The world’s most effective air-to-air missiles

[The SC]

Advanced air-to-air missiles (AAMs) such as the Meteor, IRIS-T and AIM-9X Sidewinder form the core weaponry used in a dogfight scenario. Airforce-technology.com lists the world's ten most effective air-to-air missiles based on precision and engagement features.

Meteor BVRAAM
The Meteor is a next generation beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) developed by MBDA for the common requirements of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The ability to counter the current and future combat threats makes it one of the best air-to-air missiles in the world.

The UK Ministry of Defence placed a contract, on behalf of six nations, for the Meteor missiles in December 2002. Development firing trials of the missile were successfully concluded by 2012. The missile will be integrated on modern combat aircraft such as Eurofighter Typhoon, Saab Gripen Dassault Rafale and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The Meteor BVRAAM features a state-of-the-art active radar seeker, a two-way data link communication, and a solid-fuelled Ramjet motor to engage a wide range of targets with pin point accuracy. It also carries a blast fragmentation warhead with proximity and impact fuses for optimum lethality. The missile has high countermeasures resistance and offers the biggest 'no escape zone.'


http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/iris-t-air-air-guided-missile-germany/
IRIS-T (Infra Red Imaging System Tail/Thrust Vector-Controlled)
The IRIS-T (Infra-Red Imaging System - Tail/Thrust Vector Controlled) is a new generation short-range air-to-air missile produced by Diehl BGT Defence. The missile can engage aerial targets within a range of 25km.

The missile was developed by Diehl, a company based in Germany, in partnership with companies from Greece, Italy, Canada, Norway and Spain to replace the AIM-9L Sidewinder AAM. The first series production version of the IRIS-T was delivered to the German Air Force in December 2005.

The IRIS-T can destroy a wide variety of targets with its high explosive fragmented warhead fitted with a proximity fuse. It is fitted as a standard weapon for Eurofighter Typhoon, F-16, EF-18, Tornado and Gripen fighter aircraft. It is equipped with imaging infra-red (IIR) seeker for high accuracy and all-aspect capability in severe electronic counter measures (ECM) environments. The solid-fuelled motor with thrust vector control ensures the engagement of highly manoeuvrable targets.

MICA
The MICA (Missile d'Interception, de Combat et d'Autodéfense) is a short- and Beyond Visual Range (BVR) AAM system developed by MBDA for the Rafale and advanced variants of Mirage 2000 combat aircraft.

The system includes two variants - MICA (EM) RF featuring an active radio frequency seeker and MICA IR featuring a dual waveband imaging infrared seeker to defeat enemy counter measures. A surface-launched version, named VL MICA, is also available for use by naval or ground-based air defence systems.

The MICA is fitted with a focused splinters HE warhead and is compatible with any advanced fighter aircraft. Its lightweight and compact dimensions allow for integration of up to six missiles on medium to lightweight fighters.

PYTHON-5
The Python-5 from Rafael Advanced Defence Systems is a fifth generation air-to-air missile designed to engage very short range and near beyond visual range targets. It is the newest member of the Python missile range and one of the most advanced AAMs in the world.

The Python-5 has high resistance against countermeasures and can be deployed on a wide range of aircraft such as F-15, F-16, Mirage, Saab Gripen and Su-30MKI. The missile is equipped with a new dual waveband Focal Plane Array (FPA) imaging seeker, inertial navigation system and advanced Infrared Counter-Counter-Measures (IRCCM).

The Python-5 can be launched from a very short to beyond visual ranges in Lock-On-Before Launch (LOBL) and Lock-On-After Launch modes with full sphere launch capability. The solid fuel rocket motor and warhead ensure a high probability of success.

AIM-120 AMRAAM
The AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) developed by Raytheon has proved its combat capabilities during missions in Iraq, Bosnia and Kosovo. Multi-shot capability, immunity to countermeasures, and low smoke solid-fuel rocket motor make the AIM-120 one of the world's best AAMs.

