Multi Mode seeker can mean different things. It could be a seeker that uses different modes. The SM6 for example has an active and a semi active mode. The brimstone uses multiple targeting capabilities, as does the SDB II. One cannot judge ‘superiority’ through nomenclature. A multi mode seeker for example can have the RF component that is AESA
I understand… so, the nomenclature “Multi-mode seeker” is very general and not specific :apologetic:
Thanks for your time!
A multi-mode seeker uses more than one form of guidance. E.g. Brimstone I/II uses laser guidance and MMW radar, so it’s regarded as dual mode. It also uses INS/GPS but that’s really just to give it a steer although weapon manufacturers regard it as a separate mode.
In the case of the Cuda, I’m not sure. It doesn’t seem to have IIR from models, so maybe it’s just different wavebands for the radar; if that is the case, it’s probably going to be AESA. So essentially ARH but using AESA radar and different wavebands (probably for different ranges). Higher frequency gives better resolution and accuracy but at the cost of range. It’s unclear whether it will use 2 frequencies simultaneously or switch from one to the other. Simultaneous use would make jamming difficult.
Asking for the most advanced seeker is honestly like asking who the best employee in the world is. Best seeker for what task, at what range, in what conditions? Even then, you’d only be able to discuss type rather than try to sift through manufacturer claims and highlight reality vs fiction.
As a CAS AGM it would be difficult to claim there’s a better seeker head than Brimstone II right now. All weather, very difficult to jam, lock after launch, autonomous lock after launch based on search and target details etc. As regards AAMs and SAMs, damned if I could even hazard guess. Fixed target cruise missiles? JASSM, Storm Shadow and KEPD 350 seekers are all pretty much on-par, state-of-the-art, let’s go through the square window seekers.
Thanks so much for your answers… 😎
I will be more clear about these:
1) I’m referring about “air to air missile”, above all, current (most advanced) and future missiles.
2) Just I was asking the difference between “multi-mode” and “AESA” seekers, because there is a lot info. about the different kind and “denomination” of missile guidance and some case, the info. may be confused :apologetic:
2.1) I read about the future missile CUDA that will have “multi-mode seeker”… [ATTACH=CONFIG]228642[/ATTACH], also I read about the future missile K-77M that will have “AESA seeker”… my confusion is about the missile CUDA (look at the picture), because won’t have “IIR seeker/EO” neither “laser guidance”, so only would have different wavebands for the radar, but I just want to be sure of this!
3) And my main doubt is if a “multi-mode seeker” (not consider other kind of guidance like CUDA) is based in AESA technology, or is only an improved “ARH” with different wavebands.
3.1) I was asking: What is the most advanced seeker?… I mean, if an AESA seeker is more advanced than a multi-mode seeker or vice versa, that was all…
Greetings
I will leave this news here… It’s about the proyect “FGFA”: http://indrus.in/economics/2014/02/07/russia_fulfils_fgfa_obligations_with_india_-_alexander_kadakin_32917.html
And… the future “Brahmos” for the “FGFA”: http://indrus.in/economics/2014/02/07/brahmos_wants_to_make_missile_adaptable_for_fgfa_-_sivathanu_pillai_32883.html
I consider this article as inaccurate (by “ROSTEC“)… Because (“according to translation”) says that: “Thanks to a new design solution PAK FA ahead of American F-22… http://rostec.ru/news/3958
*It’s the same news in all pages, but this is more complete…
it says PAKFA has a RCS 15 times smaller than Su-27 and F-22 has a RCS of 0.4-0.3 squared meters according to Alexander Davidenko
Su-27 has a RCS between 10 to 15 squared meters
Thanks… Now, There is a detail, We know that the PAKFA’s RCS is between 0.1-1m2 (estimated) and Raptor’s RCS is between 0.3-0.4m2 (estimated), so…
*At a certain moment, the PAK FA will have a RCS lower than F-22… and… At other moment, the F-22 will have a RCS lower than PAK FA!
