Anti Radar Missiles for Singapore?
-
I find it odd that our fleet of F-16C/D Block 52 fighters (specifically the D-models) come equipped with state of the art avionics for SEAD missions yet we only have a number of US-surplus AGM-45 Shrike missiles for this important role. Why was there no purchase of AGM-88 HARM missiles or other more advanced ARMs?
Puzzling isn't it? -
Need to spell out mah....we ALREADY clear for F15 liao...almost all the USAF conventional weaponary are open to us, less the cruise missile and fuel air bomb.
-
HARMs work by homing in on radar emissions of SAM site radars. The advantage of the HARM over the shrike, is its higher speed (around Mach 5), allowing it to outrace most SAMs, so if a fighter is fired on by a SAM, it can destroy the radar of the SAM site with the HARM before the SAM actually hits the aircraft. Other advantages are that the HARM has a smokeless motor, coupled with its higher speed, would cause SAM operators not to notice the incoming missile before its too late, preventing them from switching off their radars in time. The HARM also has an inertial guidance system, allowing the missile to home onto the last known position of the SAM radar if the SAM operator manages to switch off its radar before the missile hits.Originally posted by Delta 5:I find it odd that our fleet of F-16C/D Block 52 fighters (specifically the D-models) come equipped with state of the art avionics for SEAD missions yet we only have a number of US-surplus AGM-45 Shrike missiles for this important role. Why was there no purchase of AGM-88 HARM missiles or other more advanced ARMs?
Puzzling isn't it?
If you look at our surrounding SAM threats, most of them are low altitude optically or infrared guided SAMs, which ARMs(anti radiation missiles) are useless against. Indonesia expressed an interest in procuring the russian S-300(SA-10) system some time ago, and ARMs would have been effective against it. If that deal had materialized, we would probably have gotten the AGM-88s. however, it did not, so we were stuck with the AGM-45s carried by the A-4s.
The rise of Chinese military power might cause us to procure the AGM-88 in the near future though, as they make use of many long range SAM systems that the HARM might be useful against. -
Yup Yup!! agree it will be most ideal acquiring AGM-88 in coincide with the transformation of singapore armed force into the 3 Generation lethal fighting force.
. -
Well, if our friends do pick up the Chinese built KS-1A system, we'd have a pretty good excuse to pick us a few silver bullets to go SAM hunting with.
But as usual, we probably already have HARMs. And already trained in its usage.
Besides the HARM may not necessarily be the best anti-radiation missile in existence. The BAe ALARM is reputedly more effective.
The ALARM missiles, would climb and guide its way to the emmitter, and if the emitter turns off, it would deploy a parachute and float about until the emitter turns on, and fire off a 2nd rocket to go after the missile.
Now thats a kickass ARM. -
true. but the HARM is a cheaper missile compared to the ALARMOriginally posted by Shotgun:Well, if our friends do pick up the Chinese built KS-1A system, we'd have a pretty good excuse to pick us a few silver bullets to go SAM hunting with.
But as usual, we probably already have HARMs. And already trained in its usage.
Besides the HARM may not necessarily be the best anti-radiation missile in existence. The BAe ALARM is reputedly more effective.
The ALARM missiles, would climb and guide its way to the emmitter, and if the emitter turns off, it would deploy a parachute and float about until the emitter turns on, and fire off a 2nd rocket to go after the missile.
Now thats a kickass ARM.
however, NATO doctrine states that in any engagement with a SAM site using HARMs, 2 HARMs are to be fired at one target... -
Nope, The official statement of HARMÂ’s speed is 2 Mach+, though widely believed an understatement. But no matter how, the HARM's maximum speed won't exceed 3.5MachOriginally posted by sgFish:HARMs work by homing in on radar emissions of SAM site radars. The advantage of the HARM over the shrike, is its higher speed (around Mach 5), allowing it to outrace most SAMs, so if a fighter is fired on by a SAM, it can destroy the radar of the SAM site with the HARM before the SAM actually hits the aircraft. Other advantages are that the HARM has a smokeless motor, coupled with its higher speed, would cause SAM operators not to notice the incoming missile before its too late, preventing them from switching off their radars in time. The HARM also has an inertial guidance system, allowing the missile to home onto the last known position of the SAM radar if the SAM operator manages to switch off its radar before the missile hits.
...