The AMRAAM was ordered by 36 nations across the world. It can be attached aboard F-22, Eurofighter Typhoon, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-35 JSF, Sea Harrier, Tornado, Harrier II Plus, JAS-39 Gripen, and the Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS).

The missile is guided by an internal active radar seeker complemented by an inertial reference unit and microcomputer. The missile carries a high-explosive fragmentation warhead with proximity and contact fuses.


http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/aim-9x-sidewinder-air-to-air-missile/
AIM-9X Sidewinder
The AIM-9X Sidewinder from Raytheon is the latest member in the Sidewinder family of short-range air-to-air missiles. Touted as one of the most advanced short-range AAMs in the world, it can be easily integrated on a wide range of modern combat aircraft.

The missile is inducted by the US Navy and Air Force as well as air forces of eight international customers. It is deployed on F-15, F-16, F/A-18, Sea Harrier and F-4 fighters, A-4, AV-8B and Tornado attack aircraft, and AH-1 helicopter.

The AIM-9X Block-I variant is equipped with a focal plane array IR seeker, solid-propellant rocket, and annular blast fragmentation warhead. It offers outstanding resistance against infrared countermeasures. The AIM-9X Block II variant with updated electronics is currently under development.

AIM-132 ASRAAM
The ASRAAM (Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile) is designed by MBDA for within visual range (WVR) combat missions for the Royal Air Force (RAF). The missile is also deployed by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) on its F/A-18 Hornet strike aircraft.

The ASRAAM was inducted into service by the UK RAF in September 2002 and the RAAF in 2004. It can be integrated on Eurofighter Typhoon, Tornado, F/A-18, and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It is also compatible with aircraft fitted with AMRAAM or Sidewinder missiles.

The ASRAAM is guided by an advanced focal plane array Imaging Infra-Red (IIR) seeker and gathers the target data using the aircraft sensors. The missile integrates a high lethality blast fragmentation warhead with impact and laser proximity fuses. The low signature rocket motor fitted to the missile enables high speeds throughout the flight, while the guidance system ensures the engagement of targets in highly cluttered and countermeasures environments.


http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/a-darter-air-to-air-missile/
A-Darter
The A-Darter is a fifth generation air-to-air missile system developed by Denel Dynamics, Mectron, Avibras, and Opto Eletrônica. The missile is intended to equip next-generation fighter aircraft and is scheduled to enter into service with the South African and Brazilian air forces in 2014.

The missile can be integrated on JAS-39 Gripen, Hawk Mk120, F-5E/F Tiger II, F-5A/B and future F-X2 fighters. Its lightweight design is also compatible with conventional Sidewinder hard-points.

The missile is equipped with two-colour thermal imaging seeker and multi-mode Electronic Counter-Countermeasures (ECCM) suite for engaging targets in hostile countermeasures environment. It can also be guided towards the target by the host aircraft's radar and helmet-mounted sight.

 

[The SC]

R-73E/R-73EL
The R-73E/R-73EL (NATO code name: AA-11 Archer) short-range air-to-air missiles are produced by State Machine-Building Design Bureau "Vympel". The missiles are capable of intercepting fighter aircraft, bombers, attack and military transport aircraft.

The R-73E/R-73EL missiles can be fitted to MiG or Sukhoi type fighters, and other attack aircraft and helicopters. The fire-and-forget missiles employ all-aspect infrared homing guidance system for engaging the targets in cluttered and enemy active countermeasures environments.

The R-73E/R-73EL missiles are fired by P-72-1D/P-72-1DB2 air rail launcher. The solid-fuel rocket engine enables the missile to carry an 8kg continuous-rod warhead for a maximum range of 30km.

R-77 (RVV-AE)
The R-77 (RVV-AE) (NATO: AA-12 Adder) is a medium-range air-to-air missile developed by State Machine-Building Design Bureau "Vympel". The R-77's multi-purpose target engagement capabilities and resistance against countermeasures are among the best in the world.

