but it might be possible Russia sells them some of their earlier models. Intriguing possibilities ahead...


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 149
Joined: 28 Apr 2005, 15:55

by Tiger05 » 14 Feb 2020, 00:00

While the MiG-31's maximum speed is officially Mach 2.8, in the real world they are prohibited from reaching that speed. This is what i remember from an article on the aircraft that was published a few years ago in Combat Aircraft magazine. I dont recall precisely what was the speed not to exceed but it was closer to Mach 2 than to Mach 3...
Last edited by Tiger05 on 14 Feb 2020, 23:08, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1722
Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

by marsavian » 14 Feb 2020, 00:49

Mig-31 steady state supersonic cruise speed is Mach 2.35. Mach 2.83 is available as a maximum. It's only at Mach 3 the engines get damaged. However there are other problems to Mach 2+ cruising for the Mig-31 as well as the poor 5g turning limit for maneuverability.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theaviatio ... -plane/amp

Five minutes after take-off, the MiG was already at an altitude of 16000m (52,493ft). The afterburners would still be lit and the crew experiencing significant g. In addition, the MiG-31 had a disconcerting idiosyncrasy – at high supersonic speeds (above Mach 2.35), the control stick moved all the way forward, pushing up against the instrument panel. The pilot had to extend his arm fully, which was very uncomfortable and quickly caused fatigue. However, the MiG-31 was significantly more benign in its flight characteristics at supersonic speeds than the MiG-25. The great weight of the MiG-31’s on-board equipment and systems had an effect on its performance compared to the ‘Foxbat’, but its instrumentation was significantly greater and a generation more modern.

The SR-71 was intercepted using only a thermal channel (infrared, IR). The massive IR emissions of its engines permitted it to be detected at a distance of 100-120km (62-75 miles). The MiG-31’s thermal detection system was called OMB (or optical multifunctional apparatus) and was mounted in the lower nose of the aircraft. The device was lowered and turned on by the WSO. The MiG’s radar was not turned on. On combat alert the radar was set on a combat frequency, and in order not to expose this frequency to a ‘probable enemy’, the radar was not turned on. A passive system (the thermal apparatus) was adequate for a reliable intercept.


“After the take-off order from the command post we lit the afterburners and took off. Our take-off speed was approximately 360km/h [224mph]. Not coming off afterburners, we went for altitude with a 60° right bank and turned to a course of 100°. We attained 8,000m [26,247ft] and reached the horizontal area (for acceleration) in which we passed through the sound barrier. Here vectoring station `Gremikha’ had already assumed responsibility for vectoring us. Our indicated speed at this time was 1,190km/h [739mph]. We went for altitude again, up to 16,000m [52,493ft]. At 16,000m we were flying at Mach 2.3 and made a left turn to a combat course of 360°. The WSO lowered and turned on the OMB and within five seconds had captured the target. A feminine voice in the earphones announced, Attack’, and a symbol was illuminated on the SEI. The SR-71 was proceeding on the ‘return loop’, from east to west, so we began the intercept immediately.

“As usual, we executed an ‘aiming run’ from 16,000m, gaining altitude to 18,900m [62,008ft]. After closing to 60km [37 miles] I spotted the contrail of the SR-71 on an intersecting course. I reported the heading to my WSO over the SPU [samoletnoye peregovornoye ustroystvo, intercom], ‘I have visual!’ A contrail at 22,000-23,000m [69,000-72,000ft] is very rare, but on this day the weather was excellent and the air was transparent, and the contrail was clearly visible. I passed under the spyplane: it was 3,000-4,000m [8,843-13,123ft] above us, and even managed to make out its black silhouette. The SR-71 was flying over the ocean ever so carefully on a track 60km [37 miles] out from, and parallel to, the coast. I reported ‘we’re breaking of to the command post and came off afterburners. We had been airborne for 15 minutes 40 seconds.

