Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Share your best strategies and tactics with other players by posting them here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
DeSade
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 5:08 pm
Contact:

Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by DeSade »

Very interesting new study by CSBA:

http://csbaonline.org/publications/2015 ... periority/

for me especially chapter "cost of speed" (p. 35-38), which deals with range detection of IRST systems as function of targets speed. Its first time I see numerical values in respected publication, and it looks like detection range doubles just for moving from high subsonic to low supersonic and triples at 1.8M.

Also next chapter "An Alternate Vision of Future Aerial Combat" have some bold concepts with mothership like "anti-fighter bomber", although personally I'm not entirely convicted by author :)

Anyway, for some time there is huge interest in IRSTs among largest players, and recent opinions like Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jon Greenert stating that "stealth may be overrated" add credibility to that technology:

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military ... /22949703/

From the CMANO perspective its important because in my opinion IRST model in the game has some room for improvement.



ckfinite
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:33 pm

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by ckfinite »

From the CMANO perspective its important because in my opinion IRST model in the game has some room for improvement.

Can you describe exactly how? The fundamental limitation of IRST systems is that you're trying to find a penny at the bottom of the Empire State Building, while looking through a straw.
DeSade
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 5:08 pm
Contact:

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by DeSade »

ORIGINAL: ckfinite
From the CMANO perspective its important because in my opinion IRST model in the game has some room for improvement.
Can you describe exactly how? The fundamental limitation of IRST systems is that you're trying to find a penny at the bottom of the Empire State Building, while looking through a straw.

True for F-14 AN/AAS-42, however current IRST systems continuously scan narrow area of wide sector, similar to mechanically scanned radar arrays, but due to much less weight and inertia they do it much faster - some sources compare scan rate to that of AESA radars, see for example:
The performance of the Typhoon's Pirate IRST has increased due to better processing and software since it entered service in 2007, says a Eurofighter engineer. The service-entry standard was “pretty raw.” Better processing exploits the fact that the IRST is extremely agile, capable of performing complex tailored scans, because its steering mirror is much lighter than a radar dish. It can scan faster than an AESA, in some cases, because it does not transmit

http://aviationweek.com/awin/us-navy-fo ... ed-systems

As for CMANO model, it is pretty robust, what I would like to see is looking again at the detection ranges and taking target temperature into equation.

Often quoted for PIRATE is 90km detection for high subsonic head-on fighter (number taken from Austrian Air Force website). However general consensus is that under less that ideal conditions you should halve it or even divide it by three. Still, it gives around twice larger detection range that in CMANO (from my experience below 10 nm).

As for temperature, look at the data form the link in my first post. This is much broader subject than only aircraft - PIRATE is said to detect incoming AAM from much larger distance than aircraft (130+ km), due to much higher speed and temperature of target. See also awesome video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN-A6PWRFno

of F-35 DAS detecting ballistic missile launch at 400 nm and tracking it up to 800 nm distance
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by mikmykWS »

I think this is definitely worth looking into and there probably is good cause to add a variable. Will add it as something to talk about.

Thanks!

Mike



Dimitris
Posts: 14771
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by Dimitris »

Added modifier for IR-detection range boost dependent on Mach number, in Build 699. (We already have a modifier for afterburner in place).
DeSade
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 5:08 pm
Contact:

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by DeSade »

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

Added modifier for IR-detection range boost dependent on Mach number, in Build 699. (We already have a modifier for afterburner in place).

I know you probably hear it a lot, but you guys are awesome :)
magi
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:06 am

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by magi »

That clip was really interesting.....
falcon2006
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:52 am

RE: Future of air-to-air combat lies in IRSTs?

Post by falcon2006 »

To some extent, its true that IRST and pods like Sniper XR will be the key sensors in the future A2A combat.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”