American and European Air to Air Missiles.

[DumbPilot]

One correction NEZ is that portion of the missile's flight in which there is enough energy available to the missile to hit target but doesn't guarantee 100% of hitting the target while the target, as the target may have ECM and other such counter measures.

I can't be certain about probability of kill at that point because while ECM exists, home on jam features in the AIM-120 also do. So beyond kinetics, all up to black magic(read: RF shenanigans) to guide the missile up to target.. but usually it is very successful in doing so, so I'd assume a way higher probability of kill when fired from NEZ.

 

[Super Flanker]

It is a common practice in all AFs when engaging in contested airspace. Nothing unprofessional about that.
Modern BVRAAM have seeker and target acquisition capabilities when can detect and lock on to target on end run independently.

This has two goals

1. Create airspace denial for some time in designated area.
2. Increase psychological pressure on enemy making him search, jam or dodge the missile on priority breaking his engagement/lock

This frees the enemy to carry out their operation.

However small chance that such BVRAAM will hit an aircraft it still has a chance and no one would endanger a priced asset like fighter aircraft unless stakes are not high.

This is absolutely false.. most missiles are not fired in NEZ.

NEZ(no escape zone) is that portion of the missile's flight in which there is an almost 100% guarantee of hitting the target while the target is running away, and during ballistic(missile motor has been spent already) flight.

Due to the nature of BVR combat, for you to fire your missiles inside NEZ means:
1) Your opponents have a shitty missile that does not have as much range as yours.
2) You, for some reason, have not turned away from the bandit group even though by now you should have(as launching in NEZ also places you inside the enemy's NEZ if he has a comparable missile)

View attachment 168327


For example here is an AIM-9L range chart
View attachment 168329

If the max limit is 26,000ft(4 nautical miles~) then NEZ would be around 8,000ft(1 nautical mile~). Something usually goes very wrong or very right if you have to fire at NEZ..

Thank you for correcting me. But I will stand by my point that PAF pilots are not the most professional. There are posts written by posters (especially in the "MiG-21 shot down Pakistani F-16" thread"/and a few other threads) which have sources quoting that PAF pilots were given passing marks in their training programs. Add to the fact that PAF cannot afford much flight hours and therefore it's pilots are not the most trained.

 

[Super Flanker]

One correction NEZ is that portion of the missile's flight in which there is enough energy available to the missile to hit target but doesn't guarantee 100% of hitting the target while the target, as the target may have ECM and other such counter measures.

"The No-Escape Zone is the zone within which there is a high (defined) kill probability against a target even if it has been alerted. This zone is defined as a conical shape with the tip at the missile launch. The cone's length and width are determined by the missile and seeker performance. A missile's speed, range and seeker sensitivity will mostly determine the length of this imaginary cone, while its agility (turn rate) and seeker complexity (speed of detection and ability to detect off axis targets) will determine the width of the cone."

 

[Dark Sorrow]

"The No-Escape Zone is the zone within which there is a high (defined) kill probability against a target even if it has been alerted. This zone is defined as a conical shape with the tip at the missile launch. The cone's length and width are determined by the missile and seeker performance. A missile's speed, range and seeker sensitivity will mostly determine the length of this imaginary cone, while its agility (turn rate) and seeker complexity (speed of detection and ability to detect off axis targets) will determine the width of the cone."

I can't be certain about probability of kill at that point because while ECM exists, home on jam features in the AIM-120 also do. So beyond kinetics, all up to black magic(read: RF shenanigans) to guide the missile up to target.. but usually it is very successful in doing so, so I'd assume a way higher probability of kill when fired from NEZ.

Modern jammers like EL/M-8222 jammer are very smart and capable of Deceptive jamming and/or DRFM jamming.
Such techniques gives false positive signature and missile is steered away from the actual target to some false (empty) location; home-on-jam doesn't work on such techniques effectively.
Gone are the days of Sweep or Barrage jamming (primarily employed in Russian EW Suites).
One of the reason we move from Russian EW Suite to Israeli EW Suite was that Russians use raw power with traditional techniques while Israeli use smart techniques.
Home-on-jam was specifically designed to beat Russian jammers (which focused on raw power) and is not very effective against Israeli jammers.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Thank you for correcting me. But I will stand by my point that PAF pilots are not the most professional. There are posts written by posters (especially in the "MiG-21 shot down Pakistani F-16" thread"/and a few other threads) which have sources quoting that PAF pilots were given passing marks in their training programs. Add to the fact that PAF cannot afford much flight hours and therefore it's pilots are not the most trained.