“The Blackbird was flying its normal route, over neutral waters, and it made no sense to follow it. Therefore the vectoring station gave the command to turn onto a course for our airfield. We dropped down to 15,000m [49,212ft], transitioned to horizontal flight, and engaged a stopwatch. This was the so-called ‘area for canopy cooling’. During flight at speeds in excess of Mach 2, the skin, including the canopy, heated up to 800°C. Therefore it was necessary to cool it. Failure to do so might result in cracking or catastrophic failure during subsequent altitude reduction. Our speed remained in the order of Mach 1.6.

“After 30 seconds we once again began to lose altitude. We went subsonic at the normal 12,000m [39,370ft].
Dropping down to 8,000m [26,247ft], we tracked toward our airfield. After the last vector was issued the command centre handed us off to our regiment command post, which directed me to a checkpoint at an altitude of 4,100m [13,451ft]. At 32km [20 miles] out from the airfield I lowered the gear and began to descend. We conducted a straight-in landing at a speed of 310km/h [193mph] . The entire flight had lasted 50 minutes.


Kazakhstan inherited about 30 from the Soviet Union with about 20 still in service.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... g-31bm.htm


Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
Location: Finland

by hornetfinn » 14 Feb 2020, 10:15

mixelflick wrote:I agree.

Frankly, I'm perplexed as to why Iran or another nation hasn't purchased Mig-31's. It's absurdly capable at least insofar as defending vast swaths or airspace, Iran's nuclear facilities etc... Up until the F-35 acquisition by Israel, I'd go so far as to say it would be a very destabilizing influence in the Middle East. The Mig-31 is given a lot of respect and for good reason: It's one of the few interceptors that can engage/re-engage at will due to its long range and blistering speed.

I have no doubt Israeli F-15's would have probably carried the day, but the Mig-31 would present an entirely new and dangerous calculus in any strike on Iranian reactors. I understand sanctions are likely the reason they haven't been acquired, but if memory serves they'll be lifted soon.

When they are, I guess it'll be a toss up between the SU-30SM, SU-35 and SU-57. I'm not sure if the Mig-31 production line is closed, but it might be possible Russia sells them some of their earlier models. Intriguing possibilities ahead...


MiG-31 definitely looks like very capable long range interceptor which would increase for example Iran's capabilties. I think the reason they have not been exported much is because Russia itself needs them badly. AFAIK, the production of MiG-31 ended about 25 years ago and they probably can't make new ones now without major effort. I think Russia is much more interested in selling new Su-30s and -35s which would be major improvements for Iranian Air Force also. But it seems like they don't have that much money to acquire new fighter aircraft. They have only been able to buy a small amount of new or slightly used aircraft and most of their inventory is either from 1970s acquisitions from USA or "donations" from Iraq during Desert Storm. They'd badly need replacements but it seems they can't afford them and/or sanctions make it impossible to buy modern equipment.


Enthusiast
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Mar 2023, 17:33

by adri » 04 Mar 2023, 17:36

F-14 vs MiG-31 or AN/AWG-9 vs N007 ! How can it be ? Do not understand how can someone even compare this radically different aircraft, radically differ radars and radically differ approaches .... People ,F-14 is not comparable to MiG-31 but e.g. also naval Su-33 ( flight and flight maneuvering characteristics ) .F-14 is heavy but maneuverable naval fighter and can pull 8-9G in subsonic ,even 7G in supersonic flight regime. MiG-31 can pull 4-5G max in subsonic and that's it ! MiG-31 is a heavy non -maneuverable strategic high- speed high- alt interceptor ,nothing else ,nothing more. MiG-31 is nothing else then one flying brick or flying locomotive as the crew call him. There was and is no need for maneuverability for him . F-14 with 4 or max 6 AIM-54 Phoenix missiles , its Vmax with them is 2M ,Hmax 15kms , that's the limit. Period ! MiG-31 with 4 heavy R-33 and 2 heavy R-40TD-1 ( all six almost half a tone of weight ) ,Vmax is 2.8M and Hmax is 22kms ! In energy of flight domain ( max V and max H ) , F-14 can't compare with mighty MiG-31 ,that's the fact . MiG-31 can cruise at 2.35M ( 2500km/h on Minimal AB engine mode ) and overfly almost 1500kms with these 6 heavy A2A missiles . Something that even one 5th gen fighter like F-22A can only dream about.

