Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military From: u714092@eagle.larc.nasa.gov (prichard devon ) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Su-27 Message-ID: <1990Sep18.024145.19687@cbnews.att.com> Date: 18 Sep 90 02:41:45 GMT References: <1990Sep12.014855.29015@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. Lines: 32 Approved: military@att.att.com From: u714092@eagle.larc.nasa.gov (prichard devon ) From: Allan Bourdius There's only one interceptor in the world that can engage its targets in excess of 100 nautical miles and that is the US Navy's F-14A+/D. With Sidewinder, AMRAAM, and Phoenix, coupled with the AWG-9 radar, the F-14 series is probably the most formidable air defense fighter in the world. especially at that range, isn't the crucial point "how well can the radar hop modes and still retain track and lock?" the return is probably so weak that jamming is easy unless frequency hopping is used. I think this is the reason for the Russian prediliction towards monopulse radar. you might want to check the stats on the F-15 and F-18; they both have 100+ mile radars... though realistically, the logistics of having enough 100 mile missiles (i.e. Phoenix) _and_ the ROE to use them _and_ the success rate thereof, are such that this is not the most important point in air defense. having AWACS airspace control, visual target ID (which the Tomcat _did_ pioneer), sufficient numbers of fighters and missiles; that is what is needed. -- |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| | Devon Prichard making the world safe for helicopters ... | | u714092@eagle.larc.nasa.gov | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||