Won't comment professionalism, training or skill of PAF pilots as I am not knowledgeable in that domain.
I understand technology (especially semiconductor, electronics and software) and not people.

 

[johnj]

Thank you for correcting me. But I will stand by my point that PAF pilots are not the most professional. There are posts written by posters (especially in the "MiG-21 shot down Pakistani F-16" thread"/and a few other threads) which have sources quoting that PAF pilots were given passing marks in their training programs. Add to the fact that PAF cannot afford much flight hours and therefore it's pilots are not the most trained.

PAF brought 500 aim c5s, more than a decade ago, now not a best aam, and firing help to understand/test IAF capabilities, and they are very professional, and similar to NATO.
PAF cannot afford much flight hours - true, only issue they are facing now.

 

[Hari Sud]

One correction NEZ is that portion of the missile's flight in which there is enough energy available to the missile to hit target but doesn't guarantee 100% of hitting the target while the target, as the target may have ECM and other such counter measures.

‘yes, you may be right. Can you briefly deal with ECM measures on board Su-30MKI? You probably have the answer to F-16 AAMRAMs hitting ground instead of the target.

 

[Super Flanker]

Won't comment professionalism, training or skill of PAF pilots as I am not knowledgeable in that domain.
I understand technology (especially semiconductor, electronics and software) and not people.

PAF brought 500 aim c5s, more than a decade ago, now not a best aam, and firing help to understand/test IAF capabilities, and they are very professional, and similar to NATO.
PAF cannot afford much flight hours - true, only issue they are facing now.

Yes Pakistan had ordered 500 AIM-120C-5, the order was placed by Pakistan in early 2006 to equip its F-16C/D Block 50/52+ & F-16A/B Block 15 MLU aircrafts. I have heard somewhere that a US Navy carrier battle Group for it's air-arm can carry a larger stock of missiles than that.

Coming to professionalism, well I don't say that they are "Unprofessional" rather I am trying to say that their pilots are not upto the standards of F-16 pilots from Countries like US etc.

I have heard sources on this forum which quote American pilots scolding PAF pilots for being Unprofessional and receiving only passing marks in their training exams. I don't have the Sources with me right now though, I will have to do some extensive digging for it.

 

[Super Flanker]

‘yes, you may be right. Can you briefly deal with ECM measures on board Su-30MKI? You probably have the answer to F-16 AAMRAMs hitting ground instead of the target.

In terms of ECM capabilities of SU-30 MKI, the SU-30s can carry Elta EL/M-8222 SPJ. This is a standard EW pod for all SU-30 MKIs in service with Indian Airforce.

The ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ is a power-managed jammer, air-cooled system with an ESM receiver integrated into the pod. The pod contains an antenna on the forward and aft ends, which receive the hostile RF signal and after processing deliver the appropriate response.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

‘yes, you may be right. Can you briefly deal with ECM measures on board Su-30MKI? You probably have the answer to F-16 AAMRAMs hitting ground instead of the target.

Couldn't understand you. Can you clarify.

 

[Super Flanker]

Couldn't understand you. Can you clarify.

I think so that he is asking you to write a post/brief having information about SU-30MKI's ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) capabilities. (I.e Israeli Elta jammer pods)

 

[Dark Sorrow]

I think so that he is asking you to write a post/brief having information about SU-30MKI's ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) capabilities. (I.e Israeli Elta jammer pods)

Okay. Will do it tomorrow.

 

[Kumaoni]

Until the Soviet Union existed, no, but now, American (not Euromutt) are probably better than Chinese Junk and aging but still game Russian weaponry

 

[BON PLAN]

‘Too technical about distance. The pilots who used these knew the distance hence your argument is unbelievable. Something else was done to neuterlize it. What was that Something else?

