Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air Launched Ballistic Missile

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • panzerfeist1
    Rank 6 Registered User
    • Feb 2018
    • 399

    #21

    https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/russ...nched-missile/

    The missile flying at a hypersonic speed, 10 times faster than the speed of sound, can also maneuver at all phases of its flight trajectory, Putin continued

    Image result for silver sparrow missiles

    Does anyone have sources of the silver sparrow missile maneuvering at every stage like the kinzhal missile or it just maneuvers at the re-entry or terminal phase? Does the
    CH-AS-X-13 basically fall in the silver sparrow category or more to the kinzhal category of capabilities?

    Also why do people keep saying that the rampage missile is hypersonic while mathematics say its supersonic? Why even throw this missile design on a supposedly hypersonic missile thread?

    It seems the Russians are undergoing 2 different hypersonic missile designs with one of them being planned to fit internally. Although I am a little depressed knowing that missile engineers in the US are banging their heads against the walls if they are tasked with fitting an internal hypersonic missile design on a F-35 while the Su-57 has more room to play with. So if there is a scramjet missile design on the upcoming maks airshow that would fit internally on the SU-57 would everyone on this forum come to an agreement that the SU-57 would be the most effective aircraft in SEAD operations? Any thoughts on that?



    I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

    Comment

    • XB-70
      Rank 4 Registered User
      • May 2018
      • 350

      #22
      So if there is a scramjet missile design on the upcoming maks airshow that would fit internally on the SU-57 would everyone on this forum come to an agreement that the SU-57 would be the most effective aircraft in SEAD operations
      ?

      There are many different contributors to making a successful SEAD operation. One is having a capable weapon that can destroy the air defenses in a timely manner. But another is being able to operate in near vicinity to gain detailed real time information on those air defenses (satellite information is sporadic and the enemy largely knows when they are overhead) so that their destruction can be appropriately planned. And the F-35 is the best at gathering and disseminating information.

      So, to answer your question: No.

      Comment

      • moon_light
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • May 2012
        • 1033

        #23
        Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
        It seems the Russians are undergoing 2 different hypersonic missile designs with one of them being planned to fit internally. Although I am a little depressed knowing that missile engineers in the US are banging their heads against the walls if they are tasked with fitting an internal hypersonic missile design on a F-35 while the Su-57 has more room to play with. So if there is a scramjet missile design on the upcoming maks airshow that would fit internally on the SU-57 would everyone on this forum come to an agreement that the SU-57 would be the most effective aircraft in SEAD operations? Any thoughts on that?
        Why does that matter? hypersonic missiles are launched from standoff range 600-1000 km. Whether they are external or internal is not relevant.

        Comment

        • moon_light
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • May 2012
          • 1033

          #24
          Originally posted by mig-31bm View Post
          Click image for larger version

Name:	1.PNG
Views:	857
Size:	357.0 KB
ID:	3865710Click image for larger version

Name:	2.PNG
Views:	839
Size:	410.5 KB
ID:	3865711
          Stop gap measure before scramjet come online?

          Comment

          • panzerfeist1
            Rank 6 Registered User
            • Feb 2018
            • 399

            #25
            XB-70

            If I was operating a pantsir, tor or buk system I would feel more nervous of a hypersonic missile than I would be of a supersonic or subsonic low altitude missiles because I know my equipment was meant specifically to target such missiles instead of hypersonic targets. A huge modern defense network can deal with lets say 1 sortie of 76 F-35s launching subsonic or supersonic low or high altitude missiles carried internally than imagine 76 su-57s launching 152 for each internal weapon bay a hypersonic missile design and they keep a stealth profile and launch it close enough from being tracked. The SAM operators will definitely sh!t themselves when its raining hypersonic missiles at a short notice of time from a close distance. Am I still wrong?



            moon_light
            Why does that matter? hypersonic missiles are launched from standoff range 600-1000 km. Whether they are external or internal is not relevant.


            external reveals(especially carrying a big missile) a bigger RCS allowing SAM radars to track targets a lot better and regarding the field of photonics noise levels can be heard 100 times better and even the an/spy-6 has noise sensitivity 100 times lower than the previous an/spy-1 radar according to public sources. Meaning you can be targeted at far ranges by SAMs in the future. Early warning radars will pick such a external carry target more farther than internal weapon carry design. Also what if there was an enemy target nearby? Sure your going to say they will fly in groups but that can still give 4th gen fighters a lucky shot but 4th gens will have a low chance of that if all F-35s had an internal carry design and SAM radars will have less of a chance to pick the target up and come up with a plan. Depending how close or far F-35 groups fly I would not risk the chance of mad dog missiles especially when active radars on missiles are receiving better performances than before when other F-35s are helping the SEAD operation of an external carry F-35.