The R-77 (RVV-AE) can be deployed on MiG/Sukhoi fighters and other foreign-made aircraft as well as land-based anti-air weapon systems. It is launched from AKU-170E launch unit aboard the aircraft.

The R-77 carries a 22.5kg multi-shaped charge rod type warhead for a maximum distance of 80km. An inertial/radio-corrected navigation system guides the missile during the initial flight phase, while a multi-function doppler-monopulse active radar seeker is employed in the terminal phase.

 

[The Accountant]

Why there is no PL15 and PL12 aka SD-10B ...

 

[The SC]

Why there is no PL15 and PL12 aka SD-10B ...

Most probably because they fit in some categories above..

The PL-12 (PiLi-12, 霹雳-12) is a active radar-guided beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile developed by the People's Republic of China. It is considered comparable to the American AIM-120 AMRAAM and the Russian R-77


via Popular Science...

The PL-15 is developed by the 607 Institute. It is the replacement for China's current BVRAAM, the radar guided, PL-12, which reportedly has a range of approximately 100km. Compared to the PL-12, the PL-15 has an improved active radar seeker and jam-resistant datalinks, along with a dual pulse rocket motor to extend its range.
Even in the prototype stage, the PL-15 is already an international star. Speaking at the 2015 Air Force Association conference the same week as the test, USAF Air Combatant Commander General Hawk Carlisle cited the PL-15 as the reason for Congress to fund a new missile to replace the American AMRAAM. His reasons for concern is the PL-15's range. By incorporating a ramjet engine, its range could reach 150-200km, was well as its terminal maneuverability. That would out-range existing American air-to-air missiles, making the PL-15 not just a threat to fighters like the F-35, but also to US bombers and aerial tankers critical to American air operations across the vast Pacific. General Carlisle called "out-sticking" the PL-15 a high priority for the USAF.

 

[randomradio]

Interestingly, India operates/will operate 6 of those 10.

There's no Derby, R-27 and other Japanese, Indian and Chinese missiles in the mix.

 

[The Accountant]

Interestingly, India operates/will operate 6 of those 10.

There's no Derby, R-27 and other Japanese, Indian and Chinese missiles in the mix.

No offence intended but purely from technical point ... is it wise to have such a huge variety of missiles ??? it is not only costing you guys much higher in terms of integration but will also be logistic nightmare ... world is moving towards standardization for cost saving ...

It means if you have four aircrafts from one base then you have to get four different type of missile in sufficient quantities for each ... further your inventory must also be high to keep a bare minimum stock ...

Lots of challenges .. why not to stick to 2 to 3 best systems ?

 

[Penguin]

Lots of challenges .. why not to stick to 2 to 3 best systems ?

That is what you get when you buy aircraft from a variety of source ;-)

 

[randomradio]

No offence intended but purely from technical point ... is it wise to have such a huge variety of missiles ??? it is not only costing you guys much higher in terms of integration but will also be logistic nightmare ... world is moving towards standardization for cost saving ...

It means if you have four aircrafts from one base then you have to get four different type of missile in sufficient quantities for each ... further your inventory must also be high to keep a bare minimum stock ...

Lots of challenges .. why not to stick to 2 to 3 best systems ?

The large variety of types does not create as much impact on a country with a growing defence budget.

According to the IAF, after a certain number has been achieved, there are no savings going for the same type again. So after 90 jets of one type, we can go for 90 of another type and the cost will be the same as going for another 90 of the first type. This is IAF-specific.

As for the weapons themselves, it's even less of a problem. A single type of jet can have multiple missiles from multiple countries integrated. So a Mirage-2000 that has used up its MICA load can land at any air base and equip the Astra. Long term, we plan to standardize with indigenous weapons, but that's not a cost saving measure.

When the defence budget is growing at 10-15% a year, the forces have a lot of flexibility in choosing what works best. The logistics nightmare argument is highly subjective, especially when we do not yet have any short term intentions of building an expeditionary force.