It may be a diversion.
Or the use of old missiles near the end of their life... The pilots praying the help of Allah to find a target....

 

[BON PLAN]

One correction NEZ is that portion of the missile's flight in which there is enough energy available to the missile to hit target but doesn't guarantee 100% of hitting the target while the target, as the target may have ECM and other such counter measures.

It's true. The NEZ is that space where the target, even if it is a highly agile one, can't evade by doing max G turns.

So the NEZ depends of the speed of the fighter launching the missile (the higher it is the bigger the NEZ is), dépends of the altitude and difference of altitude of the fighter and its target (the bigger difference there is, the bigger the NEZ is), depends if the target is approaching or not. In fact there is no one NEZ, there are plenty of NEZ, calculated by the weapon system in real time or nearly.

But of course, the electronic counter systemes, or DIRCM or chaff or... may affect the missile in or without the NEZ.

 

[johnj]

It's true. The NEZ is that space where the target, even if it is a highly agile one, can't evade by doing max G turns.

So the NEZ depends of the speed of the fighter launching the missile (the higher it is the bigger the NEZ is), dépends of the altitude and difference of altitude of the fighter and its target (the bigger difference there is, the bigger the NEZ is), depends if the target is approaching or not. In fact there is no one NEZ, there are plenty of NEZ, calculated by the weapon system in real time or nearly.

But of course, the electronic counter systemes, or DIRCM or chaff or... may affect the missile in or without the NEZ.

In simple, no escape zone mainly depends on aero-kinetic-potential performance of target vs missile performance, then seeker/eccm.
60km NEZ of meteor is against su35/37 in high electronic warfare environment, and nez, 20km of c5/c7 against su27 and probability of kill depends on lots of factors like machine ,human ,environment, decoy etc.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

‘yes, you may be right. Can you briefly deal with ECM measures on board Su-30MKI? You probably have the answer to F-16 AAMRAMs hitting ground instead of the target.

Most information about ECM is classified and such information regarding such system is rather sparse.
Such systems also keep evolving rapidly in response to the treat they might encounter, though most these changes are mainly software oriented; some information can be outdated

I will post the information I could find on internet and the things I deduced (will highlight the same).

DARE ASPJ pod is heavily influenced from ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ.

Purpose

1. Enhance survivability of fighters and other military aircraft by suppressing multiple threats in dense radar-guided weapon systems environment
2. Protect the aircraft against all types of traditional and modern Air-to-Air & Surface-to-Air threats

Deployed mainly on Su-30MKI but can also be deployed on Jaguar, Mig-29 and Tejas.

Contains independent forward facing and rear facing; 16 Configurable Element Active Array Transmitter Receiver Units (deduced after looking at DARE ASPJ pod).

ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ provides full spectrum capabilities

1. L-Band (1-2 Ghz) : Against long range surveillance radars, GPS and LOS communication
2. S-Band (2-4 Ghz) : Against naval surveillance and fire control radars and LOS communication
3. C-Band (2-4 Ghz) : Against surveillance and weather radar and LOS communication
4. X-Band (8-12 Ghz) : Against aerial, naval and ground-based surveillance and fire control radars, missile seekers, satellite communication
5. Ku-Band (12-18 Ghz) : Against aerial, naval and ground-based fire control radars, missile seekers, satellite communication

Physical Advantages

1. Small size, lightweight (around 100 kg) and low drag
2. Can be installed on outer WWR A/A missile weapon stations (R-73 station)
3. Allow Su-30MKI full flight envelope (G load, velocity, etc.)

Electronic Advantages

1. Autonomous threat handling based on predefined large repository of jamming techniques maintained by IAI. IAI also continues to update the threat library. We pay substantial amount to IAI/Elta every year to update threat library. We have paid more to IAI/Elta than we have paid Russians for the support of MKI platform.
2. Better utilization of jamming resources in time, frequency and direction compared to Russian alternatives
3. Complete Automatic operation - minimal pilot workload feature not available in to Russian alternatives
4. High RF sensitivity and high ERP compared to Russian alternatives

Jamming Modes I have read ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ supports

1. Deceptive jamming
2. DRFM jamming
3. Barrage jamming
4. Pulse jamming

The first two are very important against A-A Missiles like AIM-120 C5 as when the missile is gammed the missile will encounter extreme difficulty to home on jam.
Though Russian jammers have higher transmit power they use Blanket Jamming hence home on jam is effective against them.
Blanket Jamming also fails against AESA seeker or radar.
Properly designed AESA seeker or radar will significantly reduce the effectiveness of ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ.
JF-17s Block 3 with PL-15E are a significant threat to MKI.

