IIR seekers are fundamentally different than the previous generation of seekers. Small (psychically) sources of heat/light just don’t work the same against it. Your making assumptions based on tech that you yourself admit may not exist.

Again, the thread started by talking about current “traditional” flares so try to keep it on topic.

——-edit

Here was a booster-phase NCADE missile intercept test that uses a 9X seeker.

The live-fire test was intended to prove that the NCADE seeker – derived from Raytheon’s AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missile – can discriminate between the threat missile’s plume and body. The company says the seeker performed this function, but also intercepted the target.

Notice the seeker is not fooled by the LARGE&HOT exhaust of the ascending ballistic missile.

The discussion was flares, not fuel dump, DIRCM, etc.

Obviously technology and active countermeasures will improve, but as far as flares go…. IIR seekers are virtually immune.

Fuel dumping is 60 years old because it worked on 1st gen seekers, not modern IIR seekers. Again, if you have some data to refute with, by all means present it.

If we are going to start throwing in multiple non-flare countermeasures, then we must also include mid-course updates that will keep the missile on track.

Sorry, but you seem to be the ones that don’t get it. Older IR missiles only saw a hot spot (or multiple hot spots). Modern IIR missiles see an actual picture of the target.

In order to “white out” the view, the flare would have to physically occupy a large portion of the FOV. This has been demonstrated in Iraq during ground strikes where the FLIR has been “whited out” due to the large explosion. Also, the flare is stationary (or slowing down quickly), while the plane is racing away. Modern IIR seekers can see not only the target, but can discriminate between flare and plane and ignore the flare.

If I am wrong, by all means show some data that proves that a modern IIR seeker can be reliably fooled by ANY kind of flare. As of now, all the data available shows this not to be the case.

Via radio, direct fire (from guns) and paintball grenades were used. We used both helicopters and ultralights in the battles.

I will have to wait for the commercial to appear on YouTube to check it.

The reason the F-22, F-35, and all other modern fighters still carry flares, despite having almost no effect on modern IIR seekers, is that older heat seeking missiles (that are more susceptible to flares) are still in wide use by our potential enemies. That, and MADPADS can still be fooled by flares.

As to where I have seen flares in my thermal viewer…. you have heard of “120mm illumination rounds”, right? I have seen many times where a parachute flare drifted into my FOV and all that was seen in the viewer was a small hot spot. No “white out”, and this was even with 1st gen thermal viewers. 120mm Illumination rounds are a lot bigger than flares in a fighter so don’t try to say they are not as bright.

When not, even the F-22A/F-35s are helpless against fighters equipped with recent AAMs and a fifth-generation staring Focal Array seeker. 😮

This is a correct statement… and is the major driver behind the Block 5 planed upgrade to add DIRCM to the F-35.

Now you also understand the urgency (and the world’s need) for a VLO fighter, that is to start and end combat in the BVR rangeband.

Sorry Sens, but your mistaken. Just look at the video (post#2) again. Several of the engagements are with countermeasures (dozens of flares which is more than that C-17 shot) and in no way looks like a “flashlight into your naked eyes”.

For that you need DIRCM.

Also, that video is from 2000 of a Aim-9X Blk1. Block 2 will likely have even better target and countermeasure discrimination. It’s GPS mid-course updating system will also help to keep it on track minimizing the effect of countermeasures even further.

I am a M1A1 vet and have plenty of experience with thermal viewers (same as IIR head of new seekers). That being said, small, high energy heat sources do not produce a “white out” effect in the viewer. What does cause “white out” is large, high heat events (think large explosions), but flares do not qualify.

I do not think it was under the wing because the missile came from above the wing in this test.

I think it was the design of the flare launcher that was hidden.