            I wonder what 600-1000km missile you are supposedly referencing if I care to ask?
            I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

            Comment

            • QuantumFX
              What?
              • Dec 2008
              • 1832

              #26
              Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
              ***

              Does anyone have sources of the silver sparrow missile maneuvering at every stage like the kinzhal missile or it just maneuvers at the re-entry or terminal phase? Does the
              CH-AS-X-13 basically fall in the silver sparrow category or more to the kinzhal category of capabilities?

              ***
              DF-21D is like the Pershing-II. So yes, it falls into the 'silver sparrow 'category. Unlike China's HGV program, the DF-21D is more susceptible to interception during mid-course. DF-21D has a range of 1700 km. CH-AS-X-13 is nearly twice that, but CH-AS-X-13 is likely to be only an air-launched DF-21D.

              Comment

              • moon_light
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • May 2012
                • 1033

                #27
                Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post

                If I was operating a pantsir, tor or buk system I would feel more nervous of a hypersonic missile than I would be of a supersonic or subsonic low altitude missiles because I know my equipment was meant specifically to target such missiles instead of hypersonic targets. A huge modern defense network can deal with lets say 1 sortie of 76 F-35s launching subsonic or supersonic low or high altitude missiles carried internally than imagine 76 su-57s launching 152 for each internal weapon bay a hypersonic missile design and they keep a stealth profile and launch it close enough from being tracked. The SAM operators will definitely sh!t themselves when its raining hypersonic missiles at a short notice of time from a close distance. Am I still wrong?
                76 F-35 equal 608 SDB II/SPEAR or AGM-X that a huge number for any air defense to deal with. If they use low flying tactic and external hard points, you suddenly have to intercept 1824 targets....Can you really deal with that?. I am pretty sure any operator will **** themselves with 600-1800 missiles coming toward them. It only gets worse from there with stuff like SPEAR-EW.
                Internal hypersonic weapon, there are options for F-35 such as Triple target terminator, it is an improved AMRAAM with A2G capability, 76 F-36 = 456 missiles internally. For any defense networrk intercept 456 targets coming at Mach 4 or Mach 5 doesn't sound fun.

                Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                external reveals(especially carrying a big missile) a bigger RCS allowing SAM radars to track targets a lot better and regarding the field of photonics noise levels can be heard 100 times better and even the an/spy-6 has noise sensitivity 100 times lower than the previous an/spy-1 radar according to public sources. Meaning you can be targeted at far ranges by SAMs in the future. Early warning radars will pick such a external carry target more farther than internal weapon carry design. Also what if there was an enemy target nearby? Sure your going to say they will fly in groups but that can still give 4th gen fighters a lucky shot but 4th gens will have a low chance of that if all F-35s had an internal carry design and SAM radars will have less of a chance to pick the target up and come up with a plan. Depending how close or far F-35 groups fly I would not risk the chance of mad dog missiles especially when active radars on missiles are receiving better performances than before when other F-35s are helping the SEAD operation of an external carry F-35.

                I wonder what 600-1000km missile you are supposedly referencing if I care to ask?
                The photonics noise levels reduction you are talking about is internal noise (when you convert frequency), that is not the same as background noise. It is unlikely you can create a missile that can fly 500-1000 km while still very maneuverable and they will be very vulnerable to enemy duck below the radar horizon. In addition, you can intercept SAM with MSDN or HEL
                Last edited by moon_light; 19th June 2019, 06:38.

