via Want China Times.
China has decided to purchase Su-35 fighter from Russia because it is able to launch rearward-firing missiles, according to senior colonel Wu Guohui, an associate professor at Beijing's National Defense University.Interesting. Now even if a plane is able to get in a "chase" position the can still be at a disadvantage. I wonder why the Chinese are emphasizing this capability above the "over the shoulder" shots that the Sidewinder and other missiles are capable of doing.
The Russia-designed R-73M2, R-74ME missiles, US-designed by AIM-9X and the China-designed PL-10 all have the capability of being launched against enemy aircraft from the back of the aircraft, according to the party-run People's Daily. The missile has a "nose cone" over the rocket engine and modified fins to prevent instability problems while briefly flying backwards after launch.
The birth of rearward-firing missiles has changed the concept of aerial warfare, according to Wu. In regular air-to-air combat, a fighter must shoot down its enemy from behind. With rearward-firing missiles and a a rearview display mounted on the helmet of the pilot, fighter pilots in the future can attack their target from the front.
China has no proper fighter yet capable of launching such a missile during actual combat. The Su-35 will be incorporated into the PLA Air Force to help pilots and the aviation industry get a feel for the new mode of combat. In the future, China will be able to make its own modifications from the Su-35 model.
I wonder what the thinking is here and if there isn't some disadvantage to the "over the shoulder" stuff that we haven't been told.
This seems obvious. Why wouldn't every air superiority fighter want have ability to fire a missile or two backwards? By obvious I mean wheels on the bottom of luggage obvious and couches that can act as recyclers obvious.
ReplyDeleteThese are over the shoulder type missiles they are not lauchned to the rear but make a sharp turn to engage target behind the plane ,so they have an extreme offbore capability by fact of added lock on after launch(LOAL) e, none that i know of can hit a plane a6 o'clock but a 160 degree off bore for R-74 version is near that. Aim 9x has cca 90° off bore sight capability, LOAL is a must have for planes with internal weapons bays
ReplyDeleteHaven't they been talking about this order for a year or two now? I will believe it when the Chinese show us those Su35s because it is starting to turn into a saga....
ReplyDeleteFrom what I heard, those over the shoulder shots burn a lot of fuel and energy, maybe a rear firing missile has more range and energy for the end game? Don't Sukois have read facing radars already, how hard could it be to mount a rear facing IRST for both radar and IR fired missile for self defense? Come to think of it, it would be a lot easier than the pilot having to look over his shoulder with those fancy new helmets and take the shot, with a rear facing IRST, your missile would already have lock on anyways, pilot just needs to pull the trigger.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRear firing missiles arent a new tech, maybe they hae been improved lately but I remember having a conversation with the hornet driver I worked with in my tacp, that the rear firing missles weren't snearly as deadky because I pilot could see them and act accordingly unlike a missle to the rear where he has to try to find the thing from behind.
ReplyDeleteIn a slightly off subject point, im hoping to see more of the off shoulder loal missles make their appearance in the cas world. We have the 114-p now we just need a few more
Rear shooting missile wouldn't need that much in terms of range as target is heading into the missile.
DeleteAs for the Hornet driver idea of them not being scary ,i don't buy it , IR missiles sport high 90+% hit rates vs radar guided ones that are closer to 60% a head on missile leaves only small time window as merging speed is close to mach 4 ,flares are ineffective and best chance of breaking missile lock is a high angle rate where missile needs to turn really hard so missile from the flank,but definetly not head on or tail on
"a head on missile leaves only small time window as merging speed is close to mach 4"
DeleteNot likely
A forward fireing missile starts at a high speed, say mach 1 and accelerates.
A rear fireing missile starts at MINUS mach 1, has to accelerate to 0 and then get up to interception speed.
Dont get me wrong, nasty little trick, but it has severe limitations.
I'd be amazed if it works, can a rocket engine do reverse?
Agree Mr T. All the latest IR missile are reputably deadly, like AIM9X, IRIS-T, ASRAAM and R73/74 are very difficult to break off, they turn hard, have lots of energy for end game and are difficult to trick. I think the head on shot would be most difficult shot to defend plus these are smaller missiles that are going to be more difficult for the pilot to see. Also reaction time for a shorter range shot will be reduced compared to a longer range BVR shot.
ReplyDeleteIn a counter stealth fight, even if your F22/F35 sneaks in to get a shot, you could just fire a rear facing IR missile back right up the gut of the LO fighter which means he also now is in trouble.
You might get shot down but that stealth fighter might also become a kill, that's not a good exchange rate.
In more important news, that never gets covered by US media, it just got a little hotter between China and japan....
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/japan-pm-says-ready-more-assertive-against-china-084214563--business.html
Kinematics is part of it: every bit of fuel a missile burns going forward is wasted in an over the shoulder launch.
ReplyDeleteI would guess that fire control is a big part of this too. The fire control to guide a missile to a LOAL position in an over the shoulder shot has to be tricky stuff, especially if the target plane is maneuvering instead of just blindly following.
Rear facing radar/irst working with a 'backwards' missile, OTOH, can use all the same fire control techniques already developed for conventionally fired missiles and could even do a LOBL shot.
To fire a missile "backwards" the missile is fired upwards. The kinetic energy of the already forward moving aircraft is transformed into altitude. To do this effectivly a missile needs wing surface. Just look at the IRIS-T or AA-11. Both have more wing surface than a AIM-9. IRIS-T can turn with 60g.
Delete