 

[The Accountant]

The large variety of types does not create as much impact on a country with a growing defence budget.

According to the IAF, after a certain number has been achieved, there are no savings going for the same type again. So after 90 jets of one type, we can go for 90 of another type and the cost will be the same as going for another 90 of the first type. This is IAF-specific.

As for the weapons themselves, it's even less of a problem. A single type of jet can have multiple missiles from multiple countries integrated. So a Mirage-2000 that has used up its MICA load can land at any air base and equip the Astra. Long term, we plan to standardize with indigenous weapons, but that's not a cost saving measure.

When the defence budget is growing at 10-15% a year, the forces have a lot of flexibility in choosing what works best. The logistics nightmare argument is highly subjective, especially when we do not yet have any short term intentions of building an expeditionary force.

I would humbly like to disagree with the cost ... Every new weapon induction involves cost ... In the terms of selection, induction, integration, buffer stock management and logistics management ... I can tell you this because this is my area of expertise ... Anyone telling you contrary to that is a plane lie ...

And it is not about budget or avalibility of funds ... Its about management ... Profitability of my company within group is highest within the MENAP region still we keep on focusing of efficiencies to further improve it ...

That is what you get when you buy aircraft from a variety of source ;-)

Poor planning on part of indians ... They have lot of funds but wasting them

 

[randomradio]

I would humbly like to disagree with the cost ... Every new weapon induction involves cost ... In the terms of selection, induction, integration, buffer stock management and logistics management ... I can tell you this because this is my area of expertise ... Anyone telling you contrary to that is a plane lie ...

And it is not about budget or avalibility of funds ... Its about management ... Profitability of my company within group is highest within the MENAP region still we keep on focusing of efficiencies to further improve it ...

That thing about cost was told by the IAF themselves. And it's true.

If the IAF purchases two aircraft that are different, it's like buying a car and a bike. Now, costs are lower for the bike, so you can buy two. And you can buy a 500cc Honda and a 500cc Yamaha, one with higher acceleration, the other with higher top speed. However operation and maintenance costs are similar even though you have two different bikes configured with two different settings.

At 90 jets of any type, the cost curve flattens out for the IAF. That's why they could maintain 14 different types at one point even when they were poorer than today. Most other air forces struggle with just 3 types. Today, the IAF has 6 types, which is a vast improvement compared to the late 80s.

As an example, for the French, a single Rafale costs $2.4M a year to operate. If you bring in all 126 Rafales, the cost of flying the Rafales is only $302M a year for the entire fleet.

In India, the yearly cost of operating an MKI is $3M. That's $378M a year for 126 jets.

Note that Indian costs will be at least half that of the French costs. So consider the Rafales to cost as less as $1.2M a year, that's $151.2M for the whole fleet. Proof: IAF M-2000s cost $3000 in CPFH while the French M-2000s cost $8000.

Similarly, the Gripen may cost as much as the Rafale to acquire, but the operations cost may be twice as less as the Rafale. Let's say 151.2/2 = $75.6M a year.

Any air force would prefer to maintain a higher acquisition to operation cost ratio. So what the IAF did is pay twice as much as the MKI for the Rafale, and brought in twice or thrice as much in terms of capabilities, while reducing the operations costs by half. It's a really good deal.

So instead of running 378 MKIs at a total cost of $1134M a year, we can have 126 each of MKIs, Rafales and Gripens and spend only $604.8M a year while also having boosted the overall capability of the air force with the new acquisitions. You've basically saved $529M a year, worth $21B over 40 years.

The reason why there is such a big cost difference is because the IAF is a high end force. So splitting this high end force into a mix of high end and low end jets brings in savings. Comparatively, most air forces are low end forces, so sticking to just one or two types makes more sense to them.

Your company is similar to the low end air forces. That's why it is harder for you to cut costs, so multiple types won't make sense in this case.

