The USN had simply HMS back in the 1970s as did South Africa, before the Soviets.
The Russian HMS are just that, a simple sighting rectile. The Eurofighter, Israeli and US are more closer to HMD with similar imagery to the HUD. The Eurofighter HMD is also hardened against laser dazzlers and can mount night vision cameras on the side. ISTR the F-35 JSF will not be fitted with a HUD, just have the HMD.
NSM is pretty cool, ISTR mention made of a proposal for a slightly shorter one sized for internal carriage in the JSF internal bay. However it can be fooled by both decoy dispensers and is not strictly all weather (would have trouble in fog for example).
By: Arabella-Cox - 4th August 2005 at 10:31
It is your target speed, distance, and aspect that appear near the TD box
Which is kinda irrelevant isn’t it?
Either you can lock it or you can’t, whether it is doing 40kts or 400kts, if it is within the off boresight range of your missile it will lock, if it isn’t it won’t. Otherwise what is the point of high launch manouverability and high rate of turn seeker elements and wider FOVs?
By: cru - 18th January 2005 at 12:44
in any of these cases having your airspeed and height in your personal field of view means zip.
It is your target speed, distance, and aspect that appear near the TD box
By: Arabella-Cox - 18th January 2005 at 12:34
The new US and W Europe planes are equipped with HMDs and not just HMSs for the same reason. Not to mention that, as I said, Russians are working to at HMDs.
I really don’t see the advantage of HMS over HMCS (helmet mounted cueing systems). If it is inside the radars field of view a short IFF squawk should determine its friendliness, if it isn’t inside the FOV you can maintain lock with the IRST and try to move it to within your FOV. If you are operating in friendly airspace then ground based sensors or airborne sensors may already have detected and identified it as hostile or friendly so you just need to fire. If it is within visual range… is it an enemy plane or not… in any of these cases having your airspeed and height in your personal field of view means zip.
By: cru - 18th January 2005 at 09:22
Something No Russian pilot have ever had? I guess a simple radio jammer would have been sufficient to make useless the entire GCI network over the SU?
Interesting.
??? The Russians had datalink from the mid 50′ (Lazur on Su 9, Su 15 TM). However the TKS 2, presently the most modern Russian datalink used on Su 27 SM is far from what the MIDS-LVT (F 16, F 18, Eurofighter, Rafale, Mirage 2000) and MIDS-FDL (F 15) could offer.
Despite not telling the pilot how high or how fast he is flying the helmet mounted cueing system in the Fulcrum/Flanker gave the Russian pilots in addition to R-73 missiles a WVR combat advantage. Their near BVR detection system would have been IRSTs which were no where near as useful as a modern radar but passive and able to detect most targets at well beyond visual range. For IFF interogations with the target tracked by IRST or HMS a very short transmission from the radar could be used that hopefully minimises the enemies chance of detecting the intercepting aircraft.
Gary, the idea is to fire before the enemy does and run. That’s why in the 70′ the Americans introduced on F 14, F 15, F 16, F 18 dedicated WVR radar modes, like supersearch, boresight and vertical scan. That’s the reason that everybody (Russians, West Europeans) adopted these modes too.
The same reason prompted the introduction of the HMD in the 70′ by US Navy and later, in the 89’by the Russians on the MiG 29 and Su 27 (albeit with a more capable missile).
The same reason made Israelis to go one step further and introducing HMDs (Dash).
The new US and W Europe planes are equipped with HMDs and not just HMSs for the same reason. Not to mention that, as I said, Russians are working to at HMDs.
This means that, far from being some fancy toys, HMDs are more effective than crude HMDs. In these days, US and Europeans defense budgets are so tights that unless a system is consider vital it is not considered.
By: Arabella-Cox - 18th January 2005 at 06:24
Arsenal is working to a comparable system. Don’t know the situation in this moment.
I have seen photos of several systems that look quite different that have been credited to Russian designers, though admittedly some may have been for rotary wing crew.
You forget the datalink. Unless you don’t have an AWACS or Hawkeye around (unlikely for a JHMCS user),you still get a decent sitiuation awarness,no mather where your radar is pointing.
Something No Russian pilot have ever had? I guess a simple radio jammer would have been sufficient to make useless the entire GCI network over the SU?