About radars ,it's also strange to compare these radars. AN/AWG-9 as mechanical radar was most powerful radar in one western fighter for a long period of time . AN/AWG-9 works (as operational in IRIAF nowdays) in X band and in Pulse and Pulse -Doppler Illumination modes. Has X band waveguide system on the reflector of flat slotted antenna and L band Dipole IFF antenna system also on it. Max search range in HPRF mode is 200nm ( 370kms) .For e.g. in TWS ( max automatic tracking of 24 aircraft but in narrow FoV ) is 160nm ,twice as much as AN/APG-63/70 and AN/APG-68 can achieve ( 80nm in TWS max with 10 aircraft max automatically tracked). Antenna diameter is about 900mm . Has one very powerfull TWT with average power in HPRF mode of 2.5kW with max pulse power in that working mode of 10kW . As mechanical radar weighing about 600kgs with mechanical beam steering ( max angular beam steering speed 80°/s ) has very slow movement of radiation pattern from one sector to another inside complete radar envelope ( 130° in azimyth e.g. ) .

Story about 24 automatically tracked differ aircraft in TWS is only for paper ,nothing else. Something that this radar could never achieve in real combat scenario. Great thing for IBM digital comp that allowed tracking 24 differ aircraft/signals ,in theory yes but in real 'reality' of course no. Something impossible to achieve especially in very very narrow FoV .