During Operation Swift Retort PAF fired couple of AIM-120s on MKI; though the communication for MKI were jammed, ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ were able to autonomously steer off the missiles away from its host aircraft saving host aircraft. I tried to find more details but looking at the unavailability of information it seems IAF has made details surrounding the incident classified.

PAF is worried from the effectiveness of ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ has asked ISI to get more details on ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ and its weakens.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Properly designed AESA seeker or radar will significantly reduce the effectiveness of ELTA El/M-8222 SPJ.
JF-17s Block 3 with PL-15E are a significant threat to MKI.

IAF is looking at AESA radar and seeker threat looking in Scorpius - SJ ELL-8251SB AESA SJS.

I believe we have even purchased them for our MKI, Tejas and probably Rafale.

For all talk of Spectra EW Suite is is not very effective against AESA radar and seeker threat possessed by JF-17 and J-10.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

IAI Awarded Multi-Million Dollar Deal for AESA Airborne Self Protection Jammer Pods for an Air Force in Asia

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) has been awarded a new multi-million-dollar deal for the purchase of Scorpius-SP Airborne Self Protection Jammer pods with Active Electronic Scanned Array (AESA) technology (ELL-8222SB), for an air force in Asia. Scorpius-SP is based on cutting-edge AESA technology with multi-beam operation – the ability to simultaneously detect and suppress multiple threats in different directions around the aircraft. AESA multi-beam technology provides exceptionally high sensitivity, allowing the system to detect advanced threats including Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) Radar, and very high jamming power for effective suppression of the targets. These capabilities represent a breakthrough in electronic protection and attack, creating the most effective airborne self-protection system available today.
Scorpius-SP utilizes Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM) and a range of sophisticated ECM techniques, providing protection against all types of Air-to-Air (A/A) and Surface-to-Air (S/A) threats in a dense radar-guided weapons environment. Based on IAI-ELTA's best-selling ELL-8222 pod configuration, this compact, lightweight, and aerodynamic pod is similar in contour to A/A missiles and may be installed on outer wing stations of fighters and other aircraft. The jammer significantly enhances aircraft survivability and mission success in today's highly challenging threat environment.
The technology behind Scorpius-SP is based on IAI-ELTA's decades of development and operational experience in AESA technology. In recent years, IAI-ELTA successfully developed AESA to meet the challenging requirements in the domain of electronic warfare (EW), culminating in the Scorpius family of systems that represent the future of EW. Scorpius-SP is the implementation of Scorpius technology for aerial self-protection. Other Scorpius systems include Scorpius-G for ground-based electronic defence, Scorpius-N for naval EW, Scorpius-T for aircrews' live training, and Scorpius-SJ for aerial support and stand-off jamming.



I believe this customer from Asia is IAF.

 

[BON PLAN]

In simple, no escape zone mainly depends on aero-kinetic-potential performance of target vs missile performance, then seeker/eccm.
60km NEZ of meteor is against su35/37 in high electronic warfare environment, and nez, 20km of c5/c7 against su27 and probability of kill depends on lots of factors like machine ,human ,environment, decoy etc.

The NEZ of Meteor was in fact said to be 2.5 to 3 that of AMRAAM C5 / C7, and twice that of AMRAAM C8 (also known as D model).

Something interesting about the pk of all the medium or long range missile when fired at a "confortable" range : the missile immediatly after beeing fired climb fast and sharp to reach low density air for less drag, so it is in a descent the last part of its flight just before the interception (to convert potential energy in kinematic energy). So the seeker sees the target from the top, a face absolutely never protected by RAM or LO measures...