Is it feasible to design a two stage AAM? for example lets say that the first stage could be a booster with sensors for midcourse guidance, and a Python-4 as the second stage.
The first pic is that of a Heron, not a Searcher-II.
The most surefire way of distinuguishing a Heron from a Searcher is to look for the position of the pod, which is located mid-body incase of the Searcher-II. Heron has the same right upfront.
To sumarize; even though in theory the head-on range of any AAM should be higher than in pursuit mode, in practice the opposite is true thanks to the limitations of the seeker.
This means that R-27ET has a range of 66km, but only if the aircraft is detectable HEAD ON at 66km using the R-27ET seeker which is unlikely unless you are aiming at the sun
So why create the ET version at all? And why should any airforce buy this kit? :confused: What will the numbers be like in pursuit mode?
Enough fellows, this is not the thread for this discussion. 😡
Anyway remember the Pakistanis had shotdown an IAF Searcher-II over Lahore? Photos of the wreckage they recovered and apparently studied to advance their UAV tech 😮
A photo of IAF Kanpur-II, one of two aircraft designed and manufactured by the *Indian Air Force* (the first one being Kanpur-I). I had taken this photo in 1997 at IIT Kanpur hangar (Kanpur is the name of the city). At that time I photographed everything except for what-i-thought was a piece of junk in the corner, and hence only this hazy cutout is all that I’ve got.
Four IL-78 MKI serials have already been confirmed, only RK3450 is left in the series but we can assume it has been delivered. Which means that only one tanker is left for delivery.
Sign In
