AA-11 Archer question

Anyway, I don`t understand why US dropped it, if they had a similar design already on the F-4. Any clues? Thanks

The main problem with the american system was that they didn’t have the missiles to match so basically you had AIM-9 missiles with a Field of view of less than 40 degrees on the pylon, which is well within the effective field of a scanning radar in a close combat mode. The Soviet system only really becomes useful when you add both a wide FOV (90-120 degrees in the Archer, 110 degrees for the R-27T/ET models) and of course the added advantage of thrust vector controls on the rocket motor of the Archer allow for very hard turns off the rail to actually keep high offboresight targets in view at launch.

But for the sake of discussion, I feel new features should be incorporated to the Russian HMDS. e.g night vision, cueing of other fire control sensors, if it is not already capable of.

The problem there comes down to weight. In a helo you might pull a max of 3 gs so an extra 1-2kgs for NVGs is acceptable, but adding 1-2kgs in a fighter leads to adding 9-18 kgs for a high g turn to your head. Unless you head is supported that could really strain your neck, and for what? At night you would be using radar, IRST, and off platform sources for target finding rather more than the Mk 1 eyeball. The EO system fitted to the Mig-29K and late model Flankers includes a Thermal sight, whose picture is displayed in the HUD. Adding a few computers and projecting that image in a monocle probably wouldn’t be that hard, in fact a full binocular setup would be relatively straight forward in theory… but again I don’t think it would be pivotal in combat. Certainly in navigation modes or ground attack it might be more useful…

Good call, I’d also like to know why the USN did not keep it in service. In the mean time I found this article which contains a lot of technical information (although the illustrations alluded to in the text aren’t provided, sadly): http://www.hartov.dk/Yahoo/vtassafe.htm

What were you hoping for? A stabilised built in laser rangefinder/Thermal Imager/MMW radar sensor built into the helmet. While supposedly better western HMS are still on drawing boards or anywhere except in aircraft these simple sights have been operational now for almost 20 years. Exactly what else would a proper HMS do that this can’t? Do you really think in the few second it take a pilot to look at and lock up an enemy aircraft his height or speed or AOA will change so drastically that he will need this information in his visual field of view?

well, I have to say I too agree. Surely, my comment on the ‘look’ of the helmet did not mean to undermine the advantage, Arsenal HMDS has provided Russian fighters in WVR arena, over the years. But for the sake of discussion, I feel new features should be incorporated to the Russian HMDS. e.g night vision, cueing of other fire control sensors, if it is not already capable of.

cheers,

Thanks Garry, I would not say it better myself. I tried once the HMS cueing on the Mig-29 FM simulator at the AFB. After a while I used it completely subconscious. The Russian HMS may look obsolete, but it`s simply and effective tool and makes any IR missile even more lethal. Anyway, I don`t understand why US dropped it, if they had a similar design already on the F-4. Any clues? Thanks

Thanks for the pic martinez, can’t say it looks anything close to a hi-tech helmet that makes the R-73 lethal. But I guess it is the very first operational HMDS helmet. Who will be the manufacturer for the helmet by the way?
Thanks for the pic martinez, can’t say it looks anything close to a hi-tech helmet that makes the R-73 lethal. But I guess it is the very first operational HMDS helmet. Who will be the manufacturer for the helmet by the way?

What were you hoping for? A stabilised built in laser rangefinder/Thermal Imager/MMW radar sensor built into the helmet. While supposedly better western HMS are still on drawing boards or anywhere except in aircraft these simple sights have been operational now for almost 20 years. Exactly what else would a proper HMS do that this can’t? Do you really think in the few second it take a pilot to look at and lock up an enemy aircraft his height or speed or AOA will change so drastically that he will need this information in his visual field of view?

Arsenal, first HMCS was american VTAS used in F-4J Phantom-II along AIM-9H Sidewinder SEAM.

Thanks Pit, did a search on the aforementioned keyword. Apparently, much have been mentioned above the HMS in another thread here; Russian Attack Capabilities II . I should not rob this thread further.

cheers,

Thanks for the pic martinez, can’t say it looks anything close to a hi-tech helmet that makes the R-73 lethal. But I guess it is the very first operational HMDS helmet. Who will be the manufacturer for the helmet by the way?

cheers,

Arsenal, first HMCS was american VTAS used in F-4J Phantom-II along AIM-9H Sidewinder SEAM.

Regards

Thanks for the pic martinez, can’t say it looks anything close to a hi-tech helmet that makes the R-73 lethal. But I guess it is the very first operational HMDS helmet. Who will be the manufacturer for the helmet by the way?

cheers,

Well it did sound logical when I said it 😀
Daniel

😉

Some corrections to my previous statements. The target data for the R-73 are supplied by RLPK, KOLS and the NSC. That`s all the combat employment manual says. Also, the R-73 seeker is able to lock-on after “blind” emergency launch. I dare to say the 60degree off-boresight capability of the R-73E could be real or at least I believe it.

Hmm, it does sound logical if you think this way. The R-73 off-boresight angle is 45 degree which is less than the N-019 radar scan limits (azimuth ±60, +57degree in elevation), then the HMS caged with the N-019 could provide an initial launch data to the R-73 seeker. After the missile is launched it has to turn quickly to the target sector according to data loaded when on pylon. The missile should be able to acquire the target with its own IR seeker. Actually the combat manual doesnt mention such a feature, or whether it is possible for R-73 to achieve lock-on after launch. The benefit would be an increased off-boresight to 60 degree which is fact the limit of the Mig-29 HMS.

what do you think?

Well it did sound logical when I said it 😀 But I had rather overlooked the IRST or the idea of the HMS just telling the missile sensor where to look rather than the missile where to go.

