Stingers (FIM-92B and later) use Pseudo-Imaging (Rosette Scan) seekers with the POST seeker.
This is one of the two entrants for the Next-Generation Short-Range Interceptor program of record.
3 Likes
While some manpads do in fact use IIR (Mistral 3 has been using one since the mid-2015s), most manpads in circulation today remain old iglas and stingers, so equipping a heli with DIRCM still makes sense even if it has a reduced efficiency against IIR seekers
1 Like
DIRCM is not whats debated here. Its not effective against IIR Missile. What is Debated Is LDIRCM which could only be effective if it can physically damage the seeker with the laser. I
No offense but this is a stupid take.
Which is not possible based on established metrics (according to [Volume 7 of the Infrared Handbook, 3.3.5.1 Detector Damage] needs about 63kW to be delivered) and known power draw President-S uses 3.5kVA, assuming 100% of said power was transmitted and a full duty cycle that means it would take ~18 seconds to destroy a generic seeker. and with a stinger for example self destructing at 17 seconds, it would take too long to be useful.
And considering it’s rated for ranges between 500 through 5000m The stinger has a time of flight to said ranges of ~1.3-11.7 seconds.
So it should be obvious that that’s not how it functions.
10 Likes
For all those thinking that LDIRCM is at the point where it can actually function as a pseudo-DEW and fry seekers or thermal imaging arrays (yes, the APS thing on the Type 99 tank is basically LDIRCM); it takes both a significant amount of power and a significant amount of volume to produce a laser that can both output the required power to damage something quickly and focus it at multiple distances in order to effectively transfer that power into the target. Doesn’t matter if your laser has 300w of power when your target receives one ten-thousandth of that due to atmospheric scattering (something especially bad at sea level with dense air) and incorrect focus.
And none of these systems have the volume to fry anything meaner than a black balloon, if allowed to use their laser on them for a very long period of time. Not even the huge LDIRCM systems in use on cargo aircraft and airliners flying in and out of dangerous airports have the power or volume dedicated to actually damaging missiles.
2 Likes
Damaging missiles and damaging a few pixels on the IR seeker are two very different things, however both might achieve the same thing: the missile to not hit the protected target. Also side effect is forcing HOJ and that is not ideal anyway.
No it isn’t? It’s targeted at your eyes not your thermals lol. Your eyes can’t withstand much more than a flashbang. LDIRCM is specifically IR targeted and it is a different story otherwise.
You do get that heat will be transferred away over time, so the longer it takes to get to the point where damage occurs, the more work the system will need to perform to heat it up. and that with cooled detectors they are often starting from a fairly low (Cryogenic) temperature.
inserting a jamming Waveform is antithetical to an attempt to damage the as it requires the Jammer to pulse in a pattern to function. Where as destruction would necessitate the complete use of the duty cycle to transfer as much energy as possible in as short a time for a variety of reasons.
It’s more than enough to guide on, and it’s not like guidance can’t be resumed should the Jamming cease at some point during flight.
So how exactly is it supposed to interfere with dual band seekers? since the other band is outside the jammers bandwidth for example the POST seeker equipt Stinger using a UV channel to bypass IR lasers.
UV is only for reference and can’t be used as primary tracking. Cause against head on targets it will underperform, It basically is like IOG, cause primary tracking is still IR, and UV is only used when IRCM is activated.
Also by specifically IR I meant that guy’s comment on type 99 which uses visible light cause it blinds enemy tank gunner.
It is inaccurate and that’s why it is only on when IRCM is up, and when flares are applied the HOJ doesn’t necessarily pick up the correct signal. Also that just means the centre of mass is missed as the LDIRCM in question is at the bottom of the target.
As I said, achieves the same thing, but one much more achievable than the other.
And there is a reason they are cooled to that sort of temperature, cause they don’t work otherwise. Pixels on IIR is more fragile than you think. Anyway this is completely down to chance and it’s not like stupid flares have not jammed AIM9X twice in a row, by a su22 or sth never the less.
???
“The detected signal may be negative (a non-radiating target seen against a bright background) or positive (a radiating or reflecting target seen against a dark background). Preferably, The seeker will initially operate in the visual contrast mode until an adequate IR signal is available to home the missile. If a sufficiently IR radiating target is present, the seeker may select and receive in the IR mode.”
in what way? When all four quadrant sectors of the detector are receiving equal energy it is pointed at the source.
