• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

AIM-260

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,332
Reaction score
79
Neither Meteor nor AIM-120D really have an answer for towed or other advanced expendable decoys.
You need time for the seeker to discriminate between the decoys and aircraft with even say (clean) Super Hornet
levels of signature reduction.

Ideally that discrimination would be achieved by IIR which wants slower missile speeds for thermal reasons or
MMW which because of the narrower beam width needs more time to cover the same handover volume
as a lower frequency seeker.

So one approach to buying time is coasting to seeker takeover at comparatively slow speeds (good thermally for IIR),
discriminating and then boosting for end-game.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,332
Reaction score
79
[Another concern it raises is with the choice of JP10 for the FMRAAM sustainer, suggesting that the corrosive properties of this fuel cause doubts about suitability for long-term storage.

Sorry. I missed this. JP-10 has been shown to have a shelf-life of 30 years in missiles. Even at the time it was known to be at least 18 years. So this was utter FUD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMI

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
28
The DoD is constantly upgrading the ECCM capabilities of the AMRAAM so towed decoys might not be as big of an issue as you think.

That being said, I agree that a dual-mode seeker is a much better option.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,332
Reaction score
79
The DoD is constantly upgrading the ECCM capabilities of the AMRAAM so towed decoys might not be as big of an issue as you think.

That being said, I agree that a dual-mode seeker is a much better option.
Sure. There are advanced signal processing techniques that, for example, try to discriminate based on subtle
differences in decoy and platform velocities.

But there really are no generalized ECCMs for active* microwave seekers against advanced towed decoys beyond
trajectory shaping and/or a bigger warhead.

* I'll leave out track-via-missile and other two-way datalink enabled off-board assistance from the firing platform.
 

Forest Green

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 11, 2019
Messages
476
Reaction score
141
You might be better off firing a MALD-J at the AEW (I am assuming you meant AWACS) as it has a massive range advantage over a Meteor, it can do it's own jamming, and it runs cool enough to not trigger MAWS on the way in. Put a IIR seeker & a 20lb warhead in it and you are golden as a way to take out ISR, IFR, AEW, AWACS, etc.
True but a MALD-based weapon doesn't have the versatility for use in other A2A roles.
 

Jeb

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
269
Reaction score
18
A 2-stage CUDA would allow you to fill both needs. 2-stage for long range, single-stage for packing them in. One missile for both missions for cost effectiveness. (I'd want them to use a finless booster 8"-10" dia. if they could fit them in without taking more than a single AIM-120 equivalent spot.)
I just had a fun idea for a flexible missile system. Set up a two-stage missile but have the design such that if you needed a short-range engagement, the launcher could separate the stages and each one could operate as an independent short-range missile, but for long range, the stages remained linked and the "boost" stage would just self-destruct after the "terminal" stage was separated and boosting on its own.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
221
A 2-stage CUDA would allow you to fill both needs. 2-stage for long range, single-stage for packing them in. One missile for both missions for cost effectiveness. (I'd want them to use a finless booster 8"-10" dia. if they could fit them in without taking more than a single AIM-120 equivalent spot.)
I just had a fun idea for a flexible missile system. Set up a two-stage missile but have the design such that if you needed a short-range engagement, the launcher could separate the stages and each one could operate as an independent short-range missile, but for long range, the stages remained linked and the "boost" stage would just self-destruct after the "terminal" stage was separated and boosting on its own.
That's a two-stage missile dragging along a lot of redundant sensors, control units, steering actuators, warheads/lethality enhancers, etc.
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
28
That's a two-stage missile dragging along a lot of redundant sensors, control units, steering actuators, warheads/lethality enhancers, etc.
How will it have twice the warhead, sensors, etc?

The duplication in booster-related gimbaled TVC is more than made up by the increased efficiency once the booster is jettisoned. This is why the naval Standard series of SAMs uses boosters instead of single, giant SAMs.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,515
Reaction score
583
That's a two-stage missile dragging along a lot of redundant sensors, control units, steering actuators, warheads/lethality enhancers, etc.
How will it have twice the warhead, sensors, etc?

The duplication in booster-related gimbaled TVC is more than made up by the increased efficiency once the booster is jettisoned. This is why the naval Standard series of SAMs uses boosters instead of single, giant SAMs.
He was suggesting a booster that could also act as a missile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeb

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
28
ah.. ok

That's what I get for not reading ALL of the posts ;)
 

Forest Green

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 11, 2019
Messages
476
Reaction score
141
How about 1 missile that carries 5 or 6 independently targetable explosive darts that all seek out the cockpit of their given target fighter?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,515
Reaction score
583
Sounds unnecessarily complicated.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,479
Reaction score
190

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,515
Reaction score
583

In_A_Dream

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
73
Reaction score
11
I wonder if we'll ever see the development of a 2 stage missile, where a missile essentially splits into 2 parts: one part emitting and providing the guidance, and the other (the actual warhead) receiving passive signals until it reaches its target.
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
343
Reaction score
46
I wonder if we'll ever see the development of a 2 stage missile, where a missile essentially splits into 2 parts: one part emitting and providing the guidance, and the other (the actual warhead) receiving passive signals until it reaches its target.
technically speaking, very unlikely as it would means 2 missiles in one. You were basically describing SARH or maybe command guidance.

