Something No Russian pilot have ever had? I guess a simple radio jammer would have been sufficient to make useless the entire GCI network over the SU?
Interesting.

??? The Russians had datalink from the mid 50′ (Lazur on Su 9, Su 15 TM). However the TKS 2, presently the most modern Russian datalink used on Su 27 SM is far from what the MIDS-LVT (F 16, F 18, Eurofighter, Rafale, Mirage 2000) and MIDS-FDL (F 15) could offer.

Despite not telling the pilot how high or how fast he is flying the helmet mounted cueing system in the Fulcrum/Flanker gave the Russian pilots in addition to R-73 missiles a WVR combat advantage. Their near BVR detection system would have been IRSTs which were no where near as useful as a modern radar but passive and able to detect most targets at well beyond visual range. For IFF interogations with the target tracked by IRST or HMS a very short transmission from the radar could be used that hopefully minimises the enemies chance of detecting the intercepting aircraft.

Gary, the idea is to fire before the enemy does and run. That’s why in the 70′ the Americans introduced on F 14, F 15, F 16, F 18 dedicated WVR radar modes, like supersearch, boresight and vertical scan. That’s the reason that everybody (Russians, West Europeans) adopted these modes too.

The same reason prompted the introduction of the HMD in the 70′ by US Navy and later, in the 89’by the Russians on the MiG 29 and Su 27 (albeit with a more capable missile).

The same reason made Israelis to go one step further and introducing HMDs (Dash).

The new US and W Europe planes are equipped with HMDs and not just HMSs for the same reason. Not to mention that, as I said, Russians are working to at HMDs.

This means that, far from being some fancy toys, HMDs are more effective than crude HMDs. In these days, US and Europeans defense budgets are so tights that unless a system is consider vital it is not considered.

[HTML]And how long has JHMCS been in operational service?[/HTML]

IOC in 2003. There are now about 200 in service in Navy and AF, according to the manufacturer (Vision Systems Intl.).

[HTML]RHAWs will also see you… plus that will only work if the target is within your radars field of view… so if you are using your radar anyway why not just use your radar… you can’t visually check the target with your eyes so there is no point in using a HMS for that.[/HTML]

You forget the datalink. Unless you don’t have an AWACS or Hawkeye around (unlikely for a JHMCS user),you still get a decent sitiuation awarness,no mather where your radar is pointing.

[HTML]And is a much more recent technology. It has yet to be proven that putting speed and altitude information in the visual field of a pilot during a dogfight will make him a better dogfighter… all he really needs it to be able to use his eye to cue the seekers of his missiles and his radar at a target[/HTML]

[HTML]But for a Russian fighter pilot if the target is running away and it is within visual range then an IR guided R-27 should reach it.[/HTML]

You are right. Any new systems must be absobed by its users and this is not a simple problem. For exemple, if you go to Aviationweek article, you will see that pilots who are left eye dominant have some problems in using it.

However, the main benefit in having the extra information is that you know in a blink where to fire (you “see”the oponent before he “see” you), if to fire (friendly or ennemy) and when to fire (if he is in your weapons range). As you know WVR fight is very rapid. If you have a firing solution faster, you fire and break while the other guy still is still trying to have a visual contact.

[HTML]I have seen quite a few designs for Russian designed HMS that seem to offer the HUD in the visual FOV capabilities of JHMCS, but I doubt the cost is worth the very minor improvements in performance for it to be added as an upgrade[/HTML].

Arsenal is working to a comparable system. Don’t know the situation in this moment.

[HTML]A Small monocle with a crosshair that blinks when the target is locked is enough for the job. Western sugar coating might look flash but as usual they are trying to build a video game rather than a weapon system[/HTML]

The JHMCS is not very expensive. It’s around 250 000 $(comparable with the Israeli DASH)

The JHMCS is way ahead the Russian helmet (this one is barelly comparable with what the US Navy had in the 70′).

-First, the JHMCS is feed with data from the radar or data link (MIDS FDL on F 15 and MIDS LVT on others). This means that you can “see” the target from 10-15 Nmiles (the radar is on automatic lockon mode), while the guy with a Russian helmet had to actually have visual contact with you which means a much shorter range. Think this way: if you have very good eyes you can visually locate a target 5-7 km, but only in good weather and with the sun in your back; if you have the sun in your face, already you don’t see much, not to mention bad weather or night. You are also unaware if what you see is an ennemy or one of yours, if he is heading to you or run from you.

-With a Russain helmet you can fire upon one of your comrades. This is excluded with a JHMCS because when the radar illuminate the target, it automatically interogates it with the IFF

-The JHMCS acts as a helmet-mounted HUD — it shows (beside the mininum needed to pilot the plane, like artificial horizon, speed, altitude, heading) data about the target: a TD box, a square in the direction where the target would appear. All what you have to do is to put the steering dot in the TD box and you get a shot cue.

-There are some information about the target that help you to make the right decision: near the TD box will appear the target range , closure speed and aspect. This will help you — let’s say that you have a (confirmed as enemy) target 7 Nm away comminig towards you. In this situation you can fire. But if you have a target 7 Nm away and running from you, there is no chance you reach it with a Sidewinder, so you have to come closer, or to switch to an AMRAAM.

The JHMCS will work together with the 9X who is a real killer: the FPA snsor is awesome (it is not the ASRAAM one as many says, it is only based on ASRAM one but better) is sensitivity is hudreds times bigger than the senor of 9M, the tracking rate is unbelieveble (it scans with a speed of 800 dps and rotates at 1600 dps! The field of vue is 180 degree ( 120 degree for ASRAAM and Phyton IV, 90 degree for the older R 73, 120 degree for the new one). The meneuvrability is 80 G (60 G fro the Phyton IV, 45 G for the R 73)!
Also, the range (believed smaller compared with the two missiles mentioned, because the 9X has a 5 ” engine instead a larger 6″ of the ASRAAM and Phyton) has improved dramatically (see http://www.nxtbook.com/fx/books/raytheon/aviationweek-oct04/) to 16-20 miles thanks to reduced drag.
<br />
However it can be fooled by both decoy dispensers and is not strictly all weather (would have trouble in fog for example).

Not quite. The FPA sensor is different. It is almost impossible to fooled with decoys, the only way would be to destroy the FPA with IR jammers (lasers). Also, the midwave FPA are less disturbed by bad weather (unlike long-wave, wich have longer range, but are next to useless on bad weather)

[HTML]the first to have it in service. (ie. not testing but standard issue!) [/HTML]

That what I’m saying. The HMD was installed on some 400 F 4s.Now, that means opertationally!

This is why I mentioned that the xaim 95 “Agile”was the first experimental TVC missile, and no one deny that the Russain R 73 was the first operational TVC missle…

[PHP]The first helmet mounted sight was ready by the mid 70’s , and although relatively limited in comparison to later refinements and developments , was the first system in use[/PHP]

The first in South Africa, not in the world…

Didn’t say it is impossible, just don’t know. Anyway,if there would be a source of inspiration, US is more plausible, if we consider the extent of KGB industrial espionage there, compared with SA, that hadn’t any relation (diplomatic) with the Soviet Uniuon

Info about the xaim 95: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-95.html