PARIKRAMA
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2014
- Messages
- 4,871
- Reaction score
- 185
- Country
- Location
Can anyone tell me by what margin the LGB missed the target? If i understand if the margin is less than 5m than its within acceptable CEP of 3-5 m.
Secondly, reading posts i understand R73 failed to hit the target.. This may have been seekers issues here.. But Strangely i would have preferred perhaps Python 5...
Bcz as far as i know the R73E is basically a LOBL missile with 2 color seeker which uses two different bands of "light" to distinguish an aircraft from a decoy flare. These bands of light is UV and IR. IR is related to heat, while UV is often related to very high voltage, burning, or cosmic energy coming from the sky at night. UV and IR energy also come from the sun in addition to all frequencies of visible light
When a flare is seen by the R73E seeker ,those flares will emit UV energy as well as IR energy and visible light energy so by making a missile UV sensitive it can detect whether a heat or IR source is a flare burning or an aircraft engine output heat and light to properly target.
Whereas in case of Python 5 which has both LOAL and LOBL actually uses an IIR seeker which creates the image of the target in IR spectrum. This is a better prospect but 2 colored seeker are much cheaper to produce..
Judging by the whole different posts , i am presuming that the LOBL in this case means pilot HMDS must have a solid lock on the target. It does not need to calculate anything, it just needs a sensor on board the aircraft to direct the seeker in the missile to the target. That sensor can be the helmet mounted sight, the IRST, or the radar. Once directed to the target and a lock is achieved meaning the seeker is now tracking that target exclusively, then the missile can be fired.
A LOBL missile cannot be fired to fly to a specific place in space and then find and lock the target itself... that would be LOAL case. There is no datalink for communication between launch aircraft and R73, so a missile launched without a lock will hit only the ground. This seems to point to me either a wrong targeting or a error in target inputting link .
For Igla Manpad, Igla uses PRONAV or proportional navigation. PRONAV describes the path the missile takes to it's intercept point. In PRONAV, the missile's path is computed based on the target's path. In PRONAV, the missile has to know where the target is; that's the whole point of using PRONAV as a guidance algorithm. So again i think, the targeting input itself was not very precise and hence PRONAV could not do any correct navigation at all.. This needs serious look into... again from seeker perspective it is suppose to distinguish between a flare and a target flying object. We do need to check whether it was error in targeting input or seeker being unable to work in that particular conditions.
+++
Am i the only one or is Russian Weapons here failing in real environment test.. Is it to build a consensus to move away from such platforms?
@Abingdonboy @MilSpec @AUSTERLITZ
Secondly, reading posts i understand R73 failed to hit the target.. This may have been seekers issues here.. But Strangely i would have preferred perhaps Python 5...
Bcz as far as i know the R73E is basically a LOBL missile with 2 color seeker which uses two different bands of "light" to distinguish an aircraft from a decoy flare. These bands of light is UV and IR. IR is related to heat, while UV is often related to very high voltage, burning, or cosmic energy coming from the sky at night. UV and IR energy also come from the sun in addition to all frequencies of visible light
When a flare is seen by the R73E seeker ,those flares will emit UV energy as well as IR energy and visible light energy so by making a missile UV sensitive it can detect whether a heat or IR source is a flare burning or an aircraft engine output heat and light to properly target.
Whereas in case of Python 5 which has both LOAL and LOBL actually uses an IIR seeker which creates the image of the target in IR spectrum. This is a better prospect but 2 colored seeker are much cheaper to produce..
Judging by the whole different posts , i am presuming that the LOBL in this case means pilot HMDS must have a solid lock on the target. It does not need to calculate anything, it just needs a sensor on board the aircraft to direct the seeker in the missile to the target. That sensor can be the helmet mounted sight, the IRST, or the radar. Once directed to the target and a lock is achieved meaning the seeker is now tracking that target exclusively, then the missile can be fired.
A LOBL missile cannot be fired to fly to a specific place in space and then find and lock the target itself... that would be LOAL case. There is no datalink for communication between launch aircraft and R73, so a missile launched without a lock will hit only the ground. This seems to point to me either a wrong targeting or a error in target inputting link .
For Igla Manpad, Igla uses PRONAV or proportional navigation. PRONAV describes the path the missile takes to it's intercept point. In PRONAV, the missile's path is computed based on the target's path. In PRONAV, the missile has to know where the target is; that's the whole point of using PRONAV as a guidance algorithm. So again i think, the targeting input itself was not very precise and hence PRONAV could not do any correct navigation at all.. This needs serious look into... again from seeker perspective it is suppose to distinguish between a flare and a target flying object. We do need to check whether it was error in targeting input or seeker being unable to work in that particular conditions.
+++
Am i the only one or is Russian Weapons here failing in real environment test.. Is it to build a consensus to move away from such platforms?
@Abingdonboy @MilSpec @AUSTERLITZ
Soon My dream will come True