N007 Zaslon ? That is something completely different, something more powerful and something more capable. N007 was electronic only pulse- Doppler radar with PESA with beam repositioning in only 1.2ms .Antenna diameter 1100mm. Worked in X band with 1700 phase shifters ( TRE or transmit receive elements ) and 64 Dipole IFF antenna on the reflector of flat phased array. Has two not one TWT ,one with average power in HPRF mode 2.5kW ( max pulse power in that mode was 10kW in so called ''stand by regime'' or ''Equivalent of the antenna'' regime and when radar uses DC electrical net of 27V ) and secondary one with 2kW of average power in HPRF mode. Max radar output power in HPRF mode was almost 1MW .With two TWT's could scan two differ scan zones in radar envelope 140° in azimuth and 130° in elevation simultaneously until secondary TWT goes to STT mode for 4 differ targets out of 10 max that are automatically tracked in TWS ( so called SNP sub mode). After locking on of 4 differ targets and launching 4 R-33 towards 4 differ targets within 10 sec ,secondary TWT goes to CWI mode . CWI for each of one is done every 20ms. So now about max search ranges of old N007 designed in 70's in the 3 main A2A combat modes ,let's see that . ''PPS'' as combat mode ( front hemisphere or for incoming aircraft ) ,HPRF working mode of the main TWT ( PRF in HPRF mode is 200kHz ) has max search range 600kms ,yes 600kms in quasi-continues searching mode ! ''AVT'' or Avtomat in Russians or Automatic as combination of HPRF and MPRF working mode of the main TWT for incoming and receding aircraft simultaneously has max search range 400kms . ''ZPS'' or rear hemisphere ( for receding aircraft ) as MPRF working mode of the main TWT with PRF in that mode 50kHz , has max search range 200kms. Those max search ranges are exactly 4 times greater then those in soviet mechanical radars N001 Myech in Su-27 and N019 Rubin in MiG-29 . So how can one AN/AWG-9 compare with N007 in that max instrumental ( calibrated) search ranges domain ??? N007 has bigger Peak Power ( pulse power are the same ) ,Duty Cycle and especially PP-DC ! One thing more ,about those detecting ranges . Do not read some civilian sources of info because the same are almost completely wrong and false with false data and info's. . For comparison ,one old mechanical N001 can detect incoming MiG-21 ( RCS in X band in angle aspect 30° is 3sqm ) from 100km! N001 has one TWT with average power in HPRF mode only 1kW and max pulse power in HPRF mode ( DC net 27V ) of 8kW with max output power of 100kW . So how can one N007 detect incoming fighter like MiG-21 with RCS of 3sqm from 120 or little more ( as civilian author Yefim Gordon wrote in his book which I have ,130-140kms for fighter with RCS of 3-5sqm ) Nonsense, big nonsense! Yefim is only civilian and like other civilian authors is not military radar specialist . Does not know how things work ,does not know real data ,info and capabilities of many military systems including these radars ,A2A missiles and so on. Real detecting range for incoming MiG-21( flying in upper troposphere and stratosphere) is much much greater. Only I can write is this ... N007 ( old one from 70's ) was capable to detect incoming low -flying cruise missiles like soviet Kh-55, US AGM-86 or Tomahawks ( with real frontal RCS in X band of 0.3-0.5 sqm ) from those ranges that Yefim attributed to the fighters with RCS 3-5sqm ! On many tactical military exercises crew of MiG-31 locked-on incoming cruise missiles from 90-100kms away and engaged them with R-33 Lock-on range is 70%-80% of detecting/tracking range. Cruise missiles flying very low ( 100m-300m AGL ) with real speed 0.7-0.8M and with RCS 0.3-0.5 sqm in X band .That 's the real thing .... Yefim wrote in his book that only one patrolling group of MiG-31 can cover airspace that is 800kms wide . How can it be when distance between each MiG-31 is 200kms ( max range of digit data-link system APD-518 ) .Those 3 dark grey panels on each side of MiG-31 in front of front cockpit are for APD-518 .One upper for aircraft flying higher, one in the middle for aircraft flying at same level and one facing down for aircraft flying lower then others in group. 600 +200+200 is not 800 but 1000 ( kms).

About missiles R-33 and AIM-54. How can someone even imagine that Phoenix has greater combat or operational range or whatever when we speak about civilian sources of info because in military terminology that is max authorized launch distance for engaging big, medium or small air target ( non maneuverable and maneuverable ones ) . When we talk about max possible launch distances ,MiG-31 as wrote before can achieve Vmax 2.8M and Hmax 22kms with 4 R-33 or even with 4 R-33 and 2 R-40TD-1 ( with so called Bekas radio/optical fuses ) .From that alt and with that speed ( first speed of the A2A missile ) ,max authorized launch distance for R-33 with launch parameter Drmax1 ( max authorized launch distance for engaging big incoming non maneuverable target ) is 300kms . Max launch distances on many exercises were 230-250kms for R-33 and R-33S ( on MiG-31B ). Max launch distance ever achieved for AIM-54 Phoenix was about 200kms . R-33/S has much more energy in flight ( kinematics ) then AIM-54A/C Phoenix ( real speed was not 5 but 4.5M ) .R-33/S is hypersonic with real Vmax 5 Mach but faster is older R-40TD-1 ( first hypersonic A2A missile with V max 6M ) . About that also heavy R-40TD-1 Bekas with IR homing in terminal phase ,how can someone write that this was medium range A2A missile when only radio-correction channel for this missile has range 100kms from its own fighter . IR homing head was capable to lock -on e.g . incoming SR-71 from about 100kms away ( SR-71 on cruise speed 3+M at 20-25kms alt was one big fireball with temp of 1000°C-2000°C ! Yes, old almost half a tone heavy R-40TD-1 had in fact LOAL capability . First phase of guidance was inertial with RC-channel ( one way data-link ) with max range 100kms then IR homing in terminal phase. IR passive detector ( worked on wavelength of 3 μm ) was so big and was capable to lock on e.g. incoming fighter flying on Full AB mode from almost 100kms away. Then about that huge passive IRST sensor type 8TK .

