AMRAAM mishaps onthe F3
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: warwickshire
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMRAAM mishaps onthe F3
Just been reading about some integration problems with the Tornado F3 and AMRAAM, apparently the AMRAAM locked onto an escorting F3, which
"The AMRAAM’s seeker went active and the missile tried to home in on the Tornado escorting the one that did the test-firing. The AMRAAM missed because the escorting Tornado was in a position that allowed it to escape the errant missile."
How did the F3 manage to evade the AMRAAM?
"The AMRAAM’s seeker went active and the missile tried to home in on the Tornado escorting the one that did the test-firing. The AMRAAM missed because the escorting Tornado was in a position that allowed it to escape the errant missile."
How did the F3 manage to evade the AMRAAM?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Not Telling!
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I may be wrong (not checked that thread) but seem to recall that one who knew pointed out that it would've been difficult for the F3 to shoot down his wingman with the AMRAAM, since there was no wingman...
Suspicion breeds confidence
From Strategypage 
WARPLANE WEAPONS: The RAF AMRAAM Goes Wild
September 19, 2004: The Royal Air Force has begun to acquire AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM missiles for its Tornado F.3 aircraft. This is a controversial purchase, albeit one the RAF is eager to pursue since the Tornado F.3’s current radar-guided missile is the Sky Flash, a semi-active radar homing missile derived from the AMRAAM's predecessor, the Sparrow.
Semi-active radar homing missiles are obsolete, since they require that the plane firing them fly in a straight path to “paint” the target with its radar. That approach is a good way to get a plane shot down. The smart approach is to get a fire-and-forget system like AMRAAM on planes as soon as possible.
The integration of AMRAAM on the Tornado F.3 is intended to be a stopgap until the Eurofighter Typhoon enters service with the RAF. That said, there have been recent compatibility issues reported with the Tornado F.3’s radar (the Foxhunter) and the missile known as “Slammer”. The issues are not minor – the British press reported that one test-firing went really bad. The AMRAAM’s seeker went active and the missile tried to home in on the Tornado escorting the one that did the test-firing. The AMRAAM missed because the escorting Tornado was in a position that allowed it to escape the errant missile.
The Royal Navy’s decision to retire the Sea Harrier FA.2 left open the option of installing the Blue Vixen radar in the Tornado, but such a system would require even more testing. Adding a new radar is not a simple matter of plug-and-play as it would be on a desktop or laptop computer. The RAF would have to make sure that current weapons on the plane are compatible with the new radar.
The AMRAAM purchase was made despite the problems, which makes it likely that the Tornado F.3 will be retired early in favor of the Eurofighter. The Eurofighter is designed to use the AMRAAM, at least until the new Meteor anti-aircraft missile enters service. The Meteor is designed to have extended range (100+ kilometers compared to 90 kilometers for the AMRAAM) and speed (in excess of Mach 4) compared to the AMRAAM, which it will replace in 2012.
The Royal Air Force’s new missile buy not only demonstrates the advancements in air-to-air missiles, but it also shows the need for proper testing and evaluation of weapons systems. The testing needs to be done right, or else the near-accident reported by the British press could occur in a much less convenient place than on a fight test range. As the errant AMRAAM incident shows, even “peacetime” duties like flight-testing can have a high level of risk Top American aces like Richard Bong (40 confirmed kills in World War II) and Joseph McConnell (16 kills in the Korean War) survived combat only to die in accidents testing out new aircraft. But the rewards (having reliable combat aircraft) have outweighed the risks and costs. – Harold C. Hutchison ([email protected])
WARPLANE WEAPONS: The RAF AMRAAM Goes Wild
September 19, 2004: The Royal Air Force has begun to acquire AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM missiles for its Tornado F.3 aircraft. This is a controversial purchase, albeit one the RAF is eager to pursue since the Tornado F.3’s current radar-guided missile is the Sky Flash, a semi-active radar homing missile derived from the AMRAAM's predecessor, the Sparrow.
Semi-active radar homing missiles are obsolete, since they require that the plane firing them fly in a straight path to “paint” the target with its radar. That approach is a good way to get a plane shot down. The smart approach is to get a fire-and-forget system like AMRAAM on planes as soon as possible.
The integration of AMRAAM on the Tornado F.3 is intended to be a stopgap until the Eurofighter Typhoon enters service with the RAF. That said, there have been recent compatibility issues reported with the Tornado F.3’s radar (the Foxhunter) and the missile known as “Slammer”. The issues are not minor – the British press reported that one test-firing went really bad. The AMRAAM’s seeker went active and the missile tried to home in on the Tornado escorting the one that did the test-firing. The AMRAAM missed because the escorting Tornado was in a position that allowed it to escape the errant missile.
