The S-400 sends a statement with just being there. Just see it as a deterrent.
I have zero clue if there exist any no fly zone. Nor do anyone else in here.
Having a A2D system does not automaticly mean a no-fly-zone.

I know some idiots in the West have suggested creating a NFZ over certain areas in Syria but they’ve been roundly told to shut up and stop being stupid by the more sensible people who realise the consequences.

Griffin & JAGM have GPS as a backup to it’s laser guidance. While JAGM has a MW seeker, Griffen only had a SAL seeker. With GPS, it can find it’s target in fog or when the laser/MW is not available.

btw, I have never said that the 120D had more range than the Meteor. I have only said that the touted “3x the AMRAAM NEZ” was in reference to the AIM-120B and not the C series. The AMRAAM may have better ECCM functionality but since EW is the most highly guarded aspect of warfare, we may never know.

Griffin C has IIR too and still has GPS. Back-up, for a laser guided missile used again moving targets that’s only going to be in the air for a few seconds.:highly_amused:

Griffin is mainly used on mobile targets, so GPS on its own does no good. It’s all harmonisation of INS units, that’s all. 1deg/hr drift on a 10-15s flight for a missile that’s homing in on a laser spot. Please do the maths on that and write the answer, because I make it to be half a metre, which is actually better than GPS accuracy anyway.* I believe Raytheon even received a contract to upgrade the IMU in the AIM-9XII to GPS too. Harmonisation again.

* 8*sin[1/(60*4)] = 0.00056km = 0.56m. But it needs GPS, so it can home in on a laser spot.:highly_amused:

Think about it, what you’re saying makes zero sense. Meteor is doing 1200-1500m/s and you think an improvement of a few dozen metres in positioning is going to make a difference to missile performance at 20km out from the target. Absolute BS. And the accuracy of the current IMUs is better than that the radar can manage over such short distances anyway. Again, absolute BS. The requirement for anti-aircraft missile gyros – 10deg/hr, that actually provided – 1deg/hr, the maximum possible in that size package – 3m CEP/hour, flight time <120s for AMRAAM and 300s for Meteor. No sense. You’re trying to turn something into a marketing point that has zero affect. If it did, it would have gone on 15-20 years ago.

Except that statement has been used long, long after AIM-120B stopped being used. The range improvement over the C-5 and D is exactly in-line with what’s claimed for a solid IRR variant of AARGM-ER.

May have, just as Meteor may have a GPS enabled INS (not that it would make a crap worth of difference) and Meteor has had extensive testing against ECM, so I wouldn’t be too sure on that.

And on UGM-133, you’re quite wrong about there being a requirement for GPS accuracy. The requirement was 90m CEP and original non-GPS beat that by some margin, said to be ‘<80m CEP’ in IN COMBAT but widely believed to be nearer the 40m mark of the LGM-118. Now the GPS enhancement improved that to 20m CEP. Does any of that actually make a difference with a 475kT warhead?

Someone must have thought it was important enough to make a new requirement that needed GPS in order to fulfill it…

But hey, feel free to keep making up reasons why it was not needed.

Harmonisation and redundancy. I’ve just given you a link stating the accuracy requirements for an anti-aircraft missile, and requiring of GPS they are not.

Are you telling me a damn Griffin needs GPS for all of its 8km range and 15s flight time (or less prior to seeker acquisition)?:highly_amused: Like I said harmonisation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-176_Griffin
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/joint-common-missile-program-fired-but-not-forgotten-0229/

My link already proves it isn’t needed. Face facts, Meteor >> AIM-120D. I know it’s hard to accept, but yes we, the Europeans, actually designed a better AAM than you, surprising as that may seem and no amount of horse sh!t on your behalf will undo that.

After that event no fly zone is activated.

Right, so you’re saying Russia is going to shoot down a US plane and risk a World War? Doubt it.