 

[The Accountant]

That thing about cost was told by the IAF themselves. And it's true.

If the IAF purchases two aircraft that are different, it's like buying a car and a bike. Now, costs are lower for the bike, so you can buy two. And you can buy a 500cc Honda and a 500cc Yamaha, one with higher acceleration, the other with higher top speed. However operation and maintenance costs are similar even though you have two different bikes configured with two different settings.

At 90 jets of any type, the cost curve flattens out for the IAF. That's why they could maintain 14 different types at one point even when they were poorer than today. Most other air forces struggle with just 3 types. Today, the IAF has 6 types, which is a vast improvement compared to the late 80s.

As an example, for the French, a single Rafale costs $2.4M a year to operate. If you bring in all 126 Rafales, the cost of flying the Rafales is only $302M a year for the entire fleet.

In India, the yearly cost of operating an MKI is $3M. That's $378M a year for 126 jets.

Note that Indian costs will be at least half that of the French costs. So consider the Rafales to cost as less as $1.2M a year, that's $151.2M for the whole fleet. Proof: IAF M-2000s cost $3000 in CPFH while the French M-2000s cost $8000.

Similarly, the Gripen may cost as much as the Rafale to acquire, but the operations cost may be twice as less as the Rafale. Let's say 151.2/2 = $75.6M a year.

Any air force would prefer to maintain a higher acquisition to operation cost ratio. So what the IAF did is pay twice as much as the MKI for the Rafale, and brought in twice or thrice as much in terms of capabilities, while reducing the operations costs by half. It's a really good deal.

So instead of running 378 MKIs at a total cost of $1134M a year, we can have 126 each of MKIs, Rafales and Gripens and spend only $604.8M a year while also having boosted the overall capability of the air force with the new acquisitions. You've basically saved $529M a year, worth $21B over 40 years.

The reason why there is such a big cost difference is because the IAF is a high end force. So splitting this high end force into a mix of high end and low end jets brings in savings. Comparatively, most air forces are low end forces, so sticking to just one or two types makes more sense to them.

Your company is similar to the low end air forces. That's why it is harder for you to cut costs, so multiple types won't make sense in this case.

Brother sorry but you dont know anything about how cost works ... have you ever heard of fixed cost ???

No mater you procure onw missile or 100,000 missile there will be aquisition cost which will include evaluation integration training of operation training for maintenance testing of operational purposes inventory management software and many others ... so if you are having 6 differnt missiles you are incurring it for all six times ...

There is a diffence between bike and missiles ... all the bikes work on same principles and on same road but for each missile you have to integrate with each new platform separatly .. you have to train with each missile seaparately ... have to make tactics separately ...

I would have agreed to your point if it would be a comparison between low end and high end ... but you are talking about all of the high end missiles ... 6 high end missiles ... none of them is cheap or low end ... you can say at it current status astra is low end with future potential to improve ...

As for your aicrafts we can see it is same story ... a lot many platforms ...

It gives india a good punch as adversory like Pakistan have to make differnt strategues for each aircraft but at a much higher cost ... if i would have budget with me ... i would have chisen less platforms but with very high tech which is still india missing untill rafael arrives ...

 

[randomradio]

Brother sorry but you dont know anything about how cost works ... have you ever heard of fixed cost ???

No mater you procure onw missile or 100,000 missile there will be aquisition cost which will include evaluation integration training of operation training for maintenance testing of operational purposes inventory management software and many others ... so if you are having 6 differnt missiles you are incurring it for all six times ...

There is a diffence between bike and missiles ... all the bikes work on same principles and on same road but for each missile you have to integrate with each new platform separatly .. you have to train with each missile seaparately ... have to make tactics separately ...

I would have agreed to your point if it would be a comparison between low end and high end ... but you are talking about all of the high end missiles ... 6 high end missiles ... none of them is cheap or low end ... you can say at it current status astra is low end with future potential to improve ...