                Comment

                • moon_light
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • May 2012
                  • 1033

                  #28
                  Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post

                  I wonder what 600-1000km missile you are supposedly referencing if I care to ask?
                  ROCKS and HAWC

                  Comment

                  • SpudmanWP
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jan 2009
                    • 5292

                    #29
                    Don't forget that the F-35 can likely have internal MALD-Js that will give the rest of the flight's munitions an exponentially larger chance of success.
                    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                    Comment

                    • moon_light
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • May 2012
                      • 1033

                      #30
                      Originally posted by SpudmanWP View Post
                      Don't forget that the F-35 can likely have internal MALD-Js that will give the rest of the flight's munitions an exponentially larger chance of success.
                      SPEAR-ER can do similar task and somewhat smaller
                      The latter evolution roadmap sees the involvement of the baseline Spear 3 munition, followed by a future electronic variant concept being worked out together with Leonardo, to bring EW in the Spear airframe. This is based on the Brite Cloud and its technologies. The new variant requirements definition is in the final discussion with Royal Air Force, explained Mead, and a contract could be awarded within 2018. Last week, during the press briefing at the Royal International Air Tattoo 2018, the RAF announced the integration of Spear 3 on the Typhoon. The network enabled air-to-ground weapon system installation and deployment from the F-35 represent the starting point for the Tempest combat concept model.
                      https://www.edrmagazine.eu/mbda

                      Comment

                      • ActionJackson
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Oct 2010
                        • 289

                        #31
                        Frontal aspect of a clean Su-57 is a similar RCS to an F-35 carrying two large missiles anyway.... Except the F-35 has a much better, networked electronic defense capability

                        Comment

                        • SpudmanWP
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Jan 2009
                          • 5292

                          #32
                          Originally posted by moon_light View Post
                          SPEAR-ER can do similar task and somewhat smallerhttps://www.edrmagazine.eu/mbda
                          All things being equal, the MALD-J will have more space for equipment & more power available to the jammers.

                          "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                          Comment

                          • panzerfeist1
                            Rank 6 Registered User
                            • Feb 2018
                            • 399

                            #33
                            "ROCKS and HAWC"




                            OK the moment you mentioned ROCKS this is just a dead giveaway that you are basically mig-31bm maybe with a 2nd user account here, it was quite odd when I posted a reply to you before mig-31bm immediately browsed the page(I got more examples than that) You respond twice with 2 posts just like he does before when I talked to him. One more thing can I have a source on this of the missiles stating those ranges? https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-r...ile-1001273992 flying faster than the speed of sound is not really telling me much if its hypersonic or not?
                            "Internal hypersonic weapon, there are options for F-35 such as Triple target terminator, it is an improved AMRAAM with A2G capability, 76 F-36 = 456 missiles internally. For any defense networrk intercept 456 targets coming at Mach 4 or Mach 5 doesn't sound fun."

                            100km range maybe more does sound a little risky you have sources on this and the ranges it would provide doing this?



                            https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...minator-06645/
                            "
                            T3 will need to go after very different sets of targets. The ideal solution is a missile that can use different guidance modes including GPS, radar, imaging infrared/multispectral, and/or laser guidance, while possessing enough computer power and memory to interpret very different sensor results and adjust to maneuvering supersonic fighters, stealthy cruise missiles, and ground-based vehicles. Needless to say, these are very different problem sets. "

                            I wish the team developing this good luck. although I don't seem that impressed about it because I have now found out that the R-77 is said to go after patriots missiles.

                            76 F-35 equal 608 SDB II/SPEAR or AGM-X that a huge number for any air defense to deal with. If they use low flying tactic and external hard points, you suddenly have to intercept 1824 targets....Can you really deal with that?. I am pretty sure any operator will **** themselves with 600-1800 missiles coming toward them. It only gets worse from there with stuff like SPEAR-EW.

                            If its a big defense network than yes, also give calculations of 1824 targets on how you got them. You an reduce those amount of numbers with hypersonic weapons.

                            , that is not the same as background noise.

                            But the Chinese source said 100 times lower background noise want me to pull that source again?

                            unlikely you can create a missile that can fly 500-1000 km while still very maneuverable"

                            sources please.




                            "Frontal aspect of a clean Su-57 is a similar RCS to an F-35 carrying two large missiles anyway.... Except the F-35 has a much better, networked electronic defense capability"

                            No worries the Russian engineers modified the aircraft to meet your expertise. The only thing I find cool about the F-35 that I wish the SU-57 would have is the glide bomb rack configuration.

                            QuantumFX fx thank you
                            Last edited by panzerfeist1; 19th June 2019, 16:52.
                            I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                            Comment

                            • moon_light
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • May 2012
                              • 1033

                              #34
                              Originally posted by SpudmanWP View Post
                              All things being equal, the MALD-J will have more space for equipment & more power available to the jammers.
                              Yes, but in my opinion, spear can be useful because it takes up less space
                              Last edited by moon_light; 19th June 2019, 18:40.

