Karan M wrote:
I dont think you have researched the topic completely to make this assertion.
First, India is going ahead with ASRAAM integration. The public disclosure indicates that.
Second, R-27s offer very useful capability. They are longer ranged than R73E in the TE version and can be used to passively attack approaching fighters closing in for WVR or even a NEZ BVR shot.
R27 RF version can be guided in along with an active homer for sensor diversity to attack ECM.
Third, some reports suggest these are EA versions, new active homers for returning the range advantage to the AF over AMRAAM C5.
India needs to take a lesson from this and make MMRCA award conditional on the winner having to share the source codes and complete readiness to integrate third party missiles and armaments on the platform.
Russia is not ready to let us integrate ASRAAM, I-Derby ER, MBDA on its platforms and thus gets a windfall gain on supplying its missiles which are sub optimal and not best in class. We are stuck with so called improved versions of its R series missiles which are duds and no match to the US/European and Israeli missiles.
won't launching an active radar-guided missile in tandem with a passive (IIR) work better than a single IR homing one? Also curious to know if there are dual seekers with combined passive (anti-radiation) and active radar homing missiles in service?https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/seeing-double-27656/
.. a good read, dated though
Marrying active-radar and IIR-seeker technology within one missile, however, raises various issues. BAe, GEC and the DRA are all examining issues such as whether there should be common or split apertures for the radar and IIR seekers.
Providing a common aperture for both radar and IIR seekers demands the use of advanced-materials technology. Split apertures, meanwhile, pose problems, with missile-airframe design.
A split-aperture approach may result in an asymmetric missile design. The traditional smooth lines of a radome could be succeeded by a missile front-end more resembling what one military source describes as a "shark's jaw". The "dog tooth" would house the IIR sensor, while the active-radar seeker would continue to radiate and receive throughout the front of the radar.
Such an approach would demand that, at least in the final phase of the engagement, the missile flies in such a way as to ensure that the target is always within the IIR aperture.
More arcane design solutions could get round this problem, by placing the IIR seeker at the front end of the missile, while using advanced materials shaped in such a way as to refocus the radar energy around the tip, both when it is being transmitted and received. Other options include a conventional radome, with up to four IR windows, mounted towards the front of the missile body to provide 360° coverage. Exactly which solution - or, more likely, solutions - will emerge remains to be seen.
Dual-mode AAMs have also attracted the attention of Israeli missile manufacturer Rafael, which is also examining IIR/active-radar-seeker combinations. The company says that it is funding a research programme into sensor-fusion technology for next-generation weapons