The Royal Navy’s decision to retire the Sea Harrier FA.2 left open the option of installing the Blue Vixen radar in the Tornado, but such a system would require even more testing. Adding a new radar is not a simple matter of plug-and-play as it would be on a desktop or laptop computer. The RAF would have to make sure that current weapons on the plane are compatible with the new radar.
The AMRAAM purchase was made despite the problems, which makes it likely that the Tornado F.3 will be retired early in favor of the Eurofighter. The Eurofighter is designed to use the AMRAAM, at least until the new Meteor anti-aircraft missile enters service. The Meteor is designed to have extended range (100+ kilometers compared to 90 kilometers for the AMRAAM) and speed (in excess of Mach 4) compared to the AMRAAM, which it will replace in 2012.
The Royal Air Force’s new missile buy not only demonstrates the advancements in air-to-air missiles, but it also shows the need for proper testing and evaluation of weapons systems. The testing needs to be done right, or else the near-accident reported by the British press could occur in a much less convenient place than on a fight test range. As the errant AMRAAM incident shows, even “peacetime” duties like flight-testing can have a high level of risk Top American aces like Richard Bong (40 confirmed kills in World War II) and Joseph McConnell (16 kills in the Korean War) survived combat only to die in accidents testing out new aircraft. But the rewards (having reliable combat aircraft) have outweighed the risks and costs. – Harold C. Hutchison ([email protected])
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is amazing to see how much ill-informed rubbish is talked about by those who don't have a clue. It's just such a shame that so many people are prepared to believe it and not recognise the facts.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I said above, utter drivel.
Some of these journos wouldn't know a phased array from a frequency-modulated interrupted carrier wave if it dressed in orange and slapped them across the face. Give them 2minute anecdote and they write a Tom Clancy novel - stick the words 'Defence Correspondant" after their name and everything they say is true...
Some of these journos wouldn't know a phased array from a frequency-modulated interrupted carrier wave if it dressed in orange and slapped them across the face. Give them 2minute anecdote and they write a Tom Clancy novel - stick the words 'Defence Correspondant" after their name and everything they say is true...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slagging off the F3 at this point in its' life just illustrates how out of touch this journo is. The F3 is now developed to the point where it is a very capable AD fighter and the addition of AMRAAM is part of that capabilility.
Where was that journo when the F2 entered service and the whole weapons system was a complete and utter shambles? At that time he/she was probably writing glowing articles about how good it was.
Nothing like uninformed criticism to sell newspapers.
Where was that journo when the F2 entered service and the whole weapons system was a complete and utter shambles? At that time he/she was probably writing glowing articles about how good it was.
Nothing like uninformed criticism to sell newspapers.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Flying straight and level after launch is real beam rider stuff. Stuff that the Rusiians did in the 60s.
Manoeuvring like a bastard while remaining locked on was what the Phantom did in the 60s. I doubt the F3 has to use Russian 60s tactics, but lets spread the word.
Maybe the enemy will believe it is a sitting duck.
Manoeuvring like a bastard while remaining locked on was what the Phantom did in the 60s. I doubt the F3 has to use Russian 60s tactics, but lets spread the word.
Maybe the enemy will believe it is a sitting duck.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: warwickshire
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply
Cheers for the info guys, just heard back from the author of the aforementioned article, who wrote to the MOD and RAF and now says:
They said they did not conduct ANY test shots of the AMRAAM in or around July `02 (of course, the report was in June), nor are they aware of any RAF shots.
I look forward to reading his revised article
They said they did not conduct ANY test shots of the AMRAAM in or around July `02 (of course, the report was in June), nor are they aware of any RAF shots.
I look forward to reading his revised article
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: A Brit in Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASRAAM on F3
Jimlad et al,
ASRAAM (AIM-132) and AMRAAM (AIM-120B) were both integrated onto the Tornado ADV by BAE under the Capability Sustainment Programme (CSP) back in '99, resulting in Avionic System Standard 06 (ASS06). ADV system development did not stop there.
I missed hearing the report that started the original debate but having read the starter post I followed the thread back; the more I read the greater my disbelief that anyone who gets paid as a 'defence correspondant' can publish such utter cr@p and get away with it.
Up until mid 2002 when I left the UK only one AMRAAM firing had been carried out - a single, unguided safe separation shot by BAE required to prove that CSP worked.
ASRAAM (AIM-132) and AMRAAM (AIM-120B) were both integrated onto the Tornado ADV by BAE under the Capability Sustainment Programme (CSP) back in '99, resulting in Avionic System Standard 06 (ASS06). ADV system development did not stop there.
I missed hearing the report that started the original debate but having read the starter post I followed the thread back; the more I read the greater my disbelief that anyone who gets paid as a 'defence correspondant' can publish such utter cr@p and get away with it.
Up until mid 2002 when I left the UK only one AMRAAM firing had been carried out - a single, unguided safe separation shot by BAE required to prove that CSP worked.