On the contrary, the S300 PMU2 SAM's maximum speed is 5-6 Mach and its range is 200km. -
argh what was i writingOriginally posted by 38�Ž:Nope, The official statement of HARM’s speed is 2 Mach+, though widely believed an understatement. But no matter how, the HARM's maximum speed won't exceed 3.5Mach
On the contrary, the S300 PMU2 SAM's maximum speed is 5-6 Mach and its range is 200km.
yeah you were probably right...pai seh
-
Nothing related but I'm just very curious where on earth you guys get such info. Library?Originally posted by Shotgun:Well, if our friends do pick up the Chinese built KS-1A system, we'd have a pretty good excuse to pick us a few silver bullets to go SAM hunting with.
But as usual, we probably already have HARMs. And already trained in its usage.
Besides the HARM may not necessarily be the best anti-radiation missile in existence. The BAe ALARM is reputedly more effective.
The ALARM missiles, would climb and guide its way to the emmitter, and if the emitter turns off, it would deploy a parachute and float about until the emitter turns on, and fire off a 2nd rocket to go after the missile.
Now thats a kickass ARM. -
Hello there!!!Originally posted by fallin:Nothing related but I'm just very curious where on earth you guys get such info. Library?
Its all info from books, magazines and other publications... eg Jane's Defence Weekly is a a good mag if you wanna noe defence news and equipment on which country is acquiring what. Its all public domain here.
No classified stuff here but with programs like Google Earth and loose-mouthed NSFs nothing is secret nowadays... -
The old Tacit Rainbow missiles were even better hahOriginally posted by Shotgun:Well, if our friends do pick up the Chinese built KS-1A system, we'd have a pretty good excuse to pick us a few silver bullets to go SAM hunting with.
But as usual, we probably already have HARMs. And already trained in its usage.
Besides the HARM may not necessarily be the best anti-radiation missile in existence. The BAe ALARM is reputedly more effective.
The ALARM missiles, would climb and guide its way to the emmitter, and if the emitter turns off, it would deploy a parachute and float about until the emitter turns on, and fire off a 2nd rocket to go after the missile.
Now thats a kickass ARM. -
That was the AGM-126 Tacit Rainbow I believe.Originally posted by |-|05|:The old Tacit Rainbow missiles were even better hah
An excellent low cost supplement to the HARM.
A pity that with the end of the cold war many proposed weapons were cancelled... -
Cheaper per missile yes. Cost effective... arguable. I've read somewhere that in the NATO air campaign over Serbia, more than 100 Harms was launched at a particular radar and did not manage to find their mark. One BAe Alarm managed to find it and kill it. I think its loitering capability made one heck of a difference.Originally posted by sgFish:true. but the HARM is a cheaper missile compared to the ALARM
however, NATO doctrine states that in any engagement with a SAM site using HARMs, 2 HARMs are to be fired at one target...
Unfortunately, not many aircraft, even in the RAF were capable of carrying the Alarms. Which led to its end of production. -
Defence journals, mainly =)Originally posted by fallin:Nothing related but I'm just very curious where on earth you guys get such info. Library? -
welcome to the world of military journals, defence policies and things that really make the world tick
-
yeah i read about that too. Well even though an ALARM might be more cost effective, i suppose suppression of that site was the main objectives of the flights that carried the 100 HARMs.Originally posted by Shotgun:Cheaper per missile yes. Cost effective... arguable. I've read somewhere that in the NATO air campaign over Serbia, more than 100 Harms was launched at a particular radar and did not manage to find their mark. One BAe Alarm managed to find it and kill it. I think its loitering capability made one heck of a difference.
Unfortunately, not many aircraft, even in the RAF were capable of carrying the Alarms. Which led to its end of production.
Nevertheless, the best form of suppression is destruction
-
Not applicable in peacekeeping operationsOriginally posted by sgFish:yeah i read about that too. Well even though an ALARM might be more cost effective, i suppose suppression of that site was the main objectives of the flights that carried the 100 HARMs.
Nevertheless, the best form of suppression is destruction -
Not true. If ur radar locks on to a coalition aircraft in the no fly zone, its equiv to launching a missile, commiting a hostile action. Then they get to launch HARMs at u in self defence.
-
tat's the theory, practice is veri much differentOriginally posted by Shotgun:Not true. If ur radar locks on to a coalition aircraft in the no fly zone, its equiv to launching a missile, commiting a hostile action. Then they get to launch HARMs at u in self defence. -
no. thats in practice.Originally posted by Lance_han:tat's the theory, practice is veri much different -
Well...don't the US have this policy of not firing unless fired upon?
-
they were out there with the sole intent of bombing the living shit out of the serbs, it was war already ....Originally posted by SpecOps87:Well...don't the US have this policy of not firing unless fired upon? -
ya.. wonders why too
-
Well, the rule is, if u lock on with ur guidance radar, its as good as a launch. Cos u really cannot detect a launch, u can only detect its radar locking on to u.