As for your aicrafts we can see it is same story ... a lot many platforms ...

It gives india a good punch as adversory like Pakistan have to make differnt strategues for each aircraft but at a much higher cost ... if i would have budget with me ... i would have chisen less platforms but with very high tech which is still india missing untill rafael arrives ...

The acquisition cost is small compared to the actual cost of the jet. And it reduces exponentially once more numbers are procured.

Yes, we have to pay for the cost of integration of weapons and so on, but the cost is very small compared to the capability the platform brings, and we are talking about overall cost reduction, not just piecemeal reduction. Integrating the Meteor on Rafale will cost about $40 or 50M as a one time cost, but by buying the Rafale, we save about 150M+ every year on 126 jets. For 40 years, that's $6B+ saved. Compared to that, the cost of integrating, buying and operating the Meteor is paltry.

Btw, we did not pay for the Meteor's integration cost. Our orders are so big that France has decided to sell the Rafales to India with only a 7-10% profit margin, while reinvesting half the contract value back into Indian industry. So ADLA has paid for the integration of Meteor, not IAF. We only have to purchase and operate them. The money saved can go into developing the Rafale further, which is what the French are counting on. This new govt knows how to sign deals.

Astra Mk1 is a high end missile, it will be second only to the Meteor. Meaning, it is better than MICA, Derby, R-77 and R-27. Astra Mk2 will be similar to the IDerby-ER, but less capable than Meteor.

Also, each missile is specially designed for the aircraft it will go on. For example, the Aim-132 beat all competing missiles in a tender for the Jaguar based on the IAF's specs. Python V lost to the Aim-132 on costs. It's a pretty large number, nearly 400 missiles.

We have 230+ MKI, 120 Mig-21 and 63 Mig-29. That's 413+ aircraft that use R-77, R-73 and R-27. This decision was obvious. Costs are very well managed over such a large inventory. Thousands of missiles in total.

We have 49 M-2000. We bought 493 MICAs. And the same missiles can be used on Rafale also. We will eventually have 2000+ MICAs and Meteors.

As for LCA, it can use R-73, Derby and Python-V. Again, it was an obvious choice given the aircraft's development path. We have 4000+ R-73, so it's good to spread it out among our fleet. IAF has purchased about 1500 Derby and Pythons for the Spyder SAMs already, and may purchase another 1000+ more for the LCA. So there is already an ecosystem built for the missiles.

And all our aircraft will use Astra Mk1 and Mk2. A few more missiles will be coming in beyond the ones mentioned. RVV-BD, K-100, K-77M, K-77 ramjet, RVV-MD, K-74M2, Type 730, Astra ramjet, IDerby-ER, possibly a Stunner variant etc. Possibly the Aim-120D and Aim-9X as well.

In comparison, Qatar bought 200 Meteors for their 24 Rafales.

So we are talking about such large volumes that it is meaningless to expect any sort of cost cutting by sticking to just one or two types.

We have not raised a budget air force, we do cost cutting only after we know for a fact that capability has not been compromised. And there is a reason for this. We buy a Russian jet and a similar capability French/Western jet for strategic reasons. That's why MKI/Rafale, Mig-29/M-2000, Mig-27/Jaguar combination was purchased. And the Russians and French/West don't allow the integration of other missiles into their jets. There is a certain level of duplication of capabilities, but that's also in IAF's interests because the numbers are enough. Jaguar has the Aim-132 because it won a tender. And LCA has Israeli weapons because we chose the Israelis for our weapons development. So it's all planned, not haphazard purchases.

 

[kṣamā]

@randomradio : Just to add to you post, variety also aggregates the strength while negating the cons. No doubt we have train our boys on different platforms but that also means our enemies will have to plan to counter variety of threats on not so diverse platforms. Just my 2 cents.

 

[ravi gupta]

The acquisition cost is small compared to the actual cost of the jet. And it reduces exponentially once more numbers are procured.