Many civilian sources wrote that max detecting range is what 40,50kms ??? Again nonsense ,big nonsense. For comparison, old OLS-27 in Su-27 can detect incoming fighter flying on Full AB mode from 100kms away . 8TK has much greater passive cooled IR detector and was capable to detect e.g. SR-71 from 200kms away. For the end , that AN/APG-71 for F-14D was very capable but with the same reflector of the antenna ( only 900mm diameter) , radar potential never came to expression. In that period ,Soviets got one more powerfull radar ,with biggest antenna ever in one fighter. It was mighty N007M Zaslon-M with reflector of antenna diameter 1400mm . Project and design of MiG-31M ( Product 05 ) with N007M Zaslon-M was covered underneath secret KGB operation in which famous spy Adolf Tolkachev gave some info's and data of N007 Zaslon to Americans in the first half of 80's but he never knew anything about new and more powerfull MiG-31M/N007M and never gave anything about them to US side. N007M was so huge, so powerfull that only limition when MiG-31M flew at 10 000m when worked in HPRF searching mode was radio-horizon limit !


User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2443
Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

by eloise » 05 Mar 2023, 07:42

adri wrote:F-14 with 4 or max 6 AIM-54 Phoenix missiles , its Vmax with them is 2M ,Hmax 15kms , that's the limit. Period ! MiG-31 with 4 heavy R-33 and 2 heavy R-40TD-1 ( all six almost half a tone of weight ) ,Vmax is 2.8M and Hmax is 22kms ! In energy of flight domain ( max V and max H ) , F-14 can't compare with mighty MiG-31 ,that's the fact . MiG-31 can cruise at 2.35M ( 2500km/h on Minimal AB engine mode ) and overfly almost 1500kms with these 6 heavy A2A missiles . Something that even one 5th gen fighter like F-22A can only dream about.

I don’t contest that Mig-31 much faster than F-14
F-14 even with only 2 AIM-54, 2 AIM-9 and 2EFT is limited to Mach 1.8 so F-14 with 6AIM-54 won’t reach Mach 2. However, there is no flight manual chart for Mig-31 yet, so we don’t know whether it can reach Mach 2.8 with 4 R-33 and 2 R-40.
BD852747-D8EE-41B9-85CD-7C543BCF9FF5.png
BD852747-D8EE-41B9-85CD-7C543BCF9FF5.png (433.06 KiB) Viewed 11090 times