Regarding about all relative modern air defense battery systems around the world in present time, the S 300 or the new S 400 it would not used its datalinks as emitter mode, but most of the time only as receivers while the same will get the data about the targets from the command posts.

Only sporadically those batteries S 300 or S 400 could activate its datalinks in emitter mode to inform the command posts about the battery status, and this will be done while the battery has been leaving its position for a new place.

So without emitter from datalinks or radars those batteries as the S 300 or S 400 systems it could not have been detected its position through of: ELINT, SIGINT or COMINT.

However the command posts of the batteries with its long-range radars has been operating the same mode, but those command posts will be within the territory protected by the batteries.

Another detail would be that not only the mobile command post could have been sending datalinks signals, at least if it are not located in a desolate desert or in a remote jungle, then it would probably be many others emissions from others military units as well as civilians had been used as decoys in the same area.

Just to remember the command post may not use information only from long-range ground radars, but also information from passive units in the ground or air as: ELINT , SIGINT, COMINT, AWACS and even fighters.

I suggest the reading about how the air defense system from Iraq had been canceled in the early hours of the Gulf War in 1991 without jamming the communications or long range radars from Iraq, both US and Iraq versions, since both were keeping such coincidence around in my opinion of 99%. Such rhetorical question: if both has been keeping similarity of 99% why not read just one instead to waste time with two versions?

Some say the devil is discreet by nature, so in light of this it has been hidden in the details.

Are the actual data links between unit components line of sight or not?

There is no fly zone active now on all the areas that Syrian controlled. Nutinyahoo has gone quiet. Russia is going to create the largest fighting army on the ground in Middleast. No one else can resupply so many combatants at same time. A lot of training and sieges simultaneously.

Right so how come, they were bitching about them getting hit by an airstrike only a few days ago?

Like I said.. the nuke gyros are large & expensive, not applicable to AAMs or CMs.

btw, The latest UGM-113 has GPS.. gee, I wonder why they added that if a gyro was good enough?

LGM-118 never did though and achieved similar accuracy.

The move to GPS was more about harmonising INS components. But check out the gyro accuracy requirements for SAMs and tactical weapons, it’s very low, for all the reasons I just mentioned.

And actually I said cruise missiles were achieving that kind of accuracy just with INS, not specifically AAMs. You said it was impossible. AAMs gyros will probably be less accurate but because the requirements are lower, because the extreme precision isn’t requirement over short durations with terminal homing as already very clearly stated in my link.

Now on size.

http://www.f-e-t.com/images/uploads/Teledyne_CDL_MiniPOS_2.pdf

Subsea unit 177mm dia x 268mm (7.0” dia. X 10.6”)
Weight dry 9.8kg (21.6lbs)
Weight in water 2.33kg (5.13lbs)
Mounting (4 holes) M10 144 x 144mm (M10 5.67 x 5.67”)

3 metres per hour CEP

So clearly the accuracy is possible with those kind of size constraints, but guess what, it ain’t needed. And let’s not even mention IFOGs, which are even more accurate.

um, your source was of a LRG for a plane mounted Pave Penny pod…

However, what you needed to provide was the source for an AAM mounted IMU. You know, what we are actually talking about.

Nope, my source clearly gives performance requirements for different applications, Pave Penny is an extremely undemanding application.

You stated that that kind of accuracy was impossible without GPS or terminal homing but as they say on Banzai, you wrong! Also note that the accuracy required for SAMs is relatively poor. Why? Because not important? Why? Short flight time and terminal homing, plus fact radar accuracy isn’t good enough to actually make use of the maximum level of accuracy attainable with the best gyros. Why get a gyro with 0.001deg/hr drift for a couple minutes of flight, when your radar is off 0.057deg from the get-go. So in short, having GPS INS on an AAM – pointless unless you’re harmonising components.

Now show me the GPS on LGM-118s and UGM-133s, which were stated at 40m and 20m CEP in the IN COMBAT magazine series.