I think that would have been ideal for the PAK FA a RCS between 0.1-0.5m2 (in my opinion)
Can someone translate this news? (about the PAKFA’s RCS)… http://lenta.ru/news/2014/01/13/pakfa/
PAKFA PROMO! (Video):o: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW-IopgmVx0&feature=share&list=UUx0U4oa1EOYhnujzL8Vvz8g&index=1
That would depend by whose standards. A Russian Academy of Sciences paper (coauthored by a certain M. Pogosyan) accredited the F-22 & JSF of having average RCS values of 0.3m^2.
The producer GPRZ (ГПРЗ) has stated it is an IFF. There is only one other (known) comparable system namely the Selex SIT426 Active E-Scan IFF Interogator:
http://www.selexelsag.com/internet/?open0=5338&open1=5352§ion=COMM&showentry=18743
http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=220502&d=1378315729Russian readers will note the almost identical description given on the GPRZ advertising placard. The Russkies have won the in-service race with the Su-35S and operationally, it has very interesting attributes, bear in mind that the 35S has a system (L-150-35*) similar to AN/ALR-94:
So actual AESAs for radar: 4.
Thanks estimated Jo…
For other hand… This “screenshot” is for discuss!
**Yesterday… I wrote to Carlo Kopp about the “L-BAND RADAR” and here is his answer…
[ATTACH=CONFIG]224453[/ATTACH]
Here are the two Kopp’s source:
By any chance you have the paper or the quote from Pogosyan ?
Alexander Davidenko mentioned something similar
По его словам, ЭПР самолетов старого поколения (например, Су-27) составляет около 12 м², тогда как у F-22A Raptor она колеблется в диапазоне 0,3-0,4 м². ЭПР ПАК ФА “не будет превышать показатели F-22A, она будет к ним очень близка”.
Here is… http://es.scribd.com/doc/152376871/Fundamental-and-Applied-Problems-STEALTH-TECHNOLOGY (Fundamental and Applied Problems STEALTH TECHNOLOGY)
2+2+1 = 5. 😉
Two in checks, two in slats, one in the nose. Has been covered one million times already.
I know… but “Jo” said that the “two L-BAND slats” ARE NOT RADARS! 😮
What about this, estimated Jo? :confused:
The surfaces of the PAK FA’s own “five radar arrays“ are also angled off from the vertical plane, helping to ‘deflect’ enemy radar signals.
I’d be more concerned about the security perspective…
[ATTACH=CONFIG]224337[/ATTACH]
*Oh c’mon… Kaspersky is the best security suite on the world!!! They’re using it 😎
Which itself most probably consists of a 1GHz, quad-core ‘system-on-a-chip’ with 64-bit architecture on a (somewhat woeful) 90nm die:
Hi respected Jo… 😮
Is posible that not be consider these “MCST-R’s Series” and instead of these, may be implemented the “Elbrus’ Series” that are better than MCST-R’s Series?
*For example… the “Elbrus-2S” consists of a 1GHz, quad-core ‘system-on-a-chip’ with 64-bit architecture on a “65 nm“
Here, I put a complete article about the 2 kinds of microprocessors … (this article is in Spanish)
Part 1: http://espacial.org/miscelaneas/computacion/elbrus_mcst1.htm
Part 2: http://espacial.org/miscelaneas/computacion/elbrus_mcst2.htm
**Finally… What about this? (Elbrus-8S on a “28nm”): http://www.mcst.ru/vosmiyadernyj-mikroprocessor-s-arkhitekturoj-elbrus
Regards ans sorry for my bad english! :apologetic:
UMPO awarded for the manufacture of blades for T-50
New technology helps the engine to reduce fuel consumption… 😎
**Full Article: http://www.rostec.ru/news/3627
More news…
Glider fifth-generation fighter is completely created from composite materials