adri wrote: So now about max search ranges of old N007 designed in 70's in the 3 main A2A combat modes ,let's see that . ''PPS'' as combat mode ( front hemisphere or for incoming aircraft ) ,HPRF working mode of the main TWT ( PRF in HPRF mode is 200kHz ) has max search range 600kms ,yes 600kms in quasi-continues searching mode ! ''AVT'' or Avtomat in Russians or Automatic as combination of HPRF and MPRF working mode of the main TWT for incoming and receding aircraft simultaneously has max search range 400kms . ''ZPS'' or rear hemisphere ( for receding aircraft ) as MPRF working mode of the main TWT with PRF in that mode 50kHz , has max search range 200kms. Those max search ranges are exactly 4 times greater then those in soviet mechanical radars N001 Myech in Su-27 and N019 Rubin in MiG-29 . So how can one AN/AWG-9 compare with N007 in that max instrumental ( calibrated) search ranges domain ??? N007 has bigger Peak Power ( pulse power are the same ) ,Duty Cycle and especially PP-DC ! One thing more ,about those detecting ranges . Do not read some civilian sources of info because the same are almost completely wrong and false with false data and info's. . For comparison ,one old mechanical N001 can detect incoming MiG-21 ( RCS in X band in angle aspect 30° is 3sqm ) from 100km! N001 has one TWT with average power in HPRF mode only 1kW and max pulse power in HPRF mode ( DC net 27V ) of 8kW with max output power of 100kW . So how can one N007 detect incoming fighter like MiG-21 with RCS of 3sqm from 120 or little more ( as civilian author Yefim Gordon wrote in his book which I have ,130-140kms for fighter with RCS of 3-5sqm ) Nonsense, big nonsense! Yefim is only civilian and like other civilian authors is not military radar specialist . Does not know how things work ,does not know real data ,info and capabilities of many military systems including these radars ,A2A missiles and so on. Real detecting range for incoming MiG-21( flying in upper troposphere and stratosphere) is much much greater. Only I can write is this ... N007 ( old one from 70's ) was capable to detect incoming low -flying cruise missiles like soviet Kh-55, US AGM-86 or Tomahawks ( with real frontal RCS in X band of 0.3-0.5 sqm ) from those ranges that Yefim attributed to the fighters with RCS 3-5sqm ! On many tactical military exercises crew of MiG-31 locked-on incoming cruise missiles from 90-100kms away and engaged them with R-33 Lock-on range is 70%-80% of detecting/tracking range. Cruise missiles flying very low ( 100m-300m AGL ) with real speed 0.7-0.8M and with RCS 0.3-0.5 sqm in X band .That 's the real thing .... Yefim wrote in his book that only one patrolling group of MiG-31 can cover airspace that is 800kms wide . How can it be when distance between each MiG-31 is 200kms ( max range of digit data-link system APD-518 ) .Those 3 dark grey panels on each side of MiG-31 in front of front cockpit are for APD-518 .One upper for aircraft flying higher, one in the middle for aircraft flying at same level and one facing down for aircraft flying lower then others in group. 600 +200+200 is not 800 but 1000 ( kms).

I have never seen any source indicate the maximum instrumental range of Zaslon is 600 km. Besides, max instrumental range basically just mean maximum range that echo can be displayed. It say nothing about radar detection range or detection probability.
5B37D706-FAE8-4BDE-888B-9BBB89E76462.jpeg
5B37D706-FAE8-4BDE-888B-9BBB89E76462.jpeg (300.29 KiB) Viewed 11090 times



adri wrote:About missiles R-33 and AIM-54. How can someone even imagine that Phoenix has greater combat or operational range or whatever when we speak about civilian sources of info because in military terminology that is max authorized launch distance for engaging big, medium or small air target ( non maneuverable and maneuverable ones ) . When we talk about max possible launch distances ,MiG-31 as wrote before can achieve Vmax 2.8M and Hmax 22kms with 4 R-33 or even with 4 R-33 and 2 R-40TD-1 ( with so called Bekas radio/optical fuses ) .From that alt and with that speed ( first speed of the A2A missile ) ,max authorized launch distance for R-33 with launch parameter Drmax1 ( max authorized launch distance for engaging big incoming non maneuverable target ) is 300kms . Max launch distances on many exercises were 230-250kms for R-33 and R-33S ( on MiG-31B ). Max launch distance ever achieved for AIM-54 Phoenix was about 200kms . R-33/S has much more energy in flight ( kinematics ) then AIM-54A/C Phoenix ( real speed was not 5 but 4.5M ) .R-33/S is hypersonic with real Vmax 5 Mach but faster is older R-40TD-1 ( first hypersonic A2A missile with V max 6M ) .