Yes, we have to pay for the cost of integration of weapons and so on, but the cost is very small compared to the capability the platform brings, and we are talking about overall cost reduction, not just piecemeal reduction. Integrating the Meteor on Rafale will cost about $40 or 50M as a one time cost, but by buying the Rafale, we save about 150M+ every year on 126 jets. For 40 years, that's $6B+ saved. Compared to that, the cost of integrating, buying and operating the Meteor is paltry.

Btw, we did not pay for the Meteor's integration cost. Our orders are so big that France has decided to sell the Rafales to India with only a 7-10% profit margin, while reinvesting half the contract value back into Indian industry. So ADLA has paid for the integration of Meteor, not IAF. We only have to purchase and operate them. The money saved can go into developing the Rafale further, which is what the French are counting on. This new govt knows how to sign deals.

Astra Mk1 is a high end missile, it will be second only to the Meteor. Meaning, it is better than MICA, Derby, R-77 and R-27. Astra Mk2 will be similar to the IDerby-ER, but less capable than Meteor.

Also, each missile is specially designed for the aircraft it will go on. For example, the Aim-132 beat all competing missiles in a tender for the Jaguar based on the IAF's specs. Python V lost to the Aim-132 on costs. It's a pretty large number, nearly 400 missiles.

We have 230+ MKI, 120 Mig-21 and 63 Mig-29. That's 413+ aircraft that use R-77, R-73 and R-27. This decision was obvious. Costs are very well managed over such a large inventory. Thousands of missiles in total.

We have 49 M-2000. We bought 493 MICAs. And the same missiles can be used on Rafale also. We will eventually have 2000+ MICAs and Meteors.

As for LCA, it can use R-73, Derby and Python-V. Again, it was an obvious choice given the aircraft's development path. We have 4000+ R-73, so it's good to spread it out among our fleet. IAF has purchased about 1500 Derby and Pythons for the Spyder SAMs already, and may purchase another 1000+ more for the LCA. So there is already an ecosystem built for the missiles.

And all our aircraft will use Astra Mk1 and Mk2. A few more missiles will be coming in beyond the ones mentioned. RVV-BD, K-100, K-77M, K-77 ramjet, RVV-MD, K-74M2, Type 730, Astra ramjet, IDerby-ER, possibly a Stunner variant etc. Possibly the Aim-120D and Aim-9X as well.

In comparison, Qatar bought 200 Meteors for their 24 Rafales.

So we are talking about such large volumes that it is meaningless to expect any sort of cost cutting by sticking to just one or two types.

We have not raised a budget air force, we do cost cutting only after we know for a fact that capability has not been compromised. And there is a reason for this. We buy a Russian jet and a similar capability French/Western jet for strategic reasons. That's why MKI/Rafale, Mig-29/M-2000, Mig-27/Jaguar combination was purchased. And the Russians and French/West don't allow the integration of other missiles into their jets. There is a certain level of duplication of capabilities, but that's also in IAF's interests because the numbers are enough. Jaguar has the Aim-132 because it won a tender. And LCA has Israeli weapons because we chose the Israelis for our weapons development. So it's all planned, not haphazard purchases.

Too much logic for him to understand.However very good post.Also like to add one more point we deny our adversary to have that,as 6 out of 10 we have.

 

[randomradio]

@randomradio : Just to add to you post, variety also aggregates the strength while negating the cons. No doubt we have train our boys on different platforms but that also means our enemies will have to plan to counter variety of threats on not so diverse platforms. Just my 2 cents.

BVR tactics are practically the same for any type of missile. It depends on how well they train on their jets and how good their equipment is. That means they will have to shell out more funds in order to train more, and get very good EW systems, neither of which the Pakistanis can afford.

Too much logic for him to understand.However very good post.Also like to add one more point we deny our adversary to have that,as 6 out of 10 we have.

Nah, the Europeans and Americans will sell the Pakistanis anything as long as they have the greens.