The seeker electronics roughly take about half or third of the missile's length. Your scheme basically doubles it . each part will have to carry basically their own guidance system, some sort of motor and double amount of battery as both will operate almost independently of each other.
 

Dilandu

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
204
Reaction score
59
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Neither Meteor nor AIM-120D really have an answer for towed or other advanced expendable decoys.
You need time for the seeker to discriminate between the decoys and aircraft with even say (clean) Super Hornet
levels of signature reduction.
Well, the Cold War solution to all towed decoy & eccm problems were to use nuclear-tipped missile...
 

RLBH

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
228
Reaction score
31
Neither Meteor nor AIM-120D really have an answer for towed or other advanced expendable decoys.
You need time for the seeker to discriminate between the decoys and aircraft with even say (clean) Super Hornet
levels of signature reduction.
Well, the Cold War solution to all towed decoy & eccm problems were to use nuclear-tipped missile...
Towed is relatively easy - when presented with two targets, one behind the other, go for the one in front. Likewise dropped decoys - go for the one that isn't moving in a ballistic arc. Something like MALD is tricky, which is of course the entire point of MALD.
 

Forest Green

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jun 11, 2019
Messages
476
Reaction score
141
Towed is relatively easy - when presented with two targets, one behind the other, go for the one in front. Likewise dropped decoys - go for the one that isn't moving in a ballistic arc. Something like MALD is tricky, which is of course the entire point of MALD.
If the towed or dropped decoy is jamming you as well it's not so easy.
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
343
Reaction score
46
Towed is relatively easy - when presented with two targets, one behind the other, go for the one in front. Likewise dropped decoys - go for the one that isn't moving in a ballistic arc. Something like MALD is tricky, which is of course the entire point of MALD.
If things really that easy.

The thing is the decoy may "Seduce" the missile, but the missile may have no real way to resolve which is the decoy and which is the target.

Active radar homing missile is carrying a radar seeker, which also bound to any limitation to a radar is. One important thing is the angular resolution which equals to roughly distance multipled by the beamwidth of the radar seeker.

Typical ARH seeker antenna in a missile have about 0.2 m diameter antenna and works in Ku or X-band (2-3 cm wavelength) This roughly gives about 7-10 degrees of beamwidth. ARH seeker may usually goes active at 20 km from target position, so multiply that distance (in meters) with the beamwidth (radians) gives you about 3750 m. The seeker cannot resolve object separated no less than that distance. It will just go to where the return is the strongest.. Thus the towed decoy may have a very good chance in fooling the missile.

There is technique called "super-resolution" but i havent heard about its application in current military radar. It is supposedly to allow discrimination between target and decoy as well as one countermeasure against sophisticated Cross Eye jamming.

Another thing a missile can do is to actually having a secondary or tertiary seeker that works in other band, such as Infra Red or a Passive seeker which home into another emission target could emit maybe L or S-band datalink.
 

Ronny

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
190
Reaction score
67
Typical ARH seeker antenna in a missile have about 0.2 m diameter antenna and works in Ku or X-band (2-3 cm wavelength) This roughly gives about 7-10 degrees of beamwidth. ARH seeker may usually goes active at 20 km from target position, so multiply that distance (in meters) with the beamwidth (radians) gives you about 3750 m. The seeker cannot resolve object separated no less than that distance. It will just go to where the return is the strongest.. Thus the towed decoy may have a very good chance in fooling the missile.
There is technique called "super-resolution" but i havent heard about its application in current military radar. It is supposedly to allow discrimination between target and decoy as well
Can't they use monopulse technique to improve the resolution?
monopulse-radar12.png
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
2,023
Reaction score
73
Probably depends on the missile. If they were trying to unify to one missile there's no reason that capability couldn't be on an AIM-120 sized missile.
Perhaps it is a coincidence but I believe the Block III Aim-9X was expected to become operational on Navy Super Hornet's in the 2021-2023 time-frame. It was cancelled in FY16 probably during the time when the JATM competition was ongoing. JATM is expected to become operational on the SH in the 2022-2023 time-frame. If the JATM has significantly improved HOBS performance compared to the AMRAAM, and has some sort of multi-mode or jam resistant seeker, it would make total sense for the Block III 9X to have been cancelled and the entire AMRAAM and AIM-9X family being replaced by a combination of the JATM and something like the CUDA/Peregrine like missiles.
 
Last edited:
Top