I have never seen any official source regarding top speed of Mig-31 with 4 R-33 and 2 R-40. Personally, I think It should be slower than Mach 2.8 since R-40 is quite massive and draggy.
I also haven’t seen test where R-33 reach 230-250 km. R-33S never went to production as far as I know. There is no photo of Mig-31Bm carry it either. R-33S should be easy to identify with the 2 canard at the front




adri wrote:About that also heavy R-40TD-1 Bekas with IR homing in terminal phase ,how can someone write that this was medium range A2A missile when only radio-correction channel for this missile has range 100kms from its own fighter . IR homing head was capable to lock -on e.g . incoming SR-71 from about 100kms away ( SR-71 on cruise speed 3+M at 20-25kms alt was one big fireball with temp of 1000°C-2000°C ! Yes, old almost half a tone heavy R-40TD-1 had in fact LOAL capability . First phase of guidance was inertial with RC-channel ( one way data-link ) with max range 100kms then IR homing in terminal phase. IR passive detector ( worked on wavelength of 3 μm ) was so big and was capable to lock on e.g. incoming fighter flying on Full AB mode from almost 100kms away. Then about that huge passive IRST sensor type 8TK .
Many civilian sources wrote that max detecting range is what 40,50kms ??? Again nonsense ,big nonsense. For comparison, old OLS-27 in Su-27 can detect incoming fighter flying on Full AB mode from 100kms away . 8TK has much greater passive cooled IR detector and was capable to detect e.g. SR-71 from 200kms away.

Can you give the source for Su-27 OLS-27 detection range?. The much more modern OLS-35 on Su-35 is limited to 90 km in rear aspect detection range and only 35 km in head on detection range. The exhaust flumes is still many times hotter than the skin temperature of supersonic fighters. So if OLS-35 is limited to 90 km rear aspect detection, then I find it is quite impossible for OLS-27 to have 100 km head on detection range, regardless whether the target is on AB or not.
F426203A-AC49-47FD-8B6D-0F5A38CBB1B9.png


8TP IRST sensor on Mig-31 is limited to 40 km detection range in pursuit mode (rear aspect). It highly unlikely that R-40 sensor would be better.
DED6EA44-A19E-4259-B70A-FB9CC148A6B7.jpeg


Enthusiast
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Mar 2023, 17:33

by adri » 05 Mar 2023, 15:14

"I don’t contest that Mig-31 much faster than F-14
F-14 even with only 2 AIM-54, 2 AIM-9 and 2EFT is limited to Mach 1.8 so F-14 with 6AIM-54 won’t reach Mach 2. However, there is no flight manual chart for Mig-31 yet, so we don’t know whether it can reach Mach 2.8 with 4 R-33 and 2 R-40."

So this is a picture of rear cockpit of MiG-31 ( for RIO ) . With red arrow and inside red rectangle we can see launching speed switch. RIO determines speed parameter for launching R-33 or R-40TD-1 after he got data about that from pilot or from other aircraft in the group or AWACS operators via APD-518 or AK-RLDN channels . We can see that real speed in Mach numbers for launching those missiles are 0.85 , 1.4 , 1.9 2.35 and 2.8 Mach
Attachments
image_2023-03-05_091310561.png


Enthusiast
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Mar 2023, 17:33

by adri » 05 Mar 2023, 15:18

image_2023-03-05_091806361.png
"I have never seen any source indicate the maximum instrumental range of Zaslon is 600 km. Besides, max instrumental range basically just mean maximum range that echo can be displayed. It say nothing about radar detection range or detection probability."

Do not read civilian sources of info as they are mostly incorrect and false. If You want to discuss and comment about some militiary combat systems then please find some military source or Technical Manuals .
Yes, max instrumental search range in HPRF mode of old N007 from 70's is 600kms .That means that old Zaslon can detect e.g. B-52H ( RCS in X band 100sqm ) with ALCM AGM-86B ( thermonucl warhead ) from 600kms flying at 10 000m with Vcruise 0.85Mach or from 20+kms with cruising speed 2.35M .Can engage them with R-33 from 300kms away with launch paremeters Vmax 2.8M and Hmax 22kms .

Here is the pixcture of CRT radar display for RIO inside rear cockpit with all info translated from russian .