Interesting.
Despite not telling the pilot how high or how fast he is flying the helmet mounted cueing system in the Fulcrum/Flanker gave the Russian pilots in addition to R-73 missiles a WVR combat advantage. Their near BVR detection system would have been IRSTs which were no where near as useful as a modern radar but passive and able to detect most targets at well beyond visual range. For IFF interogations with the target tracked by IRST or HMS a very short transmission from the radar could be used that hopefully minimises the enemies chance of detecting the intercepting aircraft.
By: cru - 17th January 2005 at 10:04
[HTML]Regardless of air to air performance, HMS definitely have an air to ground application. The Jaguar GR.3A can use the TIALD targeting pod from low altitude, and US ones are being used in Iraq.[/HTML]
Correct.It seems that it reduced dramatically the time needed to aquire the target,reducing the time over the target and thus you can exit the dager area in a hurry.
By: Peter G - 17th January 2005 at 09:40
Regardless of air to air performance, HMS definitely have an air to ground application. The Jaguar GR.3A can use the TIALD targeting pod from low altitude, and US ones are being used in Iraq.
By: cru - 17th January 2005 at 06:04
[HTML]And how long has JHMCS been in operational service?[/HTML]
IOC in 2003. There are now about 200 in service in Navy and AF, according to the manufacturer (Vision Systems Intl.).
[HTML]RHAWs will also see you… plus that will only work if the target is within your radars field of view… so if you are using your radar anyway why not just use your radar… you can’t visually check the target with your eyes so there is no point in using a HMS for that.[/HTML]
You forget the datalink. Unless you don’t have an AWACS or Hawkeye around (unlikely for a JHMCS user),you still get a decent sitiuation awarness,no mather where your radar is pointing.
[HTML]And is a much more recent technology. It has yet to be proven that putting speed and altitude information in the visual field of a pilot during a dogfight will make him a better dogfighter… all he really needs it to be able to use his eye to cue the seekers of his missiles and his radar at a target[/HTML]
[HTML]But for a Russian fighter pilot if the target is running away and it is within visual range then an IR guided R-27 should reach it.[/HTML]
You are right. Any new systems must be absobed by its users and this is not a simple problem. For exemple, if you go to Aviationweek article, you will see that pilots who are left eye dominant have some problems in using it.
However, the main benefit in having the extra information is that you know in a blink where to fire (you “see”the oponent before he “see” you), if to fire (friendly or ennemy) and when to fire (if he is in your weapons range). As you know WVR fight is very rapid. If you have a firing solution faster, you fire and break while the other guy still is still trying to have a visual contact.
[HTML]I have seen quite a few designs for Russian designed HMS that seem to offer the HUD in the visual FOV capabilities of JHMCS, but I doubt the cost is worth the very minor improvements in performance for it to be added as an upgrade[/HTML].
Arsenal is working to a comparable system. Don’t know the situation in this moment.
[HTML]A Small monocle with a crosshair that blinks when the target is locked is enough for the job. Western sugar coating might look flash but as usual they are trying to build a video game rather than a weapon system[/HTML]
The JHMCS is not very expensive. It’s around 250 000 $(comparable with the Israeli DASH)
By: Arabella-Cox - 16th January 2005 at 07:37
The JHMCS is way ahead the Russian helmet (this one is barelly comparable with what the US Navy had in the 70′).
And how long has JHMCS been in operational service?
-First, the JHMCS is feed with data from the radar or data link (MIDS FDL on F 15 and MIDS LVT on others). This means that you can “see” the target from 10-15 Nmiles (the radar is on automatic lockon mode), while the guy with a Russian helmet had to actually have visual contact with you which means a much shorter range.
But then any target with a RHAWs will also see you… plus that will only work if the target is within your radars field of view… so if you are using your radar anyway why not just use your radar… you can’t visually check the target with your eyes so there is no point in using a HMS for that.
-With a Russain helmet you can fire upon one of your comrades. This is excluded with a JHMCS because when the radar illuminate the target, it automatically interogates it with the IFF
The russian system integrates the HMS, IRST, and radar… if you want to flash the target for an IFF interrogation you can. BTW such things aren’t foolproof anyway… look at the blackhawk shootdowns just after DS.
