I'm genuinely curious, why is it that Semi-Active Radar Homing missiles are still used by everyone...

I'm genuinely curious, why is it that Semi-Active Radar Homing missiles are still used by everyone? In particular with aircraft. Everyone has a tons of SARH missiles still in service. Is there any reason to use them aside from cost?

Attached: Geekswipe-Illustrations-Three-Types-of-Missile-Homing-Karthikeyan-KC.jpg (1112x600, 43K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=5XMSPl4ggaA
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LY-60_/_FD-60_/_PL10
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

according to wikipedia

The basic concept of SARH is that since almost all detection and tracking systems consist of a radar system, duplicating this hardware on the missile itself is redundant. The weight of a transmitter reduces the range of any flying object, so passive systems have greater reach. In addition, the resolution of a radar is strongly related to the physical size of the antenna, and in the small nose cone of a missile there isn't enough room to provide the sort of accuracy needed for guidance. Instead the larger radar dish on the ground or launch aircraft will provide the needed signal and tracking logic, and the missile simply has to listen to the signal reflected from the target and point itself in the right direction. Additionally, the missile will listen rearward to the launch platform's transmitted signal as a reference, enabling it to avoid some kinds of radar jamming distractions offered by the target

it also helps during a fight because the RWR will be showing the aircraft as the "spike" instead of the missile itself.

Attached: 1548908506739.jpg (1920x1080, 505K)

There's also the point that a SARH lock can be dropped if need be. Once an active missile goes pitbull, there is no recall. It's going to either hit the target or miss. Take AIM-54s for instance. Once the missile goes pitbull and somehow loses track of it's target, it's going to acquire the next thing it sees, no matter if it's friendly, enemy, or not-involved.

Would that ever actually be an issue in the real world? Probably not, but it's something to consider.

>why is it that Semi-Active Radar Homing missiles are still used by everyone?

They aren't

>Everyone has a tons of SARH missiles still in service.

They really don't.

A vast amount of what you just said is garbage. I would encourage you to lurk more and read up on the subject.

i always love these condescending kiddie responses that add nothing outside of stroking your own limp dick. kill yourself, faggot.

>They aren't
>They really don't

Attached: why you always lying.png (1920x1952, 638K)

This doesn't include surface launched SARH missiles either.

The countries that still use them do so because they already have them,

That map is pretty out of date.

Prove it

KEK who drew the fucking "passive radar homing"? that's completely wrong. anyway to answer your question: FOr A2A - They are available and cheaper and NOT every aerial threat is gonna be a near-peer 4.5+ gen fighter that requires the newest AMRAAM.

Also, although not as true nowadays, was that SARH missiles weren't limited by the battery life for the active seeker\emiter of a FOX 3, thus easier to make the missile reach a greater distance. the russkie R-27ER is a good example

That image is clearly made by a retard that is confusing IR imaging with "passive radar".

The RAF stopped using AIM-7s over a decade ago in favor of AIM-120s, JSDF started replacing AIM-7s with AAM-4s two decades ago, China used all theirs up nearly a decade ago and moved on to their own designs..

Its old. Really fucking old.

The USAF retired the AIM-7 over a decade ago.

see

OP thinks aircraft are the main user of SARH missiles.

You're a fucking retard

You made a compelling argument against AIM-7 being phased out in favor of AIM-120.

>don't use
>being phased out
pick one, nigger. All those AIM-7Ms in inventory don't just suddenly stop existing because we have better missiles.

Nope, try again.

Missiles have a shelf life, the youngest AIM-7M are over twenty years old.

>In particular with aircraft.

Yes and we still have some that are usable? So the map is still accurate?

Considering I'm OP, I think I know what I meant. If you're trying to say that all these users of SARH simply don't have them anymore, I'd like to see any evidence that they all up and disappeared. SARH missiles are used fucking everywhere from naval vessels to ground based SAMs, my question is why are they still in use and inventory everywhere, particularly the air to air variety when there are so many other alternatives

>Yes and we still have some that are usable?

The US military still has Garands that are usable, that doesn't mean they haven't been retired

If you meant something else then choose your words more carefully in the future.

>my question is why are they still in use and inventory everywhere

They don't turn into a pumpkin at midnight.

funny how so many other people seemed to understand his question instead of people crying that they totally aren't used anywhere and everyone has abandoned them

What is the lifespan of an AIM-7?

>funny how 'thing that doesn't contradict what was said'

holy fuck you are retarded

The AIM-7 was known to be trash in Vietnam. Have they improved them enough since then?

I bet you think adding a gun improved the F-4's air to air record.

We don't have active duty soldiers walking around with Garands, practicing with garands, etc...