So what we can see .. We can see big circle CRT with 3 axis. One vertical in the middle of the screen has numbers 0-600 and 0-200 ( under zero) . From 0-600 is scale for ongoing distance between MiG-31 and detected/tracked aircraft in HPRF mode ( PPS combat mode ) .Numbers are from the left side of that scale . Right in the middle of the screen we can see another zero and vert scale with numbers 0-400 up and down and that is the scale for combat mode AVT ( combination of HPRF and MPRF working mode of the main TWT ) .That vert scale is the distance scale ( numbers for AVT mode are from the right side of the scale ) ,one horizontal with numbers 0-400 left and right from the middle zero is for the azimuth . One zero on the bottom with the vertical and horizontal scale with numbers 0-200 up and down / left and right are for the ZPS combat mode ( MPRF working mode of TWT ).

Below the circle CRT we can see control panel for the RIO with many buttons from left to right ( transl ) : 'United' meaning all 4 aircraft in patrolling group are working /illuminating, 'Zone' meaning 4 in one group scan almost 1000kms front of air space in that zone .'Prognosis' meaning Argon-15 digit comp prognosing fly path for all 10 tracked aircraft in one radar envelope or for 40 total tracked in one zone. Then we can see 3 buttons 'P2,P3 and P4' meaning all data and info will be transferred to other 3 interceptors in the main patr group. Then we have second row of the buttons ( vertically positioned ) : 'Manual guidance' ,'Triangulation' and 'radar' Bottom row of buttons are for 10 tracked aircraft. Above the bottom row we have so called 'G switch' ( 2, 4 and 6 ) to determine G load in the moment of launching A2A missiles .Then we have from the left to the right : letter A for 'Attack' ( lock on mode ), 'lock-on -search' mode as simultaneously done, 'lock-on mode' for IRST 8TK ,'cooperation combat mode' with radar and IRST ,transferring data to other interceptor via APD-518, 'Phi zero' combat mode when IRST does not work , 'position' of other interceptors in the group ,switches for ongoing distance scale 200 or 400 ( kms of course) , for radar/IRST , for 3 main A2 combat modes : PPS,AVT and ZPS , manual or automatic lock- on mode .5 buttons o the right side are for axis : X.Z,H for distance,azimuth,altitude, Phi,V ( triang ) and speed .


Enthusiast
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Mar 2023, 17:33

by adri » 05 Mar 2023, 15:23

"Can you give the source for Su-27 OLS-27 detection range?. The much more modern OLS-35 on Su-35 is limited to 90 km in rear aspect detection range and only 35 km in head on detection range. The exhaust flumes is still many times hotter than the skin temperature of supersonic fighters. So if OLS-35 is limited to 90 km rear aspect detection, then I find it is quite impossible for OLS-27 to have 100 km head on detection range, regardless whether the target is on AB or not."

This is from original Pilot Manual for Su-27SK for OLS-27E ( translated )

The range of detection of the fighter under maximum conditions of the work of the engines of against the background clean sky in [ZPS] under the aspect angle of 0/4 – 2/4 composes about 50 km, against the background cloudinesses, the earth and the aqueous surface of 20 – 35 km, and in the afterburning regime of the work of engines in PPS under aspect angle 1/4 composes 90 – 100 km the distance of the target lock-on it is of about 70% of the detection range. The distance of the target of lock-ons under maximum conditions of the work of engines in PPS under the aspect angle of 5° - 15° composes about 10 km for the provision of a long range of the target of high-speed lock-on in PPS necessary to increase the aspect angle of attack of more than 15°.

OLS-35 has 4 timer bigger ranges then old OLS-27 for all working modes . 4 times ! As wrote before DO NOT read some civilian sources of info ( as promotive materials and so on ) .

"8TP IRST sensor on Mig-31 is limited to 40 km detection range in pursuit mode (rear aspect). It highly unlikely that R-40 sensor would be better."
As wrote before IRST type 8TK has distance scale 0-200kms and can detect/track incoming fighter flying of full AB mode from 200kms away


Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests