Multimode Seeker

“Multi-mode” could be more accurately described as “software definable”. RF and/or IR imagery can be used in different ways depending on the target.

A single software definable RF seeker can have the following modes:
1. Active radar homing
2. Semi-active radar homing
3. Home on jam
4. Anti-radiation homing

A software definable IR seeker can have the following modes:
1. IR imaging
2. IR laser spot tracking

The seeker software can also alter pursuit modes based on target distance (trajectory shaping vs direct flight to target), pursuit profiles depending upon engagement angle (proportaional navigation, direct/tail chase, inertial GPS), fuzing options (ballistic missile [very fast] vs aircraft [relatively slow]) and blind targeting options (e.g. LOAL).

Depending upon the sophistication of microprocessors and memory, the seeker may have different levels of automatic target recognition. And seeker sophistication allows many forms of ECCM.

The sophistication of a software definable seeker is why comparison between the performance of AIM-120 A/B with AIM-120 C/D isn’t valid. Apples and oranges.

Multi Mode seeker can mean different things. It could be a seeker that uses different modes. The SM6 for example has an active and a semi active mode. The brimstone uses multiple targeting capabilities, as does the SDB II. One cannot judge ‘superiority’ through nomenclature. A multi mode seeker for example can have the RF component that is AESA

I understand… so, the nomenclature “Multi-mode seeker” is very general and not specific :apologetic:

Thanks for your time!

Multi Mode seeker can mean different things. It could be a seeker that uses different modes. The SM6 for example has an active and a semi active mode. The brimstone uses multiple targeting capabilities, as does the SDB II. One cannot judge ‘superiority’ through nomenclature. A multi mode seeker for example can have the RF component that is AESA

Just to add to that, HOJ could be considered an extra mode.

Multi Mode seeker can mean different things. It could be a seeker that uses different modes. The SM6 for example has an active and a semi active mode. The brimstone uses multiple targeting capabilities, as does the SDB II. One cannot judge ‘superiority’ through nomenclature. A multi mode seeker for example can have the RF component that is AESA

A multi-mode seeker uses more than one form of guidance. E.g. Brimstone I/II uses laser guidance and MMW radar, so it’s regarded as dual mode. It also uses INS/GPS but that’s really just to give it a steer although weapon manufacturers regard it as a separate mode.

In the case of the Cuda, I’m not sure. It doesn’t seem to have IIR from models, so maybe it’s just different wavebands for the radar; if that is the case, it’s probably going to be AESA. So essentially ARH but using AESA radar and different wavebands (probably for different ranges). Higher frequency gives better resolution and accuracy but at the cost of range. It’s unclear whether it will use 2 frequencies simultaneously or switch from one to the other. Simultaneous use would make jamming difficult.

Asking for the most advanced seeker is honestly like asking who the best employee in the world is. Best seeker for what task, at what range, in what conditions? Even then, you’d only be able to discuss type rather than try to sift through manufacturer claims and highlight reality vs fiction.

As a CAS AGM it would be difficult to claim there’s a better seeker head than Brimstone II right now. All weather, very difficult to jam, lock after launch, autonomous lock after launch based on search and target details etc. As regards AAMs and SAMs, damned if I could even hazard guess. Fixed target cruise missiles? JASSM, Storm Shadow and KEPD 350 seekers are all pretty much on-par, state-of-the-art, let’s go through the square window seekers.

Thanks so much for your answers… 😎

I will be more clear about these:

1) I’m referring about “air to air missile”, above all, current (most advanced) and future missiles.

2) Just I was asking the difference between “multi-mode” and “AESA” seekers, because there is a lot info. about the different kind and “denomination” of missile guidance and some case, the info. may be confused :apologetic:

2.1) I read about the future missile CUDA that will have “multi-mode seeker”… [ATTACH=CONFIG]228642[/ATTACH], also I read about the future missile K-77M that will have “AESA seeker”… my confusion is about the missile CUDA (look at the picture), because won’t have “IIR seeker/EO” neither “laser guidance”, so only would have different wavebands for the radar, but I just want to be sure of this!

3) And my main doubt is if a “multi-mode seeker” (not consider other kind of guidance like CUDA) is based in AESA technology, or is only an improved “ARH” with different wavebands.

3.1) I was asking: What is the most advanced seeker?… I mean, if an AESA seeker is more advanced than a multi-mode seeker or vice versa, that was all…

Greetings

Hi all…

I have questions about advanced seekers…

1) What is a “Multimode seeker”?

2) How work a “Multimode seeker” compared with the classic “Active radar homing”?

3) What is the difference between “AESA seeker” (will be integrated into the Russian “K-77M”) and “Multimode seeker” (will be integrated into the American “CUDA”)?

4) What is the most advanced seeker?

Greetings

A multi-mode seeker uses more than one form of guidance. E.g. Brimstone I/II uses laser guidance and MMW radar, so it’s regarded as dual mode. It also uses INS/GPS but that’s really just to give it a steer although weapon manufacturers regard it as a separate mode.

In the case of the Cuda, I’m not sure. It doesn’t seem to have IIR from models, so maybe it’s just different wavebands for the radar; if that is the case, it’s probably going to be AESA. So essentially ARH but using AESA radar and different wavebands (probably for different ranges). Higher frequency gives better resolution and accuracy but at the cost of range. It’s unclear whether it will use 2 frequencies simultaneously or switch from one to the other. Simultaneous use would make jamming difficult.

Asking for the most advanced seeker is honestly like asking who the best employee in the world is. Best seeker for what task, at what range, in what conditions? Even then, you’d only be able to discuss type rather than try to sift through manufacturer claims and highlight reality vs fiction.

As a CAS AGM it would be difficult to claim there’s a better seeker head than Brimstone II right now. All weather, very difficult to jam, lock after launch, autonomous lock after launch based on search and target details etc. As regards AAMs and SAMs, damned if I could even hazard guess. Fixed target cruise missiles? JASSM, Storm Shadow and KEPD 350 seekers are all pretty much on-par, state-of-the-art, let’s go through the square window seekers.