Dear Mr. Hammond,

Could you show us those official descriptions, please? I’m very curious!
BTW, I don’t have any idea why the Blowpipe uses SACLOS first, then MCLOS. SACLOS is more accurate and the operator has less work to do than MCLOS!
:confused:

Dear Member,

I am scanning them for an internet article on another forum. I will post a link when I post the article.

To your second question. The main problem with all CLOS missiles (air to air, ground to air, air to ground and ground to ground) is minimum range. The operator has to first acquire the missile in flight and then line it up to guide it. This disadvantage was demonstrated by the famous SAGGER antitank missile. It had a great maximum range but a terrible minimum range. SACLOS is best for guidance all the way. It just requires more complexity, etc. The reason is the unit that tracks the flare on the end of the missile has to first be set at wide angle and then zoom down as the distance between the launch post and the missile increase. If there is no zoom down the launch post tracker might loose the missile, plus it can be decoyed by flares (the smallest SACLOS missile the 600 meter French ERYX keeps the cost down by having two digitial like cameras that pick up the IR laser becon in the back of the missiles body — one set wide that acquires and centers the missile and then another one that is narrow to track it the rest of the 25 meters to 600 meters, but this is not possible with long range SACLOS missiles as you would need five to seven more fixed focal length CDD cameras) So to keep cost and complexity of the unit down SHORT engineers fitted the firing post of the BLOWPIPE with one fixed length unit to acquire and center the missile after launch. Also, the British military and SHORT engineers thought that having CLOS for the guidance after SACLOS has acquired and center the missile in flight would make it less likely it would be decoyed — ie and in this they are correct to an extent.

With the experience of the Falkands and Afghanistan (where the Blowpipe failed horribly) SHORT realized that it was just to much work by the gunner to keep the sight centered on the target and use the thumb-joystick to guide the missile to the cross hairs center. So they re-engineered the firing post to where the missile is guided SACLOS all the way resulting in the JAVELIN. This was made possible by technological advances since the first BLOWPIPE entered service.

Jack E. Hammond

BTW> The original concept for a manportable SAM for the US Army that resulted in the REDEYE was suppose to be a CLOS that was wired guided!!!!!

Fourth: AFAIK, Blowpipe has SACLOS via radio (but there is MCLOS for backup), Javelin (SAM) has SACLOS with laser-link and Starburst and Starstreak has laser-beam riding guidance.

Dear Member,

I have the official description of the Blowpipe, Javelin and Starstreak. The stuff their defense attaches have. The Blowpipe has SACLOS to initial acquire the missile then the operator takes over with CLOS. The Javelin has complete all the way SACLOS. Both the Blowpipe and Javelin use radio command link. The Starstreak has laser-beam riding. The Starburst again is a mystery to me, but I think it just replaces the radio command link with a laser command link. The search continues. I think I will try and find the email of the public affairs officer who took over SHORT.

Finally, both Blowpipe and Javelin allow the SACLOS feature to be shut off for very short range and very low altitude engagements — ie or the missile would fly into the ground (ie they fire it elevated then bring it down).

Jack E. Hammond

You make my head swirl!

And it seems one has to be more precise when talking to you … 😉

So you put your crosshair on the target, and an IR tracker looks for the signature of the sustainer. The idea is to keep the angular error between the crosshair-line-of-sight and the IR signature at zero. The neccessary maneuvers to achieve that is transmitted to the missile by a laser, which is aiming at the IR signature.

Thought that’s clear when I wrote riding (riding the command beam), since the basic missile was unchanged, just a laser detector instead of the antenna.
A true laser beam rider like the RBS-70 needs a different configuration, both for the missile and the launcher.

Dear Member,

There are ways around the problem for a beam rider without going to the RBS-70 solution (the exhaust is out the sides like the TOW leaving the back for the laser detectors). Ford-Aerospace developed the solution with its candidate for the REDEYE replacement (which the STINGER won): ie the laser beam is transmitted in a grid with each grid encodes so one (instead of four like the RBS-70) laser detector can obtain the beam (which is usually fitted to one of the rear fins) and for example “C3” grid is center no stearing changes are made by the missiles guidance computer, but if it detects “C4” the computer knows to stear the missile up one grid. If it is “D4” it knows up and over the left one grid. This is what the ADATS uses today — ie although I simplified the description to the extreme.

I am pretty sure that the STARBURST is a SACLOS with a laser comand link. To convert the missile itself to a laser beam riding would require way to much engineering change to the missile and its electronics. But I am trying to make sure. There are enough webpages and articles today where the facts are not checked. I discovered that trying to affirm my memory where I was given three types of laser guidance for the STARBURST by three different sources!!!!

Jack E. Hammond