Daniel

anyone has a photo of the Russian-made HMDS helmet to share? Can’t quite picture how the ‘glass monocle’ looks in the flip-down position.

cheers,

Actually I think you’ll find its a function of a high off boresite shot with the missile being cued by the HMS. The missile is launched while the target is outside the missile seekers own field of view. Target information is provided by the HMS. Until the missile can bring its own seeker to bear on the target the pilot must maintain contact with the target via the HMS to continue cueing the missile onto the target. Once the missile seeker has accquired the target then the missile can be left to its own devices.

Daniel

Hmm, it does sound logical if you think this way. The R-73 off-boresight angle is 45 degree which is less than the N-019 radar scan limits (azimuth ±60, +57degree in elevation), then the HMS caged with the N-019 could provide an initial launch data to the R-73 seeker. After the missile is launched it has to turn quickly to the target sector according to data loaded when on pylon. The missile should be able to acquire the target with its own IR seeker. Actually the combat manual doesnt mention such a feature, or whether it is possible for R-73 to achieve lock-on after launch. The benefit would be an increased off-boresight to 60 degree which is fact the limit of the Mig-29 HMS.

what do you think?

Yes i think so, i read it in aviation week, amazing magazine! Lot better then flight or AFM.

They have not decided on millimetric or centimetric radards for it . and they mentioned that it would be similar to the British ASRAAM

just read article where they have said that AGATS milimetric radar shall be used on the A-11 to make it all weather , the benifit also includes better aerodynamic performance due to a more “pointy” nose.

The new missile is also said to have midcourse update but that is bye radar not by helmet cueing.

if I`m not mistaken, you spoke about this one. The “150mm in diameter” radar seeker fits to the R-73 well.
M

2meat
an official Vympel leaflet taken at Paris airshow 2005. I hope it convince you that the Swiss writer was wrong.

best regards
M

No, The helmet mounted sight is a very simple system. Think of a glass monocle that has an electronicly lit crosshair in it. To use it in combat you flip it down so it is over your eye, so wherever you look there is a crosshair over one of your eyes. You look at the target and place the crosshair on the target and then press a button on one of the flight controls to get a lock. You will know it is locked on because the crosshair starts blinking to tell you it is a lock. When you press the lock on button the IRST and Radar and the seeker in the head of the activated R-73 all look in the direction the helmet is looking (based on IR sensors on the HMS on around the HUD that detect the position of the helmet and the direction the pilot is looking). It uses this angular information to turn the IRST, Radar, and Missile seeker to point at the target and when the missile gets a lock it sends a command to the HMS to start the crosshair reticle blinking. Once it starts blinking the missile is locked and can be fired. The pilot is also free to move their head once the lock is aquired, though it is obviously in the pilots interests to keep watching the enemy plane and launch his missle as soon as possible to get rid of the threat. The high off boresight capabilities of the Seeker in the R-73 is matched by its off the wing manouverability as it has a limited thrust vector control that allows it to engage targets at high off boresight angles off the wing.

As far as I know the R-73 does not use any form of midcourse update (barring any new model like the models matt is mentioning). The IR guided R-73 would not benefit from the hms being used to continuously illuminate the target as it doesn’t illuminate anything. All it does is generate a set of angular information used by the IRST, Radar and Missiles fitted so they don’t need to scan the whole sky to find a target, they are basically manually (and fully passively locked on). Obviously with the radar not emitting you can lock the IRST and any IR guided missiles on any WVR target totally passively, once locked the IRST gives better angular accuracy than the radar, and a short ranging ping from the radar can get range to the target as well if necessary.

(Note the IRST, Radar, and HMS are all integrated in the Mig-29 and Su-27 and are designed to work together. You can lock targets with any one of the three and hand off that target to either of the other two if you want to be more passive, or if you need to know the range to a target outside laser rangefinder range.)

just read article where they have said that AGATS milimetric radar shall be used on the A-11 to make it all weather , the benifit also includes better aerodynamic performance due to a more “pointy” nose.

The new missile is also said to have midcourse update but that is bye radar not by helmet cueing.

Actually I think you’ll find its a function of a high off boresite shot with the missile being cued by the HMS. The missile is launched while the target is outside the missile seekers own field of view. Target information is provided by the HMS. Until the missile can bring its own seeker to bear on the target the pilot must maintain contact with the target via the HMS to continue cueing the missile onto the target. Once the missile seeker has accquired the target then the missile can be left to its own devices.

Daniel

“Since an Archer launch includes illuminating the target until impact, the pilot has to keep his head turning towards the target, a very tiresome procedure when performed in heavy G dogfights.”

So, the Archer is not a fire-and-forget AAM???

The Archer is a fire and forget missile. Once locked on to a target the missile seeker recieves no information from the launch aircraft in flight. I would suggest that the pilot is choosing to follow the target with his eyes so he can confirm whether there is a hit or not so he knows whether to fire another or to search for a new target. ie a SA thing rather than a weapon guidance thing.

Early models had a radar proximity fuse and the later models had laser and that is the only active system the R-73s use. Guidance is fully passive and there is no midcourse updates nor any lock on after launch capabilities with any model R-73 that I have heard of that is in service.

It is possible they might have confused the Archer with the Alamo. The R-27R with the standard burn motor might be used at relatively close range and it uses SARH guidance. I would have thought at such ranges Archers would have been the preferred weapon because they are fire and forget and have better terminal aerodynamic performance for manouvering targets.

The Long burn R-27ERs weren’t used on early model Mig-29s as used by the East German AF.

IR ARCHERs are fire-and-forget. They might be talking about a mid-course update since the missile does have a pretty good range, but that’d be the first I’ve heard of such a feature on the R-73. In that case you’d have to keep the target in view of the radar, but only until the seeker locks on.