Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: adam@ste.dyn.bae.co.uk (Adam Curtin) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: AMRAAM Message-ID: <1991Feb13.031334.25993@cbnews.att.com> Date: 13 Feb 91 03:13:34 GMT References: <1991Feb7.015232.3245@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: British Aerospace (Dynamics), Stevenage Lines: 88 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Adam Curtin [ Note to the moderator: In this article I quote without permission from Aerospace America. I understand that limited quoting is allowed under "fair use" laws. I quote perhaps 20% of the article. Please trim this if it you consider it excessive. ] >I read that AMRAAM was at a severe disadvantage when it's European sister >was delayed indefinitely. It's a crying shame too. If the one in the >simulators are like the ones on the drawing boards, it'd be a Godsend. Do your targets in the simulators carry ARMs? >AMRAAM is to Sidewinder what a rifle is to a dagger. When I heard it >was in development, I was not surprised at all. I hope it makes it. That's a point of view which many technophiles share. However, the reality of radar warfare is somewhat different. An article by Jeffrey L Ethell in the Jan 1990 edition of Aerospace America reports the pitfalls and dubious decisions in development of AMRAAM, concentrating on a study by Air Force Col. James Burton of the AMRAAM project office. Burton ... "...studied all 407 known missile kills made in the air since 1958 (except for the 1967 Middle East war and Pakistan's 1971 clash with India), focussing hard on the 2,014 missile firings made during the Vietnam War and the 1973 and 1982 Middle East skirmishes." "...Of more than 260 Arab aircraft knocked down by Israel in 1973, only five fell to Sparrows in 12 firings. Of the 632 Sparrows fired in all the wars Burton studied, only 73 destroyed the airplane they were fired at. The ancient Sidewinder did almost three times better: of some 1,000 Sidewinder firings, 308 kills resulted in a kill rating of 30%." "In Southeast Asia, Sparrow had such a poor reputation that pilots routinely ripple-fired their Sparrows, firing off two or more in a row rather than taking a chance on a single shot. Even though few fighters came to Vietnam equipped with guns, they had a better kill rating than Sparrow-equipped fighters." "To the horror of those he briefed, Burton told them he found only four BVR kills in all the wars he covered. What is more, each of the four (two by Israel, two by F-4s in Vietnam) was carefully staged outside the confusion of combat to prove BVR's combat worthiness ... According to Burton, the only reason Israel went after its two BVR kills was strong pressure from the US to establish BVR doctrine." In air combat tests, one of those responsible for developing AMRAAM in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Charles E Myers, ... "...suggested giving AMRAAM's proposed BVR parameters to Blue Force and ARMs to Red Force ... the idea was struck down by the AMRAAM office. Clearly, the new rules might have pointed up radar's inherent weakness: A simple, inexpensive missile like ARM can home in on a radar and kill in an instant." "In 1984, Burton managed to have the idea tested in McDonnell Douglas' differential maneuvering simulators. The results were devastating. Over and over, ARM-equipped fighters shot down AMRAAM aircraft and missiles. The results wereturned over to the AMRAAM office, which invalidated them and threw out the exercise." The problem is the use of radar - ARM homes in perfectly on an illuminating radar, whether in the missile as in AMRAAM or Pheonix, or in the aircraft as with semi-active missiles such as Sparrow or Sky Flash. "In 1969, the DOD tried to test an air-to-air ARM developed from the Sparrow airframe under the project name Brazo. At modest cost, three test firings destroyed three target drones. [Defense Dept. analyst Thomas Amlie says] the program was cancelled when it could be interpreted as eliminating large radar fighters such as the F-14 and F-15, since the tests proved you could not use a radar fighter in combat when up against ARMs." Ethell concludes ... "... a growing number of soldiers and analysts are asking tough questions about the future of radar warfare. ``We cannot go around radiating signals,'' says Amlie. ``The French sell a missile to the entire Third World that will hit an Aegis every time. We are building a peacetime military that will never be effective in combat.''" Perhaps it is fortunate that we are currently pitted against an ineffective and primitive air force, where the majority of allied losses appear to have been caused by AAA. -- /home/research/adam/.signature: No such file or directory