                              Comment

                              • SpudmanWP
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jan 2009
                                • 5292

                                #35
                                Absolutely, there is no single "best solution" as it all depends on mission scope.
                                "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

                                Comment

                                • moon_light
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • May 2012
                                  • 1033

                                  #36
                                  Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                                  "ROCKS and HAWC"


                                  OK the moment you mentioned ROCKS this is just a dead giveaway that you are basically mig-31bm maybe with a 2nd user account here, it was quite odd when I posted a reply to you before mig-31bm immediately browsed the page(I got more examples than that) You respond twice with 2 posts just like he does before when I talked to him. One more thing can I have a source on this of the missiles stating those ranges? https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-r...ile-1001273992 flying faster than the speed of sound is not really telling me much if its hypersonic or not?
                                  "Internal hypersonic weapon, there are options for F-35 such as Triple target terminator, it is an improved AMRAAM with A2G capability, 76 F-36 = 456 missiles internally. For any defense networrk intercept 456 targets coming at Mach 4 or Mach 5 doesn't sound fun."

                                  100km range maybe more does sound a little risky you have sources on this and the ranges it would provide doing this?



                                  https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...minator-06645/
                                  "
                                  T3 will need to go after very different sets of targets. The ideal solution is a missile that can use different guidance modes including GPS, radar, imaging infrared/multispectral, and/or laser guidance, while possessing enough computer power and memory to interpret very different sensor results and adjust to maneuvering supersonic fighters, stealthy cruise missiles, and ground-based vehicles. Needless to say, these are very different problem sets. "

                                  I wish the team developing this good luck. although I don't seem that impressed about it because I have now found out that the R-77 is said to go after patriots missiles.


                                  76 F-35 equal 608 SDB II/SPEAR or AGM-X that a huge number for any air defense to deal with. If they use low flying tactic and external hard points, you suddenly have to intercept 1824 targets....Can you really deal with that?. I am pretty sure any operator will **** themselves with 600-1800 missiles coming toward them. It only gets worse from there with stuff like SPEAR-EW.

                                  If its a big defense network than yes, also give calculations of 1824 targets on how you got them. You an reduce those amount of numbers with hypersonic weapons.

                                  , that is not the same as background noise.

                                  But the Chinese source said 100 times lower background noise want me to pull that source again?

                                  unlikely you can create a missile that can fly 500-1000 km while still very maneuverable"

                                  sources please.





                                  "Frontal aspect of a clean Su-57 is a similar RCS to an F-35 carrying two large missiles anyway.... Except the F-35 has a much better, networked electronic defense capability"

                                  No worries the Russian engineers modified the aircraft to meet your expertise. The only thing I find cool about the F-35 that I wish the SU-57 would have is the glide bomb rack configuration.

                                  QuantumFX fx thank you
                                  Supposing I didn't divide the reply, it is harder to understand.
                                  You prefer this format?
                                  _ Scud
                                  _ R-77?
                                  _ 4*6=24, 76*24 =1824
                                  _ background noise?
                                  _ T3 range is AIM-120D at least.
                                  _ Can't prove a negative
                                  In any case, if you suppose I am a sock puppet then don't reply, waste of time for both
                                  Last edited by moon_light; 19th June 2019, 18:39.

                                  Comment

                                  • panzerfeist1
                                    Rank 6 Registered User
                                    • Feb 2018
                                    • 399

                                    #37
                                    @moonlight

                                    "In any case, if you suppose I am a sock puppet then don't reply, waste of time for both "

                                    Oh come on dont be like that whatever conversation we have together I always find it fun for example I never knew air to air missiles can have ground roles.

                                    "Scuds"

                                    You dont seem that cooperative with me to begin with but I guess your referring to Rocks.

                                    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...usting-missile

                                    "Rafael has not yet disclosed the range of Rocks, either. The company has said the missile has "a very significant standoff range" and "a high-velocity trajectory towards the target," according to Airforces Monthly.
                                    However, judging by its external design, the weapon appears to be a hybrid of the SPICE guidance package and a missile body derived from the companys Black Sparrow. This latter system is an air-launched target intended to simulate the characteristics of a short-range ballistic missile. Israel has utilized these in the testing of its Arrow family of ballistic missile defense systems in the past."

                                    Got the info thanks anyways

                                    "R-77? T3 range is AIM-120D at least. Can't prove a negative"

                                    can do air to ground roles like the aim-120d and R-37 as hypersonic missiles. But something suggests otherwise the purpose of HAWCs and a supposedly internal hypersonic missile design of the SU-57. I think the HAWCs for example offers a better impact than an air to air missile being used for ground purposes.