We're still sending jets out with AIM-7s.

Who is 'we'?

USAF and USN currently. AIM-7Ps are still in inventory and still occasionally see use even on combat sorties, there's videos of jets over syria with Sparrows loaded up. Do you have any proof they were retired?

>there's videos of jets over syria with Sparrows loaded up

You sure they were not AGM-88?

youtube.com/watch?v=5XMSPl4ggaA

I see an AGM-88 opposite of two AIM-120

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM

Those aren't HARMs my guy, look at the tails.

that thing isn't nearly as thick as a agm, better go see someone about those eyes of yours.

Attached: 1561px-AIM-9_AIM-120_and_AGM-88_on_F-16C.jpg (1561x1024, 239K)

The only major player relying on SARH these days are the russians, them being too poor an stupid to develop an active missile that is reliable and affordable.
On NATO aircraft you see AIM-120s or Meteors while you only see R-27s on russian planes, the R-77 is practically never seen in the wild except for photo ops.

That's an AGM-88, AIM-9, and AIM-120.

That's clearly an Aim-7 on the left

no shit nigger it's literally in the file name, the video posted definitely doesn't have any HARMs in it still.

Missile doesn't announce its location to approach warning radars, radar on fighter is much more powerful than anything on a missile. Making missile lighter makes it faster and more maneuverable for given rocket motor and control surfaces.

edgy boi

YOURe A FUCKING RETARD

China still uses them.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LY-60_/_FD-60_/_PL10

the majority of SARH missiles in use are SAMs, aircraft weapons have shifted almost entirely in favor of ARH for the countries that can afford them in large numbers

you fucking RETARD

>Fox 3s become uncontrolled killing machines once they lose lock
Congratulations on the most retarded post I've seen today. Their radar has no search function and no Doppler filter. If they reacquired the first thing they saw, 99/100 missiles would "lock" the ground. When a Fox 3 loses lock, it disables itself and sometimes are even designed to self-detonate, it doesn't turn into some rogue.

If production ended in the late ninties / early aughts then their rocket motors should have another 10-20 years of shelf life.

54s will absolutely acquire a new target on their own after losing track on the initial target.

the great thing about low power monopulse seekers is that they can track targets at decent altitudes through the contrast between the intended target and ground clutter
if they couldn't do this, they wouldn't be able to track targets on their own in the first place

grats, you can read the filename?

Attached: 1493064774657.png (317x341, 125K)

The missile knows where it is by knowing where it isn't.

They improved them while Vietnam was still going on.

USN never added a gun to their F-4s. They just trained better.

This is the dumbest post on Jow Forums currently

but you get a launch warning and you know the location of the launch

>Launch warning
What is this ace combat? You get a lock warning and proximity warning if your plane is equipped for that, and if the launch plane fires and splits as is common in us aviation youl have your radar warning tracking it while the missile closes from the other direction.

54s have the range and speed to use a system like that, AMRAAMs do not. Much less chance of finding a friendly at 80 nm.
But the original post was describing 54s specifically, so that's fair.
True, if there's still contacts besides the ground in the missile's radar range and gimbal. And the missiles are still "smart" enough to recognize that the ground is the ground, although I don't specifically know if the AIM-54 in question has ground avoidance systems, I know the AMRAAM does. Anyway, I didn't mean to actually imply that real missiles will actually target the ground in any case.
Until you dethroned it. Congratulations, user.

You are now aware the AIM-120D has about the same range as the AIM-54.

ARH missiles will absolutely target random shit after they go active. There’s a reason the brevity call for a missile going active is “pitbull” and a missile launched without being painted by the aircraft’s radar is called “maddog”.

Fox 3s are not launched into furballs. The other user is correct, that post was full retard.

I guess they never miss

YOU FUCKING RETARDS ARTGGHHGGGH

huh?

Pics of that plane always make me hard.

Better seeker performance due to missiles being intrinsically extendable. This includes ECM and chaff resistance because the pilot can correct the missile if it gets duped.

Missiles tend to reacquire on new targets on the assumption that they only lost the target for a moment.

>Fox 3s are not launched into furballs
Well, not unless you're alone and outnumbered.

An SARH can be disarmed in an emergency. Like if you misidentified a target.

Cost and the fact everybody has literal piles of them.

You *might* get a launch warning.
AESA equipped radar emissions don't really differ between lock and fire control mode (depending on how it's programmed , you might not even be able to tell between lock and normal search mode) , the only way you can detect a launch are IR/UV emissions from the rocket motor.
Good luck relying on that with more modern missiles, especially when it's coming head-on without needing any signifficant corrections to the trajectory.

Properly stored guns don't decay.

Explosives do.