Well to me the discussion point was the ASRAAM, MICA IR and the capacity of the platforms carrying them, especially in game.
And if you want to keep the discussion on the PIRATE, I don’t think I was out of the subject.
You say that the PIRATE is marketed to be able to give LOAL capacities to its armement, I’m just responding that I doubt the range finding method of the PIRATE allows for efficient LOAL of its missiles (even for new ASRAAM with potential DL*), meaning kinetic range has to be lost to compensate for bad ranging.
I havent read that, but I cannot refute it. I did think PIRATE maximum range was 70km?
PIRATE was designed to detect the perceived threat of Russian 5th Generation aircraft. If you cannot reliably use the system to provide accurate positional data for a weapons solution. Then I struggle to see the point in it.
I mean, it is really just a glorified stadiametric rangefinder.
You can still use it to identify a target and also guesstimate the range to a target so you are not constantly emitting a signature. You have to remember that PIRATE is largely based on early 1990s technology.
1 Like
Well that’s another point for the 2019 version Rafale and the 2010 Typhoon.
I see they plan to upgrade PIRATE with later tranches.
How does the Rafale get around the limitations the PIRATE has?
Most importantly, you have to recognise that OSF doesn’t face anywhere near the same size and weight constraints as PIRATE. According to the brochure for PIRATE, the unit has a volume of less than 10 litres, and a weight of 8kg (though I would think it’s heavier, but oh well). For comparison, the constraints for OSF were 88 litres and 100kg, so a lot more functionality can be included.
The sizeable difference is likely due to space being reserved on the Rafale for the future OSF as early as 1988 in the design phase. This is probably not the case for Eurofighter.
In terms of functionality, PIRATE is for the most part a dual field of view thermal camera for very, very long range applications:
Spoiler
The narrow FOV is used for target search and tracking (~8° x 11.25°). The wide FOV is used for identifying planes. It also only operates in a single waveband (LWIR) which is disadvantageous for air-to-air applications. MWIR is preferable due to its greater sensitive. Having both is best.
On the other other hand for OSF, due to the less severe size and weight constraints, the thermal imaging channel (used to detect targets) can operate in two wavebands (MWIR and LWIR) which enables better target discrimination and performance in different weather conditions.
Spoiler
Due to more efficient target discrimination, the thermal imaging channel is able to afford a larger field of view for situational awareness (~80° x 60°) at the expense of resolution. This cost cannot be incurred for PIRATE since the single thermal camera is required to have a very high resolution for target identification and efficient clutter rejection.
Identification by OSF is instead performed by a separate sensor, the CCD visible detector. This is essentially a long range telescope with a FOV of less than 1°. It therefore has a very high resolution for target tracking, and can determine the range via a 300mJ laser rangefinder.
Both the thermal imaging and visible sensor are also on gimbals (unlike PIRATE) which provide a far greater field of search:
Spoiler
TL;DR: OSF can afford more functionality and performance due to being heavier and having over 9 times the volume of PIRATE. PIRATE has to make significant compromises to meet constraints, OSF not nearly as much.
/rant over
9 Likes
Wasnt much of a rant, quite informative thanks.
Is OSF still impacted by atmospheric conditions?
1 Like
Its already in use on F.4 and ISE.
1 Like
To a far lesser extent. 23km is clear visibility and 1.0 means all IR radiation passes through the atmosphere:
LWIR does have its benefits but only really in tandem with MWIR for air-to-air applications.
It really depends on the specific target in question and what exactly it’s doing, the ALR-23 for example managed ~18km for contemporary targets (B-57 / B-58).
Eh, MWIR has greater sensitivity and is preferable since it will detect an afterburner further than a LWIR sensor.
ALR-23 is also a poor example since it (most probably) makes use of the US common modules program which I’m pretty sure only made use of the LWIR band. Perhaps I am wrong though.
On dev, it appears that the R27ER does not set off the MAWS appropriately with the new chaff/flare selection, only throws out flares instead of chaff. Not sure if it’s because the launch isn’t detected on rwr. Couldn’t really tell. Anyone know the cause of this?
Sounds a bit odd, chuck a report in. Only way of it maybe getting fixed.
Which aircraft? It could just be that RWR is not identifying the Su-30SM’s radar and so cannot detect launch
Hi,
It seems that on the dev server, the Rafale’s MAW still can’t detect the precise location of incoming missiles.
Shouldn’t it have the same functionality as the EF-2000’s MAW?
Image 1 is the Rafale
Image 2 is the EF-2000.
1 Like
Some sources stated it can detect the range of missiles.
I do however wonder how they’d achieve that. It’s quite similar to the PIRATE conendrum we spoke about before. Being a fully passive IR sensor, there’s not really a precise and fail proof way to detect the range of a missile without external sensors.
In the case of radar missiles, I fully expect the sensor fusion with the RWR to give pretty accurate data on the range to be displayed by both the MAW and RWR, both being presented on the same MFD
For IR and other passive missiles, i don’t really have an idea of how it would work.
Anyway, there’s a report with primary sources on that, so we’ll see how the devs respond to this
2 Likes
Interestingly… from SAT:
Y’know, DDM was quite sophisticated for 1980s era technology.
5 Likes
Su 30, though su 30 did appear to lock according to RWR, but there was no launch warning for the ER. Don’t really have anyone to test it with to assert if the issue is prevalent or not.
1 Like
Yes it should, if it still has not been fixed by the time they mark the countermeasure sensor fusion report as fixed then I will report it again.
Because the maws knows the direction of arrival of the missile and the AESA SPECTRA antennas all over the aircraft can perform ranging functions of the missiles, and also jam them when necessary.
1 Like
Ok so RWR/jamming can act similarly to the the EFT Radar based MAW then with sensor fusion ?
But on the other hand @Mulatu_Astatke sharrd a source stating that DDM by itself could get the positional data of the missile, so they can still do it without using the rest of the SPECTRA suite (M2K also carry the same DDM, and it’s RWR is just a regular RWR)