                                    "4*6=24, 76*24 =1824"

                                    External payload meaning exposing the F-35 a whole lot more and you suggested below the radar horizon approach on your last post. The SDB 1 has a max range of 110kms and the SDB 2 has a max range 72kms designed against mobile ground targets. However these max ranges can only be achieved by high altitude releases. Considering long range air defenses with capabilities of high mast radars this idea would not be a feasible approach because the F-35s would be shot down before they can even launch the glide bombs. Its like you might as well use A-10s with maverick missiles instead.

                                    However if you want to stick with the external payload around 100km at a high altitude to me that would be considered pushing it.

                                    Image result for ventral rcs




                                    vImage result for ventral rcs

                                    ventral RCS readings or the underbelly of an aircraft has more surface exposed than the front of an aircraft. The closer you get to a radar the more exposure you get. For example if a certain aircraft is said to be .0001m2 and depending on the location of the SAM it can maintain that .0001m2 going at a 45 degree dive but doing so you lose altitude. You would have to maintain a high altitude release having a pretty effective range. Although for my personal preference an external carry of small diameter bombs within a 100km high altitude release seems pretty risky.

                                    background noise?"

                                    https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/jssd/20...x6102967.shtml

                                    "The official propaganda of the Russians is generally the same: the detection distance is too far, the energy conversion efficiency is as high as 60%, the traditional radar is only 30%, and the noise is 100 times lower than the conventional radar, which greatly improves the signal-to-noise ratio, and the theoretical detection distance for the stealth target. More than 500 kilometers!"

                                    background noise interferes with a signal your trying to receive lower it than you can hear the signal better from the noise.
                                    I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                                    Comment

                                    • ActionJackson
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Oct 2010
                                      • 289

                                      #38
                                      Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                                      @moonlight

                                      "In any case, if you suppose I am a sock puppet then don't reply, waste of time for both "

                                      Oh come on dont be like that whatever conversation we have together I always find it fun for example I never knew air to air missiles can have ground roles.

                                      "Scuds"

                                      You dont seem that cooperative with me to begin with but I guess your referring to Rocks.

                                      https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...usting-missile

                                      "Rafael has not yet disclosed the range of Rocks, either. The company has said the missile has "a very significant standoff range" and "a high-velocity trajectory towards the target," according to Airforces Monthly.
                                      However, judging by its external design, the weapon appears to be a hybrid of the SPICE guidance package and a missile body derived from the companys Black Sparrow. This latter system is an air-launched target intended to simulate the characteristics of a short-range ballistic missile. Israel has utilized these in the testing of its Arrow family of ballistic missile defense systems in the past."

                                      Got the info thanks anyways

                                      "R-77? T3 range is AIM-120D at least. Can't prove a negative"

                                      can do air to ground roles like the aim-120d and R-37 as hypersonic missiles. But something suggests otherwise the purpose of HAWCs and a supposedly internal hypersonic missile design of the SU-57. I think the HAWCs for example offers a better impact than an air to air missile being used for ground purposes.

                                      "4*6=24, 76*24 =1824"

                                      External payload meaning exposing the F-35 a whole lot more and you suggested below the radar horizon approach on your last post. The SDB 1 has a max range of 110kms and the SDB 2 has a max range 72kms designed against mobile ground targets. However these max ranges can only be achieved by high altitude releases. Considering long range air defenses with capabilities of high mast radars this idea would not be a feasible approach because the F-35s would be shot down before they can even launch the glide bombs. Its like you might as well use A-10s with maverick missiles instead.

                                      However if you want to stick with the external payload around 100km at a high altitude to me that would be considered pushing it.

                                      Image result for ventral rcs




                                      vImage result for ventral rcs

                                      ventral RCS readings or the underbelly of an aircraft has more surface exposed than the front of an aircraft. The closer you get to a radar the more exposure you get. For example if a certain aircraft is said to be .0001m2 and depending on the location of the SAM it can maintain that .0001m2 going at a 45 degree dive but doing so you lose altitude. You would have to maintain a high altitude release having a pretty effective range. Although for my personal preference an external carry of small diameter bombs within a 100km high altitude release seems pretty risky.

                                      background noise?"