-The JHMCS acts as a helmet-mounted HUD — it shows (beside the mininum needed to pilot the plane, like artificial horizon, speed, altitude, heading) data about the target: a TD box, a square in the direction where the target would appear. All what you have to do is to put the steering dot in the TD box and you get a shot cue.
And is a much more recent technology. It has yet to be proven that putting speed and altitude information in the visual field of a pilot during a dogfight will make him a better dogfighter… all he really needs it to be able to use his eye to cue the seekers of his missiles and his radar at a target… they Russians have had that in service for quite some time.
This will help you — let’s say that you have a (confirmed as enemy) target 7 Nm away comminig towards you. In this situation you can fire. But if you have a target 7 Nm away and running from you, there is no chance you reach it with a Sidewinder, so you have to come closer, or to switch to an AMRAAM.
But for a Russian fighter pilot if the target is running away and it is within visual range then an IR guided R-27 should reach it.
Why you think that russian has blocked their weapon development?
I have seen quite a few designs for Russian designed HMS that seem to offer the HUD in the visual FOV capabilities of JHMCS, but I doubt the cost is worth the very minor improvements in performance for it to be added as an upgrade. A Small monocle with a crosshair that blinks when the target is locked is enough for the job. Western sugar coating might look flash but as usual they are trying to build a video game rather than a weapon system. KISS
By: Severodvinsk - 15th January 2005 at 13:36
Idont think the Russian navy and Army and AF can even put a decent fight. I say they will just launch the Damn ICBM’s and SLBM’s from thr Surviving SSBN”s.
And I’d say they have the absolute right to do that!
By: dionis - 14th January 2005 at 21:00
wow my original topic has come a long way. actually the russian flanker helmet can direct the radar too, as far as i know. even on the old Flanker Bs..
By: Styx - 14th January 2005 at 17:16
The JHMCS is way ahead the Russian helmet (this one is barelly comparable with what the US Navy had in the 70′).
-First, the JHMCS is feed with data from the radar or data link (MIDS FDL on F 15 and MIDS LVT on others). This means that you can “see” the target from 10-15 Nmiles (the radar is on automatic lockon mode), while the guy with a Russian helmet had to actually have visual contact with you which means a much shorter range. Think this way: if you have very good eyes you can visually locate a target 5-7 km, but only in good weather and with the sun in your back; if you have the sun in your face, already you don’t see much, not to mention bad weather or night. You are also unaware if what you see is an ennemy or one of yours, if he is heading to you or run from you.
-With a Russain helmet you can fire upon one of your comrades. This is excluded with a JHMCS because when the radar illuminate the target, it automatically interogates it with the IFF
-The JHMCS acts as a helmet-mounted HUD — it shows (beside the mininum needed to pilot the plane, like artificial horizon, speed, altitude, heading) data about the target: a TD box, a square in the direction where the target would appear. All what you have to do is to put the steering dot in the TD box and you get a shot cue.
-There are some information about the target that help you to make the right decision: near the TD box will appear the target range , closure speed and aspect. This will help you — let’s say that you have a (confirmed as enemy) target 7 Nm away comminig towards you. In this situation you can fire. But if you have a target 7 Nm away and running from you, there is no chance you reach it with a Sidewinder, so you have to come closer, or to switch to an AMRAAM.
The JHMCS will work together with the 9X who is a real killer: the FPA snsor is awesome (it is not the ASRAAM one as many says, it is only based on ASRAM one but better) is sensitivity is hudreds times bigger than the senor of 9M, the tracking rate is unbelieveble (it scans with a speed of 800 dps and rotates at 1600 dps! The field of vue is 180 degree ( 120 degree for ASRAAM and Phyton IV, 90 degree for the older R 73, 120 degree for the new one). The meneuvrability is 80 G (60 G fro the Phyton IV, 45 G for the R 73)!
