As if it’s difficult to find Toyota pickups over there.
You need compression to detonate. Most ordnance will not get compression if there is a plasma hole burnt through it.
BLU-109ER is a bunker buster that makes a 2000-pounder mostly pointless. If you need a bigger boom, then it makes more sense to use another asset. Quite frankly the BLU-109ER is being overly underestimated. They chose its includement for good reason, centerline clearance one important factor yet not the most important.
The big drawback I see with this pod is drag on the egress leg.
Most every modern ARM uses an INS and use their passive guidance to geo-locate the threat radar before making the attack. SARH missiles that have INS typically use it for a high arc shot so that it knows when to drop down from higher altitudes so that it enters the terminal phase with the most possible velocity. Realize that ARM and SARH missiles have similar superficial similarities, but the way they are employed is radically dissimilar.
You shouldn’t use ARH then when you meant ARM.
The hurdle of LOAL is being able to place a missile in an optical approach for the conical limited seeker. Missiles have oscillations, gyrations, and directional aspects to wield. Simply launching a missile on a ballistic trajectory has always been possible for US aircrews, but perhaps the Soviets used idiot proof safeguards. LOAL really involves traveling to a point in 3-dimensional space in such a way the seeker has a valid opportunity to track the target.
So are they still going to need a targeting pod with the EWP?
They won’t fit for sure BUT the Super Hornet is dimensionally similar to F-15. When they upscaled the design it needed upscaled engine dimensions, too.
I want to see Typhoon operators co-op on Boeing centerline weapons pod, but to go for ramping carriage up to 2-3 on a Typhoon. CFT’s and CWP make perfect sense for Typhoon, more so than just Super Hornet, with it’s higher TWR and larger wing.
The one bonus is that with CFT’s a Super Hornet could fly pylon free using this centerline pod. No reason the same pod wouldn’t be feasible to any other design including Gripen NG, Rafale, Typhoon, Tejas, etc.
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/africa/2014/08/19/mystery-jets-attack-libyan-capital.html
Mystery Jets Strike Tripoli targets. US government denies involvement. France is my guess.
Good luck toting that big pod around at 9G…. never mind. Just another instance to point out why F/A-18E/F should have used F100 or F110 rather than gold plated fuel hungry F414. The F100’s tend to be way cheaper to slightly cheaper dependent on version. The F110 in naval form was already flying at the cost of F414.
The difference is how much one emits to steer the missile. Mid course update is meant to be stealthy. Command guidance is typically meant one way communication. Data links implies two way communications, but not always using RF energy.
IIRC, the IR variants are LOBL, while the radar variants do not use command guidance (no air to air missiles use this but the earliest ones, unless you’re referring to the mid-course updates, but these missiles have no datalink), but the lock-on is delayed till after launch to avoid interference caused by the main radar’s sidelobes to the missile’s seeker.
Ljozic, not sure what you are trying to say. IR missiles can be launched blind, with the seeker slaved to where the radar expects the target to be. The problem is the seeker may not track the intended target. And you realize semi active and active radar homing seekers operate completely different. The missile seeker on SARH has to be locked on before launch to be effective. The seeker on ARH requires mid course updates near its apex or it will have a tiny chance of interception.
Don’t underestimate the importance of kinetics in BVR fighting.
I am sure light interceptors will use their kinetic advantage in a dogfight. /captain obvious
The only thing it seems to show is some sort of shaped charge which is basically a quick squirt of plasma. Perhaps it’s electromagnetically aimed.