Found this @ http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Aircraft/Missiles/R-73.html
An improved version, designated R-73RDM2, has an up-rated rocket motor giving twice the range and seeker sensitivity of the earlier model under typical combat conditions. It can also be fired rearward to protect the rear hemisphere of the launching aircraft. It has a 90º off-boresight capability, re-programmable digital control electronics, a better resistance to IR counter-measures and the capability to engage low-flying targets. The integrated counter-countermeasures (ICCM) combines four different techniques and has an algorithm that will allow the missile to shift its aim from the engine of a targeted aircraft to the middle of the airframe in the final milliseconds of an intercept. The R-73RDM2 has a range of 40 km and a maximum speed of Mach 4.
Is this information true? And, what’s the designation of the R-73 fitted with additional rocket booster section for backward operation?
By: focsletramp - 21st September 2011 at 10:08
Need help!!! Answers needed for questions relating to KH-31/AS-17/Krypton
Can anybody please help with following information:
What are the main vulnerabilities of the KH 31/AS 17/Krypton, ie. HOJ, REPO etc.
What is the missile’s RCS?
How many salvos fired?
Its flight profile?
Off bore capabilities?
Is it effected by weather?
Its processor computer?
Any help would be much appreciated, thanks for looking!
By: Arabella-Cox - 1st May 2007 at 08:56
As far as I know there are two export model Archers.
The R-73E and R-73EL. The E means export model and the only difference between the two models is that the R-73E model has a radar proximity fuse to detonate the warhead, while the R-73EL has a more accurate and reliable laser based proximity fuse.
Regarding the rear launched Archer, as far as I know there was no model with a rocket booster to improve range. This would have been too difficult to use as the Archer is pretty much cleared for launch for the entire flight envelope of the fighter, from 0 g to +9 g, from high speed to very low speed. For it to function properly (ie retain lock on) as the rear fired missile passed through a phase of zero velocity it would need to be self powered… ie the booster would have to have been jettisoned and the Archers rocket motor would have to be operating… otherwise the weapon would stall and break lock like the R-27s did.
As I mentioned the only modification, if you can call it that was a fairing over the tail to improve aerodynamics during normal forward flight, this being destroyed on launch.
By: Nick_76 - 30th April 2007 at 21:24
That report is wrong. The BR website hasnt updated the R73 page for ages, and the correct designation of the R73s in IAF service is R73E, not M2 or whatever.
By: RayR - 30th April 2007 at 21:05
I am not sure that the designation RDM2 is correct.I think it should be R73E.
By: Zare - 30th April 2007 at 21:01
I’m pretty much positive that i’ve seen information about additional rocket booster fit on both R-73 and R-27. Booster was used to leave the missile in V=0 in the air, from where missile used it’s onboard thruster to progress in opposite direction.
R-27 was unsuccessful because of it’s heavy reliance on control surfaces, but i’ve also read the R-73 passed the tests good.
Garry, any clues about the R-73RDM2?
By: Arabella-Cox - 30th April 2007 at 09:05
The rearward firing model of the Archer was a standard Archer. No booster could be fitted due to flight control problems. Basically a standard archer with a aerodynamic fairing over its rear to reduce drag during carriage on the aircraft. When launched backwards its thrust vector control vanes were crucial to making it work. The R-27 had also been tested as being a much larger weapon it was expected that the extra fuel on board would compensate for starting off flying backwards. However without thrust vectoring vanes as the R-27 passed through the period of zero rearward speed as it accelerated backwards it no longer had anything holding the weight of the missile body up and its nose stalled and dropped down facing the ground as its big butterfly wings had no airflow and therefore stopped stabilising the weapon. The R-73 has thrust vector control vanes that managed to keep the nose pointing at the target through the problem phase of flying at zero speed and allowed the weapon to maintain continuous lock on the target. Range was dramatically shorter as you would expect.
Sign In
April 29, 2007 at 2:44 am