Small FoV, and if long time coefficients are introduced into the mapping the impact of flares can be reduced, especially if additional segmentation passes are performed to spatially disambiguate contacts.
That why it’s got a proximity fuse, also terminal “diving” maneuvers are not unheard of either, just look at the Redeye.
They do, they just become less effective.
And they are a tiny target to hit a such a distance, don’t forget that Lasers still obey the Inverse-Square law so are significantly effected by distance.
It’s really not. Engineers tend to know what they are doing.
A lot of the processing is done in software so it was probably caused by an improperly configured threat library, and probably not having non simulated data for whatever formulation that was used, or a bug somewhere. It’s not likely to happen again.
1 Like
And IIR missiles are 100% effective? no. Against IRCM targets 70% at best. It is down to chance, and the engineers don’t know what they are doing cause everything is top secret, so they don’t know what they are up against any way.
However again this is down to chance, dependent on range and humidity and stuff like that that affects LDIRCM’s energy transfer onto IIR seeker.
Which means objective achieved for LDIRCM. Especially at sort of 9-10km range.
Which is hugely energetically inefficient.
Which makes HOJ the more difficult, as LDIRCM has the potential to fill that seeker.
That is 1. if it is the correct source and 2. much of the sectors would be filled out by LDIRCM and therefor HOJ would thus rely on gradient of IR signal closer to the edge to work that out. Not very accurate and this applies more so nearer the missile to LDIRCM.
That is nothing but a design, there is a reason why no one tested UV missiles, it is basically a fail safe thing much like Strela’s photocontrast mode. Also that sort of LOAL is not used anymore due to excessive need for IFF, which is modernly done predominantly with DL and not UV.
While sure compartmentalization is a thing so not everything that is known is likely to be shared. Foreign Military Exploitation is definitely a thing just look at how far the “Have Idea” / “Constant Peg” program and it’s constituents went and how broadly it trained Top gun graduates.
What system are you thinking of?
there really isn’t that high of a power density at those sorts of ranges.
Source? it does so at the last second, so it really isn’t that much of a waste, and we know that it is effective.
It literally would not matter if it did or not, The quadrant seeker works regardless, by design, it’s conceptually similar to an inverse monopulse seeker functionally.
If it was not why is the DIRCM system active? or at all relevant to the discussion if it is down to operator error?
You clearly don’t quite understand how it works, I would recommend reading the following passage;
| Quadrants | Left | Right |
|---|---|---|
| Up | Quadrant II: +ΔEl −ΔAz | Quadrant I: +ΔEl +ΔAz |
| Down | Quadrant III: −ΔEl −ΔAz | Quadrant IV: −ΔEl +ΔAz |
In what way? all it would need to do is turn the gain down, as it approached problem solved
That is literally the FIM-92’s POST seeker, used by a the -92B and later variants.
Unlike the Strela, we have data that it’s functional out to at least 6.5km or so.
Considering that it’s still in use the concept seems fine, and it’s not really LOAL if it needs to lock on before launch is it?
You do get that the Stinger has a integral IFF interrogator, it’s not an issue. And its not like it locks out the trigger anyway.
It’s a system from the late 80’s not a modern missile what do you expect?
Who knows exactly how the NGSRI will work exactly.
3 Likes
Who isn’t using a direct vision scope and therefore will only get a flash on their screen, not warcrime eye damage. It’s basically the same concept as these LDIRCM modules except in a significantly less efficient wavelength.
why does those light make the nose look like sid the sloth
Yes it can? For example, the titular Mi-28NM uses UV MAWS to direct its LDIRCM. Tracking accuracy is actually a strong point of UV sensors…
Detecting burnt out missiles is not tho, so it shouldnt be able to use its LDIRCM vs burnt out missiles lol (not that it should even work on the missiles it works on)
4 Likes
I was finally able to hop on and check my ka-52, it does have the LDIRCM, it looks like there’s one between the engines on top and looking at it from the front there’s one next to the right dazzler
No. It’s just light.
Yep, only 52M uses LDIRCM I think, and they aren’t in service yet.
Doesn’t mean Gaijin will refrain from adding it, or 52K with 38s.
No.
The Ka-52M has been in service for a long time.
No? Contract signed in 2022, not certain to have gone into full service. Unless there is something new.
Yes? Isn’t that part of the upgrade?