                                      https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/jssd/20...x6102967.shtml

                                      "The official propaganda of the Russians is generally the same: the detection distance is too far, the energy conversion efficiency is as high as 60%, the traditional radar is only 30%, and the noise is 100 times lower than the conventional radar, which greatly improves the signal-to-noise ratio, and the theoretical detection distance for the stealth target. More than 500 kilometers!"

                                      background noise interferes with a signal your trying to receive lower it than you can hear the signal better from the noise.
                                      Did you... just ... Post a screenshot from the Kerbal space program game as a source?

                                      Comment

                                      • moon_light
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • May 2012
                                        • 1033

                                        #39
                                        Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                                        @moonlight

                                        "In any case, if you suppose I am a sock puppet then don't reply, waste of time for both "

                                        Oh come on dont be like that whatever conversation we have together I always find it fun for example I never knew air to air missiles can have ground roles.

                                        "Scuds"

                                        You dont seem that cooperative with me to begin with but I guess your referring to Rocks.

                                        https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...usting-missile

                                        "Rafael has not yet disclosed the range of Rocks, either. The company has said the missile has "a very significant standoff range" and "a high-velocity trajectory towards the target," according to Airforces Monthly.
                                        However, judging by its external design, the weapon appears to be a hybrid of the SPICE guidance package and a missile body derived from the companys Black Sparrow. This latter system is an air-launched target intended to simulate the characteristics of a short-range ballistic missile. Israel has utilized these in the testing of its Arrow family of ballistic missile defense systems in the past."

                                        Got the info thanks anyways

                                        "R-77? T3 range is AIM-120D at least. Can't prove a negative"

                                        can do air to ground roles like the aim-120d and R-37 as hypersonic missiles. But something suggests otherwise the purpose of HAWCs and a supposedly internal hypersonic missile design of the SU-57. I think the HAWCs for example offers a better impact than an air to air missile being used for ground purposes.

                                        "4*6=24, 76*24 =1824"

                                        External payload meaning exposing the F-35 a whole lot more and you suggested below the radar horizon approach on your last post. The SDB 1 has a max range of 110kms and the SDB 2 has a max range 72kms designed against mobile ground targets. However these max ranges can only be achieved by high altitude releases. Considering long range air defenses with capabilities of high mast radars this idea would not be a feasible approach because the F-35s would be shot down before they can even launch the glide bombs. Its like you might as well use A-10s with maverick missiles instead.

                                        However if you want to stick with the external payload around 100km at a high altitude to me that would be considered pushing it.

                                        Image result for ventral rcs




                                        vImage result for ventral rcs

                                        ventral RCS readings or the underbelly of an aircraft has more surface exposed than the front of an aircraft. The closer you get to a radar the more exposure you get. For example if a certain aircraft is said to be .0001m2 and depending on the location of the SAM it can maintain that .0001m2 going at a 45 degree dive but doing so you lose altitude. You would have to maintain a high altitude release having a pretty effective range. Although for my personal preference an external carry of small diameter bombs within a 100km high altitude release seems pretty risky.

                                        background noise?"

                                        https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/jssd/20...x6102967.shtml

                                        "The official propaganda of the Russians is generally the same: the detection distance is too far, the energy conversion efficiency is as high as 60%, the traditional radar is only 30%, and the noise is 100 times lower than the conventional radar, which greatly improves the signal-to-noise ratio, and the theoretical detection distance for the stealth target. More than 500 kilometers!"

                                        background noise interferes with a signal your trying to receive lower it than you can hear the signal better from the noise.
                                        As soon as I stop separate quote, you mixed up my replies. Each underscore "_" is for a separate reply.
                                        _ "R-77 is said to go after patriots missiles"?
                                        _ Use SPEAR
                                        _ https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/jssd/20...x6102967.shtml said noise rather than background noise.
                                        Last edited by moon_light; 20th June 2019, 07:44.

                                        Comment

                                        • XB-70
                                          Rank 4 Registered User
                                          • May 2018
                                          • 350

                                          #40
                                          If I was operating a pantsir, tor or buk system I would feel more nervous of a hypersonic missile than I would be of a supersonic or subsonic low altitude missiles because I know my equipment was meant specifically to target such missiles instead of hypersonic targets.
                                          LO cruise missiles can do just as much damage, so I don't see your point. Nevertheless, even if the Su-57 is armed with something even greater than sliced bread, part of SEAD is being able to gather and disseminate information. So there are other factors to consider. You can't look at just one.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X