Also, the range (believed smaller compared with the two missiles mentioned, because the 9X has a 5 ” engine instead a larger 6″ of the ASRAAM and Phyton) has improved dramatically (see http://www.nxtbook.com/fx/books/raytheon/aviationweek-oct04/) to 16-20 miles thanks to reduced drag.<br />
However it can be fooled by both decoy dispensers and is not strictly all weather (would have trouble in fog for example).Not quite. The FPA sensor is different. It is almost impossible to fooled with decoys, the only way would be to destroy the FPA with IR jammers (lasers). Also, the midwave FPA are less disturbed by bad weather (unlike long-wave, wich have longer range, but are next to useless on bad weather)
You are comparing a first part of eighties system (the russian helmet integrated in mig 29 and aa-11 archer) with a year 2004 system (aim-9x and america helmet). Why you think that russian has blocked their weapon development? There is no much to say after that.
By: legolas - 14th January 2005 at 17:01
ya ya , We know america is all powerful. American HMS is the greatest in the world. I dont understand why the Americans are so concerned even after Soviet Union has fallen down and America is the only mighty Dark lord of the Whole world. Probabaly if any body attacks Russia the only thing Russis has defend itself are the ICBM’s. Idont think the Russian navy and Army and AF can even put a decent fight. I say they will just launch the Damn ICBM’s and SLBM’s from thr Surviving SSBN”s.
By: Hyperwarp - 14th January 2005 at 08:45
Hope this is the correct thread for this….
Any more info on the Bulava???
Russian Defense Minister Thanks God for New Nuclear Missiles
Created: 13.01.2005 17:26 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 17:26 MSK, 17 hours 12 minutes ago
MosNews
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/01/13/god.shtml
———-
Plus…some older news
New Long-Range Cruise Missile Added to Russian Arsenal
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/12/01/missile.shtml
By: cru - 14th January 2005 at 07:53
The JHMCS is way ahead the Russian helmet (this one is barelly comparable with what the US Navy had in the 70′).
-First, the JHMCS is feed with data from the radar or data link (MIDS FDL on F 15 and MIDS LVT on others). This means that you can “see” the target from 10-15 Nmiles (the radar is on automatic lockon mode), while the guy with a Russian helmet had to actually have visual contact with you which means a much shorter range. Think this way: if you have very good eyes you can visually locate a target 5-7 km, but only in good weather and with the sun in your back; if you have the sun in your face, already you don’t see much, not to mention bad weather or night. You are also unaware if what you see is an ennemy or one of yours, if he is heading to you or run from you.
-With a Russain helmet you can fire upon one of your comrades. This is excluded with a JHMCS because when the radar illuminate the target, it automatically interogates it with the IFF
-The JHMCS acts as a helmet-mounted HUD — it shows (beside the mininum needed to pilot the plane, like artificial horizon, speed, altitude, heading) data about the target: a TD box, a square in the direction where the target would appear. All what you have to do is to put the steering dot in the TD box and you get a shot cue.
-There are some information about the target that help you to make the right decision: near the TD box will appear the target range , closure speed and aspect. This will help you — let’s say that you have a (confirmed as enemy) target 7 Nm away comminig towards you. In this situation you can fire. But if you have a target 7 Nm away and running from you, there is no chance you reach it with a Sidewinder, so you have to come closer, or to switch to an AMRAAM.
The JHMCS will work together with the 9X who is a real killer: the FPA snsor is awesome (it is not the ASRAAM one as many says, it is only based on ASRAM one but better) is sensitivity is hudreds times bigger than the senor of 9M, the tracking rate is unbelieveble (it scans with a speed of 800 dps and rotates at 1600 dps! The field of vue is 180 degree ( 120 degree for ASRAAM and Phyton IV, 90 degree for the older R 73, 120 degree for the new one). The meneuvrability is 80 G (60 G fro the Phyton IV, 45 G for the R 73)!
Also, the range (believed smaller compared with the two missiles mentioned, because the 9X has a 5 ” engine instead a larger 6″ of the ASRAAM and Phyton) has improved dramatically (see http://www.nxtbook.com/fx/books/raytheon/aviationweek-oct04/) to 16-20 miles thanks to reduced drag.<br />
However it can be fooled by both decoy dispensers and is not strictly all weather (would have trouble in fog for example).
Not quite. The FPA sensor is different. It is almost impossible to fooled with decoys, the only way would be to destroy the FPA with IR jammers (lasers). Also, the midwave FPA are less disturbed by bad weather (unlike long-wave, wich have longer range, but are next to useless on bad weather)
Sign In
January 14, 2005 at 4:11 am